Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 197505055~3 THE MINUTES OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION ANp REVIEW taAY 2, 1975 The Orange County Board of Equalization and Review met Friday, May 2, 1975, at 6:30 p.m. in the Commissioners Room at the Courthouse in Hillsborough, id. C. Members present: Chairman Flora Garrett, Commissioners Norm Gustaveson, San Pinney, Norman Walker, and Richard E. Whitted. The Board heard appeals of 1975 real property tax valuations by the following persons for the indicated properties: Tvwnshig Tax Map B1OCk Lot Shelton Gene Lloyd Chapel Hill 107 B 33 William T. Carden Chapel Hi11 86 H 9 J. W. Long (for Mrs. Ralph Breeze,Hrs) Cheeks 20 E 7 A. L. Lepper (Mrs. Edith Rayl, Hrs) EnD 21 - 55 Dwight Walters Hillsborough 45 - 29 The Hoard also considered an appeal by Fred Cates, Jr., of the valuation of a commercial building and lot in Hillsborough Township, (Tax Map 36 Block E Lot 16) although Mr. Cates failed to appear and by appropriate order confirmed the 1975 valuation. The Board also heard appeals by the U.N.C. Law Foundation, Inc. and the Law Alumni Association of U.N.C., Inc., both represented by Morris ?z. Gelblum, Assoc. Dean, U.N.C. School o£ Law, from the Tax Supervisor's denials of application f_or exemption for two vacant tracts in Chapel Hill Township (Tax Map 27 Block F Lpt 9, awned by the Foundation; Tax Map 52, Lot 10, owned by the Association). The U.N.C. Law Foundation, Inc. also appealed the valuation of its tract (Tax Map 27 Block F Lot 9). The Hoard by appropriate orders affirmed the denial of exemption for each tract and reduced the valuation appealed by the Foundation (Tax Map 27 Block F Lot 9) from $92,400 to $30,300. The Board adopted appropriate orders reducing the.valuati.on a~pealed.by ?niilliam T. Carden.(No.7 8.6'B-9)from 5134 200 to $120,3D9; reducing t':ie valuation an~ea ed by J. ?v. Lohg (ttrs. Ralph Hreeze, Hrs)(No.3 20-E-7)from $15,20.0 to $10,370; reducing the valuation appealed by A. L. Lepper (Mrs. Edith L. Rayl,Hrs)(:do5 21-55) from $S~SOD to $4,500; re- ducing the valuation appealed by Dwight Walters (No.~ 45-29) from $13.,400 to $1,500. The Board determined to defer resolution of the appeal by Shelton Gene Lloyd until further inspection of this property could be made by the Tax Supervisor. The Board also heard the appeal of R. Harris Pvpe of the 1975 valuation of his property in Cedar Grove Township (Tax Map 26 Lot 3) and deferred resolution of this appeal pending a recommendation from the Tax Supervisor and further consideration. The Board resolved the appeal of Louis C. Edwards (NV.7 113-A-8) by order con- . firming the 1975 valuation. The Hoard recessed to reconvene at 7:00 p.m., May 15, 1975, in the Commissioners Room of the Orange County Courthouse. ~i~a~ ~ Flora Garrett, Chairman Archie Ke11y, Acting Clerk THE MINUTES OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OE COMMISSIONERS May 5, 1975 The Orange County Hoard of Commissioners met in regular session on Monday, May 5, 1975, at 1D:00 a.m., in the Commissioners Room at the Courthouse in Hillsborough, N. C_ Members present: Chairman Flora Garrett,~Commissioners Norm Gustaveson, Jan Pinney, Norman Walker and Richard E. Whitted. Members absent: None. S. M. Gattas, County Administrator, Neal Evans, Fiscal Offieer, A. B. Coleman, Jr., County Attorney, and Betty June Hayes, Clerk were also present. The minutes of the April 7, 1975 and March 13, 1975, meetings were reviewed. r 514 Upon motion of Commissioner Pinney, seconded by Commissioner Gustaveson, it was ~ moved and adopted that the minutes be approved after certain corrections were made. The minutes of the April 15, 1975, meeting were reviewed. Upon motion of Commissioner Whitted, seconded by Commissioner Pinney, it was moved and adopted that the minutes be approved. The minutes of the Auril 21, 1975, meeting were reviewed. Upon motion of Commissioner Gustaveson, seconded by Commissioner Whitted it was moved and adopted that the minutes be approved. The minutes of the April 29, 1975, meeting were reviewed. Upon motion of Commissioner Pinney, seconded by Commissioner Walker, it was moved and adopted that the minutes be approved. Chairman Garrett referred to Item # 1 on the Agenda. (Road matters such as petitions fvr paving, adding to State System, improved maintenance, etc.) Commissioner Whitted stated that Mrs. Mabel Chavious had again contacted him relative to a drainage problem that does exist on her property that is located vn Highway #86 North, and that another citizen who lives on SR #1590 i5 needing for a portion of that road to be State maintained in order to