Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Actions 12-18-86 SpMtgSPECIAL SESSION ...... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL December 18, 1986 3:30 p.m. AGENDA 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 10. 11. Call to Order. Roll Call of City Council members. Roll Call of School Board members. Invocation. Statement of Purpose. Mayor Noel C. Welcome to legislative officials Presentation of 1987 Legislative Dibling, Jr., City Attorney. Statements by the Honorable J. Honorable A. Victor Thomas, and Woodrum, III. Taylor· and School Board members. Program. Mr. Wilburn C. Granger Macfarlane, the the Honorable Clifton A. Closing statement. Mayor Taylor. Adjournment. Statements by the Mayor, members of the Roanoke City Council, and administrative staff; and the Chairman, members of the Roanoke City School Board, and administrative staff. Ofl~ce of rhe May~ December 8, 1986 The Honorable Vice-Mayor and Members of Roanoke City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mrs. Dowles and Gentlemen: The City Attorney will present the 1987 Legislative Program to Council at our regular meeting on Monday, December 15, 1986. A joint meeting of City Council and the School Board with Senator Macfarlane and Delegates Thomas and Woodrum has be~n scheduled for Thursday, December 18, 1986, at 3:30 p.m., in the Council's Conference Room. I hope all members of Council will be in atten- dance as we discuss important issues relating to the City and our school system. Sincerely yours, NCT:jas cc: Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mr. Wilburn C. Oibling, Jr., City Attorney Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Room ~.52 Municipal Buildi~g 215 Church Arc, hue, S.W. Roonoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2444 Office of tt~ May~' December 8, 1986 Mr. Donald Bartol Ms.' Sallye T. Coleman Ms. LaVerne B. Dillon Mr. Edwin R. Feinour Mr. David K. Lisk Mr. James M. Turner, Jr. Mr. William White, Sr. Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: The City Attorney will present the 1987 Legislative Program to the members o.f Council'at our regular meeting on ~ohday, December 15, 1986. On behalf of the members of Council, I would like to invite you to attend a meeting with Senator Macfarlane and Delegates Thomas and Woodrum to discuss our legislative package on Thursday, December 18, 1986, at 3:30 p.m., in the City Council's Conference Room, fourth floor of the Municipal Building. I hope all members of the School Board will be able to join us as we discuss impor- tant issues relatinq to the City and our school system. Sincerely yours, Noel C. Taylor, ~fayor~ City of Roanoke NCT: jas cc: Or. Frank P. Tota, Superintendent of Schools Mr. Richard L. Kelley, Executive for Business Affairs and Clerk of the Board Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney Room s.52 Municipal Building 215 C~urch Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2444 December 8, 1986 The Honorable J. Granger Macfarlane Member, Senate of Virginia Post Office Box 201 Roanoke. Virginia 24002 The Honorable A. Victor Thomas Member, House of Delegates 1301 Orange Avenue, N. E. Roanoke, Virginia 24012 The Honorable Clifton A. Woodrum, Member, House of Delegates Post Office Box 1371 Roanoke, Virginia 24007 III Gentlemen: I am pleased that you will be able to meet with the members of Roanoke City Council and the Roanoke City School Board to discuss the 1987 Legislative Program. Pursuant to your telephone conver- sation with my secretary, this will confirm that the meeting will be held on Thursday, December 18, at 3:30 p.m., in the City Council's Conference Room, fourth floor of the Municipal Building. I look forward to meeting with you as we discuss important issues relating to the City and our school system. Sincerely yours, /~ Noel C. Taylor, Mayor City of Roanoke ~ NCT: ]as cc: Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney Room ~.52 MunicipalBuildlng 215 (~urch Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Vlrglnla24011 (703)981-2444 CITY OF ROANOKE 1987 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM WILBURN C. DIBLING, JR. CITY ATTORNEY 464 MUNICIPAL BUILDING ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 24011 703-981-2431 CITY COUNCIL Noel C. Taylor, Mayor Howard E. Musser, Vice-Mayor David A. Bowers Elizabeth T. Bowles Robert A. Garland James G. Harvey, II James O. Trout CITY MANAGER W. Robert Herbert SCHOOL BOARD Edwin R. Feinour, Chairman William White, Sr., Vice-Chairman Donald Bartol Sallye T. Coleman LaVerne B. Dillon David K. Lisk James M. Turner, Jr. SUPERINTENDENT Dr. Frank P. Tota TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ................................................... 1 Policy Statements .............................................. 2 Legislative Proposals .......................................... 