Loading...
2009-03-16 MinutesBOARD OF SUPERVISORS MINUTES March 16, 2009 u ^~ Supervisors in Attendance: Mr. Arthur S. Warren, Chairman Mr. Daniel A. Gecker, Vice Chrm. Ms. Dorothy Jaeckle Mr. James "Jim" Holland Ms. Marleen K. Durfee Mr. James J. L. Stegmaier County Administrator Staff in Attendance: Mr. Mike Bacile, Dir., Purchasing Mr. Jim Banks, Asst. Dir., Transportation Ms. Janice Blakley Clerk to the Board Ms. Debbie Burcham, Exec. Dir., Community Services Board Mr. Alan Carmody, Dir., Budget and Management Ms. Marilyn Cole, Asst. County Administrator Mr. Barry Condrey, Chief Information Officer Mr. William W. Davenport, Commonwealth's Attorney Mr. Jonathan Davis, Dir., Real Estate Assessments Ms. Rebecca Dickson, Dep. County Administrator, Human Services Colonel Thierry Dupuis, Police Department Mr. Robert Eanes, Asst. to the County Administrator Mr. .Michael Golden, Dir., Parks and Recreation Mr. Russell Harris, Mgr. of Community Development Services Mr. Thomas E. Jacobson, Dir., Revitalization Mr. William E. Johnson, Dep. County Administrator, Management Services Mr. Don Kappel, Dir., Public Affairs Mr. Rob Key, Director, General Services Mr. Mike Mabe, Director, Libraries Mr. Richard M. McElfish, Dir., Env. Engineering Mr. Jeff Mincks, Deputy County Attorney Sheriff Dennis Proffitt, Sheriff's Department Chief Edward Senter, Fire Department Mr. Richard Troshak, Dir., Emergency Communications Center 09-150 03/16/09 Mr. Kirk Turner, Dir., Planning Mr. Warren called the regularly scheduled meeting to order at 4:04 p.m. 1. WORK SESSION REGARDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Mr. Turner stated representatives from the Renaissance Group were present to answer questions the Board members may have relative to the countywide Comprehensive Plan. He introduced Dr. Mike Chandler, the Director of Education for the Citizen's Planning Education Association of Virginia and county resident, to address the Board regarding the challenges faced by the county in reviewing the Comprehensive Plan. Dr. Chandler stated he has resided in the Midlothian District for six years, since his retirement from Virginia Tech. He further stated he has had the privilege of working with every jurisdiction in the Commonwealth and when he chose to move to Chesterfield County many of those jurisdictions were upset with him for not choosing their location to reside. He stated Chesterfield County has many attributes which distinguishes it as a great location to live, work and play. He expressed appreciation to Mr. Turner for the invitation to present this information to the Board. He spoke to the importance of the considerable ,task facing Chesterfield County as it continues to grow in determining how it will grow and how to respond to the challenges implicit with the growth in the community. He reviewed the importance of community planning and what a good solid land use plan will do for Chesterfield County. He stated over the last 20 years, the county has experienced remarkable growth and for the better part of that timeframe, the county has been attempting to respond to that growth. He further stated the current downturn in the economy provides the county an opportunity to give thought to how the county will manage future growth and it is incumbent on the county to begin deliberating on what the future might entail and what kind of future is wanted. He stated the power of planning to invent tomorrow today is an attribute of a solid comprehensive plan along with the interrelatedness of attributes and how the resource we call land will be used. He further stated it is important to fashion upon that land a variety of uses that constitute a full service community, where citizens live, work, play and have a sense of community in terms of public and semi-public uses. He stated for those reasons Chesterfield County needs to commit itself to the development of what will be in essence a real "comprehensive" comprehensive plan, which will work across the entire community of Chesterfield. He further stated jurisdictions are guided by the Code of Virginia, and the Code makes it clear that a comprehensive plan should be a physical plan which translates a community's hopes, dreams and aspirations into a schematic plan that describes how, why, when, where to build, relocate, to rebuild in order to preserve our land in our community; must be long range; is comprehensive; covers the entire community, which includes transportation, housing, land use, utility systems, public facilities, business and industry, agricultural and open space; and guides growth and J J J 09-151 03/16/09 r~ u C~ development within the community. He stated a good comprehensive plan should be similar to a road map and provide the user with a common introduction as a public policy document with the direction the community wishes to take with a vision that the community has encapsulated both in roads and in pictures, a clear representation of what the community intends to achieve and it is a document, policy document that local leaders, both appointed and elected can use when making decisions in rendering judgments as the community experiences change. He further stated the comprehensive plan can help the county in deciding what to do with rezoning requests; whether or not to expand major public infrastructure; and when and if you wish to locate new public infrastructure; should show how things will work, like residential uses, commercial uses, business uses, industrial uses and where they will be physically located; provides guidance