[LAUGHTER]
SPEAKER 1: That's right.
That's [INAUDIBLE].
SPEAKER 2: Community Cable 10, the programming service
of the Jefferson Cable Corporation serving
Charlottesville, now brings you this evening's meeting
of the Charlottesville City Council.
Cable television programming affords
increased usage of the visual medium
for local government, local education,
and for public expression.
To better inform the citizens of Charlottesville
on the activities of our city government,
we now bring you live from city hall
this evening's meeting of the City Council.
[MUSIC PLAYING]
SPEAKER 1: Council, please come to order.
We met about 10 minutes ago in the council chamber
to hold our public hearing, and it
was so tempting to hold the public hearing in the council
chamber with no one's presence, unfortunately.
Tonight is your night, citizen.
We have held many work session on the budgets--
school board budget and the city budget.
Tonight is your turn.
Tonight, we will only discuss items
that pertain to the budget.
Council tonight will not go into anything other--
can you hear me well?
There's some fray on it.
Can you hear me well?
We apologize for the inconvenience,
but the next council chamber will
be able to accommodate 500, I promise.
We will only discuss things tonight that directly
pertain into the budget.
If there's anyone have anything they
want to discuss other than what's pertaining to the school
board and city budget, Council would
be glad to discuss and meet with you at any time.
You know our regular sessions are first and third Mondays
every month, and that excluding the extra meeting we have.
So we invite all of you back for our regular meetings
on the first and third Mondays.
I'm sure that all of you are here tonight
to see your government in action, and that's good.
At this particular time, I'm going to--
on the agenda tonight, only, is there
works on is there public hearing concern their school and city
budget.
We will ask if there's anyone who wants to speak
please go to a microphone and identify yourselves.
I'm asking each person--
there's a lot of you here tonight--
please limit your comments to three minutes,
because if anyone wants to speak for the second time round,
please give the others a chance to speak once.
At this particular time, if there's
anyone who would like to speak to the school board or the city
budget--
Dr. McGee or Bernard Haggerty.
SPEAKER 3: My name is Bernard Haggerty
I am Chairman of the Piedmont Virginia Community College.
I have with me Dr. McGee.
If someone would give me the sign
at the end of three minutes, I'll
yield the balance of my time to Dr. McGee.
I'm here to speak to you ladies and gentlemen
of city council concerning this same matter that we discussed
a year ago at this time.
And that is the development of our physical recreation
facilities at the college.
This was originally envisioned in the college when
it was at the time that we requested original funding,
we were unable because of the dollars
kept growing the demand for what we were doing over there.
This was excluded in the original local funding.
In an effort to conserve time at the early part of February,
I wrote to each member of the city council
outlining five reasons why this was
so vital to our development and our continuing education
at the community college.
I would just like to cite what is one of, I think,
the most important of the five.
I think all the more important.
All of our degree programs require a physical ed semester
hours--
anywhere from three to six hours for our degree programs.
Although our local board concurs in this,
this is not something that we set.
This is set by the State Board of Community College
and the State Board of Higher Education,
similar to the requirements that you have in high school
that the students must have a certain amount of phys ed
in order to get their degrees.
This is the same requirement that we have.
As you know, there are five political subdivisions that
support the community college.
Yours are certainly one of the major support that we have.
And we are talking about the funding
of $45,612 for this purpose.
When we came to you last year for the planning money,
we outlined the total budget at that time
and said we would be back this year for this funding.
We have read the paper, and we've
listened to your meetings, and we
understand some of your problems concerning funding.
But we do think that the college is providing
an important growth and development
outlet for all of our citizens in the community.
And I urge that you provide these funds for this purpose.
I've also cited our inability to keep going off campus
to use these facilities, using a good many of the city
facilities.
Inside and this handicaps your own program within the city.
The university has been outstanding
in their cooperation in trying to schedule our students
into their programs.
I'll stop now.
I assume I have some more time.
I'll be glad to answer any questions.
SPEAKER 4: Mr. Mayor, I'm Harold McGee, President
of your Community College and resident
of the city of Charlottesville.
A few points-- in the $49,000 we are asking of the city council,
we'd like to reiterate that we believe
that we are earning our keep.
There are 527 residents of this city enrolled in your community
college.
We are spending in excess of $650,000 on their education.
Approximately 35% of our $1 million payroll
goes to city residents.
We're making other contributions.
We are providing the land for the bicentennial center
at a rent-free cost to the jurisdictions.
We are providing the meeting facilities and much
of the training facilities for your Thomas Jefferson Regal
District Planning Commission.
We provide the Police Academy at no additional cost to the city.
We have cooperated with the city fully in providing easements
for both the security complex and the bicentennial center
so as to ease the cost for that project.
