Board of Supervisors Board Approves and Appropriates FY 27 Budget and Sets Tax Rates   4/22/2026

Good evening.

I will be calling to order the April 22, 2026 meeting of the Board of Supervisors.

I would like to welcome the supervisors present, Supervisor Pruitt of the Scottsville District, Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley of the Rivanna District, Supervisor Duncan of the Jack Jouett District, and I am Fred Missel of the Samuel Miller District.

I'd also like to mention that Jeff Richardson is here from our staff, County Executive Jennifer Tevendale is here in place of representing the County Attorney's Office.

and with Andy Herrick, absent, and Claudette Bergeson, our clerk, are all present for the meeting.

Thank you and welcome.

I'd also like to acknowledge our Albemarle County Police Department representatives.

Senior Police Officer Christian Hernandez, thank you for wherever you are.

Lieutenant Angela Jamieson, thank you as well to both of you for joining us.

So moved.

Ms. Duncan?

Yes.

Ms. LaPisto-Kirtley?

Great.

Thank you.

Good evening again.

We will reconvene the April 22, 2026 meeting of the Board of Supervisors.

We have established a quorum.

We are out of recess.

And I think we will jump right into.

Well, first of all, welcome, Supervisor Malek from the White Hall District.

And with that, we will jump into our first action item, or I guess it's the only action item, adoption of calendar year 2026 tax rates, proposed ordinance chapter 1, article 5, fee schedule, et cetera.

And with that, I'll turn it over to Caitlin Malcolm, our chief of budget.

for the presentation.

Okay, good evening to the board and members of the public.

We are here to take our final action on the FY 27 budget this evening.

We have a number of items to go through.

But before we do that, I'd just like to start by acknowledging and thanking the board for all of your hard work over the course of the budget season this year.

Whether it's your first budget, like me, or your 20th budget, I feel like every year it's a little bit different.

We learn more.

We are anxious to hear your feedback when this process is over about what we can do better and we just appreciate all the work that you've put in.

We've had five different work sessions, six different town halls, several public hearings that have all led us to this point.

Really the thanks goes to you and your staff.

So tonight we have a few items in our agenda.

First we're going to look through direction that the board provided to staff last week when we met on April 15th and we'll pause after that to get some feedback from the board and see if this is in alignment with your thinking from last week before we move on.

After that, I'll go through a presentation of the requested approvals that staff would recommend to take the remaining actions on the FY 27 budget and the related resolutions as part of that process.

And then we'll turn things over to the Board of Supervisors for action on these matters.

So first, I'm going to start by going back to a slide that we looked at last week.

I'm not going to go into a lot of detail on this slide tonight because we covered this extensively last week.

But just as a reminder for the board and for members of the public, at the end of the meeting last week, the board provided direction to staff to shift funding around based on your priorities.

And the result of that I'll go through in more detail on the next few slides.

So I'm going to go through this slide pretty much word by word just for clarity and sake of transparency, make sure we're in alignment.

So in the meeting last week, the board provided this direction that you see on the slide in blue text to staff.

Everything that's in green text on this slide is staff's response to the board's direction.

So first I want to talk about it based on the funding sources that you directed staff to change in the proposed budget.

First, you ask staff to utilize $313,000 from the ongoing reserve for contingencies, and that would leave a balance in the ongoing reserve for contingencies of $350,000.

You also ask staff to move $1.15 million from the planned general fund transfer

to the Economic Development Fund and use that as a funding source.

And then you also directed staff to use the remaining balances from the one-time reserve for contingencies, which was sitting at $510,000, as well as the CIP Advancing Strategic Priorities Reserve, which is sitting at $394,000.

So those are all of our funding sources.

You also directed staff to use that funding source first to add $2 million to the affordable housing investment fund, next to add $117,000 to the Albemarle County Emergency Relief Program, or ACERP.

And then you directed us to balance the remaining amount, which is $250,000, between priorities D through H that were listed on the previous slide.

And finally, you asked us to give consideration to one time versus ongoing funding sources, which I'll speak to in more detail on the next slide.

First, I kind of want to paint a picture of how staff went about this approach, particularly for items D through H that were listed on the previous slide.

So for the two items that you gave us direction on that are part of the human services funding process, that was the offender aid restoration therapeutic docket program and the Foothills Child Advocacy Center, we fully funded the request for those agencies for FY 27.

And so the amounts you see listed here on the slide are the additions

to those agencies that are provided in the staff recommendation.

And then for the two organizations that are part of the arts, cultural, and festival agencies process, we restored those agencies to the amount that they were funded in FY2026.

So again, the 3000 for Charlottesville Band and the 2500 for Charlottesville Ballet are the additional funding provided based on your direction.

to those agencies based on the direction last week.

And then the amount remaining after all of those changes was $136,004 and that amount is provided to the Dogwood Vietnam Memorial Foundation in this recommendation.

So you also asked us to give consideration to one time sources versus ongoing funding sources.

So I'll walk you through our recommendations with respect to that.

Probably the easiest is it makes the most sense that we would fund additional work in the CIP for the Dogwood Vietnam Memorial Foundation with one time funding.

So you see that on the rightmost side of the slide.

On the leftmost side of the slide, you have ongoing revenues for programs that have appeared in the budget in years past.

That's ACERP, the OAR Therapeutic Docket, Foothills Child Advocacy Center, Charlottesville Band, and Charlottesville Ballet.

