Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 11, 1981 Regular Meeting312 A Regular Meeting of the Frederick County Board of Super- visors was held on June 11, 1981, at 7:00 P.M. in the Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room, 9 Court Square, Winchester, Virginia. PRESENT: S. Roger Koontz, Chairman; Will L. Owings, Vice- Chairman; William H. Baker; Rhoda W. Maddox; R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. CALL TO ORDER The Chairman called the meeting to order. INVOCATION The invocation was delivered by the Reverend Fred Bowman of the Calvary Church of the Brethern. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Mr. Baker stated that he would like to add at the end of the regular session a budget workshop and in relation to this, under "Old Business ", would follow the workshop as well as the Finance Committee report. Upon motion made by Kenneth Y. Stiles, seconded by William H. Baker and passed unanimously, the agenda was adopted with the above amendments. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Stiles requested that the following corrections to the minutes of March 11, 1981 be made: Page 5, last paragraph, the prior attorney's name is spelled, "Hite ". Page 6, second paragraph should read, "Ms. Deborah Brum- back." Page 6, last paragraph, the attorney's name should be spelled, "Lanahan" Page 13, under "Old Business ", the statement that Mr. Stiles made should read, "Mr. Stiles stated that he would like to know about the remaining funds in the School Budget in the amount of $350,000.00 that was earmarked in last year's budget as the amount that was necessary for the operation of the new school at James Wood Campus." Mr. Stiles stated that he noted that the minutes referred to a meeting which was pending with the Industrial Development 313 Authority and he was curious as to whatever became of this meet- ing. Mr. Malcolm stated that the Industrial Development Author- ity position papers had been presented to the Board at a previ- ous meeting and the fact that this was done, the Industrial Development Authority did not feel there was still a need for a meeting, but was sure if it was the Boards' desire to still meet that such a meeting could be arranged. Mr. Stiles stated that with regard to the water and sewer in Lenoir City, this too was mentioned in the minutes, that the general consensus of the Planning Commission was that the site plans presented for Lenoir City would be not be looked upon too favorably if they are not hooked to water and sewer. Mr. Malcolm requested that the following corrections be made to the minutes of March 25, 1981: Page 4, paragraph 4 should read, "Senseny Road" and not "Sulpher Spring Road ". Mr. Malcolm stated that he would like to know where the County stands with regard to the legal opinion on sludge that had been referred to in the minutes. Mr. White stated that nothing has been heard from the State Officials concerning this. Mr. Malcolm inquired as to why the painting that had been presented to the Board of Supervisors had not been hung in the Board room. Mr. White stated that arrangements had been made to have this done. Upon motion made by Kenneth Y. Stiles, seconded by R. Thomas Malcolm and passed unanimously, the minutes of Regular Meetings of March 11 and March 25, 1981, and the special meeting with the Planning Commission of April 3, 1981 are approved as amended. BOB WELLS ADD RESSES THE BOARD Mr. Bob Wells, of Stephens City, addressed the Board with regard to the upcoming appointment of the School Board Member from Opequon District. Mr. Wells stated that he had submitted his application to Mr. Owings for consideration for appointment 314, to the School Board from Opequon District. Mr. Wells further stated that he had submitted a letter to Mr. Owings and that he had not heard from him until the last week in May at which time Mr. Owings informed Mr. Wells that he could not consider his application, because he felt there was a conflict of interest, due to the fact that his wife was Librarian at the Middletown School in Frederick County, and that he had spoken with the Commonwealth's Attorney, Lawrence Ambrogi, about the issue and Mr. Ambrogi concurred with Mr. Owings' opinion. Mr. Wells further stated that Mr. Owings read from the Code of Virginia, Section 2.1- 349.1, Title "Teachers and Employees of School Board Not Related to Board Members or School Supervisors, i.e., Exceptions." Mr. Wells stated that he requested that a copy of this sec- tion of the code be sent to him after such time as Mr. Owings had time to discuss this with Mr. Ambrogi. Mr. Wells stated that on June 3, he contacted Mr. Owings since he had not heard from him, and Mr. Owings informed him at that time that he was in the process of writing to him telling him he could not con- sider him due to the conflict of interest, and that Mr. Ambrogi felt there was a conflict of interest. He further stated that he had had 3 persons submit their application, those being Laura Bradbourne, Lou Costello and himself and that Mr. Owings had planned on submitting the name of Lou Costello to the Board of Supervisors for consideration to the School Board. Mr. Wells stated that he called Mr. Koontz and asked his opinion on the matter and Mr. Koontz stated that he did not feel there was a conflict of interest. Mr. Wells further stated he had contacted Mrs. Bradbourne and that Mr. Owings had informed her that she was not going to be his nominee. Mr. Wells stated that he had talked with Mr. White, County Administrator, and asked if a name had been submitted and Mr. White replied no at which time he requested that he be placed on the Boards' agenda for the next meeting. Mr. Wells noted the selection process system that is now used in the selection of School Board members stating that he couldn't help but wonder if this system was any better than the 3151 previous one used, that being the one when a school board member was selected by the School Electorial Board. Mr. Wells stated that he understood that the person's name that would be placed in nomination for this appointment also had a member of his immediate family employed by the Frederick County School system. In closing, Mr. Wells requested that the Board look closely at this selection process and to make themselves fully account- able to the voters, to the people, and the citizens of the County. Mr. Stiles asked if he could reply to some of the remarks that Mr. Wells had made. Mr. Koontz stated that he would ask if any Board members had any comments or needed any clarification. Mr. Stiles stated that he felt Mr. Wells should be replied to. Mr. Koontz stated that you may reply to Mr. Wells, but this meeting will not get into a speech making contest. Mr. Stiles stated that he felt that some of the remarks that Mr. Wells made, needed to be addressed. Mr. Koontz stated that he felt any remarks should be made at the meeting when this appointment is scheduled to be voted on. Mr. Stiles stated that he would like Mr. Wells to be in attendance, and therefore asked