|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Chesterfield OfficialsBOARD OF SUPERVISORSMINUTESApril 11, 2007
Mr. Miller called the regularly scheduled meeting to order at 3:11 p.m. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR MARCH 28, 2007 On motion of Mrs. Humphrey, seconded by Mr. King, the Board approved the minutes of March 28, 2007, as submitted. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 2. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS Mr. Ramsey stated the state and local flags in the county are flying at half-mast, in accordance with the Governor’s authorization, to honor Sergeant Forrest Cauthorn, U.S. Army, who lost his life in Iraq on April 5, 2007. He noted that Sergeant Cauthorn was a 2003 graduate of Manchester High School. 2.A. RECOGNITION OF SAFE FOR RECEIVING NATIONAL COALITION ACADEMY’S CHAIRMAN’S AWARD Mr. Ramsey introduced Mr. Wayne Frith, Executive Director of SAFE (Substance Abuse Free Environment). Mr. Frith informed the Board that the SAFE coalition recently graduated from the National Coalition Academy and was selected to receive the Chairman’s Award for exemplary applications of planning products to reduce substance abuse in the county. He expressed appreciation to the Board for its financial support and also to Youth Planning and Development staff members Patty Glazier, Sharyl Adams and Jana Carter for their support. Mr. Miller expressed appreciation to Mr. Frith for SAFE’s efforts in the prevention of substance abuse. 2.B. CJW MEDICAL CENTER ANNOUNCEMENT Mr. Ramsey introduced Mr. Peter Marmerstein, Chief Executive Officer of CJW Medical Center, and Ms. Tracy Stallings, Chief Operations Officer of Johnston-Willis Hospital. Mr. Marmerstein announced that a 60,000 square foot, $30 million Thomas Johns Cancer Hospital will be constructed on the Johnston-Willis campus. He provided details of services and technology that will be available at the facility. He expressed appreciation to the Board for the county’s efforts in the redevelopment of the Midlothian Turnpike Corridor. He shared statistics relative to the positive economic impact of Johnston-Willis Hospital in Chesterfield County and recognized the outstanding work of Chesterfield Fire and EMS personnel. Mr. Miller expressed appreciation for all that Johnston-Willis Hospital does for the residents of Chesterfield. Mr. Ramsey expressed appreciation to Mr. Marmerstein for making the formal announcement in front of the Board. He also thanked Ms. Stallings for serving on the first Community Development Authority created by the county. Mr. Sowder congratulated Mr. Marmerstein and Ms. Stallings on this terrific project. 3. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS There were no Board member reports at this time. 4. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE AGENDA ITEMS AND ADDITIONS, OR CHANGES IN THE ORDER OF PRESENTATION On motion of Mr. Sowder, seconded by Mr. King, the Board added Item 8.B.2.f., Adoption of Resolution Recognizing Reverend Pernell Johnson, Senior Pastor, First Baptist Church Midlothian; replaced Item 15.E., Public Hearing to Consider the Exercise of Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of Southside Electric Cooperative, Incorporated Easements for Pole and Guy Wire Relocation Required for the Southwest Corridor Waterline Project – Part B; replaced Item 15.G., Public Hearing to Consider the Exercise of Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of Water and Temporary Construction Easements for the Southwest Corridor Waterline Project – Part A; and adopted the Agenda, as amended. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 5. RESOLUTIONS There were no resolutions at this time. 6. WORK SESSIONS O WORK SESSION ON COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR’S PROPOSED FY2008AMENDED BUDGET, THE PROPOSED FY2008 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT AND HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP ANNUAL PLAN, THE PROPOSED FY2008-FY2012 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM,AND OTHER ORDINANCE CHANGES Mr. Ramsey provided details of a report of the Auditor of Public Accounts, which indicates that Chesterfield County has the eighth lowest cost of school systems in the state in terms of cost per student. He stated Chesterfield is actually the most efficient and has the lowest cost per pupil of all the school systems in Central Virginia. He then provided details of a report of the Auditor of Public Accounts of county operations, which indicates that Chesterfield has the second lowest cost per resident of any jurisdiction over 100,000 population in the state. He noted that since the report was developed, the number one jurisdiction, Spotsylvania, has increased its tax rate by 21 cents to address a major road plan. He noted that Henrico County falls just below Chesterfield and stated the difference between the two actually equates to $45 million, which is equivalent to 15 cents in terms of tax rate. He stated this information indicates that both the county government and school system are operating very efficiently. Mr. Miller stated this information is remarkable. In response to Mr. Miller’s question, Mr. Ramsey stated the Auditor of Public Accounts is responsible for overseeing the audits of all localities and school systems in the state, and the reports are prepared based on actual audit figures. Mr. Carmody came forward and provided an overview of the County Administrator’s recommended changes to the FY2008 Biennial Financial Plan and the FY2008 Community Development Block Grant Program. He noted that staff is requesting that the Habitat for Humanity funding of $50,000 be moved to