And importantly, with the 527,000 residents,
we are providing a highly increased opportunity
for access to higher education for this region.
We very much need your support.
I'd like to do two things in closing.
One-- this is my last appearance before this body.
I want to thank you for your cooperation and your support
during my tenure with the college.
And I'd like to close with the sage of Monticello who
overlooks our campus, a quote which I
think is very important to us.
"Exercise and recreation are as necessary as reading.
I will say rather more necessary because health
is worth more than learning."
I thank you.
SPEAKER 1: Is there anyone else?
Yes, sir?
Speak, please.
Limit your comment to three minutes.
Yes, sir?
SPEAKER 5: Mr. Mayor, I'm George Gilmore,
Jr. I rise to speak for fiscal responsibility.
We realize that this is a new subject for this council,
and that my remarks will be of little effect on your action.
But we would like to point out that you could have saved
$250,000 in 1974 if you had made some common-sense projection
just last year.
In setting the stage for the night,
let's go back to January 9th 1974.
At that time, you same five council members
were discussing a $23 million capital budget.
For the next few hours, it is hard to follow your procedure.
Mr. Van Yahres, you took a course
of reducing that budget by $3.75 million.
Mr. Gillam, your direction was in the same path,
only you had your pet project, the south runway
at the airport.
Mrs. Reinhardt, you took the position
of stopping improvements at Penn park
and keeping the land for future development.
Mr. Barber, you wanted recreation centers.
And Mr. Fife, you pushed for them all.
Deputy Manager Ewitt gave his pitch
for an additional $750,000 for Penn Park.
If you would have taken the sum total of the list of expenses,
including the mall and recreation center,
you would have seen what would happen in the future.
At one time $2.4 million expenditure for the recreation
center project was turned down.
If you had followed in your first direction
in a positive fashion, some of your agonizing decisions
of 1975 would not be necessary.
What you then did was vote the entire $23 million budget,
add, of all things, $750,000 for Penn Park,
$750,000 for the city yard, and $1 million
for school expenditure.
From a $3,750,000 reduction to a $2,400,000 increase,
making a total of $6,150,000.
$250,000 or more made a yearly increase to your maintenance.
Now that $250,000 was more than half
of what you must cut the school budget--
enough money to raise the city employees and money
for the new federal standards for the fire department.
Anybody that reads the minutes of that meeting
will wonder how five grown people of supposedly average
intelligence could give this type of reverse leadership
to the community.
SPEAKER 6: Amen.
SPEAKER 5: You still followed in this direction at your budget
hearing where you had the director of real estate
assessment.
You asked them one question.
Do you need all your people?
What kind of answer did you expect?
That was one of the departments on our list for a reduction
of expenditures.
It would have been best to ask the department
head if $50,000 were cut from his department,
where would he make the changes?
If you will pay me $1.00 a year, and give me the position
of director of that department, I feel that I can find enough
good people in that department to do the job,
saving the people of Charlottesville $50,000.
They are good people in this department.
And you don't need priority 21 of the supplemental budget.
Page 90 of the main budget is the Department
of Research and information.
You have a figure of $2,095 for grave restoration
of Revolutionary veterans and priority 7 of your supplement,
$1,000 for grave restoration.
One of the issues in that war was taxation.
And it might disturb those two good former members, citizens,
to know that people are now being
taxed to restore this grave.
Mrs. Reinhardt, I know this is one of your pet projects,
but let's work together to save the taxpayers over $3,000.
I'll do the research and the coordination of these two
graves, because they are my ancestors.
And by your budget book, the figure is $2,095.
And I ask you to put up the $1,000 for the restoration,
which can be tax-deductible.
The ABC Committee--
SPEAKER 1: Mr. Gilmore, are you about through?
Your three minutes are up, sir.
SPEAKER 5: Oh, do I have anybody that will hear me?
[APPLAUSE]
[GAVEL BANGING]
SPEAKER 1: We will have order.
Regardless about that, we are going
to have an ordered meeting tonight, like every night.
And Mr. Gilmore, your time is about up.
You have one more minute, sir.
SPEAKER 5: The ABC Committee--
SPEAKER 1: Mr. Gilmore, speak when
you're ready now, Mr. Gilmore.
[GAVEL BANGS]
SPEAKER 5: The ABC Committee wishes
you to look at the March 14, 1975 memo from the city manager
in which he says, "The rationalize for the items
of the attached list is that they represent services which
can legally be reduced or eliminated,
do not seriously endanger, health, safety,
and welfare of the citizens, and three,
can be reduced to the 1971 level" Go by this list.
There's quite a big item in there
for the police department, which is reduced.
Now number two item comes from Mr. Henrich's letter
of March 1st, 1975.
The general fund is balanced in that they are sufficient funds
to meet the proposed expenditure in that fund.
