HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19750715~~
Commissioner Jan Pinney then moved the meeting be recessed until
the other engineers had been contacted and asked to attend. This motion '
died for lack of a second.
Mr. Pinney then stated he felt that all or none of the engineers
should be allowed the opportunity to attend and if this were not done
he felt he could not participate further in the meeting. Ydr. Pinney
then left the group.
Pearson Stewart then observed a quorum of the Board of Commissioners
was not present and he felt the meeting should be adjourned to a day
definite at which time all engineers should be present. •.
Mayor Cates then stated he weuld be willing to meet again when it
was agreed that Orange County and the Town of Hillsborough would joint-
ly select the engineering firm to do this work. Fie was not willing to
delegate any portion of this responsibility to the Council of Governments.
If he could not secure this agreement he was not willing to meet again
on this subject.
Commissioner Norman Gusta.veson stated in closing he was very dis-
tressed at what appeared to be. a total disregard of the main issue here
which is not the individual independence of each board but the over-riding
issue of the common good of all persons residing within the 201 study area.
For witzout this study State and Federal participation in the cost of
sewer outfall lines constructed within the defined area is not possible.
The meeting recessed at 9:00 p.m.
~~a~ ~
Flora R. Garrett, Chairman
S. M. Gattis, Acting Clerk
ORP~~7GE COWTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
July 15, 1975
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on
Tuesday, July 15, 1975, at 7:30 p.m. in the Commissioners' Room at the
Courthouse in Hillsborough, N. C.
Members present: Chairman Flora Garrett, Commissioners Norman
Gustaveson, :dorman walker, and Richard E. Cdhitted.
Members absent: Commissioners Jan Pinney.
S. M. Gattis, County Administrator; Neal ;vans, Fiscal Officer;
A. B. Coleman, Jr. and Steve Bernholz, County Attorneys; and Betty June
Hayes, Cleric were also present.
Chairman Garrett referred to Item #1 on the Agneda: (Public Hearing)
Orange County is considering acquiring about 6~.acres on the East side of
Jefferson Drive in the Oakdale development to be used as the site of a
motor vehicle repair and maintenance facility. This parcel of land might
also be used as the site of an animal pound; however, a final decision on
location of this facility has not been reached at this time.
Chairman Garrett stated that pursuant to notice duly published, this -
was the place, date, and time for a public hearing on a proposed site for
an Animal Pound.
Chairman Garrett informed the group that she' had been contacted by
Roger Dale Stephens, Developer of Sunshine Acres, and that P~Ir. Stephens
opposed the site of the dog pound in the Sunshine Acres area.
Chairman Garrett then inquired if there were any present who wished
to speak in opposition to the proposed Dog Pound and Garage site.
11
Joe Diggs, a resident of Sunshine Acres, inquired as to the exact
location of the proposed site. Tt was determined that the site was
owned by James Freeland and located where Jefferson Drive runs out.
Mr. Diggs stated that he was opposing the proposed site and that
Bruce Gornto, who also lives in the area, had requested that his
opinion be voiced.
Sue Williams, a resident of Sunshine Acres, stated that the pro-
posed site would be located approximately one-half lot away from her
property and she felt that all property value in the area would be
decreased if the Animal Pound and Maintenance Garage were place d. in
- the area.
Hilda Brody of Hillsborough inquired if there was a possibility
of the County going with Chapel Hill in securing a proper Animal Shelter.
Chairman Garrett advised 24s. Brody that the matter would be dis~
cussed later in the meeting.
Glenn Gardner, a resident of Sunshine Acres, stated that he and
his wife were opposed to the location of a Dag Pound and Maintenance
Garage in the area. He suggested that since the County owned other
property on the Orange Grove Road that the Dog Pound and Maintenance
Garage be located behind the new Grady Brown School.
Johnny Horner reported that the County had investigated the
possibility of locating the facility behind the school but that land
was not available.
Roger Date Stephens, a resident of Sunshine Acres stated that
his wife was allergic to dogs and he had .recently invested $43,000.
in his property...;. He_has four young daughters under 10 years of age,
therefore, he was opposed to the location of the Animal Shelter and
Garage.
Wayne Kendrick spoke in opposition to the Dog Pound and Garage.
Mrs. Glenn Gardner stated that many residents of the area have
young children and that the increase in traffic in the area gave cause
for anxiety concerning the safety of their children. Ms. Gardierstated
that all the residents felt the Dag Pound was needed, however, the County
should seek other sites.
Chairman Garrett inquired if there were any persons present to
speak in favor of the proposed site. She stated that she knew there
were people present who wished to speak in favor of the Dog Pound.
Kitty Murphy of Hillsborough spoke in favor of securing an adequate
facility for unwanted animals.