relative to the timing of development and redevelopment; contemplates, addresses and then provides strategies with respect to how to deal with those challenges of revitalization; and features specific change strategies. He stated a solid land use plan is going to feature a variety of attributes as well as elements. He noted that when considering some of the issues faced as a new citizen which are critical for Chesterfield County, the county needs to meld the 22 sub plans into a common vision. He further stated it is important that as the county considers the future, it includes and responds to the challenges that the General Assembly has presented, such as the mandate that we must make provisions for affordable housing; the mandate to chronicle or articulate the transportation enhancement needs faced in this community and the funding necessary to make those improvements; and the mandate to indicate where provisions will be made for Urban Development Areas. He stated the scope is thorough, although large, and will provide an overarching vision which connects the five districts to one another and provides direction to the citizen, petitioner, applicant and developer. He provided details to the Board regarding the differences between a strategic plan versus a comprehensive plan and goals and objectives. Mr. warren expressed appreciation for Dr. Chandler's complete overview of the comprehensive plan process and stated the Board is committed to developing a countywide comprehensive plan. In response to Mr. Warren's question, Dr. Chandler stated if the county planned the comprehensive plan without citizen participation it would cause distrust and an unnecessary hardship. He further stated the opportunity to engage the public in both the visioning process and at meetings in each magisterial district are appropriate steps to take in the process. He stated although the process may take a little longer and may cost a little more, the end product will have shared ownership and a shared commitment. He further stated the scope for the countywide comprehensive plan calls for a dedicated website, which speaks volumes for the Board's commitment to reaching out systematically to the public. Ms. Durfee expressed appreciation to Dr. Chandler for his thorough remarks relating to the comprehensive plan. She stated it is imperative to discuss the Code of Virginia; the county's responsibility as a government in comprehensive 09-152 03/16/09 planning; and differentiating between the comprehensive plan and strategic plan; and the importance of what the comprehensive plan can do for the county. She further stated it is important to remember where the county is and how it got there while working on the future. In response to Ms. Durfee's question, Dr. Chandler stated the comprehensive plans of the past were good, but at the local level great progress has been made in the awareness on the part of the general public and appointed and elected officials to see the value implicit with the comprehensive plan. He further stated one of the real steps forward in the last decade has been the commitment to building into the plan an implementation schedule. Ms. Durfee stated as a citizen, she expressed many concerns many years ago relative to the current comprehensive plan not being updated and limited in its scope and was being utilized solely for guidance for zoning case. She further stated a comprehensive plan is more than that and she hopes the comprehensive plan will be able to incorporate specific elements, such as open space or affordable housing, to help make sure mistakes in the past are not made again. She stated she was excited to start the comprehensive plan process. Dr. Chandler stated the comprehensive plan is a variable to consider when a rezoning is before the Board, but the Code of Virginia provides nine other variables and factors to consider when applying zoning through a rezoning process. He further stated the term comprehensive needs to be kept front and center when thinking about planning in a community the size and magnitude of Chesterfield County. He stated planning has to be responsive to the needs of the community of the moment as well as anticipatory. He further stated an excellent comprehensive plan can be put together but it will not go anywhere if there has not been commitment to implementation. He stated the scope for this comprehensive plan calls for the commitment to implementation. Ms. Durfee stated it is important to link the public facilities and services to the citizens of the county and that can be done with the comprehensive plan. Dr. Chandler stated it would be an honor to assist the county in the enterprise. Mr. Warren stated the Board is honored to have Dr. Chandler living in Chesterfield County. Mr. Holland expressed appreciation for Dr. Chandler attending the Board meeting and providing clarity on the issue of the comprehensive plan. In response to Mr. Holland's question, Dr. Chandler stated the normal evolution of a comprehensive plan is once every five years, which the Planning Commission could simply review the plan and determine it is still viable. He further stated there is nothing written in Code of Virginia, which states the plan must be rewritten. Mr. Gecker stated it is always a delight to hear Dr. Chandler speak. J J J 09-153 03/16/09 ii C7 C C In response to Mr. Gecker's question, Dr. Chandler stated he would suggest the county review the Northern Courthouse Road and Upper Swift Creek Plans which would allow another perspective to pass judgment on the