Mr. Wells if he could be at the meeting on June 24. Mr. Wells stated that he would be out of town on that date on vacation. Mr. Baker stated that he would like to hear any rebuttal that a Board member might have, inasmuch as Mr. Wells could not be here on June 24. Mr. Koontz stated that it will take another Board member to overrule me. I Mr. Malcolm stated that he agreed with Mr. Baker. Mr. Koontz stated that the chair is overruled. i Mr. Stiles stated that he felt political parties had not t played a part in the selection of past school board members. Mr. Stiles further stated that with regard to the confict of interest there is an Attorney General's opinion not directly related to this subject, but related to the subject of tie breakers on various governing bodies that says the conflict of interest statute is a minimum statute and that Boards and indi- viduals may hold themselves to higher standards regarding con- flicts of interest, which Mr. Owings has done and quite properly so in this case. He is not obligated to say, that just because it's legal it is right. Mr. Stiles further stated that in re- gard to the accountability issue, Mr. Owings is in fact account- able, and if the people of Opequon District are not satisfied with Mr Owings' choice they will have ample time to remind him of this. Mr. Stiles further stated that in fact, if your name had been nominated by Mr. Owings, that I would have voted against you as I feel there is a conflict of interest. Mr. Wells stated that the possibilities that he opened up were just that, possibilities. He further stated that if he had offended anyone he wished to extend his apologies as he did not intend to. Mr. Owings stated that regardless of the play on words, that this was an attack on his integrity and honesty and that he would not let politics play a part in this selection. He further stated that he did not have but 3 applicants and had he had more than 3 he would have had a committee review them, and make a recommendation. He further stated that he takes full re- sponsibiliy for the selection that he has made. Mr. Wells stated that is a point well taken, let the records show that I offer a public apology on any attack on Mr. Owings' integrity as a person, a citizen and as a Board member, I had no intention of doing that. ANNOUNCEMENT MADE OF APPOINTMENT OF LEWIS COSTELLO TO FREDERICK COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD - OPEQUON DISTRICT Mr. Owings stated that he would like to publicly thank Mr. Aylor for his years of service on the Frederick County School Board. Mr. Owings further stated that he would like everyone to know that he had not been contacted in any way concerning this 3171 appointment from any School Board member, anyone of the admini- strative staff and the same of the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Owings further stated that he would like to announce the name of Lewis Costello for a four year term on the Frederick County School Board and this is to be voted on at the meeting of June 24, 1981. MARY B. WHITACRE REAPPOIN'. GAINESBORO DISTRICT - APPI TO SOCIAL SERVICES BOARD - Upon motion made by Rhoda W. Maddox and seconded by William H. Baker, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein reappoint Mary B. Whitacre, from Gainesboro District, to the Social Services Board for a four year term, said term to commence on June 30, 1981 and terminate on June 30, 1985. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Will L. Owings, William H. Baker, Rhoda W. Maddox, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. R. THOMAS MALCOLM REAPPOINTED TO SOCIAL SERVICES BOARD - SHAWNEE DISTRICT - APPROVED Upon motion made by Kenneth Y. Stiles and seconded by Will L. Owings, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein reappoint R. Thomas Malcolm, from Shawnee District, to the Social Services Board, said term to coincide with the Board term which terminates on December 31, 1981. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Will L. Owings, William H. Baker, Rhoda W. Maddox and Kenneth Y. Stiles. Mr. Malcolm abstained. BLAINE WILSON REAPPOINTED TO THE BOARD OF BUILDING APPEALS APPROVED Upon motion made by R. Thomas Malcolm and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein reappoint Blaine Wilson to the Board of Building Appeals for a five year term, said term to commence on June 26, 1981 and terminate on June 26, 1986. 31& The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Will L. Owings, William H. Baker, Rhoda W. Maddox, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. R. THOMAS MALCOLM REAPPOINTED TO THE BRADDOCK HOUSE AS THE BOARD REPRESENTATIVE - APPROVED Upon motion made by Kenneth Y. Stiles and seconded by William H. Baker, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein reappoint R. Thomas Malcolm to the Braddock House as the Board representative to coincide with his Board term which terminates on December 31, 1981. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Will L. Owings, William H. Baker, Rhoda W. Maddox and Kenneth Y. Stiles. Mr. Malcolm abstained. Mr. Malcolm stated that Mr. Haston, the at -large member which we had listed for reappointment, was actually a city appointee at the time he was appointed. He lived in the city and during his term he had moved to the County, but is in fact still a City appointee. PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS ZMAP #003 -81 - FREDERICKTOWNE COMPANY, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA, 1.75 ACRES, NOW ZONED R -3 (RESIDENTIAL -GENE BE REZONED R -6 (MULTI- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL). THIS PROP IS DESIGNATED AS PARCEL 139 ON TAX MAP 52 - WITHDRAWN ZMAP #004 -81 - FREDERICKTOWNE COMPANY - OPE DISTRICT - DENIED Mr. Riley presented this request and stated that the Planning Commission had recommended denial of this rezoning request. Mr. George Johnston and Mr. Bruce Edens appeared before the Board on behalf of this request. Mr. Owings stated that if this area is rezoned for apart- ments he could foresee the roads needing repair and funds are not available for such repair. Mr. Sam Lehman noted what an impact this would have on the sewer system in this area. Mr. Johnston stated that based on a study received from the Highway Department there would be less traffic generated by the MAGISTERIAL apartments rather than by the commercial traffic. 319 Mr. Stiles noted that due to the fact of less traffic with this proposed rezoning and the fact that there was not that much rental property in Frederick County and that this would be down- zoning, he felt all of this should be considered. Upon motion made by Will L. Owings and seconded by R. Thomas Malcolm, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein deny the ZMAP #004 -81 of Fredericktowne Company, Winchester, Virginia, 7.424 acres, now zoned B -1 (Commercial) to be rezoned R -6 (Family- Residential). This property is designated as Parcels 37, 39 and 40 on Tax Map 75. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Will L. Owings, Rhoda W. Maddox and R. Thomas Malcolm. Nay - William H. Baker and Kenneth Y. Stiles. CUP #005 -81 - CHARLES A STROTHER, SR. - GAINESBORO MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT - APPROVED Mr. Riley presented this conditional use permit request and stated that the Planning Commission recommends approval of this conditional use permit with conditions. Mr. Strother appeared before the Board on behalf of his request. Mr. Baker asked Mr. Strother if he was satisfied with No. 6 condition, which stated that there could be no more than five automobiles on the site. Mr. Strother replied that he was. Mr. Stiles stated that he feels this should be a one year permit, if approved by the Board. Mr. McCauley and Mr. Patton, neighbors of Mr. Strother, appeared before the Board on behalf of this conditional use permit. Upon motion made by Rhoda W. Maddox and seconded by Willi H. Baker, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve the conditional use permit #005 -81 of Charles A. Strother, Sr., zoned Agricultural- 323 General (A -2) for a home occupation /accessory structure for used cars, parts sales. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Will L. Owings, William H. Baker, Rhoda W. Maddox, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. CUP #004 -81 - GRANVILLE MCCAULEY - GAINESBORO MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT - APPROVED Upon motion made by Rhoda W. Maddox and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve the conditional use permit #004 -81 of Granville McCauley, zoned Agricultural - General (A -2), for a public garage. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Will L. Owings, William H. Baker, Rhoda W. Maddox, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. CUP #007 -81 - JOHN K. A ND BRENDA T. OWINGS - OPEQUON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT - APPROVED Mr. Riley presented this conditional use permit and stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions. Upon motion made by R. Thomas Malcolm and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve the conditional use permit #007 -81 of John K. and Brenda T. Owings, Route 842, Middletown, Virginia, for an antique shop. This property is designated as Parcel 52 on Tax Map 91(A) in the Opequon Magisterial District. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, William H. Baker, Rhoda W. Maddox, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. Abstaining - Will L. Owings. Mr. Owings stated that he was abstaining from voting inasmuch as both applicants were members of his immediate family. CUP #009 -81 - MARGARET BROWN - BACK CREEK MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT - APPROVED 3211 Mr. Riley presented this conditional use permit request and stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval with certain conditions. Upon motion made by William H. Baker and seconded by Rhoda W. Maddox, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve conditional use permit #009 -81 of Margaret Brown, Route 652, Winchester, Virginia, for a beauty shop. This property is designated as Parcel 51 on Tax Map 63, in the Back Creek Magisterial District. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded H vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Will L. Owings, William H. Baker, Rhoda W. Maddox, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. CUP #008 -81 - WESLEY L. SPANGLER - SHAWNEE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT - APPROVED Mr. Riley presented this conditional use permit request and stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval with certain conditions. Upon motion made by R. Thomas Malcolm and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve conditional use permit #008 -81 of Wesley L. Spangler, Route 50, Winchester, Virginia, for an antique shop. This parcel is designated as Parcel 122 on Tax Map 65, in the Shawnee Magisterial District. The above resoltuion was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Will L. Owings, William H. Baker, Rhoda W. Maddox, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. REQUEST FOR LOTS 1, 2 AND 3 TO BE VACATED - ROSENBERGER SUBDIVISION - APPROVED Upon motion made by R. Thomas Malcolm and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve the vacating of lots 1, 2 and 3 in the Rosenberger Subdivision. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Will L. Owings, William H. Baker, 322 Rhoda W. Maddox, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. ROSENBERGER SUBDIVISION REQUEST - TWO LOTS - SHAWNEE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT - APPROVED Upon motion made by R. Thomas Malcolm and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve the Rosenberger subdivision request for two lot subdivision, 2.45 acres zoned B -2 (Commercial). The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Will L. Owings, William H. Baker, Rhoda W. Maddox, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT - FREDERICKTOWNE SECTION III - APPROVED Mr. Riley stated that Fredericktowne Company is requesting lot line adjustments on lots 147, 148 and 149 due to an error in I the location of the dwelling unit on lot 149 and the lot line adjustments are in conformity with the zoning for that area. Mr. Owings inquired as to why this had happened quite frequently in Fredericktowne. Mr. Riley stated that there had been different reasons, but in this case it was the builder's mistake, and that his depart- ment was working very closely with the Inspections Department to keep these type of mistakes to a minimum. Upon motion made by Will L. Owings and seconded by Rhoda W. Maddox, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve the lot line adjust- ments on lots 147, 148 and 149 as requested by Fredericktowne Company. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Will L. Owings, William H. Baker, Rhoda W. Maddox, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. ALLOCATIONS FOR SIX YEAR ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM - DISCUSSED After discussion the Board concurred that they would wait until a future meeting date and request that Mr. Bushman be present at this meeting for discussion of the .Six Year Road 323 Improvement Program with regard to allocations. Mr. Stiles stated that he would like to know if Route 696 f is being dropped from the six Year Road Improvement Plan. The Board recesses. FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Mr. Bill Baker requested that a change be made from the way the agenda was adopted inasmuch as he was requesting a workshop on the budget be held prior to action on the Finance Committee report, followed by action on the resolution. Mr. Baker presented the Finance Committee report and recom- mendations. The Finance Committee met on Monday, June 1, 1981 with all members present. The Committee makes the following report and recommendations: The Committee reviewed a resolution and list of adjustments and appropriations for FY81 as requested by the School Board for approval by the Board