Pat xennedy of Chapel Hill spoke in favor of a joint shelter with
the County joining with Chapel Hill. She stated that the Humane Society
was willing to meet with representatives from the towns of Chapel Hill,
Carrbaro, Hillsborough and the County for the purpose of pursuing the
project and she spoke further of the advantages of an Animal Shelter
instead of the old concept of a Dog Pound.
Commissioner Gustaveson inquired if it were true that the town
of Chapel Hi11 planned to move in the next month by purchasing approxi-
mately 40 acres of land for a Dog Pound site?
He was advised that this was the understanding of the Humane Society.
Commissioner Gustaveson suggested that perhaps the Board should make
inquiries concerning the plans of the town of Chapel Hi11.
Hilda Brody suggested that if the County was in favor of a joint
shelter then she would urge all units of government cooperate on this
point a1d coordinate their efforts.
The County Manager was instructed to contact the town of Chapel 'rIill
in order to determine what plans, if any, they have to puzchase land for
an Animal Shelter or what plans they have relative to an Animal Shelter.
g~
Commissioner whitted suggested that the County continue to look for
an acceptable site and to also move further out into the County with the
understanding the city water is no longer a consideration.
Chairman Garrett referred to Item #3 an the Agenda: (A.Ii.A. Tr7illiams:
To. review with the Board coverage of a proposed comprehensive liability
policy).
A.H.A. Tnlilliams of Collier Cobb and Associates filed the following
letter with the Board.
"We are glad to offer you Public Official Liability Policy which -
will indemnify you individually or collectively, for any claim or
claims made against you for a wrongful act. The policy also extends _
itself to cover your executors, administrators ,. or assigns for
which you shall become legally obligated to pay'.
The policy also covers the Board (a public entity) for any wrongful
act for which the Board may be required or permitted by law, to
indemnify you.
Lass is defined as meaning any amount which you are legally obligated
to pay for a claim or claims made against you for a wrongful act, and
shall include but not be limited to damages, cost of investigation,
and defense of legal actions, claims or proceedings and appeals there-
from, premiums on bonds to release attachments; however, such sub-
ject of loss shall not include fines and penalties imposed by law.
This is a 'claims made' type of insurance policy, and will respond
to any claim made during the policy year. At the expiration of the
policy year (or term), the succeeding policy would be the instrument
which would respond to a claim. In the event that a Public Official
Liability Policy was not in force at the time of the claim, no insur-
ance would exist.
The policy does not cover bodily injury, or damage, or destruction
of any tangible property; personal injury (false arrest, libel,
slander, defamation of character, invasion of privacy, wrongful
eviction, assault, or battery); continuous discharge or release of
pollutance, but this exclusion does not apply to such discharge if
the escape is sudden and accidental. Based upon the application
submitted and for limits of $250,000. any one occurrence, and
$1,000,000. aggregate applying to each policy year, and to include
a self-insured retention (deductible) of $2,500. per occurrence, th'e
three year premium paid in advance is $11,875. A three year policy
may be paid annually at a premium of $4,354. per year.
;de 'will be glad to put this insurance in force for you immediately
upon your firm order, and eve'respectively solicit such an order."
Mr. Williams reviewed the insurance coverage being offered. A
question and answer period ensued and a copy of the proposed policy was
given to the County Attorney for his review.
Action was deferred until ta'~e first Monday in August.
Chairman Garrett referred to item #4 on the Agenda: (Triangle Housing
Development Corporation) Ms. Ruth P4ace will review for the Board the new
rent supplement program and how it will effect Orange County.
Ms. Ruth Mace, representative from the Triangle J Council of Govern-
ment, filed the following Fact Background sheet with the Board.
County Total Chapel Remainder of
1. Existing Situation Hill County
Population in Housing
Units* 61,762 21,188 40,574
$ 100 34~ 66$
No. of Occupied Substandard
Unitsa 2,109 299 1,810
~ 100$ 14~ 86~
Chapel
Count Total Hill
No. of Assisted Units b 451
~ 100$
TI.Section 8 Funds Allocated for
FY 74-75, by population c $258,200
No, of Assisted Units
(Range)
295
65~
$87,788
1U4-127 35-43
Remainder of
_ County <:_'~ 1.~
;.a: .
156
35~
$167,830
69-84
III.Responsibilities of a Public Housing Agency under the Existing .Section
8 Program:
i
These include advertising the availability of housing assistance for
lower income families; inviting Owners to make units available for
leasing under the program; issuing and notifying Families of their
Cerificates of Family Participation; informing eligible families o:E
fhe housing quality sta{~dards and inspection provisions and landlord--
tenant responsibilities; determining amounts of the Family Gross Con-
tribution and Housing Assistance Payments, making the latter such pay-
ments; inspections prior to leasing and annually thereafter; assure
contract enforcement; authorization of evictions; and compliance with
the equal opportunity requirements.
