Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19890612 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BUDGET WORK SESSION JUNE 12, 1989 AT 10:00 A.M. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in special Session on June 12, 1989 at 10:00 a.m. for a work session on the Manager's proposed 1989-90 budget. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Moses Carey, Jr. , and Commissioners Stephen Halkiotis, John Hartwell, Shirley E. Marshall and Don Willhoit. STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr. , Assistant County Managers Albert Kittrell and Ellen Liston, Recreation and Parks Director Mary Anne Black, Data Processing Director Keith Brooks, Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe, Finance Director Ken Chavious, Planning Director Marvin Collins, Director of Revenue Johnny Horner, Purchasing Director Pam Jones, Sanitarian Tony Laws, Land Records Manager Roscoe Reeve, Board of Elections Supervisor Bobbi Strickland, Budget Analyst Donna Wagner, EMS Director Nick Waters, and Personnel Director Addie Wright. USER FEES (A copy of this document is in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's Office and in the Commissioners' Library) . Ken Chavious reviewed the user fees as recommended for the 1989-90 budget year. It was recommended that those fees that have odd cents be rounded upward to the nearest dollar. Discussion ensued on user fees and the implications of increasing these fees. Chairman Carey emphasized that there are a lot of people in this County who do not use any of the services listed but are subsidizing those that are using these services. The County's responsibility to provide certain budgetary items was discussed. Commissioner Halkiotis requested a copy of the statuatory regulations for the Courts. SOLID WASTE The future plans for disposal of solid waste were discussed. It was suggested that prior to choosing a site, the options for disposal of solid waste be publicized in a flyer to be inserted in the area newspapers. Commissioner Halkiotis suggested that the County Government use as many recycled products as possible. Commissioner Hartwell expressed a concern about the door to door pickup and how it would interface with recycling. There are still a lot of questions that need to be answered before final recommendations can be made. NON-DEPARTMENTAL With regard to Orange Chatham Comprehensive Health Services, $10,000 was added to that budget to help offset less state funding. The Schaefer House budget was discussed. It was decided that further discussion on CBA funding and programs would take place before next budget year. Kidscope funding was discussed. The program has been successful its first year. The potential savings is enormous because they can identify the problems earlyon. The Hazardous Materials Team budget was discussed. Commissioner Willhoit suggeste charging for responding to calls. He asked how the team worked in conjunction with the EMS volunteers. John Link stated that HSAC did review a number of the non-departmental budgets. They did not make any specific recommendations about increases or cuts but did make comments on the presentation of the budget and the process. With regard to the OPC budget, Albert Kittrell explained that 4.9% of the increase in this budget is for salary increases. Vacation buyback was discussed. This will be discussed again before next budget year. Commissioner Halkiotis made reference to the old forest service tower and suggested that the County request the Forest Service to donate the tower to the County. The County could then add 100 feet and use the tower to enhance the communications system in Orange County. John Link explained that the $20,000 for Habitat for Humanity will be earmarked for inspection fees that will be necessary for building affordable housing. John Link will bring back to the Board a recommendation for cushions for the benches in the Old Courthouse. Interest on the bonds will be separated in the future to show what portion of thie interest is for county projects and what portion is for with school projects. The allocation of $25,000 for the Hillsborough Chamber of Commerce was questioned. It was decided that this money would not be allocated until the Chamber submitted a plan for the building and maintaining of these public restrooms. With regard to Parks and Recreation and libraries and equity, John Link stated that the report being prepared by the Institute of Government will be completed in the near future and this may help in achieving equity for those programs the county contributes to. ADJOURNMENT With no further items to be discussed, Chairman Carey adjourned the meeting. The next budget session will be held on this date at 6:30 in Superior Courtroom, Hillsborough, North Carolina. Moses Carey, Jr. , Chairman Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BUDGET WORK SESSION JUNE 12, 1989 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met on June 12, 1989 at 6:30 p.m. in Superior Courtroom, Hillsborough, N.C. for the purpose of holding a work session on the Manager's proposed 1989-1990 budget. