Loading...
1986-04-02April 2, 1986 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 1) A regular.meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors was held on April 2, 1986, at 7:30 p.m., in the Auditorium of the County Office Building, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. ~'~ BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. F. R. Bowie, Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke, Messrs. Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., C. Timothy Lindstrom (arrived at 7:37 p.m.), and Peter T. Way. ABSENT: None. OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr. County Executive; Mr. Ray B. Jones, Deputy County Executive, Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., Deputy County Executive; Mr. George R. St. John, County Attorney; and Mr. John T. P. Horne, Director of Planning and Community Development. Agenda Item No. 1. Chairman, Mr. Fisher. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 7:32 p.m. by the Agenda Item No. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda Item No. 3. Moment of Silence. Agenda Item No. 4. Consent Agenda. Motion was offered by Mr. Way, seconded by Mr. Bowie, to approve Items 4.1 and 4.2 on the Consent Agenda and accept the other items as information. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, and Way. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr._Lindstrom. Item 4.1. Request to take Pepsi Place into the State Highway Secondary System. The following resolution was adopted in accordance with a letter dated October 22, 1984, from Mr. Elbert E. Morris of the Pepsi-Cola Bottl~ Company: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection and approval by the Resident Highway Department, the following road: Beginning at station 0+18, a point common with the centerline of Pepsi Place and the edge of pavement of Greenbriar Drive, thence in a southwesterly direction 663.10 feet to station 6+18.10 the end of the cul-de-sac. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 foot unobstructed right of way and drainage easement along this requested addition as recorded by plat in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle Coutny in Deed Book 817, Page 230. Item 4.2. Revised Resolution to take Commonwealth Drive into State Highway Secondary System. In accordance with a memorandum dated April 1, 1986, from Mr. Tom Trevillian, Engineering Department, the following resolution was adopted: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection and approval by the Resident Highway Department, the following road in Westfield Subdivision: Beginning at station 0+26, a point common with the edge of pavement at Hydraulic Road and the centerline of Commonwealth Drive, thence in a northeasterly direction 2,439 feet to station 24+65, the beginning of the temporary cul-de-sac. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways and transportation be and is hereby guaranteed a 70 foot unobstructed right of way and drainage easement along this requested addition as recorded by plat in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 575, Page 282, Deed Book 697, Page 425, Deed Book 704, Page 517, and Deed Book 712, Page 688. Item 4.3. Letter dated March 25, 1986, from Dr. Gary T. Johnson, Research Director, Governor's Commission on Transportation in the Twenty-First Century, re. Public Hearings on Highway and Transportation Needs. This letter stated the establishment of the Governor's "Commission on Transportation in the Twenty-first Century". The task of the Commission is to confirm the critical highway and transportation needs in Virginia. Five public hearings will be held in the week of March 31, 1986. Input was requested from local legislators, officials, and citizens at their designated public hearing regarding highway and transpor- tation concerns. A schedule of hearing dates and a map indicating the coverage area of the hearings was attached. 474 April 2, 1986 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 2) Item 4.4. Letter dated March 21, 1986, from J. W. Brent, Executive Director Albemarle County Service Authority, regarding award of the "Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Accounting" to James Kister, Manager of Accounting, for the Service Authority, from the Government Finance Officers Association. Mr. Fisher noted the receipt of certification and commended the staff of the Albemarle County Service Authority for doing a good job. Item 4.5. Letter dated March 21, 1986, re. Appalachian Power Company Application for Expedited Increase of Rates. This letter from John L. Walker, Jr. of Woods, Rogers & Hazlegrove (law firm), gave notice of an application from Appalachian Power Company for an expedited rate increase of 4.3 percent to be effective May 1, 1986. Item 4.6. Copies of the Planning Commission minutes for its meeting of March 11 and March 18, 1986, were received as information. Agenda Item No. 5. Public Hearing: the Daily Progress on March 25, 1986.) FY 86-87 Albemarle County Budget. (Advertised in Mr. Fisher said the budget process began in the fall of 1985. He explained that the School administration drafts the school budget; the School Board holds public hearings and then takes action. Other community service matters are considered by the staff of the County Executive, who makes recommendations to the Board of Supervisors. The Board then holds a series of public budget work sessions. The budget presented tonight is the Board's recom- mendation for the use of County funds for the next fiscal year. According to State law, the budget must be held under consideration for a week or more after public hearing. Therefore it is scheduled for adoption at the Board meeting of April 9, 1986. (Mr. Lindstrom arrived at 7:37 p.m.) Mr. Agnor presented a summary of the FY 86-87 County budget using slides of charts and graphs to depict each referenced category. He said the budget as presented tonight is a financial plan which has been reviewed by the Board. The approval at next week's Board meeting will be in the form of