IV.Anticipated Administrative Money for First Year Operation of a Section
8 Existing Housing Program in Orange County outside Chapel Hill:
A. With 84 Units under Existing Housing Program:
Start--up Allowanoe:d $23,100
Management Income: a 12 067
Total 35,167
V. Application Procedure to become a Public Housing Agency.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development will invite eligible
Public Housing Agencies (PHA's) in North Carolina to apply to parti-
cipate in the Section 8 Existing Housing Program. Invitations are
expected to be issued around August 15th and applicants wS.ll have
at least 30 but not more than 6D days to respond.
The application from a PHA desiring to participate in the existing
program shall include:
1) Types of existing housing (elevator/npn-elevator) likely to be
utilized in the proposed program and whether authorization for
use of recently completed housing is desired.
z) Number of units by unit (bedroem) size and approximate number for
occupancy by elderly and handicapped.
3) Consistency with local Housing Assistance Plan,
4) Qualification of applicant as PHA.
5) Statement of housing quality standards to be used.
6) Conformity to an equal opportunity housing plan.
7) Proposed schedule for Utilities Allowances.
8) Proposed time schedule (number of units to be leased by the end
of each 3 month period).
* As of December 31, 1974, TJCOG estimate
a As defined in Housing Assistance Plans as part of Community
Development applications. Figures have been updated from the
1970 Census.
b This includes public housing, FHA and Farmers Home Administration
assisted housing on the ground or under construction as of
January, 1975. These figures include some estimates.
~~='
e It is understood from conversations with officials at HUD in
Greensboro that the intention is to distribute Section 8 funds
within counties according to population distributions.
d $275 per unit is allowed for start-up costs
e $.5~ of total monthly Fair Market Rents (k'MR) is allowed
for management costs. Total figure is based on FMRs for
two-bedroom units for ten months."
Nate: For non-elevator units in Orange County, Fair Market
Rents are
.lumber of Bedrooms 0 1 2 3 4 -
FMR $125 $143 $169 $195 $213
Ms. Mace advised the Board that Community Housing funds were begin-
ning to flow from Congress and she requested the Board to constitute a
Committee from members of the Board to review and discuss housing needs
in detail. The Board agreed to meet with the Towns of Chapel Bill,
Carrboro, and Hillsborough on t4onday, August 11th, at 7:30 p.m. for the
purpose of reviewing the Rent Supplement Program.
Chairman Garrett referred to Item # 2 on the Agenda: (Title XX: --
The Social Services Director will report the latest information that
has been made available to him.)
Chairman Garrett recognized Tom Nard, Director of Orange County
Social Services. Mr. Ward reviewed the initial Proposal submitted by
the County i:n April for Title XX. This proposal had been requested by
the State in order to determine local needs. A detail application for
each Contract prepared must be submitted to the State. Mr. Ward stated
that he was of the opinion the State does not have sufficient staff to
screen all Contract Proposals sa the program by necessity will be one
that will be phased in gradually.
P4r. Ward added that the State will allocate up to $4D3,000 in
Federal funds to Orange County. Currently, the County is spending
$202,000 of Federal funds and this means that there should be substantial
funding for non-county operated programs. Mr. Ward stated that he felt
after August 1st, the County should be in the position to discuss with
any potential Contractees the details of any Contracts, however, guide-
lines for Contracts have not yet been released to the Social Services
Department. He. stated that the most outstanding feature of the State
plan is the income limitation feature that restricts even the purchase
of service by persons whose income is above the State Median Income Level.
In effect this means that Social Services has overestimated the amount of
Federal matching funds that will be coming to the County as Title XX
reimbursements for the current fiscal year.
Commissioner ?valker requested the Board to move to Ttem #9-C on the
Agenda (A review of the appointment of Ms. Mae McLendon to the Social
Service Board in light of the Attorney General's ruling) since Mr. T.~ard
was present.
Commissioner Walker referred to a copy of°`the Attorney General's
ruling on the appointment of Mae McLendon to the Social Services Board.
According to the ruling, the State Social Services Commission has the
authority to set rules and one of their current policies and/or rules
is that no citizen can sit as a member of a Social Services Board if
a member of their family is a recipient of funds from the Social Services
Department.
Mr. Ward advised the Board that he was bringing the matter to their
attention solely for the purpose of making sure that the County has a
properly constituted Social Services Board.
Commissioner Gustaveson stated that he was concerned about the rule
and that he questioned the constitutionality of the ruling and that he
would like the County Attorney to investigate.