And then the additional funding in the middle for the Affordable Housing Investment Fund is funded with a combination of one-time money and ongoing money.

So finally, some people process this information better in a table format.

So that's what's listed here on this slide.

You can see the overall proposed budget in FY 27.

You can see the revision that was provided and is being provided today based on your direction to staff last week.

And then in the very rightmost column, you see the change from last week to this week.

So quickly I'll go through an update from the school division before I turn it over to the board for any discussion on the slides I've covered so far.

So it's pretty typical at this point in the process that the school division would have an update to their budget based on all the activity that's taken place by the board up to this point.

They are scheduled to adopt their budget tomorrow evening and so we have a few updates from them based on the direction that the board provided in our meeting last week.

So the school division is requesting that the board include use of fund balance for the school fund at $3.15 million.

So that would be using essentially from reserves that we have on hand specific for schools to fund priorities that their board has decided to fund despite the change

in ongoing revenue, despite the outcome.

So that would be used specifically for purchases for security equipment, instructional resources, and technology purchases.

And so here the action for the board's consideration is that staff would recommend that the board include that update to allow the schools to use the use of fund balance in the final adopted budget when you approve the resolutions that are in your agenda packet later this evening.

All right.

Thank you very much, Supervisor Missel.

Thank you.

Thanks, staff.

I think you obviously heard exactly what I think the intention was, at least from my perspective.

So thank you for that.

And I think all of the items listed were appropriate and well considered.

So thank you.

I don't have any questions.

Thank you, and Chair, I just want to reflect.

I mean, unless staff has more presentation.

Great.

I want to begin by just

This is an issue of First Impression to make the new request from the schools.

I'm recalling, as someone who's only been on the board now for two and a half years, I'm recalling that the schools are only allowed to save 2% of their total budget.

And we separately, to allow them to save more than that in a given year, do we separately have a fund that we have for them?

Is that what they're asking this to be drawn from?

Yeah, so under the board's financial management policies, there is 2% of the school fund revenues that they're able to have in their budget.

Now, based on, I'll say, the current budget for order of magnitude, their budget would be a little over $300 million in 27.

So that'd be about $6 million in total.

So of that 2%, that's sort of the cap they can retain.

So at the end of fiscal year 25, when the audit was done, that balance available was approximately $4.5 million.

And the schools will use that in a year to say how much of that may be used to advance one-time initiatives, reused as part of balancing the budget.

Any amount above that would go to the CIP unless otherwise directed by the board.

So the schools have about $4.5 million.

This uses 3.1 of that.

Now to make a statement rather than a question.

I can see why this would make a lot of sense for the schools, given that we've essentially said we are stepping in almost like a fiscal agent to save 6.4 for you.

They're in a position where they can now say, ah, I do not have to save as actively as I had been a few minutes ago.

I can be a little bit more forward leaning with my fund set-asides.

I guess I'm mostly intrigued that this is even a thing that is sent to us for confirmation if it's on their books.

But I gather it is, and I don't know that that needs to be a question.

It would not have occurred to me prior to this that we would have to approve this if it's 2% that they retain from their budget.

I would just add that the board having ultimate authority on the preparation side, it would need to be included.

Great.

I had a brief sidebar with another

Board Member right before we reconvened earlier.

But it's quite relevant to this, and I think it deserves to be brought into open discussion for us to engage on.

And that's the Dogwood Memorial piece, which I'll begin by saying the Dogwood Memorial piece, I just want to put all cards on the table.

We are funding it.

I'm not sure I, counting noses, ever counted more than

The email that we got from

The President of the Dogwood Memorial seemed to indicate that there is not a clear way forward for them, that they don't have a concrete plan.

I did not get the sense that there is a positive working relationship at this exact moment with the city, which makes it unclear

how effectively our funds could be leveraged in the immediate future, and even, I think, fairly if our funds would be leveraged in the immediate future.

I don't want to say that that alone should defeat our intention to fund it, but I think it casts a considerable pall over the decision to fund this improvement.

My understanding, again based on a sidebar I had previously, is that the city is considering possibly additional funding and additional planning support, but any funding from the city is going to be contingent on an operating agreement with the Dogwood Memorial.

And if there is a level of prudence that is being exercised by the city on their disbursements, which is smaller right now than ours, I feel like that level of prudence would also be appropriate for us.

And I guess I would just say I find myself a little uncomfortable with this disbursement.

not having a greater degree of clarity on how, if, and when it is going to be used for a project that otherwise is not capitalized right now.

So I would make that statement.

Third thing I think is worth discussing, and I'm almost remiss to bring this up because I like to only bring up things that I think I have

a goal or a solution in mind with.

And this is almost, again, more of an observation.

But I found myself gritting my teeth a little bit over the one-time versus recurring allocations.

I understand how they got there.

But I also, in my mind of hearing Chair Gallaway, I've heard you say explicitly several times, and it stuck with me.

You really got in my head.

You said, oh, I would much rather, and you threw out arbitrary numbers, but I'd much rather $10 in recurring funds than $100 in one-time funds for the housing trust fund, because it's important that we develop that ongoing stream.

And so I find myself gritting my teeth in frustration after we have planned to make a $2 million disbursement to AHIF, which I applaud this board for doing.

But because so much of our final round of funding adjustments are for agencies who are going to

The whole reason we're even having the discussion on agencies is about level funding, and so if we do it with one-time funding, then we're gonna have the same conversation again.

