Laserfiche WebLink
236 <br /> <br />Special session <br /> <br />Public Hearing re: <br />City Manager's <br />proposed budget; <br />proposed tax <br />adjustment; use of <br />General Revenue <br />Sharing Funds <br /> <br /> 3. It is hereby found and~determined that the Project meets <br />the criteria set forth in Section 5 of the Ordinance. <br /> 4. This resolution shall take effect i~ediately. <br /> <br />On motion the meeting adjourned. <br /> <br />Clerk <br /> <br />L/ ~ - Presiden~ <br /> <br />COUNCIL CHAMBER MONDAY, MARCH 31, 1980 <br /> <br /> Council met for a public hearing on this date with the <br /> <br />following members present: Mr. Albro, Mr. Brunton, Mr. Buck, <br /> <br />Mr. Gatewood, Mrs. O'Brien. Absent: None. <br /> <br /> Mrs. 0'Brien requested that Council set a date for another <br /> <br />public hearing to give the public the opportunity to comment on <br />Council's budget proposals. Other Council members agreed with <br />this 'idea and, after some discussion about a convenient date, <br />it was decided to set the date for the continuation of the public <br />hearing at a subsequent work session, with a newspaper announce- <br />ment to inform the public of the date. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cole Hendrix, City Manager, stated that the purpose of <br /> <br /> this public hearing was to give the public an opportunity to <br /> comment on the following: (1) the City Manager's proposed budget; <br /> (2) the proposed tax adjustment; and, (3.) use of General Revenue <br /> Sharing funds received by the City from the Federal government. <br /> <br /> Ms. Nancy Kramer, President of the Charlottesville EdUCation <br />Association, spoke in favor of the school board's requested <br />budget. She stated the large turnout at the public hearing <br />was an indication of widespread support for the school board <br />budget as well as a plea for that level of funding. She commended <br />the school board on the process used to develOp the budget and <br />for its financial responsibility, pointing out that the budget <br />contained no new programs, included a less costly plan for <br />reducing class sizes, advocated less than the 15% asked for by <br />teachers and was the result of examination of various alternatives. <br />Ms. Kramer addressed herself to why teachers deserve an 11.7% <br />pay increase, citing the correlation between educational quality <br />and city quality; the time and money spent by teachers in obtaining <br />training; the teachers' average of 12 hours/week spent working <br />beyond contract hours; the demands on teachers including additional <br />duties, increased negative publicity and the needs of special children. <br />Ms. Kramer cited a recent CEA survey that showed that 30 teachers <br />had left the City school system in the last 3 years, not including <br />pregnancy leaves and administrative promotions. She cited a <br />study from Boston University that showed prospective teachers <br />currently in training as having lower academic standings than <br />previous teachers in training. Ms. Kramer stated that teachers <br />cannot be compared to other City employees, there being different <br />standards for pay scales, educational requirements, job requirements <br /> <br /> <br />