of Supervisors. The Committee expressed some concern about the absence of detailed information regarding the actual dollar amounts involved with several of the items in the list. The Committee recommends approval of the request as presented by the School Board with the additional stipulation that a full accounting be provided of the actual amounts by categories at the end of the fiscal year. The Committee noted that Mr. Perrault, from the School Board Office, will be present at the Board Meeting to discuss i any of the items that the Board may have questions about. The Committee has asked Mr. Perrault to provide as much supplemental information as possible of the actual amounts involved in the various transfers and supplements at the Board meeting. The Committee therefore recommends approval of the list as a resolution. The following budget adjustments and appropriations for the fiscal year 1980 -81 are hereby requested of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors by the Frederick County School Board: 1. Increase the Special Education Fund appropriation to include additional amounts to be received that were not anticipated at the time of budget presentation. 324 Mr. Stiles - How much? Mr. Perrault apologized for not having anymore detailed information on some of the figures than we had on June 1, this is because some of the reimbursements are just going in today. He further stated that in Special Education approximately $44,000 more dollars would be received than was budgeted, but approximately that much more was being spent in disbursements in the tuition grants alone. Mr. Stiles - That is offset by the increase in tuition? Mr. Perrault - Yes. 2. Increase School Food appropriation to include any additional funds that might be received in June in order that payment can be made to the respective schools. (All School Food Funds are 100% Federal and State money - no local funds involved except $400.00 for School Lunch tickets.). Okay. 3. Increase the budgeted amount of Incentive Funds to reflect actual receipts and to enter the additional amount on the disbursement side as needed to cover deficit items. (The actual amount for this item is not available until May of the following year after the budget has been approved.) Mr. Stiles - How much? Mr. Perrault - Approximately $50,000. Mr. Stiles - These are funds that can be spent essentially anywhere in the budget? Mr. Perrault - That is correct. 4. Increase Title I Funds to include any amounts received in the 1980 -81 year that were not budgeted or estimated and to spend any or all extra funds as needed to operate the Title I Projects. (These funds are all 100% Federal money and represent no local funds.) Mr. Stiles - How much? Mr. Perrault - I cannot answer that one because it depends on how much is spent as of the last day of June and how much they ask for reimbursement, again it is a trade off, the Federal Government will give us back what we spend. 5. Add to the 1980 -81 Budget all receipts from Title II -B CETA and to include expenditures for the fiscal year. Mr. Stiles - How much? Mr. Perrault - We get back what we spend. Mr. Stiles - In last year's budget that was $47,000. Do you have an idea about how much it will be this year? Mr. Perrault - No I do not. 6. Transfer amounts from categories with a surplus to cover anticipated deficits in 6500 (transportation). Mr. Stiles - I think we can expect an itemization of which categories and also an explanation as why there is a deficit in Transportation. Which categories are we talking about transferring funds out of? 325 Mr. Perrault - I do not know at this point. Mr. Stiles - I cannot understand why there should be a deficit in the Transportation category. Last year we, by general consensus, provided funds for the school budget with the understanding that gas, which is a major item in transportation, would be budgeted at $1.35, so if the budgeted figures we were given were correct their should be a substantial surplus in Transportation. Dr. Wright - What you say is true, and I think the highest we have paid is a $1.18, but the oil and the anti - freeze cost us more and we used more than we had estimated, and $10,000 had been taken from this item. Mr. Stiles - The oil, grease and anti - freeze is not broken down in last year's budget, but as he recalls it is only $12 to $15 thousand out of a $400,000 budget, so certainly that couldn't have had a severe impact, considering that the price of gas only averaged 75% of what was budgeted for that category, which should have resulted in a savings in this category of about $50,000. Were the number of miles grossly under estimated? Dr. Wright - I wouldn't say grossly. Mr. Stiles - requested that the figures that he had requested from Mr. Sine at the previous work shop, but still had not been received, be sent to him as soon as they were available. Is there any feel for which categories will have surpluses? Mr. Perrault - Yes, certainly Instruction will have. We are not saying for sure at this time that Transportation will have a deficit, but if it should have, we are asking permission to transfer monies from another category to cover any deficit that is there for auditor purposes. Mr. Stiles - We approve the budget every year based on certain amounts being projected as being spent in each category, then why is there that much of a difference to how the money is spent, to how it was projected to be spent? Dr. Wright - You all appropriate the budget amount, but a lot of things change during this time period which does not always make this possible. 7. Transfer $67,448.97 from 6502 - 4000 -01 Replacement of Buses to Capital Outlay 9000 - 4000 -01. Mr. Stiles - This is just a budget transfer of bus purchase money - replacement of capital outlay - does his mean that additional bus routes were added or that there are additional buses in service? Mr. Perrault - It is just a matter that when we bought the buses they were all charged into Transportation as replacement, and now they want three of them to be considered as new buses in Capital Outlay. Dr. Wright - A matter of transferring from one classification to another. 8. Transfer $34,111.97 from appropriation 6502 - 4000 -01 to 9000 - 4000 -01 to cover the deficit in item 9000 - 4000 -01 School Buses. Okay. 9. Transfer from 6501 - 3000 -01 and 6501 - 3120 -01 to 6701 - 3980 -01 the cost of repairs, parts, etc. of cars and other motor vehicles. �26 Mr. Stiles - How much? Mr. Perrault - That again I can't tell you because I have not received the paper with the figures, but sometime toward the end of this month this will be determined. 10. Add Title VI -B carry over funds received in 1980 -81 fiscal year of operation and apply these funds as needed to offset Special Education expenditures. Mr. Stiles - Any idea how much? Mr. Perrault - Part of this is in the $44,000 figure I gave you earlier. 