unallocated until such time that further discussions can be held with the Habitat group, as well as the Jefferson Davis Association regarding the executive director position. He stated the General Assembly adopted legislation this year authorizing local governments to adopt a higher pension benefit for public safety positions beginning July 1, 2007, noting that a locality would have to adopt an authorizing resolution to opt into that program. He further stated the latest information indicates that localities would be required to fund that pension benefit in the year it is opted into. He stated the cost for FY2008 is estimated at $1.5 million, and staff is recommending that, if the Board chooses to move forward with this program, funds be appropriated from debt service savings anticipated in the current year that would show up with Results of Operations in the Fall of 2007, and also through debt services savings in FY2008. He noted that an item will come before the Board in the future to consider adopting a resolution opting into the pension benefit. In response to Mr. Miller’s question, Mr. Ramsey stated staff is identifying the public safety pension issue and asking that the money be set aside should the Board take action to implement the benefit change. Mr. Carmody stated a Senior Engineer position in Transportation is a recommended change to address workload increases. He further stated Mr. Ramsey has requested that $500,000 for park land acquisition funding be identified as a priority to be considered with the FY2007 Results of Operations. He provided details of the County Administrator’s recommended changes to the proposed FY2008-2012 Capital Improvement Program. He then reviewed Board members’ recommended changes, including funding from the Matoaca District Improvement Fund for the CARES Shelter and for the purchase of pagers for Fire and EMS volunteers; $800 use of reserve for the Richmond Forum requested by Mr. Warren; and additional BPOL relief for retailers, requested by Mr. King. In response to Mr. Miller’s question, Mr. Carmody stated one cent of the BPOL tax for retailers with gross receipts of $3.5 million and less equates to $85,000 in revenue. In response to Mr. King’s question, Mr. Ramsey stated the BPOL rates will be discussed at a later time. He further stated the $340,000 budget request for additional BPOL relief for retailers would accommodate a reduction when the BPOL rates are considered. Mr. King requested that the Board members consider setting this funding aside until the BPOL rates are adopted. Mrs. Humphrey stated she wants to fully fund the CARES Shelter’s budget request, using Mataoca District Improvement Funds to make up the difference. She further stated she will work the Chief Mauger regarding funding of volunteer pagers with Matoaca District Improvement Funds, rather than the General Fund. In response to Mrs. Humphrey’s question, Mr. Ramsey stated the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission has requested that the Board begin setting aside money for options on park land because of increasing difficulties in finding adequate land in the areas where the facilities need to be built. Mr. Carmody provided the Board with a list of actions associated with the budget that are being requested of the Board. He then recognized the staff of Budget and Management for their tremendous support during his first year as Budget Director. Mr. Miller thanked Mr. Carmody and his staff for their efforts in preparing this year’s budget, indicating that it has been an extremely difficult year. There was brief discussion relative to setting aside money to accommodate a BPOL rate reduction for retailers, if the Board chooses to do so later. Mr. King stated he would support the funding of pagers for volunteers. Mr. Miller stated he is not prepared to make a decision today regarding a BPOL rate reduction and would also like additional time to discuss the funding of volunteer pagers with Chief Mauger. Mr. Sowder stated he would also like to discuss BPOL in greater detail before making a decision to set money aside for rate reductions. In response to Mr. King’s question, Mr. Ramsey stated staff recommends that if the Board is going to consider the BPOL reduction, the budget be amended to reflect what is being requested. He further stated, if the Board is not comfortable taking that action, the budget would have to be amended at a later time to accommodate a BPOL reduction. Mr. King stated he supports setting the funding aside now. Mr. Miller stated he is not comfortable in setting aside funds at this time for a possible BPOL rate reduction. Mr. Warren stated he was prepared to support setting aside $85,000 for a BPOL rate reduction, but would prefer to defer the issue of setting aside $340,000 for this reduction. Mrs. Humphrey clarified that she intends to provide additional funding for the CARES shelter and funding for the purchase of volunteer pagers from her District Improvement Funds. Mr. Ramsey suggested that the Board discuss the tax rate prior to addressing budgetary issues. 