It should be noted, however, that the general form
fund is balanced by, again, using
a portion of carryover balance from the previous years.
This situation cannot continue in future years,
and it is recommended that the city council be prepared
to raise sufficient revenues to meet current expenditures
or to reduce expenditures to meet current revenues.
The city manager has stated, number one,
that he is not an elected official, number two,
he carries out the wish of city council.
The blame for the budget can only be on city council.
I also wish that you would look at Roman numeral
22 in the main budget.
Without the prospects of any new programs,
it will command a 30% tax rate increase in the future.
It will leave a burden with future councils
that will make the job much more difficult than I can imagine.
Remember, a $200,000 program will
take the tax of 1,100 apartment units or 500 houses,
bringing in a total of $400 a year in taxes.
The ABC Committee has desired to help,
but we have not seen any signs from the council
or from city manager.
In summing up, the taxpayers now has
to bear the yoke of permanent expenditures
for your unnecessary and extravagant programs.
Thank you.
[APPLAUSE]
SPEAKER 1: Let me say again--
no person to speak longer than three minutes.
It isn't fair to those of you who are here
to speak at 12:00 o'clock tonight because someone get up
and speak for 15 or 20 minutes.
I'm only looking out for you.
We're going to be here.
I think it's only right and fair that every person get
a chance the first time around.
Anyone wants to speak longer than three minutes,
please stick around.
Your turn, in time, will come.
First time around, limit your comments to three minutes,
and you'll get another three minutes
when the others have had their chance for the first time.
Yes, sir?
SPEAKER 7: My name is Larry Richardson.
I will speak as Chairman of the Bicentennial Committee
of the Chamber of Commerce.
I am here to support the funds in the budget for both
the bicentennial activities and the chamber of commerce
tourist and convention work.
In partial answer to Mr. Gilmore,
I would like to point out that in 1973, this council
and the supervisors of Albemarle county
asked the bicentennial commission to study the funding
of their activities.
This they did, and they recommended both to the council
and to the supervisors of Albemarle county
that a transient lodging tax be instituted.
That's a 2% charge on all of the rooms
and all of the motels and hotels.
After the recommendation by the bicentennial commission,
both the city and the county did adopt this tax.
I'd like to point out that the estimate made at that time
was that in three years, this tax would produce
enough to more than pay for the entire activities
of the bicentennial commission.
Apparently the estimate was fairly correct.
It's my understanding that in the first six months,
the figure was just under $40,000
collected from this tax.
Further, it seems to me, that after appointing
a bicentennial commission and having
that commission of citizens who serve on the commission,
donate their services, and have made commitments
in the name of the city, we have a bicentennial center being
built due to, in great part, to their activities,
that the good name of the city is, in some respects,
at least questioned if we don't continue to support it.
I would like to point out also that it's my understanding
that this is the last year that this activity would
be supported by the city, that it is going
to go out of existence as a city function
and be transferred to the bicentennial center.
I think also that there is at least a moral commitment
to the operators of these businesses
where the taxes are collected to at least spend
a portion of these funds to attract visitors here.
And that it is a good business, because the more visitors
we attract, the more tax is paid by the tourists
and not the citizens of this city.
Thank you.
SPEAKER 1: Thank you.
SPEAKER 8: Mr. Mayor, I'm George Wiley.
I come before you tonight supporting the following
departments, and I will be brief--
The Administrative Assistant position,
presently, this individual is a local person.
Department of Community Development
where federal money is input, programming with the community
input.
Personnel technician, this individual
is also a local person.
The Office of Research and information
should be combined with the citizen assistance
department, which serves many community
needs and public services.
In the field of education in this city,
we have a fine system.
In order to keep our institutions rated high
on the list, we must keep up with the future
and these programs that mean so much to our children
up future years.
Thomas Jefferson planning district,
Charlottesville serves in the planning district
and its services are vital to our community in many ways.
Again, local people serves in this capacity.
The VPI and State University extension--
here, we have local personnel affected
and should be emphasized.
Housing tax relief and rental relief for the elderly
is very important and should not be terminated.
Senior citizens are one of our most important natural
resources.
The youth employment service serves
as a good interest to our youth during the summer,
and the city market proves to be a vital service, especially
when the prices of food keep going up.
Consumer services, such as refuse collection,
refuse disposal, street cleaning, street maintenance,
sidewalks, street lighting are very important
and should not be cut back.
Property tax pays for all these services,
and remember one thing, the assessments.
Cutbacks in the police and fire department services
should not be considered for the safety of the people as well
as health.
My last comment to you tonight--
think twice before you make a mistake.
And remember, as officials, you are still
part of this community.
And someday, you won't be on council.
I hope tonight that you will rely on public comments
in the best interests of all.