That the remainder that we're actually discussing with AHIF, which we've said we want to prioritize recurring funding for, a vanishing fraction of it, right?

120th, am I doing that tabletop math right?

120th is recurring.

I find that frustrating.

I don't have a solution.

I don't have in my mind right now, oh, then we should swap the recurring and the one time for ACERP.

I'm not suggesting that, because I also think ACERP needs to be recurring funded better.

But I wanted to voice that frustration and my dismay on this, and perhaps pump that up in the air.

Dig?

Set.

Set that.

Volleyball.

See if anyone else has some thoughts that they want to spike with it.

Got it.

Thank you.

Just a clarification.

So Mike had asked if this was a budget free-for-all.

Are we just making comments on the slides presented so far?

But at this point, this is what we worked on the last time.

So, taking the volleyball, I am just frustrated in general of, again I've only followed this a couple of years, but feeling like to get housing funding we are having to pull from all these things, it came up

In one of the discussions today on Housing of the TomTom of just it's also so unclear to the public of like how we're getting like I don't even understand actually totally what final number we're at with AHIF because you guys do the math in the air and you like say you've gotten us to some point and I trust you but like it's it's not clear

You know, where this money is coming from.

So yeah, going forward, I would love to see a way that we can get to $10 million ongoing funding without having to do all of this stuff.

My other main comment is on the development piece.

This is going to sound a little bit critical, but it's really my only frustration with this budget process.

I was going through it for the first time.

I feel like the increase in fees ultimately is an increase on new homeowners and new renters.

And there's a great quote in one of the presentations today that said, you can't make housing more affordable by driving up the costs.

And so the developers are not paying these fees.

But I feel like my frustration is that you knew we had to eventually vote on these as a separate thing, but the

estimated increase from the fees is built into the budget.

And I was like, where in the budget is this?

And I found it, but it's a tiny line mentioned, and even the 256 wasn't, like that was rolled into a different number.

And so I feel like that should be part of a work session, because it is, as we're dividing up this extra money, 256,000, is not insignificant.

And so I just feel like

You know, a discussion over fees, whether they should be increased, how much should be built into a work session.

But the other thing I wanted to say is just overall this process has been fantastic.

It has been so well organized, the orientations that we got beforehand, even when you guys would do the presentations in the work sessions.

The slides literally match the budget and so I could like flip through the budget and follow along and so I feel, you know, I felt very prepared.

You know, any question has been answered quickly and I know it

It can seem obvious that you have a well organized budget.

It's easy to read and understand.

I've looked through the city budget.

I've read the school budget in this process.

Not all budgets are even searchable.

Not all budgets are organized as easily.

The work that you've done on the budget has been really good, really helpful.

Not everybody does it.

Not all municipalities give their incoming people training on what a budget is before they're thrown into work sessions.

And so I just really appreciate the work that has gone into this, the support that we have.

And overall, I feel like it's set me up to do this while going forward.

And so I do really, really appreciate all that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I would agree with what others have said about the preparation.

Every year, it gets clearer and clearer to me.

And so I may be a slow learner, but I appreciate the 19 times through because it is really getting better and better all the time.

Thank you for the question about the school reserves because that was the one I was going to ask to make sure that it was coming out of the holdback as opposed to something over and above the holdback.

So that's very clear.

Just a general question, when awards are made for agencies, there are milestones they must reach before funds are distributed, correct?

So that's going to exist.

That's not something that would have to be added on to any project that we're funding, whether it's the veteran pedestrian bridge or whatever.

And there must be in the files somewhere from many years, five years ago or so, there was

a support at the county board for considerably more than this amount toward the bridge so I would be I guess very much if this is the time to re-advocate for the spending for that I would expect that there will be some change of heart

in other jurisdictions who have fallen down on the job on supporting this and so I very much support keeping this funding in the

budget as we have in the proposal so that as it reaches the next stage, I mean there are hundreds of thousands have been spent on design and all of that has cleared through city, although it took two and a half years to get the clearance through the city.

But those milestones have been met, so they are, and they had four years ago, three years ago, they had a hard figure from Fielder's Choice to build it for a million five.

and all this delay has caused some increase.

I don't know what the increase is, but they were far closer to achieving their goals a few years ago than they are today, but that doesn't mean that they're giving up.

I think they're trying to live long enough to get it done.

And I will just add, because it may not be clear to some, that in addition to getting folks to the memorial and also to all of McIntyre Park and the Botanical Garden and the other bridge that's already been built over the railroad tracks,

over to McIntyre Park in the ball fields and therefore to the why that this bridge will connect all of the county users who are significantly numerous who use the shared use path from McIntyre all the way to Rio Road, Rio Point, Belvedere Senior Center, et cetera.

So I think it has much more to offer to our wider community than perhaps has been understood at the beginning.

and regarding the development fees, I will just reiterate that this was based upon 50% cost recovery.

I've been advocating for far more than that because I don't think it's really fair for all the rest of the taxpayers to continually be supporting what is benefiting one section of our applicants.

So anyway, that's just my view.

I didn't win on that and that's fine, but I just want people to appreciate that this is a

established formula increase and a very well-crafted modification, redesign of the fee structure, which I really appreciate, and will be much more readable and usable and implementable.

One check instead of six is always a good thing.

But I really think that this small increase is appropriate.

Thank you.

Yes, thank you very much.

I also agree with my colleagues.

I think this process was, frankly, outstanding.