7. DEFERRED ITEMS There were no deferred items at this time. 8. NEW BUSINESS 8.A. BUDGET ITEMS 8.A.5. TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE ANNUAL TAX LEVY ON VARIOUS CLASSES OF REAL ESTATE AND PERSONAL PROPERTY Mr. Ramsey stated the budget is based on a real estate tax rate of $0.99, one cent of which is designated for the road plan, and it also reflects a five-cent reduction from the current tax rate. Mr. Miller expressed concerns relative to the progression of increased assessments since 2004. He stated there are many elderly residents in the Dale District on fixed incomes, who can no longer afford to live in their residences. He further stated the $0.99 advertised tax rate, combined with a 16 percent increase in assessments equal a 10 percent increase in taxes. He stated a $0.95 tax rate would result in a 7 to 7.5 percent increase in taxes, which exceeds the composite index for inflation and population change. He further stated increased assessments represent increased taxes. He again expressed concerns relative to progressive cumulative increased assessments. Mr. Miller then made a motion for the Board to adopt a tax rate ordinance establishing the tax rates for calendar year 2007, including a $0.95 real estate tax rate. Mr. Warren seconded Mr. Miller’s motion. He stated he does have questions about the impact of the $0.95 real estate tax rate on the latest budget figures the Board has been provided. He inquired whether Mr. Miller’s motion included delaying the one-cent real estate tax proposed for road funding. Mr. Miller clarified that his motion would not include setting aside one cent of the $0.95 real estate tax rate for transportation, indicating that he would prefer to defer the road plan until next year. He stated, although the impact of the state’s transportation funding is unknown, he is hopeful that the General Assembly will be correcting the transportation plan and providing relief to localities next year. Mr. Sowder expressed concerns that increases in household incomes have generally not exceeded 4 to 5 percent. He stated he supports deferring setting aside one cent of the real estate tax for transportation until next year for the reasons Mr. Miller provided. He further stated the county is already pursuing innovative solutions to transportation issues with developers. He stated, in his opinion, everyone wants the best school system possible, and no one wants to do anything that would adversely impact the school system. He further stated, in his opinion, the tax rate could be reduced below $0.99 without impacting the schools. He commended Mr. Ramsey and staff on maintaining county operations and the school system on a low level of spending per capita. He stated the citizens are overwhelmingly concerned about increased taxes if the $0.99 real estate rate is adopted in relation to their income. He further stated he can easily see reducing the tax rate an additional two cents below the $0.99, with no adverse impact to the county. Mrs. Humphrey inquired about the impact of a $0.95 real estate tax rate on the school budget, future budgets, and the county’s bond rating. Mr. Ramsey provided details of the impact of reducing the real estate tax rate from $0.99 to $0.95 on the proposed FY2008 budget, as well as the current budget. He stated, assuming that we move forward with the road plan, staff sees difficulty in the third year of sustaining the $0.99 rate, and if the rate goes lower, in his opinion, the county’s financial strength will be put at risk. He stated the bond rating agencies have just confirmed the county’s AAA rating, and one of the county’s main strengths they talked about was multi-year planning. He further stated major adjustments to school and county allocations would be necessary to accommodate and sustain a $0.95 tax rate, and it is his opinion that this would put the county’s bond rating at risk. He stated he would recommend that the Board plan for additional tax rate reductions in next year’s budget and direct staff to make reductions there if possible. He noted the Board has made the largest real estate tax reductions in county history in the past two years. Mr. King stated he supports responsible tax rate reductions. He further stated he would have a problem if asked to reduce the annual budget of his business and expressed concerns relative to the impact of an additional reduction on the school budget that has already been prepared. He stated, in his opinion, either the county’s bond rating is important and the state auditor’s report is correct, or they are not. He further stated, with the challenges the county is facing with VRS benefits packages, health care, and public safety retirement changes, he is predicting that the county will not be able to sustain its real estate tax rate. He noted that he is supportive of the public safety VRS benefit change. He stated, if the Board is not satisfied with the State Auditor’s report, then the county should hire an outside auditor to determine how well the county is operating. He expressed concerns relative to declining services to citizens and a negative impact of the county’s bond rating if the tax rate is reduced lower than $0.99. He stated it is absurd to say that schools will not be impacted by additional tax rate reductions. He expressed concerns relative to delaying the one cent proposed to be set aside for transportation, indicating that the impact of state funding for transportation is still unknown. He stated there are many pressing road issues in the county that should not be delayed an additional year. He requested that the Board adopt a responsible real estate tax rate. Mr. Miller stated he understands Mr. King’s position. He further stated he arrived at a $0.95 tax rate by starting with the revenue neutral rate and applying composite index of population and inflation. He stated he hopes the tax rate decrease will not impact the county’s bond rating. He further stated the county will still receive a 7 to 8 percent increase in revenue with a $0.95 real estate tax rate. He stated the Board cannot be less than cognizant that many of the citizens being served are really suffering because of increased taxes. Mr. Micas noted that tax rates require approval by the majority of the full Board and, therefore, must be approved