an ordinance which will authorize disbursements of funds for next year. The Board will also set the tax rates in order to support the budget. Adoption of the Appropriation Ordinance changes the budget from an informative document to a legal document, which has the force of law and imposes responsibility and authority on the County's staff for its administration and enforcement. Mr. Agnor said the total of the proposed budget is $57,852,719, which represents an increase of 7.75 percent or $4.16 million over the FY 85-86 budget. The major categories of the County government are as follows: General Government, increased by $790,000 (5.2 percent); Education increased $3.39 million (10.1 percent); Debt Service, reduced by $80,000 (3.9 percent); Capital Improvements Program remains the same at $1,000,000; and the Revenue Sharing Agreement with the City of Charlottesville, increased by $60,000 (3.2 percent). Important changes in the General Government and the School Division include a three and one-half percent salary adjustment for all employees in the pay and classification plan who receive a satisfactory performance rating for the current fiscal year. This increase will be achieved by a one percent scale adjustment and a single step increase (two and one-half percent) for employees who have a step to which their salary can be moved within their position range. A ten percent salary increase for teachers is proposed, which will be achieved by an across-the-board increase of $1,895 to every step on the teachers' salary scale. This is designed to move the salary entry level upward by 13.5 percent, and provide a 7.9 percent increase to employees at the top step of the scale. Next, Mr. Agnor listed several new and expanded programs in the General Government budget which total $164,870, representing 29 percent of the requests that were received. New and expanded programs for the School Division, include 5.8 new teaching positions as well as other personnel increases, totaling $462,958. Other categories of new and expanded programs for schools total $536,174. 86 percent of the new and expanded programs requested by the School Board were granted. Mr. Agnor then summarized revenues calculated to be available to finance the budget. The School Division will receive an increase from State, local, and other funds totaling $3.39 million (10.1 percent). In the General fund, property taxes lead the major categories in increases with a total increase of $1.85 million (7.9 percent). Other local revenues increase by $510,000 (4.6 percent). The decrease in miscellaneous revenues is due to a reduction in the use of unallocated funds to balanCe the operating budget (purely, an accounting entry). To provide these estimated revenues, Mr. Agnor said the proposed budget relies on a continued tax rate of $0.77 per one hundred dollars of assessed real estate value, and an adjusted tax rate of $4.40 per one hundred dollars of assessed value for personal property, and machinery and tools - a reduction of $0.10 from the current rate. Mr. Agnor said Albemarle County continues to operate in a sound financial environment, although there is never enough money to meet all needs. The County debt has not increased in recent years. In fact it is approximately $5 million less than it was ten years ago, and has been reduced per capita by one-half. This reduction is due partly to an expanding population, but mostly by operating the government with a balanced budget, financing capital improvements within existing resources, and borrowing only minimum amounts. April 2, 1986 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 3) 475. At this point, Mr. Fisher oPened the public hearing, beginning with comments regarding the General Government, General Management, section: Mrs. Wayne Harbaugh, Executive Director of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (TJPDC), was present. She said according to her information, Albemarle County's contribution to the Planning District Commission is $25,810, ($300 is set aside for the citizen representative), which is an increase of $385, or 1.9 percent. This level of funding means an equivalent of three-fourths of a planner's time will be cut from the professional staff. The TJPDC has worked with Albemarle County during past years on projects for housing, transportation, and economic development, for which needs will probably increase in the future. Coalition building of governments in this area will become significant in order to deal effectively with other areas of the State. Mrs. Harbaugh said at the December budget session of the Planning District Commission, a bare majority of members voted to request funding that would provide the positions of a director and two planners. Three of the votes cast against the request were from Albemarle County. Albemarle County is at the center of the planning district, is fast-growing, has good resources, and getting is industrial and commercial land use where the adjoining rural counties are getting the people and school problems. Albemarle County is also able to obtain certain federal resources that are not available to other counties. The perception of per capita funding is that counties would share resources on a basis that can be applied to all jurisdictions. The TJPDC budget does not reflect any pass-through moneys to Albemarle County for work in the transportation field. Mrs. Harbaugh said as she leaves the Planning District Commission staff (referring to her retirement), she is concerned that there will be few resources necessary to carry on the work of the Commission. She is also concerned about the spirit of cooperation established by this coalition of governing bodies. MrS. Harbaugh said she hopes that under Mr. Bowie's leadership as Chairman of the Commission, Albemarle Will be perceived in the future as a jurisdiction that is willing to carry its load and support a fair distribution of resources. Mr. Fisher thanked Mrs. Harbaugh for her work with the Planning District Commission, Albemarle County, and the other jurisdictions over