I thought staff did a really, really good job of presenting us with all the material, especially what we received for today's presentation.

I'm just going to hit on, first of all, I like everything what you've done as is.

I don't agree with my esteemed colleague regarding

the fees and that's because I don't want to get I don't understand what costs where I don't want to get into the nitty-gritty I think that's staff's job to get into the nitty-gritty of you know what fee we should charge for what we haven't raised anything since 22 so I think this this is good in that it you know the fees are up to date and it does charge the developers

They may pass the costs on, but you know, nowadays, frankly, what's not being passed on?

Everything is being passed on to us.

From the federal government to the state to even local.

So, I agree with Supervisor Mallek regarding the cost recovery.

Regarding the Dogwood Memorial, I was deeply disappointed that the fact that another locality right next to us has not chosen to fully participate, maybe they'll change their mind, I don't know.

I still think it's a good project and if you think

Perhaps providing this money may cause the Dogwood Memorial to actually come up with a different type of plan that would also work.

I don't know.

I'm just throwing that out.

The other one regarding ongoing, I think it was ongoing or one-time funding for AHIF,

I'm sticking by the one-time funding.

Why?

Because I want flexibility in our budget.

Once again, we don't know what's going to happen over the next two years.

It can be very, very dicey with the state and especially with the federal government.

So I like to keep flexibility for this board and not tie us down to anything.

If we can do it the following years, absolutely.

But I don't want to tie us down with

the one time funding to become ongoing.

The school division budget update, if I understood you correctly, that this is their money, the 3.15 in their reserves.

OK. Then I'm good.

All right, Supervisor Missel.

I appreciate it.

I kept my comments quick because I was thinking it was just questions.

But I have a few questions, comments.

One is on the $3.15 million.

To follow up on what Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley said, have there been similar requests like this in the past where the school has come to us after the fact and said, you want to tap into these funds that are available to us?

Was this sort of a new thing?

Yes.

There have been?

Yes.

OK.

So this is not an uncommon thing.

Another question or observation.

And first of all, I mean, I'm fully supportive of the budget and the way it's been presented.

So start with that.

If there is uncertainty at the Dogwood Memorial, and I agree with Supervisor Malek,

I'm just wondering, would it be helpful from a leverage standpoint for us to make the funding distribution contingent on city participation?

Would that be helpful to the Memorial Foundation or not?

Just a question to throw out there.

Maybe not.

I'm supportive again of the way it is, but trying to think of a way to give them leverage with the city.

The other question regarding the ongoing funding to the five organizations, this does not guarantee that they will be funded again next year the same way, right?

So OK, that's good to know.

In terms of the housing fund, I completely agree.

I mentioned to Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley, I'd like to see those numbers flipped, the ongoing versus the one time.

I guess if you were to

Look at the sources of the funds as ongoing versus one time.

You could take the other four exclusive of ACERP, put those four into the one time funding category, essentially, which is about $113,500.

That could go to AHIF of ongoing funding.

Just an option.

It's not that much more, but it's a little bit more.

And then you could just shift those categories.

On development fees, having lived this for decades, I agree with both supervisors on that.

And I'm wondering, at some point, I assume that this would be something we would discuss as we go into the summer and we start to look at the budget earlier, which we didn't have the opportunity of being a part of.

That's all.

Great.

Let's see.

I'll start with Dogwood, I suppose.

I think the commentary has been made relative to the city of Charlottesville and their contribution or commitment or what have you, so I don't need to revisit that.

But I trust that the dollars don't go out the door.

I don't know that giving them this 136 gives them any more or less leverage with the city But I do expect that it could give them leverage with private donors And it is a small amount that gets them up over halfway to what they requested of us That level of commitment could help with those private folks And sometimes in these situations just knowing how it's worked with other projects

some private donors can then help sway other jurisdictions as well.

And I appreciate Supervisor Pruitt's comments about this item, but the last time was more questioning the timing more so than my commitment to it.

I'm happy to commit and give full support for providing this.

And I don't think $136,000 held.

If it ends up not going to this project for whatever reason, it's a CIP reserve now.

basically.

So I'm not worried at all just knowing how these things have worked out at much larger dollar amounts about how it would be clawed back and or retained until it was a viable project.

Yeah, last Wednesday I was not clear how these numbers were going to fall when we were having our discussions.

But now seeing it laid out, I mean, it was clear that there wasn't going to be that many ongoing dollars.

I think the 117 in ASERP makes sense to keep with the ongoing.

And while I wish there was more ongoing in the AHIF amount, the remaining dollar amounts,

You know, on top of the 82, it's something, but it's not a whole, whole lot.

So, I mean, I'll continue to, you know, we'll have future budgets and future swings at this item.

But this gets us to, did I miss it earlier, what the total is for a hit, 7 million?

Yes, that's what I had, just over 7.

Got it.

One time versus ongoing.

I think that's all the comments.

I'm ready to support what's been presented.

I feel like, as with most budgets, there are things here that I wish would have gone different directions.

But the board has certainly had very comprehensive discussions about everything.

I think the public is clear where each of us stands on things.

You know, can arrive at their own decisions on what they think about how we think about things.

But we've done our job relative to going through everything in a diligent manner.

So I'm ready to take action as well.

But if there is further discussion needed relative to how this breakout occurs, I'm just going to look to my right and left and see if there is any additional discussion.

All right.

Ms.

Bowman, do we go to the motions?

