Laserfiche WebLink
252 <br /> <br /> Ms. Riddick provided information on the history of the <br />voting machines, the use of the equipment, and the absence of <br />replacement parts and discussed the problems which are <br />created when the voting equipment breaks and the impact on <br />the election process. <br /> <br /> Ms. Waters outlined a proposal for Council's <br />consideration: 1) acquire three new machines initially, with <br />additional purchases phased in over three or more years at a <br />purchase price of $7,000; and 2) stockpile the remaining <br />equipment to be available for future equipment breakage. <br /> <br /> Ms. Clare Smith, Secretary of the Electoral Board, <br />addressed several questions on the priority of the voting <br />machines and responded to Ms. Waters~ proposal by saying that <br />the Board would prefer to purchase four voting machi~es~at~ <br />this time. Ms. Smith added that the State Electoral Board <br />will not approve more than a two-year purchase of voting <br />equipment. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano questioned why staff had not recommended the <br />purchase in the operating budget and Mr. O'Connell replied <br />that it was due to the difficulty of funding this request <br />during a tight budget year. <br /> <br /> Ms. Waters outlined a second proposal to acquire the <br />voting machines over two years, with funding to be included <br />in the 1992-92 operating budget. Ms. Waters recognized that <br />in the short-term the Board will need to rely on spare parts <br />for the existing machines. <br /> <br /> Mr. Vandever asked about the current operating condition <br />of the machines and reviewed Ms. Waters' proposal to <br />emphasize that the purchase of four to five voting machines <br />would be included as part of next year's operating budget. <br /> <br /> Ms. Smith raised concerns about the use of new voting <br />machines for the first time for a presidential election. <br /> <br />Ms. Waters restated her proposal as a motion. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano seconded the motion and recommended that <br />staff review with the Electoral Board the status of the <br />voting machines after this November's election. <br /> <br /> Ms. Waters' proposal was unanimously approved by <br />Council. <br /> <br />APPROPRIATION: <br /> <br />(2nd reading) <br /> <br />FY 91-92 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS <br /> <br /> The appropriation of the FY 91-92 Community Development <br />Block Grant funds which was offered at the June 17th meeting <br />was approved by the following vote. Ayes: Rev. Edwards, Mr. <br />Toscano, Mr. Vandever, Ms. Waters. Noes: None. Absent: <br />Ms. Slaughter. <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, the Council has previously approved the <br />appropriation of certain sums of federal grant receipts to <br />specified accounts in the Community Development Block Grant <br />(CDBG) Fund; and <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, it now appears that portions of the amounts <br />originally appropriated to some of these accounts are not <br />needed for the purpose for which they were designated, and <br />that these unneeded funds should be reappropriated for <br />certain other purposes in connection with this grant; now <br />therefore, <br /> <br /> BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of <br />Charlottesville, Virginia, that the appropriations made to <br />the following expenditure accounts in the CDBG Fund are <br /> <br /> <br />