secure an FHA loan. Chairman Garrett stated that Leroy Johnson of Piney Grove Church Road wished to contact P4r. 5. H. Jones relative to the roads in that area. The Clerk was instructed to write the Board of Transportation on these matters. Chairman Garrett asked that Item #2 and 3 on the Agenda be deferred. Chairman Garrett referred to Item #4 on the Agenda- (Consideration of possible local legislation allowing creation of a County Department of Human Resources). Chairman Garrett presented a cony of a Bill entitled "An Act to Authorize Boards of Commissioners to Create Connty.Hoards 'and Departments of Human Resources" that had been received from Rep. Patricia Stanford Hunt, it was painted out that this Hi11 could be introduced as local legislation and that the Bill was permissive. Discussion ensued. Commissioner Walker stated that he wished to go on record as opposing the pro- i posed legislation. He stated that he had presented the Bill to each member of the Social Service Board and that they did oppose the enactment of the Bi11 as they felt it would create another level of government. Chairman Garrett stated that Transylvania County had adopted similar legislation in that the Soard of Human Resources serves as an Advisory Council. She stated that she felt that the proposed legislation would provide a tool for the study of the matter. Commissioner Whitted stated that he. had carried a copy of the proposed Bill to the Mental Health Hoard and that each member of this Board had approved the legislation as they felt it would coordinate the services now being offered by the various governmental agencies. He said he felt the enactment of the Bill would provide an option to the County and he would personally like to see it adopted.. Commissioner Pinney stated that he worried about creating another layer of govern- ment. However, he did favor the Sill as it allowed the Hoard to have a choice of whether to institute a Board of Human Resources. Commissioners Gustaveson stated that he was not sure whether or not the proposed legislation was a good thing, but "T feel it is something that is in the right direc- tion". He said that the merits of the matter could be decided upon and he would like t^ see the Bill adopted as it would provide an option and would be a useful thing to have on the books if the County decided to move in that direction. Commissioner Iial::e= stated that he felt it was the job of the Hoard to see that services are not duplicated. Upon motion of Commissioner Whitted, seconded by Commissiener Gustaveson, it was moved that the Board request Rep. Hunt to introduce House Hill 492 as local legisla- tion with amendment of providing ex-officio to be included in the local legislation. Chairman Garrett called for a vote on the motion. Commissioners Garrett, Gustaveson, Pinney and ~rRlitted voted aye. Commissioner Walker voted nay. Chairman Garrett declared the motion passed. Chairman Garrett referred to Item #2 on the Agenda: (Mr. Robbie Harris, County Forest Warden, to discuss $3,000. appropriation for certain radio equipment that would place the Orange County Fire Department and the North Carolina Forest Service in direct radio communications.) • Robbie Harris, Orange County Forest Warden, requested the Board to appzove a - $3,000 appropriation for radio equipment that would be installed in his truck. Mr. Harris reviewed the needs associated with-the request. Discussion ensued concerning who would own the equipment; who would be respon- sible for repairs, and if the equipment would work with the equipment of the Emergency Medical Services Communication System. County Manager :stated that this request was well timed because changes have been made in Emergency Medical Communication System and this will tie into their plans. Upan a motion of Commissioner Walker, seconded by Commissioner Whitted, it was -- moved that the Board approve from the Contingency Fund the sum of $2,860 for the pur- pose of purchasing radio equipment for the Forest Service. County Manager questioned the Forest Warden as to who was responsible for ordering the proper type radio equipment. The sorest Warden agreed to assume the responsibility of securing the needed information and seeing that this information was given to the County Manager. Chairman Garrett called for a vote on the motion. Commissioners Garrett, Gustaveson, Pinney, Walker and Whitted voted aye. Chairman Garrett declared the motion passed. Chairman Garrett referred to Item #3 on the Agenda: (Representative of the Orange County Welfare Rights Organization to discuss an unspecified problem.) The delegation representing the Orange Covnty Welfare Rights Association were presented. Chairman Garrett recognized Willie May Williams, President pf the Welfare Rights Organization. Ms. Williams filed a list of Concerns with the Board. Concerns to be shared with the County Commissioners by the Orange welfare Union '~inutes -- A. Union has been having problems with Social Services Board. 