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Moses Carey, Jr. , and Commissioners Shirley E. Marshall, Stephen Halkiotis, John Hartwell and Don Willhoit. ATTORNEY PRESENT: Marilyn Tomei STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John Link, Assistant County Managers Ellen Liston and Albert Kittrell, Purchasing Director Pam Jones, Emergency Medical Services Director Nick Waters, Budget Analyst Donna Wagner, Health Director Dan Reimer, and Clerk to the Board Beverly Blythe. Chairman Carey called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. The specific topic of discussion for this meeting was EMS services and user fees for the coming year. Chief Ray DeFreiss of the South Orange Rescue Squad stated that he believed the outcome of this issue would determine the quality of EMS in Orange County. An equitable solution needs to be found to this problem. He stated that additional information needs to be gathered before a decision is made. Hopefully, volunteers could be included in the further study of this issue with a final decision being withheld until sometime next year. Mr. Dan Cowhig, an EMS volunteer, stated that the real issue is how to provide the best EMS service at the least cost to the taxpayer. He mentioned that voluntary contributions make up most of the squad's budget. They collected $145,000 last year. He pointed out that for two-thirds of the week EMS is covered by volunteer rescue squad members. He indicated he believed that charging a fee for the EMS services would reduce the amount of financial contributions, as well as the number of volunteer hours worked by EMS volunteers. He suggested as an alternative to the user fee proposal having a voluntary "check" box on a bill, such as the county water bills, where citizens could indicate if they want to make a voluntary contribution to EMS. He also mentioned a system in operation in Fairfax County, VA. , where subscriptions are sold to the citizens. Those that do not subscribe and need to use the service are billed in full for the cost of the service. He pointed out that the savings in labor costs for volunteer paramedics alone totals approximately 1.5 million dollars a year. Many of the cost savings are impossible to calculate. The volunteers are a diverse group and include many health care professionals in their ranks. Their contributions are varied and would be impossible to replace with paid professionals because of the cost. He suggested forming a committee consisting of paid EMS staff, volunteer EMS members, hospital employees, citizens, and County financial staff, to look at EMS as a whole and come up with a workable solution. Ms. Clara Heck, a paramedic with South Orange Rescue Squad, stated that she had researched the insurance issue. The average deduction on major medical is now approximately $250.00 for major medical. This trend will continue with deductibles of $500.00 in individual and group policies in the near future. It is a misconception to assume that an EMS charge would normally be paid by insurance companies. She pointed out that the most important issue is the volunteer spirit. Orange County has been a leader in starting rescue squads with volunteers in North Carolina. That leadership trend is continuing. Many of the volunteers have reached the highest level of certification at the national level. She mentioned she felt that the User Fee Study neglected to take into consideration the financial and labor input by EMS volunteers. It only begins to address the economic impact on the volunteer squads and does not examine other alternatives to fund the cost of EMS. Ms. Barbara Overby, a volunteer paramedic with South Orange Rescue Squad, spoke in opposition to charging a fee. She indicated that volunteers with the Orange County rescue squads pursue advance training to reach the paramedic level which enable them to provide life saving fluids, drugs and cardiac techniques prior to arrival at the hospital. She stated that the User Fee Study needed to include volunteer and citizen input. She also stated that her belief is that donations will plummet of user fees are implemented. Recruitment of new volunteers will decrease. Rapport with the community will be damaged, other forms of commitment and support in the community