6 INTRODUCrION The City Council and School Board of the City of Roanoke are pleased to commend this Legislative Program for consideration by the 1987 Session of the General Assembly. This Program has been prepared by our City Attorney, Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., with the assistance of comments and suggestions from Council members, School Board members, City and School administrators and citi- zens. The Program consists of two parts. The first part is a series of policy statements which represent the philosphy of Roanoke City Council on a number of important policy issues. Obviously, it is impossible to anticipate all the legislative issues that will arise during the course of any session of the General Assembly, and these policy statements should provide helpful guidance to our legislators throughout the Session. The second part of the Program consists of specific legislative pro- posals of the City. The City Council and School Board are uniquely qualified to understand the legislative needs of this City and its people, and I am of the opinion that this Program is responsive to those needs. With the support of our legislators, and this City is fortunate to have legislators who are most supportive and re- sponsive to the needs of our City and its citizens, I know that our City government and School Division will be improved and that the quality of life for our citizens will be advanced. If during the course of the Session our legislators have questions concerning the position of the City on legislative mat- ters, they are encouraged to contact our City Attorney who I know will be pleased to respond after consultation with Council or the School Board and any other appropriate officials. I also know that the City Attorney will be in contact with our legislators on many occasions during the 1987 Session, and their consideration of his communications is deeply appreciated. Noel C. Taylor Mayor - 1 - POLICY STATEMENTS Effective Government Local governments were originally organized to provide essential services and protection that citizens could not or would not pro- vide for themselves. Examples of such essential local services are education, provision for health and welfare, police and fire protection, delivery of safe water, sewage treatment and refuse collection. Local governments and their officials are continu- ally striving for economy and productivity in delivery of such services. Unfortunately, the essential services for which local governments were originally created have been overshadowed by numerous less critical programs mandated by the federal and State governments. The federal and State governments should recognize that local governments are the best vehicle for the delivery of basic public services because local governments are closest to the people and most responsive tO their needs. Furthermore, basic public ser- vices cannot be performed in the most effective way if Virginia adopts the federal model of over-regulation with the State dic- tating in minute detail the structure of all local government, the administrative and legislative procedures to be followed uniformly by all local governments and the details of all programs administered at the local level. With more and more programs and functions being returned to the states and localities by the federal government, it is impor- tant that local governments be granted greater autonomy to manage their own affairs and that the Commonwealth refrain from inter- vention in local policy and administrative issues. Mandated Programs Efforts to reduce huge federal deficits will almost certainly involve more responsibility at the State and local levels. As the federal government eliminates programs and functions, there will be a continuing temptation for the State to pass these programs and responsibilities down to its already financially stressed cities, towns and counties. It is, however, unrealis- tic to expect local governments to assume any new mandates, either through law or regulations, which require expenditure of local funds. Moreover, local taxpayers are not supportive of local tax increases to fund mandates from Richmond. The General Assembly and the Governor are urged to actively seek the reduction of excessive regulatory and statutory mandates. As noted in the 1984 JLARC study of Local Mandates and Fiscal Resources, State mandates in the area of education and social services are of serious financial concern to localities. The General Assembly is strongly urged to adress the local fiscal impact of state mandates during the 1987 Session. Revenue and Finance The study of local governments conducted by the Joint Legis- lative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) in 1983 found that most local governments are fiscally stressed and that cities are generally more fiscally stressed than counties. Furthermore, the same study found that the fiscal stress of localities has been increasing in recent years. A major factor in the fiscal stress of localities is the level of State aid and State mandates. State aid to localities has grown at a rate considerably less than the rate of growth in State general fund revenues, and, at the same time, the State has continually imposed new unfunded mandates on the locali- ties. These factors are compounded by rapidly shrinking federal aid. The problem of fiscal stress is further complicated by the con- tinued erosion of the local tax base. The General Assembly is urged not to cap, remove or further restrict any revenue sources that are currently available to localities, including taxing authority and user fees. Investigation and study of additional local revenue sources is also encouraged. Historically, real and personal property taxes have been the foundation of local tax revenues. The State's restriction and erosion of other local resources, however, have resulted in over reliance on property taxes, placing local governments