Many city workers and citizens will
be affected directly or indirectly
if you make these reductions.
Finally, I encourage you to endorse fully
the affirmative action plan within a few pages.
This plan means a lot to the blacks
and other minorities in this city government
as far as promotions and employment.
Thank you, very much.
SPEAKER 1: Thank you.
Sir?
SPEAKER 9: I must have misunderstood you
when you started.
Were we supposed to be speaking to the city budget [INAUDIBLE]??
SPEAKER 1: You can speak to the city budget, the school budget,
both.
SPEAKER 9: It's just 3 minutes?
SPEAKER 1: 3 minutes.
SPEAKER 9: Both?
SPEAKER 1: That's correct.
Yes, sir?
SPEAKER 10: He hasn't used my three minutes-- part
of my three minutes.
I want to be sure that.
SPEAKER 1: Sir?
SPEAKER 10: My time starts now.
SPEAKER 1: No, your time starts right now.
[LAUGHTER]
SPEAKER 10: At a public meeting on January 6 of this year,
I submitted to this council comparative costs
of the operation of a certain part of the city
functions, that is the bureaucratic side of the city
government.
And I emphasize that I was not directing my remarks
to the police department, the fire department, or any
of these other departments, because I
feel that the real expense of this city
sits right in the bureaucratic side of it.
Now at this council meeting, I understand--
if I recall correctly --the city manager was directed to come up
with a budget of $16,200,000.
So the first question is, where is it?
Then Mr. Gilliam and Mr. Fife suggested a 3-day work session
for taxpayers input.
Now on good authority, I understand
at a subsequent executive meeting, the council,
with the absence of one of these gentlemen,
changed, specifically, this designation--
that there would be three closed sessions.
They were held on March 17, 24, and 25
with no public participation.
Now here we are, March 31--
the first public discussion of the city budget
in which we can voice our opinions and input.
Now this one-time deal, in our estimation,
is beyond any doubt, the way I feel
about it, a circumvention of the Freedom of Information.
Now four years ago, when this council [INAUDIBLE]
its majority, it really inherited
a valuable legacy, a surplus of seven several million
dollars, a well-organized and efficient management
and operating staff, a total employment slightly in excess
of 430 people, a departmental set up
with well-diversified capabilities,
a new city hall of exquisite design and appearance and space
enough to take care of the needs of the community
for several decades, and a beautifully engineered bypass.
Now we could go on, and on, and on
and extol the accomplishments of these prior years.
But what of today?
Well, our surplus funds seriously have been depleted.
And an inspection of the budget--
and I don't recall a page that is this budget--
shows for the year of '76, '77, a general fund
of minus $1 million.
Now we're confronted with an astronomical tax assessment
to bail out our sinking ship.
Nearly twice as many departments are overstaffed with numbers
of people.
A total payroll of nearly 565 persons, and I understand--
listen to this--
105 people were added this past year.
A management and bureaucratic group
sufficient to operate a city of nearly 100,000 people,
with salaries and department heads
and their assistants substantially higher
than cities of equal or twice the size of Charlottesville.
And I've shown that to you gentlemen before.
New buildings, for what?
The city hall-- its every nook and cranny
filled with living bodies.
Three empty school buildings and a road that ends nowhere.
Or does it?
You have all of what, lady and gentlemen,
the word inflation is a principal culprit for increased
costs.
There is quite a gap between $16,200,000 and $19,300,000--
a difference of $3,100,000.
At least, we demand a 50% increase or $1,500,000.
How can it be accomplished?
You can consolidate some of these departments
with greater efficiency.
There are between 20 and 30 positions
in the staff of bureaucratic section of this management
that you can do without.
Now here are the departments.
In the city manager's office, in the city's attorney's office,
the city's assistant department, community development,
data processing, department of personnel, say?
[INAUDIBLE]
--city assistance department, community development,
data processing, department of personnel,
office of purchasing, I had elected offices in here,
but i crossed them out.
Office of real estate assessment--
[LAUGHTER]
Department of Welfare, Department
of Parks and Recreation, Department of Public Works,
and I finally ended up with Department of Traffic.
That's as far as I got through with my budget.
Now this represents, in salaries alone
that can be eliminated, nearly $300,000.
City of Charlottesville, the ghost of Albert Gallatin
hangs high over your heads.
And it's up to you to emulate the efforts of this great man.
Now some of you don't know who Albert Gallatin is.
Well, he happened to be the first Secretary of the Treasury
under Thomas Jefferson when he became
President of the United States.
He cleaned up a $10 billion debt.
He reduced taxes and also eliminated a lot of excess fat
in the budget of the government in those days.
Now I'm--
SPEAKER 1: Thank you, Mr. Anderson.
