HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-11-1999 - 2~• ~
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 11, 1999
Action Agenda
Item No. ~'"
~~
SUBJECT: Potential Resources Required for Two Initiatives (Expanded Wastewater Treatment
Management Program and Innovation & Efficiency)
DEPARTMENT: County Manager PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/1~ No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Issue Paper John Link or Rod Visser, ext 2300
Rosie Summers, ext 2412
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough 732-8181
Chapel Hill 968-4501
Durham 688-7331
Mebane 336-227-2031
PURPOSE: To discuss two initiatives related to Commissioners' goals for 1999-2000.
BACKGROUND: There was insufficient time available at the Board's Apri126 work session for the
planned discussion of initiatives related to the possible expansion of the Wastewater Treatment
Management Program and support for a renewed Innovation & Efficiency Committee review of County
operations. This item has been carried forward to the May 11 work session.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The potential financial impacts and resource requirements of these two
initiatives are described in the attached issue paper. Depending on the Board's direction, any new
resources required will be included in the Manager's recommended budget for 1999-2000, which will be
presented to the Board at the end of May
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board discuss the two initiatives and
provide appropriate direction to the Manager and staff.
~ ,~
ISSUE PAPER
Potential Resources Required Related to Two Specific Initiatives
(Expanded Wastewater Treatment Program/Innovation and Efficiency)
1. Expansion of the Wastewater Treatment Management Program
In 1998, the Orange County Boazd of Health formed an ad hoc committee to develop a proposal to
expand the current Wastewater Treatment Management Program. The current program focuses on
monitoring alternative on-site wastewater treatment systems and does not include conventional septic
systems.
2
In October 1998 the ad hoc committee forwarded a proposal for an expanded Wastewater Treatment
Management Program that would include conventional septic systems to the Board of Health. In
November 1998 the Boazd forwazded the adopted proposal to the Boazd of Commissioners. On March
8, 1999, the Boazd of Health and the Board of Commissioners discussed the proposal in a joint work
session.
The proposal includes athree-pronged approach of education, inspections, and homeowner incentives.
It proposes to start the inspection phase of the program in the water quality critical areas of the
watersheds and move outwazd from there. The funding mechanisms for the program were proposed to
be a combination of fees and County general fund support.
At the March work session, the Commissioners agreed in principle that this is an important azea to
consider for protecting the health of the public and for protecting the environment. The Board asked
the Health Department to start this program with a more fully developed educational plan. This would
specifically tazget educating current homeowners about maintenance of their septic systems and raise
general public awareness about safe drinking water. Funding needs and strategies for the remaining
portion of the program also would be more fully developed in the first year.
The Health Department is in the process of recalling the ad hoc committee for additional work on the
education plan and will return to the Boazd of Health in June and to the Boazd of Commissioners in
August with a fully developed educational plan. It is expected that a request for a new environmental
educator position will be made at that time for the remainder of the 1999-2000 budget year.
In the 1999-00 budget process, the Health Department is requesting that two-thirds of the
environmental health educator position's cost and associated costs for implementing the educational
plan be placed in reserve for potential implementation in 1999-00. If the position were approved
effective October 1, the estimated 1999-00 cost is as follows:
Annual Position Annual One Time Offsetting Revenue Net 99-00 Position Cost
Costs (Salary/ Operating Start Up or Budget Savings (prorated for 10/1 date)
Benefits) Cost Cost and Start Up Costs
$44,550 $15,350 $3,292 $0 $48,217
A ~ 1 4
2. Innovation and Efficiency
During discussions of proposed goals for 1999-2000, the Board of Commissioners has indicated its
desire to reconstitute the Innovation and Efficiency Committee. In April 1996, that group produced a
report with 13 recommendations for potential cost savings and streamlining of organizational structure
and operations. That group, or a newly appointed successor committee, would review the results of
the 1996 study and identify other opportunities for operational innovation and efficiency, consistent
with a new charge to be developed by the Board of Commissioners.
The 1996 study involved many hundreds of staff hours to support the I&E Committee in its work.
Given that experience, and the County's current heavy workload, it would be important to provide
additional resources to ensure that the Committee could complete its charge in a timely and thorough
manner. Existing staff would naturally provide technical assistance to the committee as it reviews
various departmental operations. However, there would need to be a dedicated entity that would
handle the administrative and logistic support, including the necessary organization, coordination,
writing, and production of the committee's working materials and final report and presentation. This
support function could be provided by: 1) outsourcing; 2) a new position (with this and other
responsibilities); or 3) a combination of outsourcing and additional County staff.
If the outsourcing approach were chosen, the effort might be similar to that undertaken by the recently
engaged Y2K Coordinator. A qualified firm or individual, with extensive experience in organization,
coordination, and technical writing, would serve as the principal liaison to the I&E Committee, and
keep the project on time and on track. The cost of this effort would depend on the scope of work
required to assist the Committee in carrying out its charge. It would be reasonable to expect that the
hourly cost of this type of support would run in the range of $75-$150 per hour.
Alternatively or in combination with the above, the County could consider adding a new position that
would likely be housed in the Personnel Department, but which would also work very closely with
Budget staff. The position would handle the I&E coordination function, both with the reconstituted
I&E Committee, and on an ongoing basis after the Committee completes its charge. In addition,
during the annual budget process, this position would evaluate new position and position change
requests, under the joint direction of the Budget Director and Personnel Director. For the remainder of
the year, the position, under the direction of the Personnel Director and with the input of the County
management team, would:
^ Follow through to support operating departments to implement recommendations resulting from the
I&E and new position processes (e.g. outsourcing, staff realignment, internal system changes).
^ Complete systematic evaluation of vacant positions to assure the most effective use of County
resources and recommend realignment or other alternatives when identified.
^ Develop guidelines for outsourcing and provide enterprise-wide technical assistance to departments
that are pursuing outsource support.
^ Complete organization and staffing studies including assessment of the organization, functionality and
efficiency of positions/programs such as solid waste.
I j ~
4
^ Through focus groups and brainstorming session with department heads, employees and work groups,
identify employee ideas for improved efficiency and follow through to support consideration and
accomplishment of these.
^ Follow through to support consideration and, if determined, implementation of policy initiatives to
enhance efficiency and effectiveness. For example, analysis and revision of the grant request process
as needed to assure adequate funds are requested for the proposed work and indirect costs are
recouped. As another example, assess assigned areas to identify any duplication of services and
develop with input of all involved recommendations to address such duplication.
The estimated cost of the additional position is shown below.
Annual Position Annual One Time Start Offsetting Net Annual Position
Costs (Salary/ Operating Up Cost Revenue or Cost and Start Up
Benefits) Cost Budget Savings Costs
$44,055 $1,000 $0 $0 $45,055