will drop off, and current members will leave. Mr. Bobby Green stated that the Orange County Rescue Squad was founded in 1968, and the South Orange Rescue Squad was founded in 1971. The volunteers have served the county since that time. He stated that he did not understand why the philosophy behind the EMS is any different than the philosophy behind fire and police service. He suggested that other alternatives to the user fee be pursued. Alternatives include (1) leave the system as it is, (2) institute an EMS tax, (3) use the water bill as a means of allowing citizens to indicate willingness to donate a specified amount of money, or (4) ask citizens to subscribe. PRESENTATION BY COUNTY MANAGER John Link stated that the first part of his presentation would be information previously requested by the Commissioners. He used overheads to show the breakdown between paid staff and volunteers. Copies of these "overheads" are incorporated herein by reference and may be found in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's office. Chairman Carey asked the rescue squad volunteers to understand that the Commissioners and county staff recognize the high quality of service they provide. They realize that throughout North Carolina, and elsewhere, Orange County's rescue squads set an example of rescue service at its best. The fee for service proposal is one way the county could assure that high quality service would continue into the foreseeable future. He mentioned that the rescue service in Fairfax County, Va. realized that EMS service is not a free service. The issue of how the service will be financed is one that must be addressed. He encouraged the EMS volunteers to share other "models" with the Commissioners so that a well-informed decision may be made. Commissioner Willhoit stated that when this issue came up in 1980 it was because the squads had difficulty in finding volunteers during the day. Therefore, paid staff were hired and a fee for service was initiated to recoup the cost of salaries. Commissioner Hartwell indicated that he and Bobby Strayhorn agree that the service is not free. They also are in complete agreement that they do not want to do anything that would lower the quality of service in the County. However, Mr. Strayhorn felt that having the charge for this service show up in his tax bill and knowing that the main thing he is doing is subsidizing the insurance companies is not the way he would like t go. He feels that the goal of everyone in the room needs to be (1) to acknowledge that it is not free, (2) to honor the volunteers and the role they play in delivering the 7 quality of service they now offer and to avoid negatively impacting that, and (3) to stop subsidizing the insurance companies at the expense of the Orange County taxpayer. This issue will be successfully resolved if those three goals are reached. Commissioner Halkiotis stated that he is undecided on the fee for service issue. He mentioned that the philosophic reasons behind volunteering makes what those people do very special. He wants to be certain not to do anything to damage that volunteering spirit. He indicated that this issue needs to be thoroughly studied. He endorsed the concept of waiting and setting up a task force to look at this issue. He suggested that the rescue squad workers get insurance information and process the forms themselves. Chairman Carey pointed out that the user fee issue needs to be resolved so that implementation would be applicable to the 1989-90 budget. One alternative is to charge a fee as the Manager has proposed, or to charge a fee for part of the service. Another solution would be to charge no fee but to put it on the tax bill and designate it as such. He also indicated that he found it difficult to continue to subsidize insurance companies. Commissioner Marshall stated that she felt very strongly in support of the volunteers. The reason that this issue must be addressed now is because of the Federal Government and their mandate to the counties about the way they are trying to bring services to the poor who do not have insurance. As the County picks up the medicare B under catastrophic health insurance, and pay medicaid for more women and children, the money the county must contribute is increased greatly. Commissioner Willhoit indicated that one problem is that the fee does not cover the entire cost. He suggested compiling figures to show what money would be needed if the fee for service was not implemented and present that at the Public Hearing. He stated that the hazardous materials team have in the past responded to incidents on I-85 involving the transport of hazardous materials. He indicated this type of