Is that what we're doing next?

Yes, that's correct.

So just going to walk through a high level of the FY 27 budget before we move on to the motions that staff would recommend for the board's action.

Oh, I said Ms.

Bowman.

So based on the board's direction, last week this slide and the following slides include the current tax rate for personal property, which is $4.28 per $100 of valuation, which is the same as the current rate for calendar year 2025.

So these are the calendar rate 2026 proposed tax rates that the budget is balanced on.

So just to give the board and the public a high-level overview, the total budget for all funds across the county for FY 2027 is proposed to be $727.7 million.

And these slides and the following slides include the numbers balanced to all the changes you just reviewed and discussed on the previous slides.

And the resolutions that are in your packet for approval this evening also include all those changes that we just walked through.

So focusing a little bit on the general fund, as the board is very familiar, the general fund revenues total to $512 million in FY 2027.

This is balanced with the general fund expenditures, which are also at $512 million.

As the board and public are aware, we tend to focus on the general fund and the budget process, because that's where all tax revenue is received.

It's the primary source of funding for the transfer to schools operating, as well as the capital and debt programs.

And it's where the board has the maximum amount of policy discretion.

in the budgeting process.

So next to give an overview of the capital improvement program, on this slide you see the total capital improvement program for fiscal years 27 through 31.

Again, they are balanced at $362.1 million, and that's across the entire five years of the plan.

On the next slide, you see the FY 27 budget for capital projects.

The board, when you take action this evening, you typically, in years past and what we're requesting this year, is that you appropriate the funding for the first year of the capital improvement program, which is FY 27, and that's the total you see listed on the slide in front of you of $95.7 million.

You will approve the entire capital improvement program that you saw on the prior slide in one of your motions or you'll have that for your consideration.

And the request is that you appropriate the funding for this first year as part of the FY 27 budget process.

And I should have said previously, the Board has seen this slide as well as the prior slides in Work Session 3 where we talked about the Capital Improvement Program in more depth.

The only change to this slide from what you saw previously is it now reflects the changes in the transfer to the Affordable Housing Investment Program out of the Strategic Priorities Reserve that was in the CIP and it also now reflects the new number for Dogwood Vietnam Memorial Foundation.

So the agenda and desired outcomes for this evening, I will walk through the six motions that are in front of the board for consideration this evening, and I'll go through all of them, and then I will turn it over to the board for your discussion and action on those.

So the budget is balanced on the two tax rates that are shown on the slide here.

The real estate tax rate of $0.894 per $100 of assessed valuation on the real estate tax and $4.28 per $100 of assessed valuation on the personal property tax.

And the recommendation from staff is that staff would recommend that the board adopt the resolution to set the calendar year 2026 tax rates that are in attachment A of your packet this evening.

The next is that staff would recommend that the board adopt the ordinance and attachment B, amending Chapter 1, Article 5 of the county code for the fee schedule.

And that is the proposed amendments to Chapter 1, Article 5 that are consistent with the board's adopted financial management policies.

And those proposed changes, as previously discussed, are based on that cumulative cost of living increase since the last fee adjustment, which you discussed, was last in FY 2022.

And those would be implemented in January of 2027

It would amount to $266,000 in this budget.

So the next is that staff recommend that the board adopt the revised FY 27 operating and capital budget resolution.

That is an attachment C in your packet tonight and aligns with the information we've discussed on the previous slides.

Once you've adopted the budget resolution, staff would recommend that you adopt the annual resolution of appropriations.

The difference here is that the Virginia state code says that the budget, which was on the previous slide in attachment C, is just a plan.

You need attachment D, which is the resolution of appropriations to have the legal authority to spend funding.

I do want to draw your attention to a couple items that are in this resolution that's in attachment D.

First is that in that resolution there's a certain amount of authority that is delegated to the county executive's office for very specific circumstances to make adjustments to the budget.

When that's done it's always used for an administrative purpose in nature and it's reported to the board by staff on subsequent quarterly financial reports, but sharing that here in the interest of ongoing transparency with the board and members of the public.

The other thing to flag here is that this resolution includes a little more flexibility than what we had in prior years for the Opioid Abatement Fund and clarifies the guidelines around the money that can be used in that fund and who must make the approvals within local government to make that happen.

And the final thing I wanted to flag here based on the board's discussion previously, in that resolution on page 8, and this is again attachment D,

So on page eight in paragraph six of that resolution is the language that requires agreements with agencies that they must adhere to before we can disperse funds to them, since you all asked that at several stages tonight.

So staff would recommend that the board approve the revised FY 27 annual resolution of appropriations.

And then the next item is allowing the county to use bond proceeds to reimburse the county for capital program expenditures.

So here staff recommend that the board adopt the resolution of official intent to reimburse expenditures with proceeds of a borrowing.

And then finally is the recommendation about the FY 27 through 31 capital improvement program.

So here, staff would recommend that the board adopt the resolution to adopt the FY 27 through 31 capital improvement program, which is attachment F in your packet.

Thank you.

And Ms. Tebbandale, I have a question.

In the past, when we've read these resolutions, we've been very specific in stating the numbers and the rates.

So the slides I'm seeing are now referring to attachments as we are used to.

No, you may.

Because the resolutions have been provided, and if the board is intending to adopt them as the resolution state with the tax rate that is in it, you do not need to read the resolution.

Got it.

So I just want to clarify, because this is different than what we've seen in the past.