the years. He said it should be noted that she has done a good job. He then asked Mrs. Harbaugh how many cents per capita was requested for funding. She said 48 cents; this budget reflects 35 cents per capita. Mr. Lindstrom asked the amount of the full request. Mrs. Harbargh said $28,128. She said City Council's budget now reflects the full funding that was requested of them (48 cents per capita) contingent upon the other jurisdictions also funding at that level. Mr. Bowie thanked Mrs. Harbaugh for her support through the entire year that he has been Chairman of the Planning District Commission. Mrs. Cooke said Mrs. Harbaugh had been a tremendous help to her personally when she served on the Planning District Commission and the Metropolitan Planning Organization. Mrs. Harbaugh said she has enjoyed working with the staff and officials of Albemarle County. The public hearing continued with the subject of Human Services. Mrs. Ann Brushwood, president of the local Alzheimers Disease and Related Disorders Group, was present. She thanked the Board for adding funding to the budget for the Adult Day Care Program. The Program will provide rest to County residents who now give 24-hour care to family members who need constant supervision. This will give caretakers time to earn a living, take care of household tasks, and yet have the comfort of knowing their loved ones are safe and well taken care of. Adult Day Care will be a low cost alternative to nursing home care. Mrs. Brushwood said she feels the Program will be a savings to private, public, local, State and Federal dollars. Next to speak was Mr. Ed Jones, Albemarle County representative on the Jefferson Board for Aging (JABA). Mr. Jones said he wished to speak in support of the Home Safety Repair Program and he asked the Board to give consideration to a modest increase in funding for that program. Charlottesville agreed to allocate $11,356 to the Home Safety Program. He encouraged the Board to give support at a similar level. Mr. Jones said the Program's present funding has not permitted the JABA to publicize the availability of the program's service for County clients, however demand has spread by word-of-mouth. Thirteen new County clients were referred to the Program in March. At the present budget level of $5,000 recom- mended by County staff, a 10-hour week program can be supported, but this does not meet minimum needs. Mr. Jones said 49 perCent of the Home Safety Repair Program operating budget was contri- buted by four Virginia based foundations and one local organization in the form of start-up grants (money for purchase of equipment). Money for equipment will continue to be sought from this type of source. The Program is applying for donations of materials and supplies through the neighborhood assistance act and it makes use of voluntary labor and in-kind donations of scrap materials. Mr. Jones said JABA understands the Board does not wish to subsidize repairs to rental property. JABA proposes that the County give increased funding to the Home Safety Repair Program with the stipulation that no County money will be spent on rental improvements. He said the Home Safety Repair Program needs the Board's support in order to continue and expand in Albemarle County. Next to speak was Mr. Bruce Williamson, President of the Board of Directors of the Central Virginia Child Development Association. He said the Association applied to the County this year for a $6,250 allocation for child care provider training. This amount would train 25 providers in Ablemarle County at a cost of $250 per provider. Mr. Williamson noted that no funding has been recommended for this program from the County. He asked that the Board reconsider not only this recommendation, but also the issue of child care in Albemarle County. 476 April 2, 1986 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 4) Mr. Williamson said in Albemarle County there are approximately 2,600 children under five years of age in homes where both parents work. In the Charlottesville-Albemarle area there are approximately 1,100 spaces in either licensed child care centers or other informal child care facilities. There is a need for child care provided by people who receive proper training. A nine-week training sesssion (two hours per week) is provided by the Association. This training has received certification as continuing adult education from the University of Virginia. Child care training of 25 providers in Albemarle County would affect 100 to 125 children. Mr. Williamson urged the Board to consider the requested allocation for next year. Dr. Raymond Ford, a County resident and pediatrician, was next to speak. He said there are some major changes occurring in our society, which he would like to point out to the people of the older generation who are present. He said when older people and their children went to school, ten percent or less of them were cared for outside of the home. That figure now, according to his office, is probably 60 percent. He said he is addressing a problem that was not existent in the past. Children then were with their parents perhaps 80 waking hours per week. Children today might have 40 waking hours with their parents; the other 40 hours are spent in day care with another provider. Dr. Ford said there is an analogy in American history that applies. He said about 150 years ago this meeting might have concerned the need for public education. In that same time, the Board would have asked why education should be paid for by tax funds. The public would say because it is for the good of all, it benefits society as a whole. He said today no one would argue that public education is a bad thing, in general. Dr. Ford said he is not suggesting the County should run day care centers. He said day care children are different. They are immunologically immature. The average day care child who is with four or more children, has 11.8 separate respiratory illnesses per year. When a child went to school at six years of age in 1941, he/she was immunologically mature. Continued