1. I3aven't been able to get agenda. 2. Have trouble getting Information i.e. programs ex: Title XX. 3. Board has a bad attitude. 4. Have no rules or regulations. B. Proposed to County Commissioners that we meet on a regular basis with the Social Services Board to establish.a better working zelationship between the two (2) groups to better serve clients. C. Next time folks are appointed to the Hoard we have some recommendations of folks who would be good members aC. the Hoard. 1. Recommend a consumer to serve on the Board. 2. How is County Commissioner chosen to serve on the Board? Is he rotated, if not,we recommend that the Commissioner be rotated yearly. 3. we .also want rules and regulations governing County Commissioners. D. Suggestion that a secretary be present with a tape recorder so that Mr. Ward does not have to write minutes by memory. E. Is the Social Services Board having night meetings, if not, we recommend that they hold meetings at night so working folks can attend. F. Suggest that confidential material be deleted from minutes and remainder of information that is public be distributed to interested folks. G. Copy of DSS budget and how funds are distributed. H. Copy of relationship between bSS Board and County Commissioners including functions and responsibilities of both Beards. I. Recommend that all confidential material to be discussed at the end of the D5S meetings sv that folks who want to httend will know what time to be at meeting. J. Since we are a non-profit organization, so why do we have to pay for a copy of Title XX? K. Ca11 for a public meeting to set or review priorities for Title XX since there was no public hearing to determine needs. L. Bring copies of bylaws, histories, etc. to share with County Commissioners. r 51~ Discussion ensued between the Welfare Rights Representatives, Commissioner Walker, Tom Ward, the County Manager, and Members of the Board regarding the list of concerns that was filed. Ms. Williams requested that the Board forward to the Welfare Rights Organization a copy of the persons that were members of the Social Service Soard and all materials relative to policies and laws of the Social Service Board, a copy of the Social 5er~- vice Budget, and a copy of Title XX. Mr. Ward explained that a list of appointees could be easily secured, however, it would be impossible to supply the second request but he suggested that the group secure a book on Social Service Laws from the Insti- tute of Government. Chairman Garrett referred to Item #7 on the Agenda: (Approval o£ Community Shelter Plan prepared by State Civil Preparedness Agency.) Mr. Gattis filed a Memorandum entitled "Updating Civil Defense Emergency Opera- tions Plan" and another item entitled "Procedures for Development of Shelter Community Shelter Plan (CSF) Step IV Orange County, North Carolina". Upon motion of.Commissioner Walker, seconded by Commissioner Whitted, it was moved and adopted that the Board approve the State Preparedness Plan as presented by the Civil Defense Agency. Chairman Garrett referred to Item #e on the Agenda: (Appointments: (A.)Four persons to Energy Task Force; and -(Ba Durham Technical Xnstitute Advisory Committee). Chairman Garrett recognized Lowell 5paight from the Durham Technical Institute. Mr. Spaight stated that he was looking forward to working with the Task Force that the Board would appoint; and that Dr. Crompton, the new President of Durham Techni- cal Institute would be taking office within the next week; and that he and Dr. Crompton would welcome the opportunity to meet with the Soard and members of the Durham Technical Institute Advisory Committee. Chairman Garrett requested that each Commissioner nominate an appointee to the Durham Technical Institute Advisory Council. Commissioner Gustaveson nominated John Whitted, Route # 1, Hillsborough. Commissioner Pinney nominated Tom Bacon, Route # 1, Hillsborough. Commissioner Walker nominated Janet I. White of Efland. Commissioner Whitted nominated George Corbett of Hillsborough. Chairman Garrett nominated Christine Lockart of Route # 1, Chapel Hill. Commissioner Pinney moved that the nominations be closed and that these people be approved by acclamation. The Board accepted Commissioner Pinney'S motion. Discussion ensued as to the various agencies that should be