11. Increase Title IV -D appropriation to include additional funds received during the 1980 -81 school year. Okay. 12. Add to 6601 - 3990 -02 the sum of $1,328.00 to cover the cost of the Nutrition Education Project. Mr. Stiles - Where is this money coming from? Mr. Perrault - This is a project that was approved after the budget was made and it is in school food and it is Federal money. 13. Transfer from 6201 - 1343 -01 the sum of $16,912 to cover the appropriation for 1980 -81 salary of Edwin Barnett, Psychologist, to 6401- 1112 -02 and the sum $16,912 to cover salary expenditures. This is to be included with #14. 14. Transfer from 6201 - 1343 -01 the sum of $15,577 to cover the appropriation for 1980 -81 salary of Beth Skinner, Psychologist to 6401 - 1112 -02 and the sume of $15,577 to cover salary expenditures. Included with number #13. 15. Transfer $4,581 from 6301 - 1092 -02 to 6401- 1113 -01 to cover cost of one (1) Nurse's Aide and add the sum of $4,581 to cover salary expenditures. Okay. 16. Transfer $7,208 from 6201 - 1341 -01 to 6301 - 1092 -05 and add the sum of $7,208 to cover salary expenditures for Swimming Instructor. Okay. 17. Transfer $500 from 6305 - 3064 -00 (Curriculum Materials - Industrial Arts) to 9000 - 4033 -00 (Reimbursable Equipment.) Mr. Stiles - What was this for? Mr. Perrault - They were alotted $500 in the curriculum material category in the Industrial Arts Department and they spent it on equipment, and this is just being transferred to that category. 18. Transfer items and amounts in 078 Title VI -B Flow- Through category to appropriate categories throughout the regular budget where appropriations were originally made. Mr. Stiles - Is this supplementing local money that has already been spent? 327 Mr. Perrault - When we did the Special Ed category payroll, certain of those people are called 6B Flow- Through money, and they wanted to keep track of them seperately sc they would know exactly how much was spent on 6B so we set up a special category in the back of the computer print out called 078 Title 6B Flow- Through and we have been charging it there all year, but there was no allotment because the allotment was in Special Ed and we want this put back there at this time. 19. Transfer from School Construction Fund the sum of $17,894 to School Debt Service Fund. This represents temporary interest on the $1,000,000 James Wood Ridge Campus Literary Loan. Mr. Stiles - Is there a surplus in the School Construction fund at this time? Dr. Wright - The last time I saw it, it was about $130,000. James Boyd confirmed this figure. 20. To record the amount of $7,136.97 as an appropriation in 7401 - 1000 -01 Dowell J. Howard Vocational School. This represents recovered costs from the Commonwealth of Virginia for Social Security, Retirement, and Life Insurance. The appropriation will be made from State Receipts. Okay. 22. Add amounts received (not anticipated at budget preparation time) to cover any undetermined deficits in the 1980 -81 fiscal year. Mr. Stiles - How much? Mr. Perrault - I hesitate to say. -- Mr. Stiles - Five figures - six - is it over or under $100,000? Mr. Perrault - As I stated earlier, the $44,000 that was in Special Ed which was not anticipated, $51,000 in incentive funds. Mr. Stiles - Last year if I recall the receipts not antici- pated at budget preparation time totaled approximately $180,000. Will it approach that this year? Mr. Perrault - I really don't know until we get all the money in at the end of June, other than the ones that I have already related to the others which have been sent in and we don't know if we will get it all or not. Mr. Stiles - How much have you sent in? Dr. Wright - we sent in for all the last quarter reimburse- ment. Mr. Stiles suggested that the Board also hold item number 22 for consideration. At this time Mr. Baker read #21 and 23 for the benefit of the press and public. Mr. Stiles stated that he was prepared to support this and he would request that the Board be notified when the exact figures are available. Mr. Stiles further stated that he felt that this would be time consuming, but he felt it would be help- ful if the estimated line item figure could be listed. 32 8 Dr. Wright inquired as to when the School Board could expect to have an answer to #21, 22 and 23. Mr. Koontz stated that it would be shortly as the overall j budget will now be discussed. f t Upon motion made by William H. Baker and seconded by Will L. Owings, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve the list of adjust- ments and appropriations for 1981 -82 as requested by the School Board with the exception of numbers 21, 22 and 23. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Will L. Owings, William H. Baker, Rhoda W. Maddox, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. BUDGET WORKSESSION Mr. Koontz stated that he would like to discuss with the Board the BPOL Tax. Mr. White stated that before the Board proceeded with regard to the budget he would like for the Board to review a worksheet that had been prepared by Jim Boyd, Finance Director, which shows a reevaluation of the County's current position in terms of revenue estimates. He further stated that the bottom line indicated that that there is an increase in revenue esti- mates of $160,000.00 primarily as a result of interest on deposits and payments of delinquent taxes. Mr. Stiles asked if what Mr. White was basically saying was that we can either reduce the real estate 2� to start with, or address this $160,000.00 as part of the deliberation on BPOL. Mr. White replied yes, that would be the two options, that he was not advocating increasing spending by this amount at all. Mr. Stiles stated that he was the Board member that most continuously suggested that the BPOL Tax be examined as an alternative to the Merchants Capital Tax. He further stated that the Board had been given a figure and in our worksessions had been given no basis for that figure, and the resolution, that is addressed under Tab B, in tonight's agenda states that appropriations in the amount of 24 1/2 million dollars is hereby being authorized and that if the Board approves this resolution it will in fact be appropriating money with funds for which are 329 dependent upon an ordinance that does not exist, and that is quite frankly, a bassackwards way to do business. He further stated that he did not see how the Board can figure a budget based on revenue that we don't know for sure we are going to have. That ordinance may and may not pass and if we approve it approve it based on this we are in effect locking ourselves in at approving a budget at whatever rate is necessary to generate this revenue. Mr. White stated that part of the thinking on the BPOL pro- posal initially was to offset impact on the real estate tax. The estimates on the amount of tax BPOL might collect are properly categorized as estimates, and the County is currently engaged in an accounting study to do a detailed evaluation, and that the primary report received thus far stated that the pre- liminary estimates were very realistic. He further stated that this was in fact locking the Board in for a revenue adjustment to make up this amount and if the Board is