Plans. He further stated it is a good possibility that the majority of information in those Plans will be sustained if they capture the values, aspirations, and vision that the community holds. He stated the county must be able to take the individual pieces and create a mosaic that is countywide. Mr. Gecker expressed concerns regarding the process that would evolve into essentially a rehearing of the issues that had just been heard in process of reviewing the Upper Swift Creek and Northern Courthouse Road Plans and using the county's resources that way. He stated when the county has completed the process of reviewing the comprehensive plan, a set of action items is important to have. He further stated during discussions about the comprehensive plan, growth management, revitalization, stabilization and environmental stewardship need to be dealt with. In response to Mr. Gecker's question, Dr. Chandler stated the consultant retained to review the comprehensive plan will have the competence, skill and witnessed ability to turn out the public. He further stated the citizens need to be challenged to think globally in the sense that they are Chesterfield County, not just individual communities. He stated the issue papers or reports will be critical as well and each of them will inform the community of the visioning process and will be a valuable resource for the county's steering committee. He further stated key steps to ensure the community vision are the open door policy of sharing anything that comes out of this process through the Planning office and the dedicated website. He stated a good plan is about community building. Mr. Gecker stated linking needs to be successful not only geographically speaking, but also with various constituents groups in the county. Ms. Durfee stated all the communities in the county need to balance their assets with other communities in the county to create the community of Chesterfield. She further stated she is looking forward to the comprehensive plan process to help get away from a district mentality approach. In response to Ms. Jaeckle's question, Dr. Chandler provided a breakdown of the differences between implementation and strategy relating to the comprehensive plan. Dr. Chandler stated if a goal of the comprehensive plan was to move away from having the tax burden on-the residential properties, then the plan would need a strategy to grow the economic base in the county. In response to Mr. Warren's question, Mr. Turner stated Dr. Chandler has no relationship with the Renaissance Planning Group. Mr. Turner stated the committee comprised of staff and outside individuals reviewed the proposals against the scope 09-154 03/16/09 ~, of work and felt like the Renaissance Planning Group presented the best response to the scope of services. Mr. Vladimir Gavrilovic provided a brief synopsis of what the Renaissance Planning Group brings to the comprehensive plan review process. He stated the comprehensive plan should not live on a shelf and should be focused on action items to help establish priorities and could be used as marketing documents. He further stated all of the firms which will be used for the comprehensive plan process are local firms which work for a national practice. Mr. Warren expressed appreciation to Mr. Gavrilovic for the presentation to the Board. In response to Ms. Durfee's question, Mr. Gavrilovic stated the Renaissance Group will use county data but will also analyze that data to ensure it is the most up to date information. 2. DINNER On motion of Mr. Durfee, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board recessed to the Lane B. Ramsey Administration Building, Room 502, for dinner with members of the Community Services Board. Ayes: Warren, Gecker, Jaeckle, Holland, and Durfee. Nays: None. 3. INVOCATION Colonel Thierry Dupuis gave the invocation. 4. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Honorable Dennis Proffitt led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America. 5. WORK SESSIONS 5.A. COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD Ms. Burcham introduced Mr. Michael Giancaspro, the Chairman of the Board, to discuss CSB accomplishments. Mr. Giancaspro stated the CSB, a thirteen-member board, provides services to citizens of all ages from infancy to older adults. He reviewed the services provided, including Psychiatric Rehabilitation Services, Adult Outpatient, Substance Abuse, Child Adolescent Services Team, Chesterfield Infant and Toddler Connection, and prevention services. He stated there has been a twenty percent increase in the amount of consumers served since 2004. He provided the Board a breakdown of the numbers of consumers served by population for FY2008. He reviewed the CSB request for funding for an ICF-MR, which is a 12-bed adult Intermediate Care Facility. He stated although the CSB provides high quality services to many citizens, it fails to provide those services in a timely J J J 09-155 03/16/09 0 matter to a large number of citizens. He further stated the challenges faced by the CSB include consumers with multiple disabilities and complex issues; poverty and lack of affordable housing and transportation; and a lack of services available to meet the needs of the Hispanic youth. He reviewed the FY2009 demand versus capacity ratios for all services provided by the CSB. He further reviewed the FY2010 revenues with 41 percent coming from Medicaid, 31 percent from county funding, 18 percent from state/federal funding, and 8 percent from fees or miscellaneous revenue. He