represented on the Committee. The Clerk to the Board informed the Board of the County Vocational Education Committee that was funvtioning in the area of Vocational Education. The Board then requested that the Clerk serve as Chairman of the Durham Techni- cal Institute Advisory Committee. zt was agreed that a joint meeting should be scheduled between the Board, Members of the Task Force, and the President of Durham Technical Institute on Monday, May 21, 1975, a~ 7:3D p.m. in the Commissioners Room. Chairman Garrett referred to Item #6 on the Agenda: (Mr. Burnham, Triangle J, Council of Governments, to discuss possible Energy Recovery from Solid Waste) Chairman Garrett recognized Mr. Mark Burnham of Triangle J, Council of Govern- ment. P4r. Burnham filed a Memorandum entitled "An Energy Recovery Implementation Plan for the Research Triangle Area of North Carolina" and another item entitled "Energy Recovery Implementation Project Proposal". Mr. Burham stated that Triangle J had recently been advised that funds were available that would allow a Regional Solid Waste Study to be made within the six (6) county area. He stated that they-objectives of the project were: one, draft a regional solid waste agreement with emphasis on energy and materials recovery and seek its implementation; two, define energy and material recovery system financing alternatives in the regional and North Carolina legal framework; three, seek energy use participation through letters of intent from prospective buyers of recovered energy in the project area. However, the County would need to agree to certain in- kind local involvement and that the in-kind portion need not mean that monies would have to be made available. Mr. Burnham preceded to review the material that he had filed. He stated that a deadline of May 9, 1975, had been given to Triangle J, there- fore, a decision was needed now. niscussion ensued and it was pointed out that if any funds were needed they could be considered in next year's budget deliberation. 517 Upon the motion of Commissioner Gustaveson, seconded by Commissioner Pinney, it was moved and alopted that the Board accept the presentation contained in the Memorandum dated April 30, 1975, from Triangle J, Council of Government. Chairman Gannett referred to Item #8 on the Agenda: (B. Appointments of four persons to the Energy-Task Force) Chairman Garrett requested that each Commissioner submit names of prospective appointees for the Energy Task Force. Commissionez Walker nominated Thomas McCume. COmmissionez Gustaveson submitted the names of Paul Morris, Chandlee Barksdale, Gray_ Culbreth and Henry Mears. Chairman Garrett submitted the names of Henry Mears and Robert Nutter. It was agreed that the Board would appoint four (4) persons to this Task Force. Upon motion of Commissioner Pinney, seconded by Commissioner Walker, it was moved and adopted that Benry Mears, Chandlee Barksdale, Thomas McCume, and Robert Nutter be approved as members of the Energy Task Force. Commissioner Gustaveson explained the purpose of N. C. Fellows. The N. C. Fellows would appropriate up to $700. for an intern and the County must appropriate S3DO. for the intern and this student would work with the members of the Energy Task Force. Upon the motion of Commissioner Whitted, seconded by Commissioner Pinney, it was moved that the Board accept the recommendation of Commissioner Gustaveson and to appropriate to the N. C. Fellows the sum of $300. from the Contingency Fund for .the employment df an intern tv work with the Energy Task Force. Chairman Garrett called fox the question. Chairman Garrett, Commissioners Gustaveson, Pinney and Whitted voted aye. Commissionez walker voted nay. Chairman Garrett declared the motion passed. Chairman Garrett referred to Item # 10 on the Agenda: (Mrs. Ortense Aickson, County Tax Collector, to report number and total amount of 1974 County Tax Liens advertised for sale). Chairman Garrett recognized Ortense Dickson, County Tax Collector. Mrs. Dickson filed the following memorandum: "Unpaid taxes on real property at the time of the first advertisement, $524,864.13. Unpaid accounts - 3658. Advertisements to appear in the News of Or_a_n_ge_ County on May 1, 3, 15, and 22nd. Tax Lien sale to be held on June 2, 19'75. _ (For 1973 - Unpaid taxes on real property at the time of first advertisement 5492,872.58. Unpaid accounts 3775." Questions and answers period ensued. Chairman Garrett referred to Item #11 on the Agenda: (Mr. Ervin Dobson, County Planning ninector, to review: (A.) Plats fvn approval; (B.) The Micol rezoning request) Chairman Garnett zecognized Ervin Dobson. A. Plats for approval - None. $. Mr. DpbBOn advised the Board that the traffic `count for Highway 70A and 751 had been received. However, the rezoning request of Robert Micpl had not been approved by.'