sickness of a child at three months or three years old, has an impact on the health of the child and his/her family. Dr. Ford emphasized developmental and psychological immaturity of day care age children. He said he is not referring to five or six year old children, but rather children in critical stages of development who are in the care of possibly strangers outside their homes. He said this situation will not change; it will not become less, it will become more. He said day care is not a question of free enterprise; the product is our children. Dr. FOrd said he hopes the Board does not see the issue as people selling day care for a living and therefore not needing public support. Dr. Ford said day care providers can be trained to limit disease and create a stimu- lating environment for children. There is nothing inherent in humans that makes them able to do that. Having a child or grandchild does not qualify a person to care for strangers' children. That is an educational need that must be faced and there is no tradition to call upon. This is the first generation facing this situation. Dr. Ford said from a medical point of view, he urges the Board to be innovative and do something exemplary that will be beneficial for many years. Next to speak was Mrs. Rhonda Judy. Mrs. Judy said she is a certified child care worker and has kept children in her home for three years. Often parents ask how she disciplines children. Because she is certified, she cannot spank. However, before she receiving training, no one told her how else to discipline a child. Mrs. Judy said she had to babysit from 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. for six weeks to earn the $250 tuition for training classes. She said she believes the training is vital to child care providers in the County. Mr. Ken Ackerman, Executive Director of the Monticello Area Community Action Agency (MACAA), was present. He said his comments are based on the principle that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. The budget for the Project Discovery Program has been modified since the Board's budget work session. He said the program is geared to promote~ higher education opportunities among low income and minority youth in public schools. Features of the program include the following: 1) the majority of participants are first generation college-bound students; 2) there is a low student-teacher ratio; 3) extensive follow-up and family contact; 4) while the program is a community based activity, it compli- ments the local school efforts and there is a strong relationship with school personnel; and 5) there is a broad based advisory counsel which promotes support and coordination. This program has been operating in Charlottesville since last summer. Nine of the participants are now seniors in Charlottesville High School. Eight of the nine students are moving toward a college education. These students were not considering entering college before partici- pating in the Project Discovery Program. The County's share of the modified budget is just over $8,000. This will serve 60 students at less than $140 each. Mr. Ackerman pointed out that the program has participation from the Charlottesville schools, the University of Virginia, and Piedmont Virginia Community College. He said the program is cost effective and the results are evident. Mr. Fisher asked if the total budget for MACAA ($19,135) includes any funding for the Project Discovery Program. Mr. Ackerman said no. He noted that the Program is funded by the State, and that MACAA is one of seven agencies in Virginia chosen to promote and operate the Program for the coming year. Therefore local monies can be matched by State funds. Mr. Fisher asked if it would be a one-to-one match. Mr. Ackerman said no. The State funded 50 percent of the total budget. While there is no matching requirement, the extent of activi- ties is restricted because of the level of State funding. Ms. Kobby Hoffman, President of the local chapter of the National Organization for Women (NOW), was present and read the following statement: April 2, 1986 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page5) 477 If present trends continue, women alone and women with children will consti- tute most of not all of the population in poverty in the U. S. in a few decades. For this reason, the local chapter of NOW supports funding for the following programs which have been proposed to the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors: The Albemarle County Housing Improvement Program; The Adult Day Care Program; The Education for Life Program and the Housing Counseling Program proposed by the Monticello Area Community Action Agency; The Home Safety Program proposed by the Jefferson Area Board for Aging; The Charlottesville-Albemarle Legal Aid Society; JAUNT; The Urban Bus Service proposed for U.S. 29 North. In order to prevent violence against women and children, NOW asks that the Shelter for Help in Emergencies and the Police Department receive full funding. We also ask that the County change its policy on child day care assistance under Social Services so that families receiving aid for day care do not have to give it up after they have obtained employment. The primary reason for day care assistance should be to enable more people not only to obtain and keep jobs, but also to develop economic self-sufficiency. The current policy ensures that some people with children will decide that they cannot afford to become employed, and they will thus remain habitually dependent of welfare. Finally, we commend the development of the women's basketball league by the Departments of Parks and Recreation. And we support the principle of charging fees for some recreation activities as long as the fees are low, but access to the parks and recreation areas should be free." Public Safety was the next category listed for public comments. present to speak regarding this subject. There was no one Mr. Fisher moved on to the Refunds category, which he said includes primarily the Land Use Program. He then