with three votes. Mr. Warren stated he supports an outside audit to determine whether the county is moving in the right direction. He further stated he was very involved in meetings with the consultant who helped the county achieve its AAA bond rating from all three rating agencies. He noted that one of the factors involved in the bond rating is the willingness of the public to support public facilities and expenditures. There was brief discussion relative to budget surpluses over recent years. In response to Mr. King’s question, Mr. Ramsey stated the two major elements of the AAA bond rating are: 1) the county will carry at least a 7.5 percent fund balance, and 2) the county’s debt will not exceed 10 percent of the budget. He expressed concerns that the bond rating could be impacted by a real estate tax rate reduction, combined with other issues such as retiree health care expenses and CDA proposals. Mr. King stated the county is continuing to grow, so there is more revenue, but that does not take into account the programs that are imposed by state and federal agencies. He inquired whether citizens would be willing to trade understaffing of public safety for a reduced real estate tax rate. He again suggested an external audit and deferral of an additional tax rate reduction until next year. Mr. Miller stated this is a critical issue, which will impact young couples who are struggling with mortgage payments, as well as elderly residents on fixed incomes. He further stated he does not want to do anything that will hurt the financial status of the county. He expressed concerns that the county cannot provide additional tax relief to its citizens, even though it would still be receiving increased revenues. Mr. Ramsey stated staff will do whatever the Board directs it to do and will also do everything possible to try to ensure that the bond rating is not impacted. He discussed recommended county budget adjustments if the Board were to reduce the tax rate to $0.97. Mr. Sowder stated, in his opinion, all Board members are passionate about the county and the school system. He stated he would have difficulty reducing the tax rate to $0.95, but believes that relief can be provided to the taxpayers without serious impacts. He further stated he is leaning more towards a $0.97 tax rate. Mr. Miller called for a vote on his motion, seconded by Mr. Warren, for the Board to adopt an ordinance establishing the annual tax levy on various classes of real estate and personal property, including a $0.95 real estate tax rate. Ayes: Miller and Warren. Mr. Sowder made a motion for the Board to adopt an ordinance establishing the annual tax levy on various classes of real estate and personal property, including a $0.97 real estate tax rate, and without setting aside one cent of the real estate tax revenue for transportation. Mr. Warren stated he will second Mr. Sowder’s motion since the $0.95 tax rate was not approved, and this would be a compromise. Mr. King stated he could support the motion if the one-cent transportation component remained in place. Mr. Miller stated he is fully supportive of the transportation plan, but when he began looking at the impacts, he felt it would be appropriate to defer setting aside one cent of the real estate tax revenue. He further stated he will support the motion. Mr. Miller then called for a vote on the motion of Mr. Sowder, seconded by Mr. Warren, for the Board to adopt the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH THE ANNUAL TAX LEVY BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield that for the year beginning on the first day of January, 2007, and ending on the thirty‑first day of December, 2007, the taxes on property in all the Magisterial Districts of the County of Chesterfield shall be as follows: Sec. 1. Real Property and Mobile Homes. (a) Except as provided in Sec. 1 (b), on tracts of land, lots or improvements thereon and on mobile homes the tax shall be $0.97 on every $100 of assessed value thereof. (b) On tracts of land, lots or improvements thereon and on mobile homes in the Charter Colony Powhite Parkway Transportation District the tax shall be $1.12 on every $100 of assessed value thereof. Sec. 2. Personal Property. (a) On automobiles, trailers, boats, boat trailers, other motor vehicles and on all tangible personal property used or held in connection with any mining, manufacturing or other business, trade, occupation or profession, including furnishings, furniture and appliances in rental units, the tax shall be $3.60 on every $100 of the assessed value thereof. (b) On aircraft as defined by Section 58.1‑3503 and ‑3506 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the tax shall be $.50 on every $100 of the assessed value thereof. (c) On motor vehicles owned or leased by members of volunteer rescue squads, volunteer fire departments, volunteer police chaplains and by auxiliary police officers as provided in Section 9-57, Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, the tax shall be $.96 on every $100 of the assessed value thereof. (d) On wild or exotic animals as defined by Section 58.1‑3506 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the tax shall be $0.01 on every $100 of the assessed value thereof. (e) On motor vehicles which use clean special fuels as defined in Section 58.1‑2101 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the tax shall be $3.24 on every $100 of the assessed value thereof. (f) On motor vehicles, trailers, and semitrailers with a gross vehicle weight of 10,000 pounds or more used to transport property for hire by a motor carrier engaged in interstate commerce, the tax shall be $.96 on every $100 of the assessed value