So we'll just walk through these.

This is the first.

Second.

All right.

All right.

Without objection as well, is there any further discussion?

Ms. Mallek?

Yes.

Mr. Missel?

Aye.

Mr. Pruitt?

Aye.

Ms. Duncan?

Yes.

Mr. Galloway?

Yes.

All right, motion carries.

The next item.

I move that the board adopt the ordinance attachment B, amending chapter 1, article 5 of the county code, fee schedule.

Is there any further discussion?

Ms. Mallek?

Yes.

Ms. Duncan?

No.

Aye.

All right, motion carries five to one.

All right, the motion has been made and seconded.

Is there any further discussion?

Ms. Mallek?

Yes.

Ms. Duncan?

Yes.

Aye.

All right.

All right, it has been made and seconded.

Is there any further discussion?

Ms. Mallek?

Yes.

Mr. Pruitt?

Aye.

Ms. Duncan?

Yes.

Aye.

All right, the motion has been made and seconded.

Any further discussion?

Ms. Mallek?

Yes.

Ms. Duncan?

Yes.

Ms. LaPisto-Kirtley?

All right, the motion has been made and seconded.

I heard Mr. Missel first, probably because he's closer to me.

Is there any further discussion?

Ms. Mallek?

Yes.

Mr. Missel?

Aye.

Mr. Pruitt?

Aye.

Ms. Duncan?

Yes.

Mr. Galloway?

Yes.

Ms. LaPisto-Kirtley?

All right.

Is that all our motions?

Any supervisors would like to make any comments before I complete?

I'll just go through real quick to see.

Some have made their comments, but we'll just do a round.

Yeah, I just, again, want to thank staff.

I mean, this is nearly a three-quarter of a billion dollar budget, and you all make it look easy.

And you make our jobs easy.

And I just, you know, I've been through a lot of budget processes in the past.

I just appreciate your ability to communicate very clearly for people who don't live this on a daily basis and I'm grateful for that.

And I'm also grateful for how well you listen and for that as well.

So thank you all for this immense lift and I know this is a great day for all of us to have this behind us.

Supervisor Pruitt.

Any additional comments?

I have no additional comments.

Thank you, Chair.

No, thank you very much.

I will just add, in addition to the other comments that have been made, and of course I agree with, that we also appreciate all the members of the public who attended town halls, who have written us emails, who have come to public hearings, who have invited us to meetings, one-on-one conversations.

All of that input really matters to go through this process.

It's very hard to do when you don't have that type of input, or makes it more challenging than it already is.

Very appreciative to all our constituents for their participation in the budget.

I would also like to remark, well done to our two newest supervisors.

It's one of the most difficult tasks to join a board, whether you've been elected to other positions or not, and then have to jump right into the budget.

So well done, and welcome to your first budget, or congratulations on your first budget.

I would like to remark, too, I have said publicly on a number of occasions that budgets and the decisions that we make are a reflection of the values we hold, and I still hold that to be true.

But I also want to say to the Board that I'm glad for your diligence in doing the budget prep because this is really one of those times where the Board, as Board members, can really get down into the weeds and the details of operations.

It's our job to fund those things.

So we must understand what they are.

We must question it when we don't.

And staff has to stand up and answer for those type of things, as led by Mr. Richardson.

So I appreciate all of the supervisor's due diligence in embracing that and knowing that we can get down in there and muck it up in the details, if you would.

But now that budget has concluded, we've got to get our noses out of those operational weeds, I guess, in some ways.

And then what I would like to do, Board, is I know we've offered some comments here, but I will be coming back around to you all.

I don't exactly know the form or format yet, but asking you all to maybe do an evaluation of how you felt in the past.

I know

Mr.

Bowman and Mr. Sumner have collected comments and feedback on budget process so I may join with them just to have a discussion maybe we could formalize that in a way and perhaps even have some discussion about that at a future meeting to just voice what those things are because then that will help us have an even tighter and continually improve our budget process moving forward and I'm sure I know in fact that the staff invites that type of feedback as well so thank you all for the for the lift and the work.

All right, board, that will take us to item number three.

I've got a checklist of items in between all the board members.

I've checked every item off the comments that you've made, and I will be just a bit redundant.

I do want Mr. Sumner to talk just for a second about the debt that we issued.

We actually

So that was a parallel process that was necessitated that we do, but it was heavy lifting out of the finance and budget department.

So if I could first ask Jacob just to talk for a couple of minutes about what happened today.

for the board and community's benefit.

Sure.

Earlier today, we issued a little over $130 million of bonds to help pay for and fund our capital improvement projects.

And we've been before the board several times talking about asking for the appropriation resolutions and the authority to do that.

So today was the day that we sold the bonds on the open market.

We had a very successful offering.

We had nine bids.

So there was very strong interest in our bonds.

Any questions from the board on that?

I do appreciate Jacob's team and all the hard work they did in heavy lifting and I would also call out Emily Kilroy from our Economic Development Department as part of the work that we did with the bond rating agencies.

She was especially called out for the good work she did on economic development and how

She and the team presented a lot of data to our agencies on the health and vibrancy of our community, so I also want to thank her.

Just a couple of closing comments, I know you're ready to go.

Board, I want to give you some data from Abby Stump, our community and public engagement director, that six budget town halls with approximately 200

attendees at six budget town halls.

That is an increase year over year from last year.

I would especially want to call out the departments, all of our departments that were represented.