in financial jeopardy. JLARC's own study shows that the real property tax rate in Virginia is the second highest among fifteen Southern states and fifty percent higher than nine Southern States. The City supports additional and more equitable sources of revenue, but the decision on which, if any, local revenue sources should be reduced or eliminated should be strictly a local decision. Education The Report of the Governor's Commission on Virginia's Future states that education should be the highest priority of the Com- monwealth. Yet, the Report notes that Virginia has not honored its commitment to education. Inadequacy of State funding of education is readily apparent in our own City. Using new methodology, the General Assembly set the per pupil cost of the Standards of Quality (SOQ) at $2,044 for Fiscal Year 1986-1987. Actual per pupil cost for City students, however, is estimated to be $3,623 for Fiscal Year 1986-1987. Moreover, the City schools actually receive only $660 per pupil for this Fiscal Year after application of the composite index and State sales tax to the SOQ funding formula. Full funding of the State's share of the actual cost of the Standards of Quality and full funding of categorical educational mandates is a high legislative priority of the City. Magnet Effect Of Central Cities The larger, more urbanized, central cities of the Commonwealth provide a full range of social and humanitarian programs. School systems in these cities provide excellent special education pro- grams, and private charities located in central cities provide a broad range of charitable assistance. These factors make the Commonwealth's central cities a magnet for those in need of ser- vices. It is not surprising that our central cities include a disproportionate number of handicapped, disabled, illiterate, un- employed, impoverished and homeless persons. The City of Roanoke has graciously shared its municipal resources with those in need of services. The City's generosity continues while the communi- ties from which these persons come make no contribution toward their support. The magnet effect creates an unfair situation for the Con~nonwealth's central cities. Since the central cities are bearing a disproportionate burden, which should in all fairness be shared equally by all citizens of the Commonwealth, the General Assembly should provide special funding and authorities to these cities. Economic Development Economic development is a way of improving the economy and tax base of the Commonwealth and its localities. Virginia has, unfortunately, lagged behind neighboring states in its economic development programs and activities. The City endorses the em- phasis of Governor Baliles on economic development, which includes all those activities that enhance the economic well being of the Commonwealth and its political subdivisions, and the increased efforts of the Division of Industrial Development to foster eco- nomic development in Virginia. According to the Report of the Governor's Commission on Vir- ginia's Future, Virginia needs an economic development strategy. The Commonwealth is implored to form a partnership with its localities to develop a statewide strategy which should recog- nize the unique economic development problems of Virginia's land poor cities. Tourism and convention activity should be recognized as integral components of economic development. Drugs The City and School Board are vitally concerned about the problems caused by drugs in our society and support efforts to increase programs designed for the prevention and cure of drug abuse. LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS FULL FUNDING OF STANDARDS OF QUALITY AND CATEGORICAL EDUCATIONAL MANDATES A top priority of the City Council and School Board is full funding of the State-imposed Standards of Quality (SOQ) and full funding of categorical educational mandates. Increased State funding should be achieved without reduction to other funding components of the State's public education budget or to other State funding items affecting local government. The new methodology developed by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) for calculating the costs of the SOQ, which subsequently was modified by the Governor and included in the 1986-1988 Appropriations Act, is not realistic and should be revised. The methodology supported by City Council and the City School Board is that previously utilized by the Department of Education prior to the 1986-1988 Biennium. The Department's cal- culation, which represents a more realistic estimate of SOQ costs, was on the statewide average number of instructional posi- tions, statewide average salary and benefit costs and an amount for support services based on actual costs. Utilizing the new methodology, the General Assembly set the SOQ per pupil cost at $2,044 for 1986-1987 and $2.254 for 1987-1988. Under the new methodology, however, a discrepancy exists between what the State maintains is required and the actual cost to lo- calities of funding the SOQ. Actual per pupil cost for Roanoke City is estimated to be $3,623 for Fiscal Year 1986-1987 and $3.977 for Fiscal Year 1987-1988. More importantly, Roanoke City Schools actually will receive only $660 per pupil for Fiscal Year 1986-1987 and $759 per pupil for Fiscal Year 1987-1988 after ap- plication of the composite index and State sales tax to the SOQ funding formula. The