-the-Board but that business was being conducted on the'site. Discussion ensued. Commissioner Walker moved that the-Board go ahead witht.the approval o£ Mr. Micol's nequest to rezone his property. This motion died for lack of a second. Commissioner Gustaveson suggested that a letter from the County Planner be forwarded to Mr. Mica1 indicating that the Board would like to have certain questions answered and if it does not receive a positive response then the County would issue a stop work order. Discussion ensued between the County Attorney, the Planning Director, County Manager, and Members of the Board. Upon the motion of Commissioner Gustaveson, seconded by Commissioner Whitted, it was moved that the Planning Director forward a letter to Mz. Robert Micol advising him of the Board's concern over the safety factors involved with his property and requesting that he move the mound of dirt that he had piled on the lot. Chairman ~ Garrett called for a vote on the motion. Commissioner Gustaveson, Pinney, Walker, 518 and Whitted voted aye. Gommissioner Garrett voted nay. County Attorney, A. B. Coleman, Jr., advised the Board that he was of the opinion that they could not make this type of request to a property owner. Upon a motion of Commissiener Pinney, seconded by Commissioner Whitted, it was moved and adopted that the Board recall the motion that was :made by Commissioner Gustaveson and seconded by Commissioner T^Riitted. Commissioner Pinney moved that the Board give the County Attorney permission to draft a letter to Mr. Micol as he sees proper. Commissioner Whitted seconded the motion. Chairman Garrett called for a vote. Commissioners Garrett, Gustaveson, Pinney and Whitted voted aye. Commissioner T9alker voted nay. Chairman Garrett declared the motion passed. Chairman Garrett suggested that a committee composed of Cpmmissioners and members of the Planning Board meet together to do some immediate revising of Zoning Ordinance. She stated "I think there is considerable discussion as to whether new ordinances are needed or revision of tha old ordinance." Commissioners Pinney and Whitted agreed to volunteer to serve on a special committee to study the Zoning Ordinance and Amendments. The County Planning Director stated that the planning studies which his Department is now undertaking has already shown that certain areas are not covered in the current Ordinance and that these areas will need consideration. Chairman Garrett requested the Board if they were willinq_to defer from the Agenda to hear representatives from the Orange County Museum. The soard agreed to defer from the Agenda. Margaret Jones, Henrietta Auman, Eugenia Whithard, Dr. Charles Blake, and Rebecca Wall were present to represent the 'Museum. Mrs. Margaret Jones was the spokeman for the group and she requested that the Board allocate to the Museum part of the downstair rpoms. She reminded the Hoard that the County had previously promised to give to the Museum all the space in the Old Courthouse. Chairman Garrett thanked the group for appearing and advised them that space was a major problem confronting County Government. However, they would take matters under advisement. Chairman Garrett referred to Item #12 on the Agenda: (Selection of Auditors for 1974- 1975 Fiscal Year). Discussion ensued concerning the firm of Ernst and Ernst. Upon motion of Commissioner Walker, seconded by Commissioner Pinney, it was moved that the County employ the audit firm of Ernst and Ernst for the fiscal year of 1974-1975. Commissioner Whitted stated that he had a firm he wished to nominate as County Auditor if Commissioner Walker's motion did not pass. Commissioner Gustaveson requested to be advised as to what procedure must be followed in the employing of an audit firm. County Fiscal Officer replied that any firm hired by the County must be approved by the Local Government Commission. Commissioner Whitted stated that he would like to request that each audit firm submit a fee quotation on the work to be done and that he would like to nominate the firm of Peat,Marwick and Mitchell of Greensboro. Chairman Garrett called:.for a vote vn Commissioner's walker motion. Commissioners Pinney and Walker voted aye. Commissioners Garrett, Gustaveson, and Whitted voted nay. Chairman Garrett declared the motion failed. Further discussion ensued and Chairman Garrett inquired, "[What is the pleasure of the Board." Upon the motion of Commissioner Whitted, seconded by Commissioner Gustaveson, it was moved that the Hoard ask each audit firm to meet with the County Fiscal Officer prior to the Baard's mid-month meeting and to request that each firm present a fee schedule for the work that needs to be done. Chairman Garrett called for a vote on the motion. - Commissioners Garrett, Gustaveson, Pinney and FVhitted voted aye. Commissioner,Walker voted nay. Chairman Garrett declared the motion passed- Chairman Garrett referred to Item #13 on the Agenda: (Amendments to County Budget 1974-1975 Fiscal Year). Neal Evans, Fiscal Officer, filed a "Proposed Budget Amendments" with the Board. r;; .;;.. 