called for comments on the Revenue Sharing Agreement with the City, and Grants category. There were no comments on these subjects or any other General Government categories. Education was the next category opened for discussion. Ms. Holly Olinger was first to speak regarding this category. She said she is employed in the County schools. She sorts and delivers mail daily to the County schools. Being in the schools every day, she sees the secretaries talking to sick children and parents regarding students who have been injured, or who are concerned about their children being released from school early because of snow. Ms. Olinger said the Board of Supervisors requested that school personnel be granted a 3.5 percent salary increase which will keep their increase in line with other County employees. She noted that these school employees do not have a merit scale to give them any additional funds to increase salaries. Ms. Olinger said the School Board requested a five percent raise for their personnel. She feels the School Board realizes the jobs of the classified employees are important. She said the classified employees are the "glue" that holds the school system together. Yet the Board of Supervisors is in effect saying these jobs are not important enough to give the employees a five percent raise. She said this is a slap in the face; she feels it is insulting and hurtful to the people whO put in much time working with the children. Ms. Olinger said if the Board of Supervisors wants to be fair to the children and their parents, please reconsider this issue. Mr. Fisher said Ms. Olinger's statement is very moving. He said the Board of Supervisors has been trying to get the School Board to adopt a merit system for its classi- fied employees for five years. Additional funds have been granted in the past for the School 8oard to bring those employees' salaries up to the level of General Government classified employees. Additional funds were also given to the School Board for salary surveys. Funds ~ere appropriated for a merit system one year, but were not used for that purpose. Mr. Fisher said the Board of Supervisors agrees that a merit system is necessary. The Board knows people are working hard and they want all employees to be treated fairly. Ms. Melva Mitchell was next to speak. She said she is proud to be a school secretary. ~s. Mitchell said she is not a school secretary because of the money, but because of her dedication and love for the children and co-workers. She quoted a slogan developed by the ~lassified employees: "We can't survive on 3 point 5." Using her salary to break down a 3.5 ~ercent salary increase, Ms. Mitchell said she would ultimately receive an increase of 39 ~ents per hour. She said her work day does not always begin and end at school, she often 2akes work home. Her first responsibility is to the children, secondly to the parents, and ~hirdly to the teachers and administrators. Ms. Mitchell said after those responsibilities ~re fulfilled, there is little time for the paperwork. Therefore, in order to meet certain ~eadlines, it must be taken home. She asked the Board to think of the school classified ~mployee's responsibilities and self esteem, and reconsider the issue. 478 April 2, 1986 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 6) Mrs. Martha Wood, President of the Albemarle Education Association (AEA), was next to speak. She said the members of the AEA support the original budget proposed the Super- intendent and the School Board. She said schools serve a highly diverse community with a broad socioeconomic factor and range of needs which cannot be served by ratios and numbers. The AEA members realize the School Board and Board of Supervisors worked together to reach compromises, but the budget only maintains the status quo. Mrs. Wood said the classified school employees are upset about the 3.5 percent salary increase proposed to the School Board by the Board of Supervisors. This has created a morale problem among the personnel affected by the increase. The imperative given to the School Board to reduce its proposed five percent increase has negative impact in several areas. First, it takes away the authority of the School Board to operate and make policy for the system in a way that is disturbing to its employees. Secondly, it tries to equate the school system's classified personnel with other County employees by placing them all on the same scale as if levels of responsibility are the same. The school classified employees feel the contact they have with students and the public, and the extra demands made upon them that cannot be written into job classifications or descriptions, places them in a separate situation. Mrs. Wood said the AEA maintains that the School classified employees do not have the same responsibilities and should not be using the same job descriptions as other classi- fied employees. The school classified employees have direct contact with students. Their roles are vital to the smooth running of schools on a daily basis and because of their special roles, their positions are somewhat different. They feel they are an important part of the total efficiency of the school system. Many employees feel the reduction in the proposed wage increase is an action to reduce the personal property tax rate, which will have little real impact on the taxpayers. The average taxpayer in Albemarle County probably owns a vehicle valued between $5,000 and $10,000. That person will see a five to ten dollar decrease in personal property taxes. This action proposed by the Board of Supervisors promotes a false sense of tax reduction among citizens and places the burden of the tax reduction on the backs of the School's classified employees. The amount of the reduction would probably cover a five percent increase for all County employees. Mrs. Wood said the AEA supports what the School Board has tried to do for its classified personnel. The members feel it is important that the School Board be allowed to do what they are appointed to do - operate the