SPEAKER 10: Thank you, very much.
[APPLAUSE]
SPEAKER 1: I would like to make one thing crystal clear.
This council, as of today, have not
had any closed meeting concerning the budget.
We have held work session with the public,
and many have been present.
No public have been able to participate in discussion.
But as of today, this council have held no closed session
on the budget.
I just won't make that crystal clear.
I would like to change the platform somewhat.
Those of you who want to speak line up at the microphones.
A line on both sides, and split please limit your comments
to three minutes again--
three minutes.
Yes, sir?
SPEAKER 11: Mr. Barber, I like to yield to the President
of the CEA first.
If you don't mind.
SPEAKER 1: I'm sorry?
SPEAKER 11: I'd like to yield to the President of the CEA,
if I may.
SPEAKER 1: Well, now who is going to speak?
You or him?
SPEAKER 11: He may speak first, and I'll speak after.
SPEAKER 1: Let me say again what I've said before.
Tonight, council is own interested items
that pertain directly to the budget, directly to the budget.
Yes, sir?
SPEAKER 12: I'm Don Schrader, President-elect
of the Charlottesville Education Association.
In purely technical terms, I speak tonight
on behalf of the 381 members of the Charlottesville Education
Association.
But since the salaries of all school
board employees except the superintendent of schools
are tied together.
I am, in practical terms, speaking
for all school employees.
On behalf of these 682 people and their husbands, wives,
and children, most of whom are taxpayers and voters
in Charlottesville, I ask that you
give a high degree of attention and consideration
to their collective voice.
Believe it or not, we understand your brother
your budgetary problems because there is a remarkable degree
of similarity between the city's and the teachers'
respective financial situations.
Both the city and the teachers have
to support their economic interests
in the face of raging inflation.
Both the city and the teachers must face the fact
that energy costs more.
Both the city and the teachers must
operate in the face of the most severe economic dislocation
since the Great Depression.
Teachers realize the problems that you are having this budget
time, and we sympathize because we've
had so much practice trying to balance
deficit budgets ourselves.
Teachers never have a good financial year.
There is a major difference, however, in the way
that the city solves its financial problems
compared with the options that teachers have available.
When the city's costs go up, the money
can be found in increased taxes and charges.
Thus, we have already seen this year, an average 43% increase
in real estate assessments and the first 50%
of a 100% increase in the cost of gas.
Teachers, on the other hand, have no machinery
for adjusting their income.
They can't raise the cost of an office call, which
for a first-year teacher is a professional charge of $0.23
an hour for the child's parent.
Neither can they benefit from a change in the minimum wage
laws.
Does council realize that the salary increase it approves now
will be all the additional money that teachers will receive
until September the 30th 1976?
That council will be locking them
into a salary system that will be
reflected in their paychecks a year and a half from now?
Taking into account that teachers
must live with every increase in the cost of living
that all other citizens must face,
I submit to you that in addition to being
locked into a rigid pay scale they are
being hurt in two other areas.
First, job security is being purchased
by traditionally low salaries.
Thus it is, that after the expense,
the personal sacrifice, and the work of gaining a college
degree, the graduate can look forward
to receiving a salary of only $8,000 a year.
This figure is so low that the President signed into law
two nights ago a tax bill that lists $8,000, which
is the starting salary for teachers in Charlottesville,
as the cutoff point for the negative income tax.
The federal government realizes how low that salary is.
Secondly, a teacher is being hurt financially
where others are not by virtue of his entry
in a profession that has no provision for promotions.
There is no such thing as an assistant teacher
or a supervisory teacher.
There is no other higher position
available without removing himself from the classroom.
This is as it should be, for keeps good teachers
in the classrooms.
Unfortunately, without promotions,
there is no way open for a teacher
to advance economically.
The school budget that you have before you
is a reduced one, calling for no expansion
in the educational system in Charlottesville.
Indeed, it calls for reductions in many areas
that need beefing up.
It bothers us that Charlottesville believes
that it can attract good, competent teachers
with a salary that qualifies them for federal support.
But we're not talking about just filling positions.
If that were the goal, then that could
be done on salaries of considerably less.
You are being asked to decide on a salary that
will attract and hold competent and talented people in order
to maintain a viable and progressive educational program
in Charlottesville.
A colleague of mine told me last week
that he doesn't mind helping the fight against inflation,
but he doesn't want to be the entire arsenal.
You have raised our taxes, raised our gas rates,
and now you're talking about denying a salary increase that
is only 61% of last year's cost of living increase.
We feel that a city that can find the money
to widen Preston Avenue in the middle of a recession
can afford to give teachers a $50 a month raise.
We feel that a city that can spend over a million dollars
to build three swimming pools in the middle of a recession can
afford to give teachers a $12.50 a week raise in the cost
of living.