518 "With the exception of changes in the General Fund, the amendments are concerned with redistribution of funds for these purposes: 1) To fully fund any deficits as required by the general statutes. These deficits were a result of overestimating fund balances available for appro- priation in the 1974-75 budget. These amounts are relatively small and by utilizing other unappropriated surpluses the net effect is no increase in total appropriations. 2) To adjust funds for Debt Service to insure that :all the transfers necessary to consolidate all Debt Service into one fund are made consistent with the law. The result of this will be no fund balances in any of these funds at year end as we move toward consolidating all fund balances in the General Fund. The net change comes from appropriating the additional surplus and reducing the contri- bution from the General Fund. The General Fund then ends up with $34,OD0.00 additional. 3) To transfer appropriations for Choreworkers and Foster Care from AD and AFDC to Social Service Administration where the actual expenditures are being made. No new county funds are required but there is an increase in State Aid for purpose of estimated revenues. The General Fund changes not related to Debt Service are results of over ex- penditures generally from increased costs and underestimated budget requirements. Costs on the expendable supply type items have increased tremendously and many other departments are having trouble staying within the supply budget. In most cases these departments have other line items that can be used to supplement the supplies and no budget amendment is required. All departments have been cautioned about supply costs and one department has actually frozen supply purchasing. It is important to note, however, thatthese supplies are necessary for the daily operation of departments, and not excessive indulgence. Continually increasing costs have made it very difficult to administer a supply budget even when it was well planned. It is hoped this will be the last budget amendment of a general nature for this year. But other problems may yet arise. There will definitely be an additional amendment for the school Current Expense Fund to zeappropriate an existing surplus and to appropriate fourth quarter refunds. Also Social Service program appropriations, particularly Medicaid, are coming very close to the budget limit. Since these vary from month to month, with no local control, we will wait until later in the year to determine if more funds or a redistribution of funds is needed. PROPOSED BUDGET AMENDMENT Increase Amended BOND FUND l ~ (Decrease) Total Expenditures: Ta General Fund (39,515.00) .00 Tv Debt Service.Fund 73,923.00 73,923.00 Fund Balance 34,408.00 73,923.00 DEBT SERVICE FUND 1 Revenues From Bond Fund 73,923.00 73,923.00 From School Debt Service 164,848.00 164,848.00 From General Fund (238,771.00) 273,349.00 FACILITIES. FUND 2 Revenues: Fees-Facilities 810.00 14,810.00 Fund Balance (deficit) (810.00) 7,690.00 GENERAL FUND 3 Expenditures: _ Motor Pool 2,000.00 26,900.00 Sales Tax 2,000.00 4,000.00 Auditing 142.00 7,642.00 Postage 1,D00.00 14,5D0.00 Courts 1,OD0.00 3,130.00 Manpower 1,000.00 1,000.00 Agricultural Extension 1,000.00 58,455.00 To Debt Retirement 1 (238,771.00) 273,349.00 Contingency 23,834.D0 53,725.00 520 Revenues: From Bond Fund 1 (39,515.00) .00 From School Debt Service 1 (167,28D.00) .00 SCHOOL DEBT RETIREMENT 1 Expenditures: To Aebt Service Fund 164,848.00 164,848.00 To General Fund (167,280.00) .00 Fund Balance (Deficit) (2,432.00) 156,448.00 SGCSAL SERVICES 4 Expenditures: Chore Workers 33,000.00 33,000.00 AFDC Foster Care 17,280.00 17,280.00 To Ala (713.00) 40,462.00 To AFDC (12,384.00) fi1,266.00 To Medicaid 4,790.00 76,190.00 Revenues- State Aid Foster Care 14,689.00 14,689.00 State Aid to Administration 27,284.00 236,284.00 AA 4 .