15
Commissioner Walker stated he would like to place the name of
William Breeze in nomination as a member of the Social Service Board
since Ms. McLendon was not eligible to serve.
Chairman Garrett stated she would like to see the appointment
stand until a ruling could be secured from the County Attorney.
Steve Bernholz stated that this was a serious matter and that
since he was not acquainted with the facts he could not rule on the
matter and that in order to present a proper opinion all the facts
concerning the appointee would have to be revealed by the Social
Services Department.
Further discussion .ensued.
Chairman Garrett stated that no official notice had been received
by the Board from the State Commission of Social Services.
Commissioner Walker requested that Tom Ward inform the State
Commission of Social Services of the County Appointment to the local
Social Services Board.
Further discussion ensued.
Chairman Garrett stated that she felt it was Mr. Ward's proper
duty to notify the State Commission of the appointment and that in her
opinion it was clearly upon the State Commission to respond to this
notification.
She stated further that she felt the Board needed to find from
the State if they rejected the nomination and if proper notification
is received, then the matter should be brought before the Board on
August 4th.
Commissioner Walker asked to be excused from the meeting due to
a severe headache.
Chairman Garrett referred to Item #5 on the Agenda: (Betty June
Hayes: to review with the Board of Commissioners the progress of the
Durham Technical institute Advisory Committee).
Betty June Hayes, Chairman of the Durham Technical Institute Task
Force, advised the Board that this greup had been working on a Question-
naire that Durham Technical Institute had agreed to mail. However, she
felt that prior to mailing this Questionnaire the Board should be inform-
ed of the fact that if the County decided to make a'Contract with Durham
Technical Institute then a commitment for space, lights, heat; and general
maintenance of a facility would be required-and that she felt the County
should be appraised of this fact prior to pezmitting Durham Technical
Institute to mail the Questionnaire. Ms. Hayes was requested to furnish
each member of the Board with a copy of the proposed Questionnaire.
Chairman Garrett referred to Item #6 on the Agenda: (Report from
the County Attorney:)
A. Variances: This matter was not reviewed.
B. Easements: Steve Bernholz, County Attorney filed a written
opinion relative to easements. Mr. Bernholz proceded to review the
opinion and stated that the Chi plat does meet the requirements of
the Zoning Ordinance.
__ Chairman Garrett referred to Item # 7 on the Agenda: (Capital
Improvements Study: Haw shall we procede?)
The County Manager advised the Board that an architect had been
employed and a preliminary investigation had been conducted on the
old Grady Brown School Structure. The investigation had revealed that
the facility would have to be rewired, extensive improvement to the
heating system would be required; elevators installed and provisions
made for the handicapped. However, that could be done at less expense
~s
than would be required to build a new facility. Mr. Gattis estimated
that there would be 62,000 square feet of usable space in the two
buildings and 19,000 square feet of usalale space in the gymnasium.
Tie stated that it might be feasible to move everything out of the
Courthouse except the Gaurts.
Discussion ensued concerning the possible uses by the various
County Departments.
The Board authorized the County P4anager to procede with the
securing of a proposals for a Feasibility and Architectual Study
of the Old Grady Brown School property and all County properties
and space needs.
Chairman Garrett referred to Item #8: (Approval of Minutes of
prior meetings).
Action was deferred until the August 4th meeting.
Chairman Garrett referred to ltem #9 on the Agenda: (Appointments)
A. Orange County Planning Board _ The terms of Leon Yates and
A. J. Altemueller have expired.
Upon the motion of Gommissioner ~4hitted, seconded by Commissioner
Gustaveson, it was moved and adopted that Leon Yates and A. J.
Altemueller be reappointed as members of the Orange County Planning
Board.
B. Ms. Jean Anderson has asked to be relieved of the position pf
First Alternate on the Orange County Board of Adjustments.
Action was deferred on this matter.
C. Commissioner Norman Walker has requested a review of the
appointment of Ms. Mae {1cLendon in the light of the Attorney General's
ruling to Dr. Tull concerning eligibility standards far Social Ser-
vices Board Membership.
Ghairman Garrett referred to Item #11 on the Agenda: (session
of the Board of Equalization and Review to deliberate cases already
presented to the Board.
Chairman Garrett recognized 4.7illiam T. Laws, Tax Supervisor.
The Board agreed to meet as the Board of Equalization and Review at
7:00 p.m. on Thursday, July 24, 1975.
Chairman Garrett referred to Item #10 on the Agenda:(Executive
Session: To review with the County Attorney matters relating to
civil litigation).
The Board went into Executive Session. There being no further
business to came before the Board the meeting was adjourn®d.to
reconvene in Executive Session.
~~~C~ ~
Flora R. Garrett, Chairman
Betty June Hayes, Clerk
`I