Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19750129`Z+~~ MINUTES OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD pF COMMTSSTONERS January 29, 1975 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met on Wednesday, January 29, 1975, at 8 P.M. in the Commissioners Room at the Courthouse in Hillsborough, North Carolina. Members Present: Chairman Flora Garrett, Commissioners Norm Gustaveson, Jan Pinney, Norman Walker, and Richard E. Whitted. Members Absent: None. S. M. Gattis, County Administrator, Neal Evans, Fiscal Officer, and Betty June Hayes, Clerk, were also present. Chairman Garrett announced that the purpose of this meeting was a work session of the Board, however, there were persons who were present who requested permission to speak before the Board. Chairman Garrett recognized Mark Burnham. Mr. Burnham made the following presentation: "We have a table that is about this wide and this high, with columns for each Town, an unbelievable complication, but the basis for that whole procedure is a formula which is included in the Housing Act, that Community Development procedure is under, that gives the basis for distributing the funds. Now we have been given to anticipate over the SMSA as the three (3) counties, Wake County, Durham County, and Orange County, areas outside of the municipalities. We have been given to expect the total of $447,000 the first year. Now there is a formula given in the Housing Act for the distribution of that money within areas and we have applied that formula the best we can to that $447,000, with appropriate figures for Wake County, for Durham County, and Orange County. The last time I was here, you will remember, there was some thought on Durham County coming fn. Durham County did npt respond until late in the game, but they have finally responed and they will be applying for their portion of the funding. So they will be a part of this formula. 5o the formula is based on population. Basically, the formula uses 1970 Census data and definitions. Three (3) ratios which measure each County's relative share of population, poverty and substandard _ housing or overcrowded housing. Each one of the ratios is weighed, the weights are: the population has the weight of one (1), poverty is counted as being two (2), and substandard housing has the weight of one (1), so there are four (4) factors, the poverty being two (2) and the others having one (1) each. The i final number is the percentage of Community Development money each county may receive. Then it goes through the calculations and there is a table here of the population. Wake County, of course, outside of the municipality, has 106,000, Durham has 37,000, and Orange has 32,000.. T'm rounding off. Then the poverty figures for the three (3) counties have 3,300 and some for Wake Gounty, 843 for Durham County, and 1,038 for Orange County. The crowding factors are close to 3,000 in Wake County, 516 in Durham County, and 901 in Orange County. So when you apply the formula as they say of the four (4) factors, one of them being poverty doubled, twice, you come up with percentages for the three (3) counties. We have Wake County, of course, having the larger population and the larger figures to deal with, we come up with 64% of the $447,000, Durham Gounty, we come up with 17%, and despite the fact that Durham County's population outside bf-the city limits is larger than Orange County's population outside the city limits, Orange County comes up with a larger percentage than Durham, because of the difference in poverty, so those are the figures that we propose to use in working out the amount of money under that $447,000, that would appropriately be Orange County's. Under that skeem of things Orange County would come in with a figure of $84,930 for the first year, Durham would be $75,990, and Wake County would be $286,080." Mr Gattis asked, "The most important thing in this formula is the percent- age and not the dollar because the dollar is still indefinite. Is that right2" Mr. Burnham replied, "The dollar is very indefinite, as I read to you last time, .the urban counties nationally are applying at a higher rate than anticipated by the people that wrote the act. So this whole thing might be an exercise in futility and it might get eliminated, but I doubt very much if it is. Tt might be lessened and it might be lessened considerably or just a little, but this is what we have been given to work with at first and we have no other word to go on and feel this is appropriate." Chairman Garrett asked, "Will the monies be increased next year?" ~, Mr. Burnham relied, "Yes, roughly the next year would be about three (3) times this year's figure. Next year, if we were to anticipate, which is hardly safe, would be $255,000 and it would be a substantial increase for Orange County, so that is the allocation formula that Wake County will be wrestling with tomorrow evening, and they will go on to apply whatever factors they feel best about in arriving at the priorities for their towns. Now, that is our next concern, we will need to think about the priorities that we will be arriving at for Orange County. Now, I have been in consultation with Sam and with both of the Towns and I have priced shopping list for all three (3) jurisdictions and it is going to take some consideration. Now, I have just some ideas I want to hang in the air. These are not suggestions. They are just ideas. If you play with population in Orange County, the County outside of Chapel Hill has the population of around 32,000, Carrboro, according to the Census, which is I'm afraid this is the figure we zaill have to go by, is 5,058, and Hillsborough is less than 2,000 (1,696). The county outside of all towns would be 25,416, so on a population basis, if yyou were to figure appropriateness for this money, the County would come in for 75% of a lion share, Carrboro would be 18%, and Hillsborough would be only 7%, so you lay with another set of figurest however, which are based on the Census. p(He passed around a set of figures). Now with the formula that I mentioned earlier for allocating the money on the three (3) counties basis. If you were to look at Orange County with the idea of applying that same formula, you would get a different picture than you would using pure population." Mr. Burnham stated that he felt that the Board needed to have a work session with the three (3) jurisdictions involved. The Board inquired of Mayor Cates and J. L. Gleason, Town Manager for Carrboro, as to when a meeting could be scheduled. It was agreed that all three (3) units of Government would meet on Thursday, February 6, 1975, at 8 p.m., in the Hillsborough Town Hall. Mike Caldwell, Planning Director of the Town of Carrboro, introduced J. L. Gleason, Manager of the Town of Carrboro, tp the Board. Chairman Garrett then recognized Kitty Murphy. Mrs. Murphy stated that she was present to urge the Board members to proceed with the acquiring of a site for the Dog Pound, and she wanted them to change the method of disposing of unwanted animals. The Board advised Mrs. Murphy that the mattez of the Dog Pound was now under consideration and that the Board would proceed with the securing of land as soon as a desirable site was made available, and that the method of disposing of unwanted animals had been corrected. Mr. Cates advised the Board there was a possibility that the Town of Hillsborough would sell to the County of Orange some land adjoining the new sewerage plant, as the Town had to purchase more property than it had anticipated in order to acquire the needed sewerage site. Mayor Cates stated that he felt this land would be ideal for a Dog Pound site, in that, it was far removed from any residential area. Discussion ensued. The Mayor was requested to present the matter to his Board and the County Manager was instructed to investigate the site. The Board of Commissioners adjourned for Executive Session then reconvened as a Board of Commissioners. The Board inquired of the Fiscal Officer as to when they could expect to receive a report vn the tax collections. Mr. Evans replied that he could give them a report on Monday, February 3, 1975, but an accurate report and true financial picture would be best presented if the Board would be willing to wait until February 18, 1975. Discussion ensued. The Board agreed to Mr. Evans' suggestion. The matter of unsettled tax requests was presented. The need to schedule a Board of Equalization and Review meeting was discussed. It was agreed that the Board would schedule a Board of Equalization and Review meeting on Thursday, February 13, 1975, at 8 p.m.. Another work session for the Board was scheduled on Monday, February 10, 1975. There being nv further business to come before the Board the meeting was adjourned. Flora Garrett, Chairman Betty June Hayes, Clerk Approved Items Filed: None