schools, make policies and see that the policies are carried out. She said the AEA urges the Board to reconsider funding of the School Board budget as originally requested and provide funds necessary for the five percent increase for the School's classified employees. Mrs. Sue Lewis, President of the Charlottesville-Albemarle League of Women Voters, was next to speak. She read a statement listing and discussing the League's positions on many categories in the County budget. The statement indicated the League of Women Voters is pleased with the efficiency of the County's budget development process this year and recommended that the budget be presented in a zero-based program format as well as a line item format in the future in order to the alleviate certain problems encountered in the budget process. The League of Women Voters does not believe projected revenues should be returned to tax payers by lowering property the tax rate this year. The League of Women Voters addressed its support for funding for the following budget matters: existing programs of the Jefferson Area Board for Aging (JABA) and the Monticello Area Community Action Agency (MACAA); Fire Department requests; alternative funding for more opportunities for voter registration in outlying areas of the County; the budget of the Department of Planning and Community Development; funding for the United Way Child Care Scholarships or change the related policy governing the Social Service program; the Youth Service Center's SOAR and Rent-A-Teen programs; the Central Virginia Child Development Association request for funds to train County child care providers; the Urban Bus Service along Route 29 North; funding for the State-mandated ten percent raise in teachers' salaries and the new positions and programs requested by the School Board; full funding for Police Department requests (especially a Deputy Chief position); the Shelter for Help in Emergency, Jefferson Area United Transpor- tation, Charlottesville-Albemarle Legal Aid Society; Adult Day Care; the JABA Home Safety Program; and the Education for Life proposed by MACAA. The League of Women Voters agrees with the Board of Supervisors that the County's pilot program for Health Risk Assessment should be drawn from the similar program implemented by the School system; applauds saving money by not paying for replacement County vehicles until they have traveled at least as far as those used by the police; and supports fees for various activities of the Parks and Recreation Department, but not for the parks themselves or parking privileges. The League is interested in seeing the report on uses of the land at the Keene Landfill when it has to be closed. The League urges that the field staffs of the Inspections and Planning Departments be encouraged to enforce laws that are already on the books in order to implement the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and other ordinances. The League does not recommend that the Board create an unusually large contingency fund or maintain a large carry-over balance, but rather reprogram County funds if necessary in order to deal with possible budgetary problems in the future. (The complete statement is on file in the Clerk's office.) Mr. Fisher asked if anyone else wished to speak regarding the County budget, including the proposed tax rates. Mr. Agnor noted that the hearing tonight also includes the use of Federal Revenue Sharing monies for funding of energy costs in school operations. There being no one else rising to speak, the public hearing was closed. April 2, 1986 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 7) 479 Mr. Way said he would like to comment on the budget. He said it is good that the Supervisors have a week to reflect on the budget's public hearing. Concerning the issue of the school classified employees, Mr. Way said he does not believe it is the case that school classified employees are in some way more special than general government employees. He said that does not mean that he does not appreciate what classified employees do in the school system. Mr. Way said he is in and out of the schools as well as general government offices. General government employees have tremendous responsibility to the public - in many cases, as much as employees within the school system. He said when he was first on the Board of Supervisors in 1968, he made the statement that he hoped the day would come when the school employees and general government employees would be paid basically in the same kind of way. That is finally beginning to take place. He said although he agrees that the school classi- fied employees are valuable, he does not believe the school system's value for its employees is greater than the general government's value for its classified employees. Mr. Lindstrom said he has supported the notion of paying classified employees in the school system at the same level as general government classified employee. He said he does not support the notion in order to save money to reduce personal property taxes or increase instructional salaries, but because he believes in the principle that there should be the same pay structure for general government and school employees. Mr. Lindstrom said it is his understanding that the 3.5 percent salary adjustment was determined by an evaluation of employees' positions in the market place. A survey of the job market was conducted by the Personnel Department, which serves both general government and school employees. One philosophy for salary payment is to pay the amount necessary to get qualified employees to do the job. Except for reward of meritorious performance, salary increases are generally reserved for those salaries that are below the market level and which are necessary to maintain a quality staff. These increases are to maintain the employees' salary base with respect to inflationary pressure. Another philosophy is to increase salaries when the opportunity arises, regardless of the competitive level for employees in the marketplace. Mr. Lindstrom said in his opinion, that