uncomfortable, then the proposed BPOL Tax should be removed until such time as the accounting study is complete. Mr. Owings stated that at all the Finance Committee meet- ings he had questioned the reality of this figure and he had not changed his opinion. Mr. Baker stated that it would be appropriate to offer a suggestion in lieu of the BPOL Tax which we estimate to be $380,000.00, recognizing what this would do to the taxation factor. He further stated that he would like to offer a sugges- tion for the Board's consideration to make up for this $380,000.00. Mr. Stiles stated that he felt the concept was superior to the inventory tax that the County now has, but he finds it inexcusable that we get down to twenty days before the budget year starts and we still don't know what the hell we are talking about, and I don't see how the Board can be asked to make a decision on this. s Mr. Stiles asked Mr. Baker if he was suggesting that the Board leave $115,000.00 as an inventory tax and replace dollar for dollar BPOL, and if this was the case, are you suggesting that the whole $380,000.00 be wiped out, and that the County 333 budget for neither tax. Mr. Baker stated if Mr. Stiles and the rest of the Board i are interested I have something I would like to offer for con- ! 1 sideration in lieu of the BPOL Tax. Mr. Baker further stated i that in leu of the BPOL Tax he would suggest that we give con- k sideration to keeping the inventory tax approximately j $120,000.00. We anticipate additional revenue of approximately I $160,000.00. We remove from the School budget $50,000.00 and i Y remove from the General Operating Fund the County's portion of e the budget $50,000.00, and with this we would come up with $380,000.00 with one offsetting the other. It does not however, effect the tax rate. M Mr. Owings stated that in the printout the BPOL is $398,106.00. He asked if it had been revised. s Mr. Stiles stated that we are still short $18,000.00. Mr. I Stiles asked Mr. Baker what area he was suggesting that the 1 $50,000.00 be taken from in the General Operating Fund. Mr. Baker replied from all areas that we can pull from that I we are not obligated to follow through with capital, etc. Mr. Stiles asked if Mr. Baker was suggesting that the Finance Committee would come back to the Board with recommenda- tions to the Board or that the administration would be given the authority to do this. Mr. Baker stated that whatever the Board decided. Mr. White stated that if this was the desire of the Board this could be taken to the staff and then brought back to the Finance Committee for their general operating aspect of this. Mr. White further stated that he felt this should be reviewed by the Finance Committee in the overall budget. He further stated that the General Operating Fund was hit pretty hard this year trying to hold the increase down, which was only 3% over the current year. He further stated that there had been a discus- sion at one of the budget worksessions about capital outlay items, with one of those being $58,000.00 in the Parks and Recreation Department, specifically the Clearbrook renovation. Mr. Stiles asked that if the accounting firm comes back with the right figures does that mean we could switch over to 331 the BPOL Tax. Mr. White stated that the statutes allow that the BPOL could be adopted at any time. Mr. Owings inquired as to when these taxes would be scheduled for payment. Mr. Owings further stated that this puts us back to square one and that he was of the opinion that after the meeting on June 4, that the people of the County are unhappy with the amount of tax increase that is being proposed, and it would seem to him that the only place for this to come from is either services or salaries. If the people are unhappy with the tax rate they are going to have to accept less services and the Board has to decide in a hurry what we are going to do. Mr. Stiles suggested that the Board discuss suggesstions for adjustments to the real estate rate and then consider all of this as a package. Mrs. Maddox stated that she would like to address the reassessment. She further stated that the County had not had a State reassessment since 1974 and alot of the people saw a significant change upward in their reassessment. She further stated that if someone had purchased a house around 1974 or 75 and tried to purchase the same house in 1980, prior to reassess- ment, you would've had to pay alot more. This new reassessment brought the property values into line with the inflationary economy and that the tax rate that is being proposed is 58� which is a penny less than last year's. She further stated that if a person would not have any increase in his reassessment he will actually pay less tax this coming year than he paid last year. She further stated that the ones hardest hit in what she had been able to determine in talking to the people are the farmers. Some of the land owned by the farmers has been assessed at just about $1,000.00 an acre in her district and she did not think this was a fair amount to put on open land that someone was trying to farm. The Land Use has been of an assist- ance to those that qualify. She further stated that the amount of a person's tax increase will be proportioned to the amount of a person's reassessment, which is not, an increase on the reassessment plus another tax. 33� Mr. Stiles stated that Mrs. Maddox is correct insofar as she goes. The fact remains that the projected advertised tax rate would bring the County about a million and a quarter dollars more out of the pockets of the people of Frederick County, in the form of a real estate tax, and the point needs to be made that the increases will be grossly disproportioned. There will be some that will be paying less real estate tax than they did last year, but they will be far and few between. He further stated that there will be some whose tax bill will double because of the effect of the reassessment. This is the same thing that happened in the reassessement in 1974. He further stated that basically the farmers will be paying approx- imately 32% more in real estate tax and more, this tax burden will be transferred to those least likely able to pay. Mr. Koontz stated that he did not feel enough taxes were being collected from the trailers within the County. Mr. White stated that if it is the Board's desire that $60,000.00 come from the General Operating Fund he feels it should come from the capital projects first. Mr. Koontz stated that in his personal opinion it would be more reasonable to take out the fixing of a ballfield or fence then to go into the area of education. Mr. Stiles stated that he didn't feel this portion should be considered separate from the whole budget, and whatever options might be available to the Board might effect what the Board wants to do with regard to these reductions. Mr. Stiles further stated that he felt the $135,000.00 in the School Construction Fund should be transferred to Debt Repayment and reduce the local contribution to the School Debt Fund by $135,000.00 