___.. Expenditures (2,750.00) 57,000.00 Revenues: From Social Services (713.OD) 43,212.00 Fund Balance (deficit) (2,037.00) (12,312.00) AD 4 Expenditures (1,722.00) 31,028.00 Fund Balance (Deficit) (1,722.00) (6,022.00) AFDC Expenditures (17,280.00) 603,720.00 Revenues: State Aid (14,289.00) 513,591.00 From Social Services (12,384.00) 62,736.00 Fund Balance 9,393.00 27,393.00 MEDICAID 4 Revenue: From Social Services 4,790.00 76,190.00 Fund Balance (deficit) (4,790.00) ( 8,590.00) NOTES: 1) Funds from old $ond Fund and Sch ool Debt Service Fund a re transferred . directly to new Debt Service Fund rather than through the Gener al Fund. Changes occur in the fund balances to reflect fi nal audit figures. Net effect is additional funds available in the General Fund. 2) Facilities Fund adjusts fund balance to account for un funded deficit reflected in audit report. Excess revenues fzom fees have alze ady been collected sufficient to cover deficit. 3) General Fund additions include: a) Motor Pool increase for tires and oil particularly - 52,000.00 b) Sales Tax expenditures were underestimated. Full amount is re- turned as revenue in the following fiscal year. $2,000.00 c) Auditing expenditures were 5142.00 over appropriati on. d) All postage funds have been expended with 2 months remaining in the year. $1,000.00 -521 e) Court increases due to juvenile detention costs, difficult to estimate. 51,000.00 f) ?Manpower funds are required for tools, equipment, etc. in support of emergency employment work crews. $1,OOO.D0 g) Agricultural Extension needs an additional $500.00 each in telephone and supplies to make it through year. $1,000.00 h) Contingency adds $23,834.00 as part of recovery from decreased appropria- tion to Debt Service. Net effect of Debt Service reduction is to fund the $8,142.00 in general appropriation increases and leave the remaining for contingency. 4) In the Social Services Administration and Program Funds a number of accounting changes are made to redistribute funds. a) Deficits and Surpluses are balanced as follows: AA (2,037.00) AD (1,722.00) Medicaid (4,790.00) AFDC 9,390.00 841.00 balance to Administration b) Reduce AA expenditures by$2,750.00 and transfer those funds to choreworkers in Social Services. c) Tansfer AFDC expenditures, $17,280.00, and State Aid, $14,289.00, for AFDC Foster Care to Social Services Administration and reduce local match from Administration by $2,991.00." Upon the motion of Commissioner Walker, seconded by Commissioner Whitted, it was moved and adopted that the 1974-1975 Budget Amendments that were presented by the Fiscal Officer be accepted. Chairman Garrett referred to Item #9 on the Agenda: (Appointees to the T.9ater- sewer Authority). Chairman Garrett advised the Board that she had received a request for the Board to postpone appointments to the Water-Sewer Authority until Thursday night. The County Attorney advised the Board that there were no decisions that needed to be made at this time that could not be made by the committees and the University of North Carolina except the decision on the rates that would be established for the Water-Sewer System. It was agreed that all action on the matter would be deferred until Thursday, May 8, 1975. The County Attorney advised the Board that the••request of Orange County Medical Foundation, Inc. to be exempt from the taxes based on the General Statues that covers hospitals, he felt was not valid. The Foundation does not quality be- cause the General Statutes does control. The purpose of the proposed building is that of ffee enterprise. The Board requested the County Attorney to meet with Dalton Loftin, Attorney for the Foundation, and review the matter. The matter of the Duke University property and their tax appeal was discussed. The County Attorney informed the Board. that he had received a request from the Hillsborough Historical Commissien to allow the Commission to install a plaque on the Courthouse as this property was the former site of the home of William Churton. The Board agreed to allow the plaque to be installed. The County Attorney presented the following application from the Sheriff's Department: "WHEREAS, the County of Orange herein called the 'Applicant' has thoreughly considered the problem addressed in the subgrant application entitled Forensic Equipment and has reviewed the project described in the applica- tion; and . ~ WHEREAS, under the terms of Public Law 90-351 as amended, the United States of America has authorized the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, through the North Carolina Division of Law and-- Order to make federal grants to assist local governments in the improvement of the criminal justice system. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE County Commissioners IN pPEN MEETING - ASSEMBLED I'_d THE CITY pF HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA, THIS 5th DAY OF MAY. 1975, AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the project referenced above is in the best interest of the Applicant and the general public. 2. That Sheriff be authorized to file, in behalf of the Applicant, an annlica- tion in the form prescribed by the Division of Law and Order for a subgrant in the amount of $483.44 to be made to the Applicant to assist in defraying r the cost of the project described in the application. This individual shall act as the authorized representative of the Applicant in connection with all -522 aspects of the application process. i 3. That if the subgrant is made, the Applicant shall provide or make. arrange- ments to provide, a local cash matching contribution in the amount of $40.28 and a local in-kind matching contribution valued under LEAA guidelines at N/A (or proportionately reduced local matching contributions if the subgrant amount is reduced) as required by the Act to defray the cost of the project. 4. That the Project Director designated in the: application form shall furnish or make arrangements for other appropriate persons to furnish such information, data, documents and reports pertaining to the project, if approved, as may be required by the Division of Law and Order. 5. That certified copies of this resolution be included ss part of the applica- tion referenced above. 6. That this resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption." Upon a motion of Commissioner Gustaveson, seconded by Commissioner Pinney, it was moved and adopted that the Chairman sign the LEAA Grant Application. Being no further business, the meeting adjourned, to meet again at 1:00 p.m: Monday, May 12, 1975, at the Chapel Hill Town Hall. ~-1 m aQ~1 ~~- Flora Garrett, Chairman Betty June Hayes, Clerk THE "12INUTES OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMTSSXO:IERS May 8, 1975 The Board of Commissioners of Orange County met at 7:30 p.m. in the Board Room of the Chapel Hill Municipal Building on Thursday, May S, 1975 in joint session with the Chapel Bill Town Board of Aldermen. All Commissioners were present. Mayor Howard Lee opened the meeting by recounting the events leading up to to- night's session giving particular attention to the request for rezoning the Proctor property which lies in the Chatham County, Orange County and Chapel Hill Zoning Dis- tricts. The Town of Chapel Hill, it was pointed out, had already denied rezoning of ' this property. This was done because all things the petitioners were asking could be granted through special use permits if the Town was inclined to issue such a permit. Mr. Emery Denny, Attorney for the Tvwn of Chapel Hill, pointed aut that this rezoning request was symptomatic of a type of problem that affected Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Orange County and Chatham County. In the area where these zoning districts join together action by any one of these agencies has-significant effect on the other jurisdictions. Therefore, he felt that when requests far rezoning in this area are made some type of joint consideration would be mutually beneficial to all involved parties. Ms. Alice Welch, Chapel Hill Hoard Member, voiced support for Mr. Denny's suggestion. Commissioner Garrett suggested t_he possibility of creating some type of zone surrounding the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro in which the County and one ox the other of the Towns would exercise joint control. ' Alderman R. D. Smith stated he felt the extra territorial zoning jurisdiction of the Town of Chapel Hill should be extended. Mayor I,ee spoke again this time about the zone in which joint control was exer- cised and also about the creation of a mechanism that would permit joint consideration of problems that affected more than one jurisdiction. xe pointed out that a County zoning a relatively short distance from the City would eventually have a significant -~ effect upon the City itself. Alderman Cohen suggested that at the least the County should notify the Town of any pending rezoning that falls within two miles of the City limits. Alderperson Alice Welch suggested the County hurry along with its land use plannsng efforts particularily in the Chapel Hill Area. Commissioner Garrett in continuing her comments about a zone of mutual considers- tion stated that if the Town could identify the area it might reasonably expand into over the next five to ten years then the County might deem this the area of mutual con- cern and the County could review with the appropriate Town any proposed rezonings in this area.