11-11-81 MinutesBOARD OF SUPERVISORS
MINUTES
November 11, 1981
S~pervi~ers in Attendance~
~r. Har~y ~. Daniel, Chairman
~r. C. L. Bookman
Mrs, Joan Qirone
Mr~ E. Merlin O~Neill, Sr.
Mr~ Richard L. Hedrick
County A~ministrator
Mr. R. Garland Dodd, Vice Chairman
~taff in Attendance:
Mr. Stanley Baldsrson,
~ir. of ~lanninq
Attorney
Fhf. Jeffrey Muzzy, Dir.
Cox~unity Development
Mr. Lane Ramsey, Directo~
of Budget ~ Accounting
Mir. Daniel called the meeting to order at the Courthouse at 2=10
p,m. (~$T).
It was nota~ that Mr. Dodd was absent to attend the funeral un
IIbehalf of the Boa.rd, of Mr. ~atrick G. Mason, Benaley-Be~muda
Rescue squad ~ember who was killed on November ~, 1981.
Mr. Daniel stated that prior to the agend~ beginning he would
like to make a few statements regarding an urticle written by the
Editor cf the Richmond News Leader. He state~ from ti~e to time
he has commented on articles written in the newspapers and that
he was particularly concerned about the article written on
November 4, 1981, which referred to "banana throwing by the
monkeys on the Chesterfield county Board Of Supervisors." ~e
~tated that he did not mind political satire made by the news
media as it ~s healthy. He stated that he felt thim article was
not proper nor written in good taste and that a response was
necessary. He stated that he did not know the edi[or, had never
meeu him and had never known him to Attend any public meetings of
the Beard since he had been a member an~ he could not unde~tand
why s~¢h an analop5, was used.
~e stated that the ~oard doe~ work tow&~d co--on goals which are
in the bemt interest of the County even though the paths towards
these goalm ~0metimes differ. He stated that the Board does have
the courage to identify problems and the courage to work for what
each individual feels proper. ~e stated that sometimes a little
"spirit" is injected but that is better than having all Board
membaru agree to everything ali the time. He s=a~sd that the
CO~y iS a model for other jurisdictions which was demonstrated
at the Virginia Ammociation of Counties Annual Meetin~ this week
~e stated that other jurisdictions were envious of the County and
its ability to maintain a low tax rate and still operate an
efficient government, just to mention a single factor. He stated
that he fel~ this article was improper and did not relate the
true story of the Board's discussions and dec,siena, Be ~tated
that the public does not f~el this way about its elmctmd
officialm. Me s%a~ed that commercial development continues in
the County because of its resources and the reputation which the
County maintains. Ee stated that this ia his personal opinion
and statmment and that he feet~ ~he County is working ~cr the
future and has demonstrated it~ desire to receive more public
input regarding the affairs of gevernment~ for e~ample, the three
v~ar financial planning for the County and the long-range
~mplicatiuDs that decisions made this year will have On cur
81-500
financial future. He stated that he felt thi~ ~%a%emeDt kad to
be made and that a copy would be sent to t~e Editor of the
Richmond News Leader.
for the record that the News Department and the Editorial
Maek~nzie, the Editor.
Mr. Daniel stated that he felt political satire was fine but that
the format used in %his article wa~ entirely unoalled fOU.
Mr. Ramsay stated that the Board had held two work sessionn
reqerdi~g the broad ovsruiew of the three year projections and
the growth trends and their impact on governmental Services. He
stated this session would address the 1982-83 budget and that
staff would like to obtain some adminisbrative guidelines in
Zr. Hedrick stated that this ~ession was Very important because
staff had made some assumDtions and it was nccessar~ for the
Board to indicate whether or not these as~umptlens ware correct
in order tha~ the budget process would proceed with the
objectives, goals and policie~ of the Boar~ of Supervisors.
~r. Jay Stegmaier, Senior Budget and Management officer, made a
presentation to the So~r~ using a ~eries of charts. The first
chart listed the budget objectives of the Board of Supervisors a~
~erc~ived by staff. The~e cbjective~ were:
Maintaining a 9S~ tax rate~
2. ~aintaining current fund balance (between
: $2,500,080-$3,000,000) as a minimum;
3. ~alntain~nq current service levels;
4. Increasing productivity (more work, at same cost}; and
5, Providing needed ~ala~y adjustments {either increase er
decrease).
Mr. S%egmaier stated that the projected ~hortfall in rev~nuen and
e~pen~es for 198~-~B would be approximately $2,500,Q~0 bat that
there were contingencies whloh sa~m~d fairly likely to affect
that shortfall which are an increase in frinqe benufits, increase
in utilities costs and reduction in rev~nUs sharing feeds. He
stated %here items should ho considered in the planning process
and e mo~e realistic shortfall would be apprexlmat~ly $3,500,000.
Hs stated other such things a~ an increase in salaries for
certain employee groups, reduction in other federal funding and
reduction in rate of r~al ~tate revenue growth could also have
an impact but these things are ~ncertaiu at this time. He gave
individual ~trategies which could be used to decrease the
shortfall as well as several combinations. He Stated staff was
not Suggusting ~ny b~t indicating various ways in which
reductions could be made.
~[r. Hedriok stated that an administrator needs to make
assumptions on management d~cisions as to how the budcet is put
together and then the budget proces~ s~arts. He stated he felt
it important that the Soard be involved from the beginning.
~rs. Girone requested that staff further investigate strategy ~
involving revenne~ and tO look into aha land use tax program.
She stated she was not in favor of a utility tax.
Tho Board stated that priority nu~er i ~hould he for the County
Administrator to investigate further changes in the pay plan to
replace ~erit and cO~t of living increases with a sinqle
variable, a performance based ~alary increment. The ~eard
indieat~ their desire not to increase the busines~ license
81-501
razes, not to increase machinery and tools tsx and not to
eliminate the land use
~{r. ~edrick stated that there had been a training ~e$~ion on
qoals and obj~ctivez az part of thm budget preparation and that
he has asked the departments to look at their work plan, what
they are doing, what they are supposed to be doing, how they are
to do i% and the cost involved. He stated that th~$ would
forecast for the future, the services needed and ~hould he ~ore
cost effective.
Mrs. Girone stated sh~ would like to see a proposal for Ionq term
borrowing for capital projects for approval by the public.
stated that a plan $houI~ be worked out fur tho~e mounting need~.
Mr. Stegmai~r stated that the 9rojeotad fund balances for the
next three years would be as follows:
1982-83 Deficit of $3,500,000
19~3-84 Surplus of S765,000
L984-85 Surplus Qf $6,000,000
The BOard thanked staff £u~ the presentation. {A cody of which
is filed with the papers of this Board.)
on motion of ~r. Da~iel~ seconded by ~rs, Girou~, the Beard went
into ~xecutiv* S*~ion tQ ~iscuss legal matte~ as permitted by
section 2.1-344(6) of the Code of Vi~glnia, 1950, as amende~.
Ayes: M~. Daniel, Mr. Bookman, ~rs. Girone and Mr. O'Neill.
Absent: Mr. Dodd.
Raconvening=
On motion o~ Mr. Bookman, seconded by Krs. Girene, the Board
adjourned at 4:3~ p.m. until ~:00 a.~. on November 2S, 19~1.
Ayes: ~r. Daniel, Mr. Bookman, Mrs. Giron~ and Mr+ O'~ei!!.
~sent: Mr. Dodd.
Richard L. ~edrick
County Administrator
~arry G./Daniel ~
Chairmar~