provided details of the FY2010 proposed budget $1 million reduction. He stated the successes or highlights of the CSB include CARF Accreditation, build-a-house, increased employment for consumers, lower pharmacy costs, and evidenced-based substance abuse services. Mr. Warren expressed appreciation for the thorough presentation. In response to Mr. Warren's question, Mr. Giancaspro stated the children will receive less services through the Community Services Board, but the schools will continue providing services. In response to Mr. Warren's question, Ms. Burcham stated the speech therapist positions are difficult to fill statewide due to a lack of qualified candidates. In response to Ms. Durfee's question, Ms. Burcham stated funding from the state is formula-driven funding, which involves a complex formula. Mr. Holland requested more analysis on causes for the large increase in the number of citizens using mental health services, when the population did not grow as much. Ms. Burcham stated more citizens are aware of the mental health services available to them, but an analysis would be done. In response to Ms. Jaeckle's question, Ms. Burcham explained the difference between the numbers for intake services and admissions relative to mental health services. In response to Ms. Durfee's question, Ms. Burcham stated funding from the state level goes up a few percentage points due to new mental health funding changes, which lowers the percentage of county funding. In response to Ms. Durfee's question, Mr. Giancaspro stated the Medicaid funding received by the state is lower than other states. He further stated some localities received very little funding. In response to Mr. Holland's questions, Ms. Burcham stated there is currently no plan in place to meet the needs of the youth, but the Community Services Board is actively searching for qualified interpreters. She further stated the Intermediate Care Facility is funded in the CIP for 2013. 09-156 03/16/09 5.B. CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS 5.B.1. SHERIFF Sheriff Proffitt presented an overview of the Sheriff's proposed FY2010 budget. He provided details of services the Sheriff's Department provides which include a restaurant; lodging; a health clinic; supplying a labor pool; operating a convenience store; operating a laundry; transportation services; security services; operating three jails; educational programs; rehabilitative and spiritual programs; and phone services. He further provided details of strategies for the future in the economic downturn to include programs and services review; home incarceration and work release programs; jail annex building; miscellaneous spending reductions; additional competitive procurements; technology; and identifying additional revenue resources. Mr. Gecker expressed appreciation for Sheriff Proffitt's thorough presentation. In response to Mr. Gecker's question, Sheriff Proffitt stated he does not see a time when the state will restore funding levels for the jails. In response to Mr. Holland's questions, Sheriff Proffitt stated if all of the jurisdictions would do video arraignment and video visitation, deputies would not need to be present and could be assigned elsewhere. He further stated he is not expecting a large number of workforce retirements in the near future. In response to Ms. Jaeckle's question, Sheriff Proffitt stated the Sheriff's Association was unable to address the part-time sheriff's legislation this year at the General Assembly. He further stated he would rather pay part-time hours compared to overtime. Ms. Durfee expressed appreciation for the thorough presentation. In response to Ms. Durfee's question, Sheriff Proffitt stated the department plans on generating revenue by using the jail annex. Mr. Warren expressed appreciation to Sheriff Proffitt for his service to Chesterfield County. 5.B.2. COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY Mr. Davenport provided a brief history of the Commonwealth Attorney's Office. He provided details of resources and staffing shortfall/impacts reductions; Exile Grant; additional funding requests; a locality comparison on judges between Henrico and Chesterfield Counties; law enforcement assistance; the effect of reduction of positions on public safety; and accomplishments of his office. He reviewed what the Commonwealth's Attorney's Office is doing to address the budget reductions. Mr. Warren expressed appreciation for the thorough presentation. J J J 09-157 03/16/09 C In response to Mr. Holland's questions, Mr. Davenport stated as a result of Project Exile, the City of Richmond has reported less violent crimes. He further stated with the Bounce Back program, the Commonwealth's Attorney's Office received approximately $800 a month, which more than covers the administrative cost of the program. He explained to the Board the privacy of citizens' information plays a big role in the inability to outsource some of the work load. He stated his office would look into some other ways of outsourcing. In response to Mr. Gecker's questions, Mr. Davenport stated in 2007 the Compensation Board funded a study to determine how much staff the offices throughout the Commonwealth needed. He further stated all of the positions were funded through the Compensation Board with the exception of one part-time and one full-time position. He stated the revenue line is down in 2008 due to the reduction of state funding and fees collected. He further stated his office has a lobbyist at the General Assembly in an attempt to continue