State should fund the full cost of the SOQ calculated on a more realistic basis. Furthermore, the General Assembly should recognize local govern- ments' longstanding support of public education. For many years, City Council has funded educational costs beyond its required share in an effort to provide quality education. FUNDING FOR GOVERNOR'S SCHOOL FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGy During the 1986 Session of the General Assembly, 1986-1988 Biennium funds were appropriated for six regional high schools specializing in mathematics, science, technology and the arts. For the second year of the Biennium, however, a 20% reduction in funding was specified along with a directive that localities should plan for total financial support of these programs in the future. The Appropriation Act places the burden on local tax- payers in these six localities to fund 100% of the excess costs not covered by minimal per pupil reimbursement/tuition. Due to the fact that these programs are highly technical in nature, and regional in scope, the per pupil personnel and support costs for the operation of these specialized schools are greater than those for the regular high school program. The General Assembly, therefore, is urged to provide additional State categorical funding for local school divisions where these State-initiated regional schools are located. Without adequate State support, the future of these State-initiated regional schools is uncertain. LITER~y FUND The State Board of Education is authorized by §22.1-146, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, to make loans from the Literary Fund to local school boards for school construction purposes. Current- ly, iow-interest Literary Fund loans are the major source of State assistance for school divisions' capital improvement budgets. During the last four State budgets, however, a total of $166.9 million has been transferred out of the Literary Fund by the General Assembly for State support of teacher retirement, thus reducing the available funds for low-interest Literary Fund loans. The inadequacy of Literary Fund money is evidenced by a long waiting list for construction loans (in excess of two years). These capital expenditures are a legitimate portion of the overall cost of education and, in the absence of direct State support to local school board construction projects, the Lite- rary Fund should be carefully protected. Consequently, the use of the Literary Fund should be limited to loans for school con- struction, alteration, renovation/modernization and expansion. The City Council and School Board support legislation that would restore to public school divisions in Virginia expedient access to Literary Fund loans and oppose the use of the Literary Fund of the Commonwealth for purposes other than the construction, altera- tion, renovation/modernization or expansion of school buildings. FULL FUNDING OF STATE MANDATED PROGRAMS JLARC's July, 1985, update to its 1984 State Mandates on Local Governments study recommended that State funding be increased substantially for special education, social services auxiliary grants and State-mandated health programs. The City strongly supports this recommendation and also strongly supports full - 7 - funding of the State's share of the actual costs of both Standards of Quality education mandates and categorical educa- tion programs, as previously noted, and continued State support of human services programs. Furthermore, in the event of reduced revenues to localities as a result of the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act or other Federal legislative actions, the City urges the State to recognize its responsibility to aid localities, either directly through State financial assistance or indirectly through the passage of permissive legislation allowing localities to tap additional sources of revenue. HOMELESS SHELTERS Homeless persons are attracted from all areas of the State to urban centers by the availability of governmental programs of assistance and private charitable relief. While the homeless are a vital concern of the cities where they are present, they are also the legitimate responsibility of the communities from which they come. Funding shelters for the homeless, therefore, should be borne equally by all the State's citizens. The City urges emergency State funding for the provision of shelters for the homeless as recently recommended by the House General Laws Subcommittee on Housing in Urban Areas. REIIvlBURSEMENT OF LOCALLY OWNED NURSING HO~S The present Medicaid formula for reimbursement of nursing care encourages nursing homes to accept non-Medicaid patients when- ever possible and/or patients who require less nursing care. Our municipally owned nursing home does not accept patients who have funds with which to pay for their care, and we, usually, care for residents of the valley who have not been accepted by other nursing homes. As a result, we care for no patients who pay their own way and more patients requiring intensive nursing services. It is recommended that Medicaid payments to the nursing homes be based upon the condition of the patient and the services required rather than the current uniform daily rate which is paid for all patients regardless of the patient's condition. ANNEXATION - FUNDING ~aND PROCEDURES In 1979, the General Assembly enacted an annexation package pur- suant