thereof. (g) On motor vehicles which are specially equipped to provide transportation for physically handicapped individuals, the tax shall be $.01 on every $100 of the assessed value thereof. Sec. 3. Public Service Corporation Property. (a) On that portion of real estate and tangible personal property of public service corporations which has been equalized as provided in Section 58.1‑2604 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the tax shall be $0.97 on every $100 of the assessed value thereof determined by the State Corporation Commission. (b) The foregoing subsections to the contrary notwithstanding, on automobiles and trucks belonging to such public service corporations the tax shall be $3.60 on every $100 of assessed value thereof. Sec. 4. Machinery and Tools. On machinery and tools used in a manufacturing or mining business the tax shall be $1.00 on every $100 assessed value thereof. Ayes: Miller, Sowder and Warren. Mrs. Humphrey noted that she voted against the motion because she supports setting aside one cent of the real estate tax revenue for transportation. Mr. Miller requested a five-minute recess. Reconvening: 8.A.1. TO CONSIDER PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS RELATING TOREGULATIONS BY THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT OF FOOD SERVICE ESTABLISHMENTS, REQUIREMENTS FOR FOOD HANDLER TRAINING; THE INSTITUTION OF FEES FOR ANNUAL FOOD ESTABLISHMENT INSPECTIONS; AND FOR REVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND FOR BIANNUAL FOOD HANDLER TRAINING Mr. Miller requested that Dr. Nelson provide a brief summary of the impetus for the proposed ordinance amendments. Dr. Nelson stated food-borne illness is a problem, and it is staff’s opinion that training of food handlers is essential for helping to keep the food chain and the food service establishments as safe as possible. He provided details of Health Department inspection violations related to training, which is the reason for the proposed amendments. He stated the ordinance would be somewhat of a burden on business, but the jurisdictions who have these requirements in place see it as an enhanced value. In response to Mr. Miller’s questions, Dr. Nelson stated he has not seen an increase in food poisoning cases, although they are very difficult to track. He further stated the cost of the program would be approximately $24,000-$25,000, which would be borne by a fee charged the individual card handlers, not the restaurants. Discussion ensued relative to the inequity of the proposed ordinance on grocery stores that prepare foods that are consumed on the premises versus those that prepare food that is not consumed on the premises. Mr. King expressed concerns that this program was not funded through the budget, instead of levying a tax on citizens. In response to Mrs. Humphrey’s question, Dr. Nelson stated volunteer organizations would not be impacted by the program because they serve low-risk foods by agreement, and at least one person from the organization must be trained in food safety. There was brief discussion relative to how this program would supplement the state’s requirements on food service establishments. Mr. Miller inquired whether this program is essential to protect the health and public safety of residents. Dr. Nelson stated, in his opinion, the program is important and would be a big step forward. Mrs. Humphrey made a motion, seconded by Mr. Miller, for the Board to adopt the proposed ordinance relating to food establishments. Ayes: Miller and Humphrey. 8.A.2. TO CONSIDER PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS RELATING TO PURCHASE AND STERILIZATION FEES FOR DISPOSITION OF CONFINED ANIMALS Mr. Carmody stated the proposed ordinance amendments would increase fees for male cat sterilization and create a new fee for adoption of cats. On motion of Mr. Miller, seconded by Mr. King, the Board adopted the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (1) That Section 4-25 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, is amended and re-enacted to read as follows: Sec. 4-25. Confinement and disposition of animals; animal shelter; redemption by owner; shelter charges. (a) The animal warden shall confine in a shelter any dogs found to be in violation of this chapter, including dogs: (i) found running at large, (ii) that do not have current rabies vaccinations or (iii) that are not wearing a license or rabies tag. The animal warden may, in his discretion, accept stray or feral dogs and cats or other animals from county residents. The animal warden shall make a reasonable effort to determine whether any animal bears identification including a collar, tag, tattoo or other form of identification. If any identification is found, the animal warden shall make a reasonable effort to notify the owner within 48 hours of confinement of the animal and shall make a reasonable effort to return the animal to its owner or place the animal for adoption before destroying it. The animal shall not be disposed of as provided in subsection (d)(ii) nor shall it be used or accepted by any person for the purpose of medical research. Notice to the owner shall be deemed sufficient when sent by certified mail to the owner's address as it appears on record in the treasurer's office. The animal warden may destroy or otherwise dispose of animals in accordance with this section if the animals have not been claimed by their owners, as follows: (i) any animal with the above-described identification which has been confined for ten calendar days; or (2) any animal without the above-described identification which has been confined for a period of five calendar days. (b) The owner of any animal