funding to the localities. In response to Ms. Durfee's questions, Mr. Davenport stated hospital administrations change from time to time and their legal personnel may not follow the protocol the DUI statute calls for, which may cause DUI cases to be lost in court due to the ineffectiveness of handling the specimen collected at the hospital. He further stated blood tests are normally used when an accident is cause by a suspected DUI. In response to Mr. Holland's question, Mr. Davenport stated his office has used forfeiture funds to assist with keeping the internship program costs down. In response to Ms. Jaeckle's question, Mr. Davenport stated if the funding continues to be reduced, there may be a time when there is no prosecutor in traffic court. Mr. Warren stated the priority for funding would be the Project Exile, then the part-time "Of Counsel" position. In response to Mr. Warren's question, Mr. Davenport stated his office's priority for funding requests would be Project Exile, unfreezing the open position within his office, then funding for the part-time "Of-Counsel" position. He further stated because of the funding situation, his office is having to reprioritize the types of cases they are prosecuting. Mr. Warren expressed appreciation for the excellent presentation. 5.C. MANAGEMENT SERVICES DIVISION Mr. Johnson provided an overview of the proposed FY2009 budget for the Management Services Division. He reviewed Management Services expenditure growth from FY2000 to FY2010, which in FY2008 were below the inflation adjusted level and the staffing ratio. He further reviewed the services to the citizens provided by Management Services which include, curbside recycling; real estate assessment; Granicus; and citizen Wi-Fi. He provided details of the financial and 09-158 03/16/09 support management and regulatory compliance of the Management Services division. He reviewed the efficiencies of the Management Services division which include financial services, vehicles, debarment policy, security management, environmental processes, P1ateHunter License Plate Reader, and fleet business model. He provided details to the Board of the various certifications held by employees in the Management Services division. He reviewed the proposed reductions from the Management Services Budget; the Organization Climate Assessment survey results; and challenges faced by Management Services. Mr. Warren expressed appreciation to Mr. Johnson for the thorough presentation. In response to Mr. Holland's question, Mr. Johnson stated the new accounting system will take twelve to eighteen months realize a financial savings. In response to Mr. Holland's questions, Mr. Johnson stated Information Systems currently has four vacant positions. He further stated the amount of term contracts managed by the Purchasing Department is a combination of county and school contracts. In response to Mr. Gecker's question, Mr. Stegmaier stated the Board has been shown the items cut f rom the budget . He further stated GIS is being relocated from Environmental Engineering to IST, which makes it appear there was much of a reduction in the Management Services budget. Discussion ensued regarding the differing amounts of reductions in the Management Services budget and the reasoning behind those amounts. In response to Mr. Gecker's question, Mr. Johnson stated the dollar amount given to the Board on the recycling collection savings is currently without glass being factored in. In response to Mr. Gecker's concern, Mr. Stegmaier stated as the departments are attempting to reduce their budgets, it may be difficult to track changes in the dollar amounts. In response to Mr. Gecker's question, Mr. Stegmaier stated the 186 unfunded positions are the positions that have been cut from the budget. In response to Mr. Holland's question, Mr. Johnson stated the Board should expect some departmental consolidations as a result of the Efficiency Committee's recommendations. In response to Ms. Durfee's questions, Mr. Charlie Dane stated the CVWMA will provide a marketing plan to update citizens on the changes with the collection schedules as it pertains to the recycling program. He further stated additional locations are being studied for placement of collection containers. He stated the county has been benchmarking with other localities in which their collection volumes are the same as Chesterfield's. In response to Ms. Jaeckle's question, Mr. Dane stated the county would realize an additional $100,000 in savings if glass were removed from the recycling list. He further J J J 09-159 03/16/09 stated at this time glass is not recyclable and is used as road beds in the landfills. C Mr. Holland urged the departments to review the budget for FY2011 to find additional savings and possibly renegotiate contracts where possible. 