Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 10-17-1978 AGENDA ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS COMMISSIONERS ROOM, COUNTY COURTHOUSE HILLSBOROUGH, WORTH CAROLINA TUESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1978 7: 00 P. M. 1. Does any Board member desire to add additional items to this agenda? 2. The Clerk submits minutes of Board meeting held on October 2, 1978 for Board consideration. 3. The Regist r of Deeds will review a proposal From the State Department of Administra ion soliciting applicants for a Land Title Records demonstration project. Agenda Attachment I) 4. Continued onsideration (and possible decision) of the question, extension of extrate ritorial zoning jurisdiction for the Town of Chapel Hill . 5. Continued onsideration of the Grady Brown renovation proposal . 6. Review witi representatives of Chapel Hill , Carrboro and JOCCA the Board of County Co issioners` allocation of Title VI positions for FY 78-79. AGENDA .ATTACHMENT I LAND TITLE RECORDS PROJECT The State Department of Administration has inquired if Orange County would be interested in working with them on a demonstration project aimed at developing a moder computer based land record system that will result in lower land title settlement cost. the state has received a grant to implement part of this program from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. All budget details of the grant have not been finalized; therefore, I cannot precisely say how financing the project will develop. Both the state and HUD expect substantial current local . financial commitment, however, as well as some assurance the county will implement the system if it is proven feasible. In general , they expect to share on a 50.50 basis the cost of' any equipment necessary for this project. Initially, computer hardware acquisition was excluded from the list of equipment eligible for matching funding. Now HUD seems willing to negotiate this point. The state is willing to place a $50,000 limit on equipment requirements. In the personnel area, the state expects the county to fund one position, a County Land Records Manager, who would ultimately have responsibility of implementing the developed program. During the planning and development phase, this person would be entirely involved in that process. The state envisions this person at the department head level with a job title such as assistant county manager for land records and salary and fringe benefits running to $24,000 annually; however, the salary is negotiable. They also expect the county to provide office space and supplies sufficient for four persons, three of whom­tli6y will provide (one full time here and two part time in Raleigh and here) . Further, they expect the county to provide staff time of the Register of Deeds, Tax Supervisor, Tax. Collector and other department heads in moderate amounts to assist in planning then program critique, without reimbursement. It is unclear what computer time resources will be required. However, the project budget at this time does not clearly identify funds to defray this cost. The project as proposed envisions federal funding of 3B% and state -local funding of 62%. Using suggested state figures for salary, a local budget to support this program might look like this: Salary and Fringe - I position $24,000 Rent 2,000 ' Office Supplies, Telephone & Equipment 2,000 Additionally, a significant but unidentifiable time allocation must be given by the tax mapping division of the Tax Supervisor's office during the implementation phase. As an ongoing program, the new department might have four employees and necessitate some reallignment of responsibilities involving the Tax Supervisor's mapping division. °2` I have not encountered many demonstration grant proposals that seem to require as heavy a local financial commitment as this and have no real feeling about how negotiable some of these funding arrangements are. Unfortunately, I was not able to reach the project director to review my concerns today and had to discuss them with his assistant. He seemed to feel these concepts in principal would not be changed a great deal . I would sugge t that we explore the grant proposal further even tentatively committing ourseIv s to proceed if selected. In the meantime, we can more definitely determine the funding pattern for this grant and attempt to renegotiate some items. It seems to me the state is requiring an unusually heavy financial commitment for a demonstration pr ject and further that we have something to sell . If you desire to proceed, the staff can prepare and file the information required by the st to and immediately get to work on the funding problem. prior to making any commitment, we will report back to the Board. The state is equiring some response from the county by the 19th.