to which some counties obtained immunity from annexation and all localities were provided additional State aid in the areas of administration of justice, law enforcement salaries, health care for indigents and street and highway construction and maintenance. As part of the 1979 compromise, annexation proce- dures were also agreed to by cities and counties. In 1980, the General Assembly acted to provide the funds necessary to imple- ment the annexation package. This City has used this funding to provide tax relief. Roanoke City Council is opposed to any reduction in the agreed upon annexation funding and to shifting of responsibility for additional programs to local government as a result of the annexation package. The annexation package was intended to pro- vide partial compensation to cities for loss of the annexation power and also represented a first step toward more equitable State funding of all local governments. Reduction of annexation funding or substantive amendment of the annexation procedures agreed to by all the parties in 1979 would be a breach of faith. VIRGINIA MUSEUM OF TRANSPORTATION The Virginia Museum of Transportation, located in Wasena Park adjacent to the Roanoke River, suffered massive flood damage on November 4, 1985. Since that time the Museum has moved to a new location, raised $165,000 form the private sector for flood re- covery and increased its annual revenues from $96,000 to $400,000. The financial burden of restoration of exhibits and relocation of the facility has been tremendous. The job has not, however, been completed, and, due to the nature of rust, mold and mildew, the deterioration of exhibits continues. The Museum is an important asset to the Valley in preserving our transportation heritage and also attracts tourist dollars to the benefit of our economy. Therefore, the City supports the Museum's request to the General Assembly for $250,000 in flood recovery money and $100,000 in operating funds. LIMITATION OF RECOVERY AGAINST CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS The insurance market for public officials' liability coverage is virtually non-existent. This situation could deter qualified persons from seeking or remaining in public office or accepting appointment to other local boards and commissions. Limitation of liability for such officials is certainly in the public's interest. - 9 - The City requests the General Assembly to provide to members of Iota! governing bodies and boards, commissions, agencies and authorities of local governments immunity from suit arising from the conduct of the affairs of such governing body, board, commission, etc. Immunity would not apply to wilful misconduct, gross negligence or violation of the Comprehensive Conflict of Interests Act. INSURANCE FOR CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS The Attorney General has recently ruled that local governments are without authority to extend insurance or self-insurance pro- grams to constitutional officers or indemnify these officers. Exceptions exist for our Clerk of Circuit Court because under §57A of our Charter the City pays all expenses of this office and, in turn, receives all fees and commissions from the office and for the Sheriff's Department in the operation of City-owned vehicles, but, as a result of the Attorney General's opinion, all other constitutional officers must look to the Commonwealth to meet their insurance needs. Insurance costs are a legitimate cost of doing business for the State's constitutional officers. The City urges the General Assembly to see that a full range of insurance, including general liability, errors and omissions, workers' compensation, unemploy- ment and motor vehicle liability, is provided for constitutional officers. The State should fully fund the costs of such coverage. EXTENSION OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE PRESUMPTIONS Police officers, deputy sheriffs and firefighters have the advan- tage of nearly irrebuttable presumptions that heart disease and hypertension are occupational diseases under the Workers' Compen- sation Act. Firefighters have an additional presumption with respect to lung disease. The City currently has a Workers' Com- pensation Act liability of $2.1 million for heart, hypertension and lung awards made to public safety officers as a result of the statutory presumption. Without voicing any opinion as to the wisdom of the current pre- sumptions, the City urges the General Assembly not to extend the occupational disease presumption to new diseases, such as cancer. The high incidence of cancer among Americans is known to all of us, and, as terrible as this disease is, it should not be the subject of a work related presumption. House Bill 573, carried over by the 1986 Session, should be defeated. - 10 JAIL OVERCROWDING Overcrowding of the Roanoke City Jail remains a serious problem. Our jail is certified to house 192 inmates, but on many occasions is required to house far more inmates. The reason for this over- crowding is that many inmates convicted of State felonies are not being picked up by the State Department of Corrections and are serving their full felony sentences in the Roanoke City Jail. A recent survey by the Roanoke City Sheriff shows that inmates con- victed of State felonies as long as ten months ago still remain in the City Jail. The City Jail was not built as a facility to house felons