Loading...
1995-11-15 adjNovember 15, 1995 (Adjourned Meeting) (Page 1) 000.%84 An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on November 15, 1995, at 5:15 P.M., Room 235, County Office Building, McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. The meeting was adjourned from November 8, 1995. PRESENT: Mr. David P. Bowerman, Mrs. Charlotte Y. Humphris, Mr. Forrest R. Marshall, Jr., Mr. Charles S. Martin, Mr. Walter F. Perkins and Mrs. Sally H. Thomas. ABSENT: None. OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr.; Deputy County Executive, Mr. Richard E. Huff, II; and County Attorney, Mr. Larry W. Davis. Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 5:19 P.M., by the Chairman, Mr. Perkins. Item la. Executive Session: Legal and Personnel. Motion was made by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, that the Board go into Executive Session pursuant to Section 2.1-344(A) of the Code of Virginia under subsection (1) to discuss appointments to boards and commis- sions and under subsection (7) to consult with legal counsel and staff regarding specific legal matters concerning reversion. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Marshall and Mr. Martin. None. Item lb. Certify Executive Session. At 6:00 p.m., the Board reconvened into open session. Motion was made by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mrs. Thomas, to certify by a recorded vote that to the best of each Board member's knowledge, only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open meeting requirements of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and identified in the motion authorizing the Executive Session were heard, discussed or considered in the Executive Session. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Marshall and Mr. Martin. None. Agenda Item No. 2. Joint Meeting with Charlottesville City Council. CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mrs. Virginia Daugherty, Mr. Alvin Edwards, Mrs. Katherine Slaughter, Mr. David J. Toscano and Mr. Tom Vandever. CITY STAFF PRESENT: City Manager, Mr. Gary O'Connell; and City Attor- ney, Mr. Clyde Gouldman. Item 2a. Discussion: Town Reversion. Mr. Martin said he, Mrs. Thomas, Mrs. Slaughter and Mrs. Daugherty served on a subcommittee dealing with educational issues. They came up with a list of things to move forward on and are suggesting that the list be given to the respective school boards for further study. The first item the committee discussed was voluntary attendance by Albemarle High School students attending Charlottesville High School in some type of magnet program, most likely dealing with the arts and music, but not necessarily limited to those items. In exchange, as the County is building its new high school, it would look at having magnet programs at the new school which students from Charlottesville High School could also voluntarily attend. The committee suggested that the school boards look at selecting programs which their counterpart school does not have so there is not any duplication. The committee also discussed suggesting to the school boards that they look at allowing students from Charlottesville High School to attend Murray High School, and students from 0001.85 November 15, 1995 (Adjourned Meeting) (Page 2) the Albemarle County school system attending Charlottesville's Opportunity School. They also agreed to suggest that the school boards look at the possibility of joint recruitment of faculty members and joint staff develop- mento The committee discussed having a joint adult education program or opportunities for adult education, looking at the possibility of joint summer schools or summer school programs, looking at the enrichment programs, and looking at the use of computers for more joint projects and at least allowing the two school systems to talk to each other via computers. Mr. Martin said those are the areas on which the committee felt they could agree. Another major issue the committee discussed was special educa- tion. He thinks the committee agreed that this is a large issue and one that requires further study by the committee, but more importantly further effort by the school boards to come up with something that is mutually agreeable. The committee did not feel it was limiting the school boards to just these topics. The committee is basically suggesting some things that the school boards could look at and leaving the floor open for them to look at bigger and more difficult issues. Mrs. Daugherty said the committee was gratified to find that the two school boards had already come up with a tentative partnership agreement and this partnership agreement includes most of the things discussed by the Board of Supervisors and City Council. This partnership agreement, if it were adopted, would be a true partnership between the two school systems and it would be a program which would be mutually enriching for all of the students in both school systems. The education committee was hoping, as a sign of good faith and as a show of belief in how important these agreements are, that City Council and the Board of Supervisors could possibly come up with a joint resolution. The only item they talked about which was not mentioned by Mr. Martin was joint purchasing. She suggested that this list of cooperative efforts be set out in a joint resolution on