confined under this chapter may redeem it upon payment of all fees required by the animal warden, if the animal has not been otherwise disposed of. No dog shall be released to its owner until the owner (i) presents a current dog license receipt or tag; (ii) presents proof of a valid rabies vaccination; and (iii) pays a fee for the animal's impoundment, of $30.00 for the first 24 hours of impoundment and $12.00 a day for each additional day. No cat shall be released to its owner until the owner presents proof of a valid rabies vaccination. No cat or other animal shall be released without payment to the animal warden of a fee of $12.00 if the cat or animal is claimed during the first 24 hours of impoundment and $6.00 a day for each additional day. Funds collected under this section shall be disposed of in the same manner as dog license taxes. If the owner cannot provide proof relating to the license tag or rabies vaccination at the time he claims the animal, then he shall provide such proof within five operating days. (c) Any person purchasing a dog or cat from the animal shelter shall pay a fee of $10.00 which shall be disposed of in the same manner as dog license taxes. Additionally, any person purchasing an unsterilized dog or cat from the animal shelter shall pay a sterilization fee and sign a sterilization agreement with the county. The county shall pay the sterilization fee to the veterinarian who performs the sterilization after the veterinarian has certified that the sterilization has been performed. The sterilization fee for all dogs and cats shall be $30.00. If any veterinarian charges an amount in excess of the sterilization fee, payment of the excess amount shall be the responsibility of the person who adopts the dog or cat. Any person who violates this subsection or fails to abide by the sterilization agreement shall be subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $50.00. (d) At any time after the confinement period for the animal expires and the animal has not been claimed, it may be (i) euthanized by one of the methods approved by the state veterinarian and the animal warden shall cremate, bury or sanitarily dispose of same; (ii) disposed of by sale or gift to a federal agency, state-supported institution, agency of the commonwealth, agency of another state, or a licensed federal dealer having its principal place of business in the commonwealth, provided that such agency, institution or dealer agrees to confine the animal for an additional period of not less than five days; (iii) delivered to any humane society or animal shelter within the commonwealth; (iv) delivered to any person who is a resident of the county who will pay the required license tax and adoption fee for such animal; (v) delivered to a noncounty resident who pays the required adoption fee; or (vi) delivered for the purposes of adoption or euthanasia only, to a humane society or an animal shelter located in and lawfully operating under the laws of another state, provided that such humane society or animal shelter: (1) maintains records that comply with Code of Virginia, § 3.1-796.105; (2) requires that adopted dogs and cats be sterilized; and (3) has been approved by the state veterinarian, or his designee, as a facility which maintains such records, requires adopted dogs and cats to be sterilized, and provides adequate care and euthanasia. (e) No provision shall prohibit the immediate destruction of a critically injured or critically ill animal, or any animal not weaned, for humane purposes. (f) The shelter shall be accessible to the public during reasonable operating hours. (g) If the owner of a dog or cat voluntarily releases it to the animal shelter and surrenders, in writing, all property rights in the animal and reads and signs a statement (i) certifying that no other person has a property right in the animal and (ii) acknowledging that the animal may be immediately euthanized or disposed of as set forth in subsection (d), except d(ii), then the animal may be disposed of by any of the methods listed in subsection (d), except d(ii). However, the animal shall not be used for medical research or experimentation, unless the owner consents in writing. (h) Any feral dog or cat not bearing a collar, tag, tattoo, or other form of identification that, based on a disinterested person's written certification, exhibits behavior that poses a risk of physical injury to any person confining the animal, may be euthanized after being kept for at least three days, including at least one full operating day, unless sooner claimed by the rightful owner. The disinterested person's certification shall be kept with the animal and shall be available for public inspection. For purposes of this subsection, a disinterested person shall not include a person releasing or reporting the animal to the animal shelter. (i) Either an animal's custodian or an individual who has found an animal may qualify as owner and may claim the animal at the expiration of the period set out in subsection (a) and after payment of the required license tax and applicable fees. If the legal owner later claims the animal and proves his ownership, the custodian or finder shall return the animal to the owner after the owner reimburses him for any license tax, fees or actual expenses paid and for reasonable charges for the animal's upkeep while in his possession. (2) That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.A.3. TO CONSIDER PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS RELATING TO FEES FOR BAD CHECKS On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board adopted the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (1) That Section 9.2 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, is amended and re-enacted to read as follows: Sec. 9-2. Fee imposed for returned checks. The treasurer shall collect a fee of $35.00 from anyone whose check for payment of any sum due to the county is returned for any reason, unless the person delivers to the treasurer cash or cash equivalent in the full amount of the returned check within five days after the check is returned. (2) That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren.