We believe that a city that can locate
in its budget over $2 million to completely revamp
the downtown area during the most severe economic recession
since the Great Depression can find money to give teachers
$0.33 more an hour.
Members of city council, your educators
are up against the wall.
The school board has helped us as much as they can this year.
Now you are the ones and the only ones who can help us.
We ask, we demand, and yes, we will even beg of you--
help us!
You must approve the school board budget
as it has been presented.
Thank you.
[APPLAUSE]
[GAVEL BANGING]
SPEAKER 1: I'll call the police to keep order.
Thank you, and I assume all of you who applaud--
he spoke for you, and you won't have to speak.
Thank you very much.
Yes, sir?
SPEAKER 11: If you please, I have a brief for you
on salaries and merit increases for the Charlottesville Fire
Department.
Tonight.
Mayor Barber, I'm speaking in capacity
of the President of the Charlottesville Professional
Firefighters Association, local 2363
of the International Association of Firefighters.
Did you know the firefighters job
is the most hazardous profession in the country?
Did you know last year 202 firefighters
was killed in the line of duty?
Did you know 37 in every 100 firefighters
are injured in the line of duty, which gives us
the dubious honor, according to the United State's Department
of Labor, of being the most hazardous profession
in the country today.
Last year in this country, over 12,000 people
lost their lives in fires.
The dollar cost and cents lost by fire in this nation
last year was the highest in the history.
It's the highest of any country in the world.
And because it is, the President of the United States
has appointed a commission to study the problems of fire.
And on November 1974 signed the bill granting $47 million
for research and education into fire prevention and protection.
Enclosed, you will find facts concerning
the salaries and step increases of the fire department.
They are being presented to you this time
before the final budget is adopted by the city council,
so that any adjustments that have to be made
can be made at this time.
Merit increases-- all the firefighters
that we represent are in pay grade 17, 19, and 21.
The merit system is made up of positions of A
through F in each grade.
It has been indicated to us that there will be no merit
increases this year.
The union's position is very strong against any move
in this direction.
Our position is that a merit increase
is nothing more than a salary step by which an individual
knows, when he joins the department,
that his salary is X number or dollars.
And in six years, if the requirements
of the merit system are met, he will be a top salary.
We feel like there are a number of faults in our merit system
as it now applies to our members.
For example, we have lieutenants in the fire department
who are making less than the people who they supervise.
Another fault we find with the merit system is
that some of our members have 25 years of service
with the City of Charlottesville are not yet making top salary.
The merit system now paying should have nothing
to do with salary increases, cost of living,
or other fringe benefits.
Under section 4.3 of the personnel rules and regulations
of the city of Charlottesville, section D,
titled Merit Increases--
only two things are cited for a man to receive his increases.
This says that he or she should be
doing his job either adequate or better when
he or she is judged by his supervisor
and if the money is available.
We are interpreting this section to mean that each department
head must provide in his budgets the funds for such increases.
Salaries-- up to this date, this local,
who represents approximately 94% of the Charlottesville fire
department has not any indication
of what our salary increases will be for 1975
and if we are to receive any cost-of-living adjustment
for the same period.
At the present salary rate for a starting firefighter,
at $8,220 a year, and since he is required
to work 3,128 hours a year, which is 1,040 hours more
than most other city employees, his hourly rate
is only that of $2.64.
And in this day of runaway inflation
and high cost of living, it is impossible to exist
on this salary.
Therefore, this local feels as though its essential salary
increase should be forthcoming plus a cost of living
adjustment to protect what we now have
so our position financially will not deplete further.
As a suggestion, there are many hours
of discussion with our membership,
and because the financial position the city
finds itself in, and because of consideration
that may be shown toward us, we have an effect on other city
groups, we would like to put forward
the following suggestions--
that all firefighters in grade 17 be moved to grade 18,
that all fire lieutenants and fire
mechanic be moved from grade 19 to grade 21,
that all fire captains in grade 21 be moved to grade 23.
These people will be placed on the new grades
according to their time and service.
Thank you.
SPEAKER 1: Thank you.
[APPLAUSE]
SPEAKER 13: I am Jim Elwinder, parent and Charlottesville city
teacher.
I am concerned about the future of quality education
and quality teaching in Charlottesville.
I will direct my remarks to the education area for the budget.
I'd like to share an anecdote which
illustrates one approach to the funding of quality education.
A man came indoors to escape the raw cold
and stood with numb hands over his gas stove.
The man said, "Give me heat, and then I'll give you gas."
Nothing happened.
Cold and shivering, the man reached down and turned the gas
on slightly and said to the stove,
"Now give me maximum heat because I've
given you a trickle of gas."
Any intelligent person in this room
knows it's not possible to get maximum heat
from a trickle of gas.
