Laserfiche WebLink
15 <br /> <br />programs out of the existing tax rate. <br /> <br /> Responding to a question from Rev. Edwards, Ms. Ingels <br />stated that the large item pickup costs approximately $92,000 <br />per year. <br /> <br /> Ms. Waters suggested putting the actual cost of trash <br />collection and disposal in a fee. <br /> <br /> Mr. Vandever stated that he continued to favor taking <br />the entire cost of solid waste out of the tax rate. <br /> <br /> Rev. Edwards stated that he was leaning toward <br />maintaining the current tax rate as he felt that would <br />provide a more balanced system, adding that he did not want <br />the tax rate to fluctuate down and then up. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano proposed that the following question be put <br />to the public for the upcoming public hearing: would they <br />rather maintain the current tax rate, either for real estate <br />or personal propertY tax, or pay a higher fee? <br /> <br />e~ adjourned. <br /> <br />President <br /> <br />COUNCIL CHAMBER - November 4, 1991 <br /> <br /> Council met in regular session on this date with the <br />following members present: Rev. Edwards, Ms. Slaughter, Mr. <br />Toscano, Mr. Vandever, Ms. Waters. <br /> <br />MINUTES <br /> <br /> On motion by Ms. Waters, seconded by Mr. Vandever, the <br />minutes of the October 21st meeting were unanimously approved <br />as corrected, <br /> <br />PUBLIC <br /> <br />There were no matters by the public. <br /> <br />STAFF REPORT: USE OF OLD MCINTIRE LIBRARY BUILDING (FORMER <br />SENIOR CENTER BUILDING) <br /> <br /> Ms. Linda Peacock, Budget Administrator, stated that <br />since the Senior Center has vacated the former McIntire <br />Library Building, many organizations (including Jefferson <br />Area Board for Aging, Boys' and Girls' Club, and <br />Charlottesville/Albemarle Historic Society) have expressed <br />interest in using the building. Ms. Peacock stated that the <br />building is one of the most architectural significant <br />buildings in Charlottesville and may be ideal for a <br />multi-purpose use, but has no parking and many areas are not <br />handicapped accessible. Ms. Peacock stated that staff have <br />identified the following questions which should be addressed: <br />what is the best use of the old Library building; in this <br />period of downsizing, should the City add to the numbers of <br />buildings it is responsible for maintaining on a daily basis; <br />should the City take on the daily operational costs for the <br />use of this building; given the building's value ($518,000 <br />total assessment), should the building be sold and returned <br />to the tax rolls, with the proceeds used for other one-time <br />City programs or donated to some group for use; and who <br />should be responsible for oversight of building uses? In <br />addition, staff recommended that the committee explore any <br />other options for use of the building. The committee's <br />membership was recommended as follows: member of the Board <br />of Architectural Review; representatives from the <br />Charlottesville Downtown Foundation, two or three <br />citizens-at-large, and a staff member. Ms. Peacock noted <br />that the North Downtown Neighborhood Association Board had <br />recommended that a member of the NDRA Board also be added to <br />the committee. <br /> <br /> <br />