All of you worked your budget town halls.

Some of you came to more than one.

And you saw our staff from every department

line up early with their sandwich boards department by department.

And there was a lot of staff meaningful interactions with our community and our citizens.

And over a two and a half week period, we did six.

I tried to get around and speak to every staff member.

And what I was most reminded of is just how wonderful our staff is, how nice they are to our community, and how appreciative I am that they gave their evening to be there to support these budget town halls.

The other thing, board, I wanted to take a minute to do is it's always amazing to watch.

Ned called it out about two new board members coming in in January and you hit the ground running with a 300 page document and you work through it, lots of information.

but you see primarily Mr. Sumner, Ms. Malcolm who this is her first budget and boy you would never know that she made it look easy and Mr.

Evening, Board.

I'm Ryan Davidson.

I'm the Deputy Chief of Budget.

I don't know what Jeff means, what we do, because we all have a piece, have our hands in all of what you see, kind of the behind the scenes here.

Hi, I'm Thomas Unsworth, Budget Analyst, working primarily with Community Development

Facilities and Engineering, Parks and Rec, and of course Human Services.

Hello.

I'm Laura Vinsant, Senior Budget Analyst.

Awesome.

So I guess since they called out all their departments, I have to speak to you.

So, Chair, we really get nitty gritty when we come back from holiday starting in January, so it's really about three, three and a half months where we're meeting with this team on a weekly basis and we see them as much as we see any senior level management weekly, 90 minutes, 120 minutes.

and we're having big meetings, discussing stuff, trying to get it to you, meet your expectations and hope that you understand the work that we do so that you can do your work whenever the budget's handed over to you.

But I will wrap up by saying this is an amazing team.

So when I wrap up tonight, I'm tired and I'm ready to move on from the budget, but I will miss working with this team to the level that we worked together for the last three months because they are fun people to be around,

They work really hard.

They take their work seriously, but they are really good people to be around.

They've got a great team and budget, and so thank you for the opportunity for us to introduce them tonight.

And again, I'll close by saying to Abby in community engagement, thank you for the work that you did to help push the information to the public, to help us with our town halls, and yes sir, we really do want to get feedback from you on how this went.

ideas you have for making it better, and we'll take that feedback very seriously, and we want to try to make it better every year.

Thank you, Mr. Richardson.

It occurs to me that the work sometimes, when you mentioned Abby, both with communications, but the team getting the questions answered and posted online,

but it also matters for our not just our legal department but our clerk who does have to make sure that FOIA and information is presented in a timely way so that citizens can do that as

and that's not just in response to our, I always say, my Rio District Watchdog, Mr. Grant, is definitely in on the FOIA rules and that's not to catch us, that's to help protect us.

So having that information ready for everyone at the same time that we have it is an important piece that all public bodies hold to, so thank you for those efforts as well.

I was so struck by the interest rate that you reported.

And some of that amount that was sold is to refinance higher interest rates.

Is that 10%, 50%?

So we had a very small portion, about $11 million of that $130 million plus that was for the refunding.

And we did see some savings on that as well.

It's probably around, over the 10-year remaining of those bonds, about $250,000.

All right, board, we will go to number three from the board, matters not listed on the agenda.

Sure, thank you.

Just three items real quick.

I participated in three, I guess, advisory committees or committees last week.

One was the local emergency planning committee meeting, and I'll just call everyone's attention to, if you don't already know this,

the city and county websites that are Community Connect.

And Community Connect is a free, secure, and easy to use platform that allows you to share critical information about your household.

That will aid first responders and emergency response personnel when responding to your residents.

Both of the city and the county have those.

They're very similar.

Also mentioned, there's a CERT program, which many of you know about.

I'm sure Community Emergency Response

Team Training, which is being offered and that's an eight session, two week training opportunity.

The second one I attended was the Albemarle County Broadband Authority, which is monitoring the Virginia Telecommunication Initiatives, or VATI, and VATI 2021.

I guess they're unsure of the timing for completion of that, VATI 2022.

There's been a shift of all project areas to spring of 2026 and they're confident that will be completed in fiscal year 2026 by June 30th.

There's a couple of things that are remaining for people in Ragged Mountain, Sherwood Farms area.

There's some VDOT permits and rail crossings that may delay Firefly getting to them but that is definitely on the list to get completed.

and the majority of that work is going to be coming to an end in July.

Sure thing.

So our CAC, we received two presentations and then one CAC-led presentation, which was a fun change of pace.

The two staff-led presentations first was on a footpath that's actually in progress,

Small very modest footpath, but I think is going to be actually a really critical connector So this is going up from the Timberland apartments up toward Azalea Which is very frequently trafficked is a very high-speed blind curve coming out of the city into the county And there's just not a realistic place to walk.

There's brush too much off the road and there's very little you know median or

Schulman,

The commission also received an update on just how to monitor projects and civic access.

I think this was a rehash of a previous, I think we've been taught this before.

And then finally, there was a CAC led, our president initiated just a quick community chatter over the transportation quarterly report that we received.

talking about some of the projects that are being funded that are relevant for our area through SmartScale, or rather not funded through SmartScale, that are being proposed for funding through SmartScale.

I should also mention while we're talking about the broadband authority that the thing that I think we all know that we haven't been saying out loud much is

It's very near time to sunset the existence of ABBA as the VADI projects end with 2022 scheduled to be fully connected by end of year.

We'll see how that goes.