which would give us another $135,000.00 rather than to just leave that there to come back next year and be told that we don't know what's where. Mr. Jim Boyd, Finance Director, stated that this had already been taken care of. Mr. Stiles stated in fact the $135,000.00 is now 0. Mr. Boyd stated that this has already been pulled forward, that he had anticipated what they are going to have left in 333 this fund. Mr. Stiles noted this is reflected in the 58¢ tax rate, essentially there is no current surplus. Mr. Boyd stated there will not be a surplus. Mr. Baker staged that he thought quite seriously we have reviewed all areas. I use the term massage the budget and that definitely has been done. We have massaged the hell out of the budget, I feel we have anyway. Mr. Stiles stated that he would like to address the subject of the School budget. There are still a number of items which v I indicate that this budget represents a reduction, when in fact t it represents an expansion. The ten new positions are still in 4 the budget, there is monies for lowering ceilings at Stonewall i School which is nice, but not necessary, there is money for landscaping at the new campus, which is nice, but not necessary, there is money for rebuilding a road, which we were told would k not be used and noone can tell me that there are areas in the i School budget that can't be reduced. He further stated that there are some current positions in the School budget that are j not necessary. Mr. Koontz inquired as to what specific positions, Mr. Stiles was speaking of. i Mr. Stiles stated that he had been told that the State su gested that in order to meet all criteria for certification that an assistant principal is recommended at Elementary Schools over 600 enrollment, and if you do not have that, then you get essen- tially a demerit against your certification. Is this not i correct? s r Mr. Malcolm stated that this was correct. Mr. Stiles stated that when the sixth grade was removed from the Senseny Road School, the enrollment then dropped to 550. Mr. Malcolm stated that the School budget could be reduced i considerably if we operated an absolute minimum in all areas. Mr. Stiles stated that he was not suggesting that that be done for one minute, but that he felt if the School budget con- tinues to grow at the rate it has been growing, that these 334. issues need to be addressed and that this needs to be done before this date. Mr. Baker stated that one of the problems the Finance Committee was faced with was the receipt of the School budget. We are dealing with something that has been habitual in this County apparently for years and in an endeavor to improve on the process, we're going to ask the Finance Committee for the School budget to be in at a time that would give every opportunity to whoever is on that Finance Committee, and hopefully the Board, to review the budget at an earlier date and time. He further stated that we received the budget this year in late March and this did not help the situation. Mr. Stiles stated that if the minutes of the Board for the first meeting of this year were checked, that he suggested at that time that the Finance Committee and the budget committee and the School Board sit down and start meeting on a regular basis to try and figure where we were going. Mrs. Maddox stated that she felt that the problem goes beyond that, no matter when the school budget comes in, and she hoped that it would come in earlier, we have been told time and time again that the Board cannot look at line items on the School budget. We are told that we have to approve the School budget by categories. When we are restricted, if we have questions about the landscaping etc., we cannot say that this is what you have to cut from this budget, and when we do tell the School board to cut the budget and they cut an item like gasoline in order to meet our requirements, and then come back and we need to transfer funds from one area to another because they have a deficit in gasoline. To me that is not a problem the Board is allowed to address. Mr. Stiles stated that he agreed with Mrs. Maddox. He stated that he had been saying ever since he had been on the Board, and this Board has not been willing to take the necessary steps to approve School monies by categories and, not only that, we come in here at the end of the year and are asked for blanket permission to transfer from whatever category, whatever suits somebody, and that is wrong and everyone knows it's wrong. If 3351 we are going to do that we might as well not even look at the School budget, decide how much we can afford to give them and tell them to take it and spend it however they want and come back at the end of the year and tell us what they have done. He further stated that he felt this was no way to deal with tax- payers' money, and he stated that according to his calculations about 60 to 65% of our budget is salaries and fringe benefits. If we are going to address this we are going to have to address salaries. He further stated that he thought that rather than going this route that everyone in the County should be given a thousand to twelve hundred dollar pay raise or whatever we felt the County could afford, which he felt would be a lot more fair then what we are doing right now. Mr. Stiles inquired as to where the money was coming from to implement the Municipal Advisors recommendations. Mr. White stated that this has been set aside from the reassessment budget. Mr. Stiles inquired as to how much this was going to be. Mr. White stated 60 to 70 thousand dollars. Mr. Stiles asked how much is being set aside to implement those recommendations. Mr. White stated that this is still being worked. We expect the amount in the fund to be more than enough. Mr. Stiles stated that he felt we should have these facts before the budget is approved. We are approving a budget right now that includes some pay raises that are way out of line with the 10% that everyone is being told that they are going to get. Mr. White stated that it was reported that this 10% was a planning factor in the budget. Mr. Stiles inquired as to whether or not there would be those pay raises that will be substantially more than 10 %. Mr. White stated that he had never said otherwise. Mr. Baker stated that if he was not mistaken, Mr. Stiles had concurred with this theory. Mr. Stiles stated yes, that is concerning merit pay. Mr. Malcolm stated that if this budget is approved tonight noone gets more than 10% until this Board takes subsequent 336 action to give more than that, and asked if this was not correct. Mr. White stated that his position on that is that noone is getting anything until we get this thing sorted out, until we get the detailed recommendations. Mrs. Maddox asked Mr. White if he was saying that he was setting aside an overall 10% increase from last year's budgeted salaries and that after the study is analized and adopted by this Board, the salaries would be the 10%. Mr. Stiles stated that individual salaries needed to be set out in the budget so