Laserfiche WebLink
173 <br /> <br />stated that the park ~ould eventually include the following: <br />four softbalI fields, four multi-purpose fields, eight tennis <br />courts, shelters, children's playground, two ponds, and open <br />space. Mr. German stated that he felt the park would serve <br />a large segment of the community for years to come. <br /> <br /> Mr. Gary O'Connell, Deputy City Manager, stated that the <br />draft agreement had been reviewed by both the City and County <br />Attorneys. Mr. O'Connell stated that three phases for <br />development of the park were planned, with the first phase to <br />begin in the fall of 1986, with completion planned for spring <br />of 1988. The cost of the first phase of development would be <br />split equally between the City and County, the operating <br />expenses would initially be equally divided, and later they <br />would be based on actual usage. The property would be jointly <br />owned by the City and County and managed by a supervisory <br />committee composed of the City Manager, County Executive and <br />Directors of the City and County Parks and Recreation Departments. <br />No lights are proposed, though some may be necessary for security <br />purposes. It was proposed thatonce the park begins to operate <br />that softball be eliminated in Rives Park and reduced in Mclntire <br />Park. <br /> <br /> Responding to questions from Mr. Barnes, Mr. O'Connell <br />stated that the park development would be overseen by City and <br />County staff and flooding only occurred, on the property next <br />to the river which would not be developed. <br /> <br /> Mrs. Gleason moved the $398,150 appropriation for the park, <br />subject to the outcome of the public hearing. ~r~ Gunter <br />seconded the motion and it was carried over to the. next meeting <br />for consideration. <br /> <br /> Mr. Buck noted that the City and County staffs had worked <br />together very well on the park plans. <br /> <br />RESOLUTION: OPPOSING FEDERAL BUDGET CUTS <br /> <br /> Mr. Barnes stated that the resolution embodies his <br />concerns about the arbitrary nature by which Congress is <br />attempting to balance the budget. <br /> <br /> On motion by Mrs. Gleason, seconded by Dr. Gunter, the <br />resolution opposing federal budget cuts was unanimously approved <br />by Council. <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville, Virginia recognizes <br />and supports fair and meaningful congressional efforts designed <br />to reduce the escalating federal deficit; and <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, responsible and equitable budgetary policy <br />embodies detailed needs and effects analyses .of both federal <br />revenue-raising measures and federal expenditures; and <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, the so-called Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act, without <br />assessing either the needs or effects of certain budgetary <br />items, seeks to reduce the federal deficit by indiscriminately <br />applying mandatory expense reductions to certain programs of <br />substantial benefit to members of our community, particularly <br />the underprivileged, needy, and elderly; and <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act's arbitrary <br />reductions will, if carried out, significantly and adversely <br />affect Charlottesvillians served by program including, but <br />not limited to General Revenue Sharing, Community Development <br />Block grants, Transit, and housing assistance; and <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, those who will be hurt most by such indiscriminate <br />budget-cutting are~ in many cases, those who are least able- <br />to help themselves; <br /> <br /> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of <br />Charlottesville, Virginia expresses its fundamental and <br />unreserved opposition to the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act and <br /> <br /> <br />