The only thing remaining is BEAD.

And our BEAD right now, we have one applicant still out, and we're twiddling our thumbs for the next stage of the 14-step long federal process, during which we have no

meaningful next step that we engage in, which means the only thing that, I mean, even our broadband office, right, their role is transforming.

They're transforming into a much more accessibility and access-focused role because our expansion is done or will be done soon.

And so with that, this board is probably going to have to be the body that actually entertains that.

But it's creeping up on us.

It may even be before our next RE-ORG meeting.

Yesterday, I went to the open house that Foothills Child Advocacy Center had invited us to.

And they have a new location, but they also are sharing their office space with SARA, the Sexual Assault Resource Agency.

There were a lot of people there.

There was a lot of staff there.

And so it was really nice to walk through both sides of the facility and kind of see what they do and hear

You know, we've gotten a lot of emails that sort of say what they do, but it was really nice to see the physical spaces and how it works.

And so it was really well done.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

The Crozet Community Advisory Committee last Wednesday, lots of really great discussion about

Things which have come out of the Crozet Master Plan from five years ago that are really eagerly anticipated but have not yet begun.

One of those being the

inventory of the naturally occurring affordable houses, or NOAs, which were a highly supported element of the master plan adopted in 2021.

And really important that we don't lose the houses we already have by looking away instead of focusing on all new construction.

And an element of that which was brought up by some of our firefighters was when

Spouse passes away, the widow, often in her 80s, is left trying to maintain an older home in Orchard Valley or one of those places.

they really need that extra support from their neighbors and community as well as the benefits which LEAP has been providing with weatherization through and now that the RGGI funds will be coming back there'll be more outside funding through channel through Dominion which will improve that but I think having some documentation about where those locations are will be especially welcomed and the

Crozet water study has been postponed from May to October, sadly.

So I have to interrogate the Rivanna folks to find out what happened to that.

But we're all looking forward to that information as well.

As someone mentioned, I guess it was at the MPO meeting, that Crozet is nearing its build out.

So that'll be how Rivanna, whose goal is to supply whatever water needs there are, and they know it takes 20 years to make it happen.

So they're always eagerly planning ahead.

But there's that balance of we should not be galloping in to make monstrously expensive investments to take water from a pitiful river to take it to Beaver Creek when there is not going to be the same kind of growth going forward that there has been for the last 15 years because there's very little land left, which is good.

So that would provide some stability for folks out there, which would be great.

Questions?

There was a lot of discussion about Nancy Mills and how

that will be entertained in the next plans going forward.

And the, wait a minute, that's the wrong notes.

OK, let me jump over to my today's page.

Sorry.

So that's all from the CCAC.

I remember still daily the pain of my first budget in 2008.

And the worst thing, which I hope will never happen this year,

is in August when the state said, oh, remember that $6 million we gave you?

Well, we're not.

And that threw everybody into a tailspin because it was a much bigger impact because the total budget was so much smaller, like 60% smaller than it is today.

I know that in the past, Lori Allshouse interviewed the board members after the budget to sort of gather that data information.

So that may be something that staff wants to do again.

Upcoming news.

Saturday is the prescription drug take back over six locations in the area.

And so I encourage people to clean out your closets.

I've got stuff that's been carried around in my car for the last year because I kept meaning to go and I didn't do it.

So that's not a good place to keep all those old jars.

White Hall Ruritan's sale, plant sale, and tree sale is this weekend.

Be there by eight o'clock in order to get good supplies.

This is at the White Hall community building at the corner of White Hall Road and Garth Road, Jarman's Gap, and White Hall Road.

And one carry away from the memorial service on ceremony on Friday at the Dogwood Memorial, but also all the way through

McIntyre Park is just one example, but we also had the same occasion at Biscuit Run.

I noticed during the dedication we went to in the cold weather last year is this really nasty plastic netting, which is put down on the ground to hold straw or something on top of seed.

And now it is spiraling up and people, old folks are getting caught in it.

It's just hideous.

So I know that VDOT had promised not to use that anymore about two years ago.

but I think that there needs to be some MOU or contract supervision or something for the contractors working in our parks for example to not use that.

There are lots of other things that the jute is heavier and stays in place more and is locally available and does not have plastic fibers in it and I hope we can get somewhere on that.

It being a danger to humans as well as to wildlife and the environment.

Birds die all the time in the nest.

The parents catch that stuff up and then take it home.

Thank you very much.

I also attended the 60th rededication of the Dogwood Memorial with Ann.

It was very well attended and it was very much appreciated.

I did want to mention, since she mentioned the prescription drug

Take Back.

That is also at the UVA Emily Couric Cancer Center.

You can always drop off your prescriptions.

There's a place there you can just drive in, drop it off, and leave.

And I did want to

commend the staff because I felt that this year's town halls, the way they were set up encouraged me to attend not only mine but others also which I thought was very instructive because we had different groups of people in different town halls so I thought it was very good.

It also helps us educate the populace through emails, phone calls, and face-to-face settings.

That's all I have.

I have not had any CACs.

I'm looking forward to one on Monday.

And I do have an EDA report, but I'm going to say that for next week.

Next time, meeting.

Alright, I will hold and do my committee reports at the next meeting as well.

I'm not ready to process a few that I've had.

Mr. County Executive, any other

Sir, not at all.

All right.

So without objection, the board will adjourn to May 6, 2026, 1 PM in late auditorium.