that it would be known what the individual was being paid. Mr. Malcolm asked Mr. Jim Boyd about the $560,000.00 that came in last year that was not anticipated. Mr. Boyd stated that that included School funds and every- thing. Mr. Malcolm asked how much of that $560,000.00 would have been County General Operating Fund opposed to School or other operations. Mr. Boyd stated that he had thought about $399,000.00 and that some monies might be ].eft over, but he didn't feel it would be very much. Mr. Stiles stated that he would suggest that the same logic be applied to the School budget that he had suggested be applied to the County budget, wherein at mid year, if it appears like 55 or 60 percent of the funds in that category, or that department, had been expended then this should be discussed at that time. Mr. Malcolm asked Mr. Boyd what was the earliest date that the school could give an intelligent decision on these figures. Mr. Boyd stated that they really don't know until the end of June. Mr. Stiles stated that he would like to suggest for consid- eration in the resolution for the remaining items on the School budget, that the resolution read the expenditures in the School operating fund be limited to $13,103,000.00 and however many dollars were budgeted and increase the Federal and State revenues where possible to be used to offset local funds in the 33 current year's budget. Mr. Stiles further stated that he would like to request that the School Board and the administration provide the Board a listing or summary of how much funds are needed to be spent to meet the State standards of quality, and compare this at how much is actually being spent so that the Board will know what is being budgeted. Mr. Stiles requested that a total figure be given for what it would cost the County for each employee to receive a flat across -the -board increase, whatever it was determined the County could afford. He further stated that he would like to know the status of the County car policy, he felt the study was way overdue and he would like to request that a report on this be done in thirty days. Mr. Stiles stated that he thought it was inexcusable that the budget was allowed to drag on as it had and that the Board needed to take a long hard look at the budget process. He further stated that he thought a tax increase of this degree i s was unconscionable. Upon motion made by William H. Baker and seconded by Rhoda W. Maddox, WHEREAS a notice of public hearing and a budget synopsis has been published and a public hearing held on June 4, 1981, in accordance with Title 15.1, Chapter 4, Section 15.1 -162, of the Code of Virginia, 1950 as amended, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, that the budget for the 1981 -82 I fiscal year as outlined in the document titled "Fiscal Plan 1981 -82 Frederick County, Virginia" be hereby approved in the amount of $24,236,138.00 and that appropriations in the amount of $24,236,138.00 be hereby authorized for the 1981 -82 fiscal i year and, i BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED That the Board of Supervisors of the I County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein adopt the tax rate I for the fiscal year 1981 -82 as herein presented at a rate of 581 r ? to be applied to real estate and the rate of $4.35 to be applied to personal property and Merchants Capital be set at same and eliminate estimate from BPOL Tax and further, request that the * School Board and Finance Committee to return to the Board recom- 333 mendations for $60,000.00 each out of the respective budgets which will be reflected in the fiscal plan and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED That appropriations are hereby auth- orized for the central stores fund, special welfare fund, school textbook fund and unemployment compensation fund equal to the total cash balance on hand at July 1, 1981 plus the total amount of receipts or appropriations for the fiscal year 1981 -82. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Will L. Owings, William H. Baker, Rhoda W. Maddox and R. Thomas Malcolm. Nay - Kenneth Y. Stiles. FUNDS IN THE LANDFILL PURCHASE FUND - DISCUSSED Mr. Stiles asked about whether or not the landfill purchase fund was still in existance or if it had been depleted. Mr. Jim Boyd, Finance Director, stated this was not includ- ed in the budget. Mr. Stiles asked if the amount left in this fund was $180,000.00 which is the amount left from the current $200,000.00 from surplus that was set aside for the Crown America Shopping Center. Mr. Boyd stated that it was discussed that this money would be used for that purpose if need be, but was never placed in the budget as such. Mr. Stiles stated that this has never been transferred so these monies still exist. Mr. Boyd replied that that was correct. Mr. Stiles asked if there were any funds being set aside this year for landfill purchase other than this amount. Mr. Boyd replied no, there was not. BOARD MEMBER CONCERN Mr. Stiles stated that at the public hearing on June 6 the Board adopted Rules of Order at the beginning of the meeting, and that he thought the Chairman was 2ntirely out of line in his comments to the audience in violation of the rules that had been presented at that meeting. 3391 NUMBER 21 OF THE SCHOOL BOARD BUDGET TRANSFERS OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR BUDGET 1981 -82 - DISCUSSED Mr. Baker stated that the $110,000.00 budget balance for the School Board was being requested to be transferred to the 81 -82 budget, of this $110,000.00; Blue Cross /Blue Shield premium increase of $42,000.00, $2.00 per pupil for instruc- tional supplies for a total of $15,000.00, library aides $18,000.00, library books for Ridge Campus, $15,000.00 and $20,000.00 for gifted and talented program for a total of $110,000.00. Mr. Stiles inquired as to what would happen to any funds over $110,000.00. Mr. Baker made the following suggestion that the School Board be authorized to transfer for the specific items as sta in the amount of $110,000.00 and any additional funds over and beyond $110,000.00 be transferred back to the General Fund. Mr. Stiles stated that he felt a limit of total expendi- tures for the School Operating Fund should be limited to $13,103,022.00. ITEMS 21, 22 AND 23 OF THE SCHOOL BOARD BUDGET - ADJUSTMENTS AND APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1980 -81- Upon motion made by William H. Baker, seconded by Rhoda W. N Maddox and passed unanimously, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein agree to table items 21, 22 and 23 listed in the School Board budget adjustments and appropriations for the fiscal year 1980 -81. Mr. Stiles inquired as to how soon the County would be ready to fill the position of Building Inspector. Mr. White stated that this would be done very soon. UPON MOTION DULY MADE, SECONDED AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, IT IS ORDERED THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DO NOW ADJOURN. i airma oard o upervi rs t ; erk, Board of Supervisors