serving State sentences. A full range of work programs, vocational opportunities and social programs are not available to inmates in a local jail nor are such programs needed if the jail is used for its intended purpose. Improper utilization of the local jail as a facility for the long-term housing of convicted felons causes the inmates to become hostile and antisocial and could create a dangerous situation. Even when construction of the new pod of the Roanoke City Jail is completed, space will not be available to house the many con- victed felons the State Department of Corrections has refused to provide for. The City urges the General Assembly to act to rec- tify State-caused overcrowding at the Roanoke City Jail. WATER MANAGEMENT The City recognizes that certain areas of the Commonwealth have water supply and allocation problems. The City further believes that the Commonwealth should assume a meaningful role in water management planning. Specifically, the role of the Commonwealth should be as follows: To provide imaginative, positive and compre- hensive leadership in water management plan- ning; To study water deficit and allocation problems and to gather and compile information and data necessary to permit the development of a sound water management policy; and To provide technical expertise to local govern- ments in water management planning as authorized by §62.1-44.38,F, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. The City, however, is vigorously opposed to any State legislation which would regulate or limit the City's use of its existing - 11 - water sources or which would impair the existing authorities of the City to develop new water resources. As is well known, the City has excellent water sources which will meet the City's needs until at least 2025. In present day dollars, it would cost more than $110 million to develop these sources (more than $60 million in source development and more than $50 million for land acquisition). Inasmuch as these water sources were developed totally with local funds, it would be most unfair and inequitable for the Commonwealth to attempt to regu- late or limit the City's use of these sources. Moreover, any legislation which would allow other persons, including the Commonwealth and its cities, counties and towns, to make use of the City's water resources would amount to subsidization of others by City taxpayers. UNIFORM STATEWIDE BUILDING CODE AND BUILDING MAINTENANCE CODE PENALITIES. Violations of the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and the State Building Maintenance Code are presently punishable as misdemeanors by a maximum fine of $1,000. See §36-106, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. This penalty has proven to be an insufficient deterrent. The City supports an amendment that would make such violations punishable as Class i misdemeanors by a fine and/or twelve months incarceration in order to ensure the safe construction and maintenance of buildings. RETAINAGE ON CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS State law currently authorizes local governments to retain 5% of the amount due on progress payment construction contracts to assure faithful performance of the contract. At least 5% re- tainage is commonly utilized in private sector construction contracts. House Bill 63, carried over from the 1986 Session, would require local governments to place retained funds in an interest bearing account for the benefit of the contractor when requested. The City is opposed to this legislation which requires local govern- ments to invest public funds on behalf of a contractor. RESTRICTIONS ON USE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT WORK FORCES The issue of restricting the authority of local governing bodies in the use of their own work forces and equipment to - 12 - construct public works projects has been before the General Assembly for several years. The City is able to document that substantial savings have been realized on many projects by utilizing City forces, and, additionally, construction projects can often be completed more quickly. Furthermore, it is the responsibility of City Council, which is directly responsible to the electorate, to decide on a case-by-case basis the most effective means of accomplishing pub- lic construction. Council is vigorously opposed to any legisla- tion that would restrict its alternatives in carrying out public works projects. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS NOTIFICATION The City supports House Bill 139, carried over from the 1986 Session, which requires any person responsible for the the release of any hazardous material during its transport, or any supervisor of a commercial establishment which emits any toxic substance imposing an imminent health threat, to notify the designated officer of the local jurisdiction in which the release occurs within one-half hour of the discovery of such release. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING Any legislation authorizing collective employees in general or for any public be opposed. bargaining for public employee group should Ail public employees now have effective grievance procedures. Both the City and the School Board have developed effective means of communication which permit public employees to voice their concerns. Collective bargaining would be a detriment to the progress which has been made. 13 -