Laserfiche WebLink
32 <br /> <br /> Ms. Richards said she thinks the resolution states the case very accurately and <br />made a motion to approve it. Mr. Toscano seconded the motion and the resolution <br />regarding the State budget was approved by the following vote. Ayes: Mr. Caravati, Mr. <br />Cox, Mr. Lynch, Ms. Richards, Mr. Toscano. Noes: None. <br /> WHEREAS, the 2001 General Assembly adjourned on February 24 without enacting a state <br />budget bill; and <br /> WHEREAS, the lack of a budget agreement means that the Appropriations Act <br /> approved by the 2000 General Assernbly becomes the budget by default; and <br /> WHEREAS, the 2000 Appropriations Act was built on revenue projections larger <br /> than those now estimated, meaning yet-to-be-determined cuts will have to be made to <br /> state agencies and localities because that budget would be out of balance by $421 million; <br /> and <br /> WHEPdgAS, Governor Gilmore has signed Executive Order 74 to bring <br /> appropriations and estimated revenues into balance for the remainder of the biennium; <br /> and <br /> WHEREAS, the budget impasse is centered around the Governor's commitment <br /> to increasing the personal property tax reimbursement level to 70%, and the Senate's <br /> insistence that the state cannot afford such an increase without cutting essential services <br /> and failing to meet its commitments to local governments; and <br /> WHEREAS, local governments, meanwhile, remain in limbo about state aid to <br /> localities as they prepare their budgets for FY02 and as they try to anticipate state <br /> funding changes for the remainder of the current fiscal year; and <br /> WHEREAS, the degree of state funding for items critical to local governments, <br /> such as second year teacher salary and state-supported local employee salary increases, <br /> HB 599 funding, Comprehensive Services Act, transportation and school construction <br /> funding, remain uncertain or in jeopardy at this time; <br /> WHEREAS, because the legislature adjourned without agreeing on the budget <br /> and the level of state reimbursement to localities for personal property tax relief; some <br /> local governments are confronted with the question of what to do about sending personal <br /> property tax bills. <br /> NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council for the City of <br /> Charlottesville, that the Governor and General Assembly are urged to preserve and <br /> enhance critical state aid to localities, specifically in the areas noted above, when <br /> approving a budget; and be it <br /> <br /> RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Governor and General Assembly act as soon <br /> as possible to approve revisions to the 2000-2002 state budget, so as to not further <br /> impede the local government budgeting process. <br /> Ms. Richards requested that the outcome of the City's legislative program be <br /> reviewed at the next meeting. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano said he does not feel the need to discuss the legislative program, <br /> other than to get the information in writing, except what has a role in the budget. <br /> Ms. Richards clarified that she was suggesting this be discussed at a regular <br /> meeting, not at a budget work session. <br /> Mr. Caravati said he will be discussing the agenda for the next regular meeting <br /> with the City Manager on Tuesday. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch said it appears that the State Senate's budget is more advantageous to <br /> the City than the Governor's budget and he is in favor of stating that. <br /> <br /> <br />