Laserfiche WebLink
136 <br /> <br />school funding a priority and funds the school system a5 20,447,502, an increase of $300,000 <br />over the current year, with an additional $475,000 allocated for the alternative school; <br />provides funds for a 3% pay-for-performance pool for City employees as well as funds for a <br />career development program for qualifying Police and Fire employees; programs a majority <br />of the increaSe in revenue sharing from Albemarle County into the operational budget to <br />support debt service and pay-for-performance increases; provides funding in the capital and <br />operating budgets to maintain the City's infrastructure and facilkies; includes funds to support <br />the Capital Improvement Program which equates to a 2% transfer from the General fund; and <br />provides funding to support technology improvements. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano asked if specific items have been identified in the budget by staff for <br />Council's consideration, and Mr. Hendrix stated that transportation funding is a major issue, <br />with reduced federal funding and a large funding request from JAUNT, and that there are <br />many new and increased funding requests from agencies for City funding which have not <br />been recommended in the budget. <br /> <br /> Ms. Linda Peacock, Budget Administrator, stated that the budget contains over <br />$200,000 in additional transportation funds for the Charlottesville Transit Service and <br />JAUNT. <br /> <br />PRESENTATION: SCHOOL BOARD'S PROPOSED FY 95/96 BUDGET <br /> <br /> Ms. Linda Seaman, Chair of the Charlottesville School Board, presented the School <br />Board's FY 95/96 budget, totaling $32,542,209, with the local share being $20,547,502. Ms. <br />Seaman stated that $39,200 is also requested to fund the CLASS program and $393,711 for <br />the Opportunity Alternative Education Program. <br /> <br /> Responding to a question from Rev. Edwards, Ms. Seaman stated that the School <br />Board is aware of the $100,000 difference in funding requested by the School Board and the <br />amount recommended by the City, and would like to further discuss the matter at the work <br />session, but noted that the School Board can deal with the decreased funding if necessary. <br /> <br />Ms. Slaughter requested that highlights of the SchoOl Board's budget be presented. <br /> <br /> Dr. Dorothea Shannon, Superintendent of Charlottesville Schools, stated that the <br />School Board's two main priorities, maintaining the student/teacher ratios and providing pay <br />increases, is accomplished in the budget, with an average 5.2% pay increase for all <br />employees. Additional instructional materials are funded and certain positions have been <br />eliminated through attrition. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano asked the School Board to provide responses to the following by <br />Wednesday, for consideration by Council prior to the Thursday work session: a breakout of <br />where technology funds from the state and.in the budget will be spent; a breakout of the <br />numbers of School employees in categories of positions over the last five years; the thinking <br />of the School Board in using $90,000 in one-time gainsharing money for operating funds; the <br />rationale for not funding agency requests; why the funding for the Perfomfing Arts Center <br />director remains at the current level even though the position has been reduced; assurance <br />that there is adequate technical funding for the Performing Arts Center; and where grant <br />funds show up in the budget so that a comparison can be made to last year's grant funds. <br /> <br /> Ms. Daugherty asked that a list of the School Board's unfunded priorities be prov~ided <br />to Council. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING: CONSOLIDATED PLAN (COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT <br />BLOCK GRANT AND HOIME PROGRAMS) <br /> <br /> Mr. Satyendra Huja, Director of Community Development, explained that the public <br />hearing is being held on the Consolidated Plan and FY 95-96 funding for Community <br />Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME programs. The CDBG Task Force reviewed <br />physical programs, the Social Development Commission reviewed social programs, the <br /> <br /> <br />