The same principle applies to the funding
of quality education.
I submit that this anecdote applies
to the funding of quality instruction, which
is a prerequisite to quality education.
The school board budget represents
the best efforts of teachers and the school board
to maintain quality education in the Charlottesville public
schools.
Any sizable cuts in the school board budget
will, in all probability, result in corresponding cuts
in the quality and quantity of education in this city.
It has been suggested that a half million dollars be
cut from the school board budget,
with the reductions coming from the teacher salaries.
This suggestion to cut a half million
appears to expect maximum heat in the form of quality
education in return for a trickle of gas for salary.
For what members of city council will
say that they do not want to present high level of services
and quality education?
City teachers are committed to quality education
in Charlottesville.
We are committed to professional improvement.
City teachers have held themselves
accountable for standards of excellence
by undergoing a thorough staff evaluation.
The dedication of city teachers has been publicly recognized
by the school board chairman, whose continuing support
we are most appreciative of.
What is yet to be publicly recognized
is city council's commitment to quality education
in Charlottesville.
We have seen no shortage in money
to fund massive capital improvements during periods
of excessive inflation.
If council is committed to quality education,
I submit that you will find the funds.
Or will city council take the approach
that maximum heat can be produced from a trickle of gas?
Thank you.
SPEAKER 1: Thank you.
[APPLAUSE]
SPEAKER 14: Mr. Mayor, Councilman,
my name is R.N. McMillan.
I'm here representing the action for budget control.
In this past week, we've put out a petition to be signed,
and I'd like to read that petition.
"We, the undersigned are taxpayers
of the city of Charlottesville directly or indirectly.
The Committee of Action for Budget Control
have given good reasons to reduce
the expenses of the city that are unnecessary.
Charlottesville city government is overstaffed, extravagant,
and not realistic in these times of unemployment
and high prices.
We petition city council to reduce the budget,
and, in turn, reduce the tax rate to $4.00 or less.
Now in these petitions, we would like
you to know that we have over 700
names on the action for budget control list and more
than 40 lists are still out.
SPEAKER 1: You're representing who again?
SPEAKER 14: Action for Budget Control.
SPEAKER 1: And you say you'd like us to cut the budget
by $4.00?
SPEAKER 14: We'd like the tax rate to be lowered to $4.00
or less.
SPEAKER 1: Oh, I see.
Thank you very much.
SPEAKER 15: I say for less.
SPEAKER 1: Excuse me, please state your name.
[COUGHING]
SPEAKER 15: Glen Bookman, I'm from 1281 Kenwood Lane.
SPEAKER 1: Thank you.
SPEAKER 15: I'm for less than $4.00, of course.
No, what I'm here for is to try to keep the city from charging
me $50 a month tax on my home.
The recent excessive property assessment, my case 80%,
is simply not justified.
At the rate which property tax is increasing,
the tax on our homes will exceed the mortgage payments
before many of our mortgages are paid off.
If the average increase in assessment is $43,
why is mine $80?
It's the same house that's been assessed before by the city,
except the hard labor that I had to do
to fill a 12-foot gully in my front yard caused
by the city terminating in a storm drain
in my front yard, which they wouldn't fix.
I did a good bit of landscaping with the pick, and a shovel,
and wheelbarrow.
It seems to me that I'm being penalized for my hard labor.
I understand the proposed budget is an increase of 5% or 6%
above that in the past year.
The budget, even as proposed, certainly
does not justify taxing us in excess of this 5% or 6%
increase.
It is my firm belief the city could and should
operate more economically.
It is hard enough for many of us to manage
our personal finances.
Many of us cannot afford luxuries.
When the city spends in excess of our means,
this is tragic for us.
This city has several departments
that they shouldn't have at all.
[COUGHING] And some departments that are well over-staffed.
I think the city has grown into an enormous operation composed
of a management layer and complex
system of departments and officials
with compartmentalized functions.
Some require an expanding diet of responsibilities and people
in order to grow.
I feel too much tax money has been
spent on non-essential items or on items
for special-interest groups.
One of my biggest gripes is seeing the city spend when I
cannot afford it.
Millions and millions of dollars on golf courses,
and swimming pools, and all kinds of recreation programs
and park programs.
Entirely too much emphasis is put on all sorts
of recreation and play.
There are many ways to exercise constructively
that would be of benefit to our homes and community.
It is stated the city expects to have
a deficit of $828,000 from its gas service
for which it has recently nailed on a huge increase.
Their water service shows a balance of $547,409.
The source service shows a balance of $156,139.
Together, the water and sewer balance
add up to a total of $703,548.
No consideration was given to taxpayers
on the $703,548 balance.
We were nailed pretty good on the natural gas deficit.