which both bodies could agree. Mrs. Slaughter said there was one other thing the Committee talked about with regard to special education. Since each jurisdiction has parent advisory groups, the groups might get together to discuss the differences in the programs and what programs could be shared. Mrs. Thomas said everyone is learning a lot about each other's jurisdic- tion in this process. The City gave the County a lot of facts and figures and vice versa. For example, in the County, the school system is not separate from the central government in the same way it is in the City, so there is quite a difference in the way things like purchasing are handled by the school systems. Everything is combined in the County. They also talked about the newly elected school board in Albemarle County and what this relationship may be between the School Board and the Board of Supervisors. This is not yet an issue in the City, but is bound to have some impact on all of this and an impact on the timing of the partnership. She thinks the current School Board would feel more comfortable dealing with that with the new school board. Mr. Toscano asked if it was the recommendation of the subcommittee that staff of the City and County put together a joint resolution of some sort that could be passed by the respective bodies embodying the principles set forth tonight. Mr. Martin said he thinks, from the County's point of view, it would be more appropriate for the school systems to discuss it and agree to something and then let that come to the Board of Supervisors as opposed to the Board or City Council having a declaration that is passed down on to the school boards. He would rather have something come to the governing bodies from the school boards. Mr. Toscano said Mr. Martin, in making the report, was very careful to say that the subcommittee wished to suggest to the school boards the following items. If the subcommittee feels that way, is it not the next logical step for both governing bodies to make those suggestions to their respective school boards who would then refine them, each of which may have budgetary implica- tions. Mr. Martin said he was being careful not to declare or command or say anything that sounded vaguely like those words. The County will have four elected school board members who were elected on their own platforms. He thinks it would be difficult for this Board to use words like "command" or "direct". November 15~ 1995 (Adjourned Meeting) (Page 3) O001SG Mr. Toscano said to use the word "suggest" or "endorse" Mr. Bowerman said he thinks Mr. Martin is saying this should go back to the school boards for them to tell the Board and Council the areas of coopera- tion they feel are appropriate based on their knowledge and responsibilities. Mrs. Slaughter said she thought part of the reason for these meetings was to identify some of the areas to bring forward. This does not command the school boards to do anything. In fact, many of these items came from school board members. It is simply for the two bodies to take some kind of role and that is why a joint resolution is being suggested. It should be worded to suggest cooperation. Otherwise, she does not know why the members met and talked if they do not want to move forward with some kind of endorsement. Mrs. Daugherty said she does not view this as some sort of commandment. She looks at it as an endorsement of the ideas. As far as she knows, all of these ideas came from the respective school boards. She feels the school boards are hesitant to move because they do not know where these two bodies .stand. The school boards know the Board and Council are meeting, but they need some word of encouragement to let them know the Board and Council wants them to work together. Mr. Martin said he is sure the County Executive and City Manager could come up with some wording that all could mutually agree to. He does not think there should be a disagreement over semantics. He hopes that City Council realizes the Board must have sensitivity here that maybe Council does not have to have. Mr. Toscano said even with appointed school boards City Council is sensitive to how they operate. All school boards have policy and funding issues to consider. The City School Board has very strong opinions on some things and sometimes the two bodies disagree. It has always been the view of Council, as elected leaders, and the school board, as nonelected leaders, to bring forth what they consider are good ideas for the community. Since the Board and Council cannot control the school boards, he suggested words like "endorse" or "suggest" to get the ideas out. City Council has talked exten- sively with all of its school board members about some of these things. He also knows the two school boards have been communicating among themselves. He is not sure that passing a resolution with this language is going to be a problem. Mr. Marshall said he just came out of an election. His people told him they want to see the Board cooperate with the City so both can save money. Albemarle County taxpayers do not want to subsidize City schools. They would like to see the two systems work together. He is not about to support the City schools with County taxpayer funds. Mr. Toscano asked Mr. Marshall if he saw anything that has been suggested that would lead him to believe that Albemarle