service does not need to be subsidized by the county. He asked for a breakdown of the number of EMS calls on I-85 as compared to local roads. Link indicated that he would support the idea of pursuing a separate tax for EMS. The state statutes provide for there to be a separate EMS district tax Countywide. It could be specified on the tax bill that 2.6 cents be earmarked for EMS services. Next year the Commissioners can pursue the alternative of establishing a separate countywide EMS tax or pursue other alternatives. Chairman Carey clarified that the proposed user fee is an attempt to recoup part of the County's direct and indirect costs. The County is not attempting to collect on the value of the services of the volunteers. An unidentified volunteer asked for clarification of how raising money through a tax would work and if it would be earmarked for EMS. Chairman Carey indicated that it would go to offset those direct and indirect costs that he just mentioned. Mr. Herb Barlow of the South Orange Rescue Squad stated he believes the insurance companies would raise their rates if claims were filed for rescue service. He mentioned that although the majority of reasons that the rescue squad opposed this idea were philosophical, he believed there were an equal number of fiscal reasons. Chairman Carey stated that it was clear that the majority of the reasons the rescue squads were against "fee for service" were philosophical. If a comprehensive study is done and the recommendation is to begin charging a fee, this will need to be addressed. Mr. Jim Greenleaf, a paramedic from South Orange Rescue, stated that he was primarily against the fee for service because of fiscal reasons. He indicated that having to charge a fee would make the efforts of the EMS squads toward collecting contributions very difficult. He agreed with the suggestion of using a tax to pay for this service. Ms. Jeffries spoke on behalf of the citizens of Orange County. She pointed out that if she was severely injured she may need to travel in an ambulance as many as four or five times. She indicated that she would not be able to afford to pay these bills. There being no further comments, the meeting was adjourned. Moses Carey, Jr. , Chairman Beverly Blythe, Clerk J CALL VOLUME BY TIME OF DAY FIRST 6 MONTHS , 1988 # OF CALLS 700 660 ............................_...................................I........... __.._...___.....__._. 600 ....... .................._......._........_....... _.. _._ ...................... 660 .............................................. ..._........_....__._.__. 600 ............................_......._._._._...__......._....... 460 __...._._.............._.............._..._..__ ._. 400 ................................................................_...........__......._._. 360 _..........._..........._.......... ............_...._ 300 .......................................:.....__.............. 260 ...._....._..............._.....__._-._.._ ' 200 _._._.._._.... 160 ......................__._.._ . . 100 ..... �__ _ ... _.. 60 0 12A-3A 3A-6A 6A-9A 9A-12P 12P-3P 3P-6P 6P-9P 9P-M TIME OF DAY # OF CALLS TOTAL VOLUME = 3561 CALL VOLUME BY TIME OF DAY FIRST 6 MONTHS , 1988 12P-3P 17,67 . ......................... 9A-12P ..................... ................... 18.69 3P-6p .:............. 16.79 .......... .......... 3A-6A. 12A-3A 6P-9P 6.3% 14.59 - f ': 6A-9A i 9P- 12A 10.79 11.99 TOTAL CALL VOLUME = 3561 9 S CALL VOLUME BY DAY OF WEEK FIRST SIX MONTHS, 1988 TUE YON 20.9% S.SX LION TUE 20.1% 82% wo . . . . . WED 8.4% .•I r . .. 17.27. ...1.1.1......1..• 1..../ :1111111111\\.1.111 4: .11111\111111111111 111111\•11111• " 1 111111111111111111 1111\11\\\\11 ' .tt 11 tt 1111..11111 \111\1.1.1 It11111f.111t1.1 .1.1..1111 11111 t\11111.1111 U TH IHIHH 111..1..1111.1. (ICJ ...... FBI _. "11 20.0% SAT THU FRI 27.0% 21.6 11.8X 1: ' PAID VOLUNTEER TOTAL VOLUME = 3561 CALL VOLUME BY DAY OF WEEK ' FIRST SIX MONTHS , 1988 CALL VOLUVE 600 450 ............ ... ............. 400 350 300 250 200 150 ................. 100 ...... 60 0 SUN VON TUE WED THU FRI SAT DAY OF WEEK TEER PAID VOLUN TOTAL VOLUVE 3661 CALL VOLUME BY TYPE FIRST SIX MONTHS , 1988 # OF CALLS 1400 1300 _.............__... 1200 ........._..... .............M_»..__......._.._......_ 1100 1000 ... ...w ._..._._. .. . _._�. 900 800 700 »....» ._».__.._.. 800 ..... _.._ -. ._.. -..:_..._� 500 400 - 300 200 ...... 100 .... __ ...... _ 0 EVER NON-EVER FIRE ASST STAND-$Y TYPE OF CALL PAID ® VOLUNTEER TOTAL VOLUME = 3,81 14 CALL VOLUME BY TYPE FIRST SIX MONTHS , 1988 EVER l,ll2 _ EVER 1,358 STAND-BY 242 St'AND-BY: 288 FIRE ASST _ 24 FIRE A= 47 NON-EVER NON-EVER 75 415 PAID VOLUNTEER TOTAL VOLU1lE = 3561