5.D. POLICE DEPARTMENT Colonel Dupuis provided an overview of the Police Department's proposed FY2010 budget. He reviewed calls for service; home burglary trends; home/street robbery trends; Incident Base Reporting (IBR) Group A incidents clearance rate; new fugitive website; LInX regional data sharing partnership success; and the increase in percentage of beats filled 24/7. He then reviewed efficiencies of the Police Department which include low cost per capita; School Resource Officers redeployed to operational duties in the summer; decreased commercial burglaries; increased DUI arrests; use of volunteers resulting in savings; maximized operational efficiency; and implementation of in-house-developed online training. He reviewed challenges and trends that are impacting the Police Department. He then reviewed the proposed reductions in the FY2010 proposed budget for the Police Department and Animal Control and the detrimental impacts of those reductions. He stated maintaining funding levels at FY2009 allocations would allow the Police Department to reinstate reductions in the proposed FY2010 budget; fund retiree health care; fund workers compensation; and fund 100 percent of the FY2010 salaries. He further stated maintaining funding levels at FY2009 allocations would allow Animal Control to reinstate reductions in the proposed FY2010 budget and fund 100 percent of FY2010 salaries. He reviewed additional funding requests for the Police Department and Animal Control. He next presented an overview of the Emergency Communications Center proposed FY2010 budget. He reviewed the call volume by fiscal year from FY2003 to FY2008; accomplishments; efficiencies; and challenges faced by the Emergency Communications Center. He then reviewed the financial activity for FY2009 and FY2010; reductions in the FY2010 proposed budget; and detrimental impacts of those reductions. He stated maintaining funding levels at FY2009 allocations would allow the Emergency Communications Center to reinstate reductions in the proposed FY2010 budget. He reviewed the additional funding request for eight additional communication officers. Mr. Holland expressed appreciation for the thorough presentation. He stated it is the vision of the Board to have full staffing of the Police Department. In response to Mr. Holland's questions, Colonel Dupuis stated the Police Department currently has approximately 50 School Resource Officers on staff. He further stated there are hot spots throughout the county and no area is immune to crime. He stated as the economy declines, citizens are getting rid of the items they can no longer afford and in some cases pets are being turned into the shelter. He further stated the animal shelter has partnerships in place to have volunteers help. 09-160 03/16/09 In response to Ms. Durfee's questions, Colonel Dupuis stated the Police Department is seeing an increase in the amount burglaries where gang relation is the motive behind the burglaries. He further stated it is difficult to use volunteers in place of the school resource officers because of the privacy issues and the availability of the volunteers. Ms. Durfee requested a presentation be made to the School Board Liaison Committee on the results of the school resource officer study. She stated she has received a lot of phone calls and emails regarding the proposed closure of the Woodlake Police Station. She further stated she wants to exhaust all other options before closing that police station. Colonel Dupuis stated police services do not come from the individual stations but from the beat, and the Woodlake Police Station is more for the administrative side of what the police officer does. Mr. warren stated he agrees the Woodlake Police Station needs to remain open due to the considerable amount of time it saves the police officers. 5.E. FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT Chief Senter presented an overview of Fire and Emergency Medical Services' proposed FY2010 budget. He reviewed the mission and vision statements and the focus for the departments. He highlighted the department's activities and accomplishments for FY2008. He provided details of a comparison of department cost per capita and the FY2009 operating budget. He reviewed the proposed budget and service level reductions for FY2010. He stated to continue delivering quality customer service, the Fire Department needs to recruit, retain and develop the employees; maintain a reliable, serviceable fire apparatus fleet; maintain up-to- date equipment and technology; and maintain, replace, and build new facilities. He provided details of additional funding requests for FY2010 to fund retiree healthcare and workers compensation benefits; fire apparatus replacement; equipment and technology replacement; and fund increases in operating expenses. He reviewed the outstanding needs for FY2010 and beyond, which include maintaining competitive salaries; staff; facilities; and improvement of response times/reliability. He thanked the Board for its continued support. Mr. Holland expressed appreciation for the thorough presentation and the outstanding firefighters. In response to Mr. Holland's question, Chief Senter stated salaries are one of the biggest reasons for the low per capita amount in Chesterfield County. In response to Ms. Jaeckle's question, Chief Senter stated as the demand for services increases, each fire station may need several ambulances. Ms. Durfee expressed appreciation for the thorough presentation. She stated she is focused on the priority of the level of service for the citizens. J J J 09-161 03/16/09 Mr. Warren expressed appreciation for the presentation and the wonderful job the Fire Department does. u 0 0 Chief Senter stated the firefighters for Chesterfield County are the finest professionals in the nation. In response to Ms. Durfee, Chief Senter stated they are currently doing an analysis on the potential impact of the aging population on EMS calls. 6. ADJOURNMENT On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Ms. Durfee, the Board adjourned at 10:02 p.m. to March 25, 2009, at 3:00 p.m. in the Public Meeting Room. Ayes: Warren, Gecker, Jaeckle, Holland, and Durfee. Nays: None. es Ste aier ounty Administrator Arthur S. Warren Chairman 09-162 03/16/09