My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1986-11-15
Charlottesville
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
1986
>
1986-11-15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/15/2002 3:27:46 PM
Creation date
8/15/2002 2:37:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Meeting Date
11/15/1986
Doc Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
79 <br /> <br />The areas selected for in-depth discussion were: <br /> <br />1. Needs of various income groups <br /> <br />2. Cost of government <br /> <br />3. Housing <br /> <br />4. Neighborhoods <br /> <br />Needs of various income groups <br /> <br /> The first area of discussion was on the City's changing <br />demographic patterns. Concern was expressed by the <br />Councillors about the diminishing middle class in <br />Charlottesville. It was noted that comparatively little of <br />the City's attention is focused on programs and activities <br />which are designed to maintain and expand the middle strata <br />of the community. <br /> <br />Cost of Government <br /> <br /> Several Councillors advanced the notion that the City <br />should strive to maintain current service and personnel <br />while not increasing the real or personal property tax <br />rates. Mr. Hendrix discussed the impact of a reduction in <br />the real and personal property rates. <br /> <br /> Continuing to solicit and receive citizen input on the <br />cost of government was cited as a positive approach which <br />the City should continue to use. <br /> <br /> A continued level of support for the public school <br />system in light of the changing demographic patterns was <br />stated as a priority of the Council. This support is an <br />essential part of maintaining and continuing the cost of <br />government. <br /> <br />Housing <br /> <br /> The Councillors' general feeling is that the City has a <br />disproportionate share of the public and subsidized housing <br />which currently exists within the region. Approximately <br />1,000 units of various subsidy types including Section 8 and <br />public housing are located in the City. <br /> <br /> The proposed additional 25 units of public housing were <br />discussed. Those units should be carefully selected. An <br />assessment is to be made so as to reasonably assure that the <br />units to be acquired have a positive impact on the <br />individual neighborhood. <br /> <br /> There is a concern for imProving what have been called <br />"traditional black neighborhoods.,, <br /> <br /> The Section 8 program, along with HUD's offer of 20 <br />additional units was discussed° The proliferation of <br />Section 8 units in the community is thought to reduce the <br />options available to persons at moderate income levels , the <br />so called "working poor," by causing a filtering up to in <br />unit quality among the very low-income. <br /> <br /> The Councillors agreed that they would consider <br />accepting additional Section 8 units if the unit is linked <br />to the individual's participation in other programs designed <br />to break the "cycle" which seems to exist among <br />disadvantaged persons. <br /> <br /> Housing rehabilitation continues to occupy a high <br />priority in the strategy to eliminate sub-standard housing. <br /> <br />Neighborhoods <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.