County residents are going to be asked to support City schools. Mr. Marshall said "no," which is the reason he thinks it should be left up to the school boards to find out what ways they can work together to save money. Mrs. Thomas said she thinks the subcommittee agreed that it would help to have the school boards know that the elected bodies are encouraging them to look at ways of cooperating. Mr. Martin said the Board of Supervisors talked about things that it could agree to and they basically agreed to those things he mentioned. The declaration is something on which the Board does not necessarily agree. When he went into this subcommittee he had to be careful of what the rest of the Board members would be able to support. He laid out on the table the things that all, the City members as well as the County members of the subcommittee, agreed to. He is sure the County Executive and City Manager can meet and come up with some language that can be passed to the two school divisions. That resolution can be discussed at the next joint meeting. In the meantime, the Board and Council can pass on those things that the school boards know they support and are behind. The school boards can then jointly move forward on those issues. Mr. Perkins said he likes the word "encourage" in that the Board and City Council encourage their respective school boards to work on areas that are mutual beneficial to each jurisdiction. 000 87 November 15, 1995 (Adjourned Meeting) (Page 4) Mr. Toscano said initially he heard from the subcommittee report that there was support for the partnership declaration and then he just heard some concerns by the Board about support for the declaration. He asked if the declaration will be included in the resolution. Mr. Martin said it is his understanding that there were members of the County School Board who were not necessarily agreeable to the declaration partnership. Mrs. Slaughter said that was not her understanding because everything Mr. Martin first read out was from the partnership declaration. She had always thought those were areas of agreement. Mr. Martin said there was a declaration that the City School Board looked at, but the County School Board had not looked at closely. There were things about the declaration that the County could not necessarily support and so the subcommittee pulled away from that and dealt with those issues that all could support. Mrs. Daugherty said she thinks they had a misunderstanding. City Council thought Mr. Martin said if the school boards mutually adopted their partnership declarations then the Board would support it. Mr. Toscano asked about the status of the partnership declaration. Mr. Martin said it is not before the two bodies at this time. Mr. Toscano said the objectives seem reasonable to him and he hopes the two school boards will look at them and pass the declaration. For example purchasing, Mrs. Thomas said the school boards can look at the partnership, but some aspects of it will be difficult. Purchasing is not something the County school system can deal with separately as the City school system does because of the way the bodies are set up. There is not a separate purchasing department in the County for the school system. Mr. Toscano said all the objectives are qualified, they are not requirements. Mr. Toscano asked if it was the consensus that staff prepare a joint resolution using words such as "encourage," and "suggest," without words of commandment having to do with the items the subcommittee identified for study by the respective school divisions. Mr. Martin said that sounded fair. Mr. Bowerman said he, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Tucker and Ms. White met last week. The committee initially met to talk about some sort of mechanism for the City and County to cooperatively work for additional home ownership and to deal with housing problems. When the committee began its discussions, it realized that there were many agencies involved that perhaps had mechanisms already established that could provide a vehicle to do this. The committee also thought that regionally there might be more funds available that could be brought in. For example, the City receives about $800,000 every year in a community development block grant. This would require cooperation between the City and the County because the County has to allocate or the City has to assume a certain part of the county is within the area in order to qualify. The committee has some very definite ideas, but it felt it needed to look at all the information available to see how to move forward. The committee does not want to minimize any of the efforts that are already ongoing such as those by the County's housing committee. He does not have a recommendation at this time. Mrs. Humphris said a lot of data by both the City and County have been presented about the different ways each governmental unit goes about solving some of its affordable housing problems and there are different strategies that each uses. The committee discussed the percentages of total assisted rental housing units in the City and County, and what percentages of total housing units those were. She thinks the committee found that the more it talked, the more it realized there was a lot to investigate. The committee felt they needed a lot of clarifications about what things mean, such