I can almost guarantee you that as long as this money is
available, it will be spent.
If the city cannot find enough to spend it on, they'll invite
the public down to come and help them plan how to spend it,
as it was done with the--
in the case with the federal revenue sharing funds,
which could have been used to lessen the present heavy tax
burden.
Also with each utility price increase,
whether by city or Vepco, the city
nails on additional high taxes.
The purchasing department budgeted $48,168.
Mr. Hendrick recommended that a super-mental budget of $16,545
to hire an assistant buyer and another clerk.
He estimates these new personnel would save the city 10% or 15%
of the $100,000 worth of local purchases he would make.
Undoubtedly, I didn't get that picture,
because I'm sure he couldn't admit
hiring $16,545 worth of personnel in order
to save $10,000 or $15,000 money.
SPEAKER 1: Excuse me, sir?
Are you about through?
Your time is--
SPEAKER 15: No, not too much.
SPEAKER 1: Sir?
SPEAKER 15: No, not too much.
SPEAKER 1: Would you like to wait for the--
give the others a chance to speak,
or you want five minutes now.
SPEAKER 15: OK.
SPEAKER 1: Thank you.
Yes, sir?
SPEAKER 16: Mr. Mayor, my name is Liam Hall.
Members of Council, fellow citizens,
we have come here tonight to receive some more bull
corn from our city manager that has
led you the council and the citizens of Charlottesville
like a Judas goat leading the cattle to slaughter
to financial destruction.
Instead of us receiving a budget from this man,
you should be receiving his resignation
for the shape he has managed to get this city into.
He can sit here and spend, spend, and spend,
and you sit here and vote, vote, and vote for everything
he wants, and he gets it.
You've had some good personnel in our city in the past.
Since this man has been here, personnel have been let go.
Outsiders have been brought in from out of town
at great salaries.
And instead of the people getting more services
for their money, the only thing we have received
is higher water, higher gas, higher sewer,
and higher tax bills.
I can not I cannot understand how group of educated people
as yourselves let yourselves get in such a shape.
You let a high school be built at the cost of Lord
knows what it will finally cost, because the people don't know.
It has nothing.
And it isn't finished yet.
It's in worse shape than Lane, and Lane
was built back in 1940.
In fact, it's the biggest joke since the Great Yellow Brick
Road, the downtown mall, the mausoleum,
which is a parking garage that would be well worth its while
if it would work.
I hope for the sake of the businessmen on Main Street
that I am wrong.
The only thing they need now is a miracle.
But this will never come.
We have spent $29 million in capital only in the past year,
and the citizens only got to vote on $8 million.
This sounds like to me taxation without representation.
So I will say to you, another year will come.
And I hope the people of this great city
will remember this coming new year and go to the polls
and vote for a change.
Vote for a council that can say no once in a while
before we go totally bankrupt.
So gentlemen, I also hope tonight you
are sober, because you are overdrawn on your bar bill.
Thank you, and good night.
[APPLAUSE]
SPEAKER 1: I would like to make one point clear,
that it was the voters who voted in the referendum
for the new high school, and it was not this council.
Yes, sir?
SPEAKER 17: My name is Harry Porter,
and I'd like to talk about the prosperity of Charlottesville.
And it's my belief that the future prosperity
of Charlottesville depends on many factors,
and one factor which I feel strongly deserves
the investment of budget funds now,
and from now on, is that money which supports efforts to plan
ahead, to plan for the future, and to plan
for our immediate needs.
The Department of Community Development
was initiated about two years ago
to bring together efforts to consider
not only our physical planning needs, but our social
and economic as well.
In my view, this department and its efforts
are tangible evidence of this city's commitment
to provide a full range of services
to meet the needs of all of us and to include citizens
in the process of planning.
I urge that you support the full budget
request for the Department of Community Development.
Thank you.
SPEAKER 1: Thank you.
Yes, sir?
SPEAKER 18: My name is Joseph Toll,
and I reside on Meadowbrook Heights Road.
I'm going to confine my remarks tonight largely
to the school budget, as is the area of city spending
which I have studied the closest.
The school system of this city is fast
getting beyond the grasp for the ordinary taxpayer.
Tangible evidence of this is the new high school.
It is proving to be a monstrous, ill-conceived monument
to our misplaced faith in so-called educational experts.
We are saddled with a multimillion dollar white
elephant, which has destroyed the integrity
of an entire neighborhood.
It hurts, under one roof, more students
than are found on the campus of many a small college.
And due to poor planning, it threatens McIntire Park
as the experts wonder aloud about finding additional space
for track facilities, baseball diamonds,
and new administrative headquarters.
All this, and nobody seems to know
what to do with the Lane High School facility.
Further evidence of our loss of control
was found in reading the school budget document for '75, '76.