8.A.4. TO CONSIDER PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS RELATING TO THE TAX RELIEF FOR THE ELDERLY AND DISABLED PROGRAM On motion of Mrs. Humphrey, seconded by Mr. Sowder, the Board adopted the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (1) That Sections 9-24 and 9-25 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, are amended and re-enacted to read as follows: DIVISION 3. EXEMPTIONS
o o o 8.A.6. TO CONSIDER THE FY2008–2012 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Mr. Carmody clarified that changes were presented during the work session related to the proposed Capital Improvement Program. Mr. Ramsey stated that, because of confusion in the change of the construction market in recent days, several Board members have suggested not actually appropriating the full amount of the request for Clover Hill High School, but allocating in the budget the full amount and appropriating something less than the $81 million requested by the School Board, with a strong indication, so that there is no misunderstanding in the bid community, that the Board is reserving that difference and fully intends to move forward with Clover Hill High School, but wait until the bids are in to make the final appropriation for the project. He further stated, from discussions with Board members, it was his understanding that the Board would appropriate between $65 and $70 million to the project. There was brief discussion relative to the cost of constructing Cosby Road High School. Mr. Miller suggested that the Board appropriate $65 million for the project. Mr. King clarified for the School Board and the public that Clover Hill High School will be built on time. Mr. Miller stated the Board is committed to building Clover Hill High School, but is trying to go through the process a responsible manner by asking appropriate questions regarding the construction funding. Mr. Carmody clarified that the total appropriation would be $65 million, inclusive of the prior year’s funding, with $16 million held in reserve until the bids are received. Mrs. Humphrey and Mr. Sowder both stated that they support the project. On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board adopted the FY2008-2012 Capital Improvement Program, as amended, including the appropriation of a total of $65 million for Clover Hill High School, inclusive of the past year’s funding, with $16 million being held in reserve until the bids are received. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.A.7. TO CONSIDER THE FY2008 PROPOSED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT AND THE HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP ANNUAL PLAN Mr. Ramsey reminded the Board that staff is requesting that the Habitat for Humanity funding of $50,000 be moved to unallocated until such time that further discussions can be held with the Habitat group, as well as the Jefferson Davis Association regarding the executive director position. On motion of Mrs. Humphrey, seconded by Mr. King, the Board adopted the county’s FY2008 Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership Annual Plan, as amended, with the Habitat for Humanity funding of $50,000 being moved to unallocated until such time that further discussions can be held with the Habitat group, as well as the Jefferson Davis Association regarding the executive director position. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.A.8. TO CONSIDER THE FY2008 AMENDED BIENNIAL FINANCIAL PLAN Mr. Ramsey stated staff recommends adoption of the Plan with changes to the county budget as presented to accommodate a real estate tax rate reduction to $0.97. He further stated Dr. Newsome has agreed to present recommendations at the Board’s April 25, 2007 meeting for adjustments to the School Board budget to accomplish the real estate tax rate reduction. Mr. Carmody provided details of proposed county budget changes to accommodate the real estate tax rate reduction. Mr. Warren made a motion for the Board to adopt the FY2008 Amended Biennial Financial Plan, as amended. Mr. Sowder stated the county supports a number of charity-related organizations. He further stated the Sports Backers organization has a huge impact on the county’s economic development, and he has heard a lot of support from area hotels regarding their funding request. He encouraged the Board to take another look at increasing support for that organization, indicating that it is an investment rather than depletion of resources. Mr. Carmody stated the Sports Backers had requested $50,000, and the recommended funding was $20,000. Mr. Sowder suggested doubling the recommended funding for the Sports Backers to $40,000. Mr. King stated he would support amending the budget to reflect additional funding for the Sports Backers because, in his opinion, the county will reap the rewards of its investment with the organization. Mr. Warren amended his motion to include increased funding of the Sports Backers organization to $40,000. Mr. Miller stated he will support the motion, but had hoped that the Board would not increase donations. He noted that there are many worthy charities, such as Meals on Wheels, that meet critical needs of county residents. Mr. King seconded Mr. Warren’s amended motion. Mr. Miller called for a vote on the amended motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. King, for the Board to adopt the FY2008 Amended Biennial Financial Plan with revisions as presented, including increasing the funding for Sports Backers to $40,000. (It is noted that Dr. Newsome will communicate to the Board of Supervisors budget adjustments to accomplish the real estate tax rate reduction.) Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. Mr. Ramsey noted that staff had recommended that the Board consider placing an item on the priority list for Results of Operations for $500,000 for the acquisition of park land. He further stated the state has recently notified the county that it would incur an additional mandated $1 million next year for the Comprehensive Services Act (CSA) Program. He recommended that the Board also place $1 million for CSA on the FY2007 Results of Operation priority list for funding. On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board approved placement of $500,000 in funding for the acquisition of park land and an additional $1 million in funding for the Comprehensive Services Act (CSA) program on the priority list of funding for FY2007 Results of Operations. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.A.9. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008 AND APPROVING FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008 Mr. Carmody stated staff is requesting that the Board adopt a resolution appropriating funds for FY2008, noting that the changes presented will be incorporated into the resolution. Mr. Miller requested that Dr. Newsome provide details of the School Board’s funding request for a pre-school program for at-risk children. Dr. Newsome stated research suggests that almost 90 percent of the brain capacity is developed by the time a child enters school. He further stated approximately 500 pre-school aged children in the county have been identified by the state as at-risk. He stated the needs of many of the students are met through Head Start and Title I programs. He further stated Dr. Cannaday notified him several months ago that the state wanted to focus on helping to support local school districts with funding for at-risk four-year-olds and inquired whether the School Board would be interested in receiving funding from the state. He stated, after looking at the data, it was clear that children who were identified as at-risk and had a pre-school experience were much more successful in school than students who had not. He further stated the School Board received a grant from the state for $215,000 for this year, and $364,000 for FY2008, which left a balance of $386,000 to fund the pre-school program for seven additional schools. He stated the Schools’ FY2008 budget includes $750,000 for this program, $364,000 of which is allocated by the state. He further stated, if a recommendation is made to the School Board that this program be eliminated, then the county would have to reimburse the state for the $215,000 received this year for start-up costs for the pre-school program. Discussion ensued relative to the schools that are currently being served by state funds for the pre-school program. Mr. Miller stated he thinks this program is ill-advised, expressing concerns about opening the door to even greater intrusion. He further stated he believes the funding would be better spent in classrooms, teachers and other issues. Mr. Miller then made a motion for the Board to adopt the resolution appropriating funds for fiscal year 2008, with the deletion of the School Board’s $750,000 line item for the pre-school program. Mrs. Humphrey stated she recalls that a pre-school program was in place several years ago, and a decision was made to eliminate the program because it was not serving the educational goals for the future of students. She expressed concerns that the state’s funding is inadequate for the program and also about the equitability of the program for all schools in the county. She further stated she will support Mr. Miller’s motion, indicating that she has a four-year-old daughter and can relate to this issue. Mr. Sowder stated, although he does not have a strong personal opinion on this issue, many of his constituents have indicated that they do not support the pre-school program. Mrs. Humphrey seconded Mr. Miller’s motion. Mr. Ramsey clarified that the resolution would also be adjusted to designate $16 million in a reserve for Clover Hill High School. Mr. Miller clarified that his motion included deletion of $750,000 in funding for the pre-school program and reserving $16 million for Clover Hill High School. Mr. Miller then called for a vote on his motion, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, for the Board to adopt the following resolution: A RESOLUTION TO APPROPRIATE DESIGNATED FUNDS AND ACCOUNTS FROM DESIGNATED ESTIMATED REVENUES FOR FY2008 FOR FISCAL PLANNING PURPOSES FOR THE OPERATING BUDGET AND THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM FOR THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield: That for the fiscal year beginning on the first day of July 2007 and ending on the thirtieth day of June 2008, the following sections shall be adopted: Sec. 1 The following designated funds and accounts shall be appropriated from the designated estimated revenues to operate and to provide a capital improvement program for the county. It is the intent of the Board of Supervisors that general property taxes levied on January 1, 2007 and due December 5, 2007 be appropriated for FY2008.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