as subsidized housing. She thinks it is very important to take into consider- ation the County's active housing committee and housing director. It is also important to get a complete picture of the whole area of housing in the region since a lot of the programs that the Planning District Commission works with are regional programs, and a lot of the different entities that work with housing in the City and County actually work with the region. Mr. Vandever said he felt the bodies had reached a level of agreement on the notion that there is a mutually shared housing burden in the two juris- dictions. November 15, 1995 (Adjourned Meeting) (Page 5) Mrs. Humphris said at that meeting she questioned the number of Univer- sity students who were considered in the City's poverty statistics. She thinks it is important to look at the City's position that it has a greater proportion of subsidized rental units, therefore it carries a heavier burden in providing those human services. It is her feeling that if the students make up a high percentage of the City's poverty statistics, but at the same time do not require the same level of services, then it is a slightly differ- ent situation. That is one thing that need to be studied. Mrs. Slaughter said the statistics for subsidized housing are outside of the student issues. Mr. Toscano said it is not accurate to say that students use a large number of subsidized rental units in the City. He thinks it is pretty conclu- sive that the City has a disproportionate number of the assisted rental units. Eight percent of the total units in the City are assisted rental units. About four percent of Albemarle units are assisted rental units. If a person looks at the data, one cannot escape the notion that Charlottesville serves as the jurisdiction in which more poor people live. Albemarle, in its housing report adopted by the Board, committed itself to providing another 160 units per year in assisted rental units. The City thought that was a good sign because in about ten years the percentages narrow. At that point about six or seven percent of Albemarle's units would be assisted rental units. On the City's side, they are trying to move people into home ovgaership. There was a lot of discussion by the committee about how to do that; how to reach mutually beneficial goals that will share the housing across jurisdiction lines. He thinks that if the 160 units get built in the County in ten years, and if Charlottesville reduces its rental units by a certain number each year, then the two jurisdictions will get to a figure that will help both jurisdictions. How to do that is another issue. There are a number of ways by which dollars can be funnelled to accomplish this goal. Two examples are the Charlottes- ville Housing Improvement Foundation and the Albemarle Housing Improvement Program. He does not think the Board can escape the fact that Charlottesville does have a disproportionate number of subsidized units. Once that is accepted, he thinks the Board and Council can work together to accomplish mutual goals in housing. That is what he saw the committee as discussing. Mrs. Humphris said the committee found that although there are a lot of things that are known about the housing problem, there is a bigger list of things that are not known. Those are the things the committee will bring back to the next housing committee meeting. Mrs. Slaughter asked what happened to the mandate to look at joint planning issues. Mr. Toscano said nothing has been done on that; most of the talk concerned housing issues. There was also talk about joint services which no one has gotten around to. Mrs. Slaughter said she would like for City Council and the Board at some point to look at other planning aspects. Mr. Marshall asked if City C~uncil feels these meetings are changing their minds about reversion or do they still want to pursue that issue. Mr. Toscano said that question involves a lengthy conversation and maybe it should be discussed later. Mr. Marshall said eventually the Board and City Council have to get around to that question. He is one of those people who do not like to waste time. The things being done are good and he agrees with what is being done. He thinks there is a way to avoid reversion as long as we keep this dialogue of communication open. By the same token, he thinks there are things the City needs to be doing in informing its people. He thinks the Board needs to talk with its legislators to get some kind of protection under some of these things. He does not want to waltz around the issues. At some time he wants to get down to discussions of these items. Mr. Perkins said all of these things are building blocks and what we build with is left up to us. A lot of those things may be determined by things we cannot control. At this time it was the consensus of the housing subcommittee to hold a meeting on December 4, 1995, at 3:30 p.m., in City Hall Basement. It was also the consensus to hold the next joint meeting of the Board of Supervisors and City Council on December 12, 1995, at 5:30 p.m., in City Hall in the Basement Conference Room. November 15, 1995 (Adjourned Meeting) (page 6) Item 2b. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda. None. Agenda Item No. 3. Adjourn. At 6:45 p.m., with no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Chairman