may be an appropriate philosophy for private enterprise, however, he is not convinced it is appropriate for government because the money used is not generated by a product, but by taxes. That requires the money to be used to provide an efficient and effective government, and no more. As a representative of the public, Mr. Lindstrom said he is compelled to the philosophy to pay what is necessary to maintain a competitive position in the market. He therefore accepts the analysis that 3,5 percent is a sufficient base increase to maintain the posture of general government and school employees in the job market. Mr. Lindstrom said he also perceives that the increase of instructional salaries is responsive to the need to be competitive in a way that the County has not been in the past, therefore he supports the increase of ten percent. Mr. Lindstrom said he supports increasing salaries by rewarding merit. He said he no longer assumes the School Board will adopt a merit plan because even though the Board of Supervisors has strongly suggested it and provided money for it, it has not happened. He said he regrets the perception of classified school employees that they are "caught in the middle" and are being penalized for not having a merit system. However, he cannot justify arbitrarily raising salaries beyond 3.5 percent to reflect the absence of a merit plan. That type of increase needs to be done based on a merit plan. He will support funding for a reasonable merit plan when it is presented. Mr. Bowie said one fact pointed out to him during his first year on the Board of Supervisors was that school classified employees were paid less than general government classified employees for the same job, which was not fair. In the 1984-85 County budget, the Board appropriated eight percent to increase the school classified employees' salaries so they would be paid the same. He said he has repeatedly stated that school classified employees should have the same merit system as general government classified employees, and he will support funding for it. Having made the salaries equal, the next step is for the School Board to devise a fair merit plan for its classified employees. Mrs. Cooke said she too supports a merit plan for the school classified employees and will work with her School Board appointee to achieve that. Mr. Henley said he believes everybody employed by the County should receive the same pay raise. This is the fifteenth budget ~e has worked on and there have been fifteen different pay scales and schemes. He said teachers also should receive the same raise as other County employees, although he does not believe it will ever happen. Mr. Fisher said tonight he pledges that if the School Board will adopt a merit plan for its classified employees like that of the County, he will vote for the additional funds in the FY 1985-86 year to make it possible. He said he hopes the School Board will do so and he hopes their employees will tell them what they have told the Board of Supervisors. There being no more comments from the Board regarding the County budget, at 9:05 p.m. Mr. Fisher called for a five minute recess of the meeting. Agenda Item No. 6. Public Hearing: Amend the FY-85-86 Capital Improvements Budget Re. Ivy Area School. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on March 25, 1986.) Mr. Agnor said the Board appropriated the funds requested for the new Ivy Area School at its March 12 meeting. It was learned afterward that the allocation of funds for the construction of schools in the Capital budget did not specifically cite the Ivy area school. In order to correctly appropriate the funds, a public hearing is necessary. Mr. Fisher asked if it is necessary to rescind the earlier action. This will just be a confirmation of the earlier action. Mr. Agnor said no. 48O April 2, 1986 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 8) Mr. Fisher opened the public hearing for comments regarding the partial funding of the Ivy Area School as advertised. There being no one present to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Agnor advised adopting a motion to reaffirm the Board's action taken on March 12 appropriating $200,000 from the Undesignated Fund Balance of the Capital Improvements Fund and transferring same to Code 1-9000-60640-170999 for the Ivy area school. Mr. Lindstrom made motion to this effect, which was seconded by Mr. Way. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NONE: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Agenda Item No. 7. Public Hearing: To consider extending Albemarle County Service Authority service areas for water to include a new structure at 338 Rio Road. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on March 25, 1986.) Mr. John Horne, Director of Planning and Community Development, explained a map sent to the Board as he referred to his memorandum dated March 6, 1986, set out in full in the minutes of March 12, 1986. At this point Mr. Fisher opened the public hearing. Mr. William Pleasants of Pleasants Associates, Incorporated, was present to represent Mr. Daley Craig. He said he had no further comments regarding Mr. Horne's presentation, however, he would answer any questions from the Board. There being no questions from the Board and no one else from the public to comment, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Lindstrom said although he does not generally support extensions of the service area boundaries, this location is surrounded by several structures that have public water. It is a unique proposal that does not require a significant change or set a precedent, therefore he supports the application. Mr. Fisher suggested that the Board examine the language in the request in order to preclude future problems. He referred to the words "service area to include new structure". He said the Board has been informed that this is not a new structure, but rather an addition to an existing structure. Mr. Fisher requested that this be incorporated in the motion. Mr. Lindstrom made a motion to approve the extension of the Albemarle County Service authority service areas to include this new addition to an existing structure at 338 Rio Road, Tax Map 45, Parcel 23, in the "water service to existing structures only" category. Mr. Bowie seconded the motion which carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Agenda Item No. 8. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Board and Public. Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Lindstrom to give a brief report on a meeting held on March 27, 1986, between the Board of Supervisors and Charlottesville City Council. Mr. Lindstrom said the Board of Supervisors and City Council met and agreed on a joint statement to be presented to the Governor's Commission on Transportation in the Twenty-First Century. The County and City commonly support the following issues: 1) an Eastern By-Pass for Route 29 North, 2) improvements on Route 29 North, 3) improvements Route 250 East and the bridge across the Rivanna River known as "Free Bridge", and 4) continued funding of the Meadow Creek Parkway. Mr. Lindstrom noted that an Eastern By-Pass is supported jointly on the condition that local planning and comments as to its location will be considered. Mr. Lindstrom said the County and City also agreed to create a committee to study a route for the Eastern By-Pass to be proposed to the Governor's Commission. Committee members should be appointed by the end of this month because its recommendations must be presented by July 1. The committee shall be composed as follows: one member of the City Planning Commission; one member of the County Planning Commission; two members of City Council; two members of the Board of Supervisors; Deputy County Executive, Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., and a person from City staff to be appointed by the City Manager. Mr. Lindstrom said he-and Mr. Fisher feel that the representative of the district that will sponsor this improvement should be one of the committee members from this Board. Mr. Fisher said it seems the Board does not have time to wait for the Department of Highways and Transportation to develop a plan, and if the Board does wait, it may not agree with the plan. It is better for the County to work with the City on recommendations for a plan, to which both agree in principle. He said the Committee will have a difficult task because basic assumptions must be made and there are many unknown factors. It will be a very intense process of trying to find a solution that the City and County can agree upon to as to what should be done for north-south traffic on the assumption that other city by-passes will be built resulting in a substantial increase of through traffic in the Charlottesville- Albemarle area. Mr. Fisher said he joins with Mr. Lindstrom in recommending that the Board and City try to agree to a joint proposal for the Governor's Commission. Mr. Lindstrom said he would recommend that the Chairman of the Planning Commission (Mr. David Bowerman), serve on the Committee as a representative of that whole body. Mr. Bowie said if there is to be an Eastern By-Pass, it will probably be located largely in the Rivanna District, therefore he would like to request that he be appointed as one of the Board's representatives on the Committee. Mr. Bowie pointed out that ten percent of the truck traffic on Route 29 North will amount to 4,000 trucks per day. There are other commuter problems that have nothing to do with by-passes. April 2, 1986 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 9) Mr. Fisher said he feels that one of the two Board members who also serve on the MPO should serve on the Committee. On that basis, he suggested either Mrs. Cooke or Mr. Lindstrom should be appointed. Mrs. Cooke indicated she did not desire to be on the Committee. Mr. Lindstrom said Mr. Bowerman would represent the interest of the Charlottes- ville District. He said someone who has experience with the MPO would maintain the County's concern of not having a by-pass through the watershed. Mr. Fisher asked for a motion to appoint Mr. Bowie, Mr. Lindstrom, Mr. Bowerman, and Mr. Tucker as representatives on the Committee. Mr. Way made a motion to that effect, seconded by Mr. Henley. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. Mr. Fisher gave a brief report of a meeting of the Governor's Commission on Transpor- tation in the Twenty-First Century, held March 31, 1986. He said he read a statement at the meeting prepared by County staff regarding highway project priorities. Mayor Frank Buck, whose statement followed that of Mr. Fisher, reflected essentially the same viewpoint on every project. Delegate George Allen also was present and spoke concerning improvements to Route 29 North and Free Bridge. Mr. Fisher said he would make copies of the statements from the Board and City Council available to Board members. Mr. Agnor noted that one of the expanded programs of the Parks and Recreation Department is to extend the swimming season in County parks on a pilot project. He said the swimming season is regulated by the County Code, through imposition of fees, therefore an amendment to the Code to accommodate that change needs to be advertised in order that the change can be made in time for the opening of the parks in May. Motion was then offered by Mr. Bowie to advertise for a public hearing on April 16, 1986, an amendment to Section 14-11, of the County Code entitled "Fees", in order to extend the swimming season in the County's parks. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Mr. Way asked for the following information concerning the current draining of Totier Creek Reservoir: 1) will the reservoir be restocked with fish, and 2) why cannot another type of pipe be installed that will last longer than eight or ten years? Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Tucker to coordinate the information in a staff report for the Board. Agenda Item No. 9. Adjourn. There being no other business to be discussed by the Board, Mr. Fisher adjourned the meeting at 9:40 p.m. Chairman