The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda - 05-06-1985 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REGULARNMETENG MONDAY, MAY 6, 1985 COMMISSIONERS ROOM HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 7:30 P.M. A. BONDLCOMMENTS B. ADEIENCESOKBERES 1. Matters on the Printed Agenda 2. Matters not on the Printed Agenda C. AINMES D. APPOINTMENTS E. Man 1. Rescue Squad Reports 2. Affirmative Action Progress Report PAGE # F. ITEMS FOR DECISION 004 1. Older Americans Month Proclamation 006 2. Revised Preliminary Report—Ef land Sewer 007 3. Preliminary Assessment Resolution—Wilkins Drive 023 4. Heart's Ease Subdivision 031 5. Amend Orange County Private Road Standards to /A Eliminate Requirement for Road Sign on Roads Is Than 500 Feet 038 6. Advertisement of Proposed Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations Text Amendments 042 7. Update on State-Local Action Agenda, Falls and Jordan Watersheds 046 8. Addition of Winningham Road and Camp Ground Road to the State Maintained Road System 051 9. Handicapped Ramp 911 Center 053 10. Change Order—Old Courthouse 056 11. Memorandum of Understanding—Agricultural Extension 060 12. Second Year Funding of the School Repair/Replace- ment Program 068 13. CETA Repayment 069 14. Budget Work Session Schedule 072 15. Budget Amendments G. ADJOURNMENT ORANGE COUNTY 001 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item, No. ACTION AG&N9a.A. zre4 ABSTRACT NEETMG DATE May 6, 1985 Subject: MINUTES DeparMent: . BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS lublic Hearing: yes Yn° • Attachment(s): Information Contact: Beverly A. Blythe WIDER SEPARATE COVER Alcoa Numbers 732-8181, 968-4501, 227-0231 PURPOSE: To correct and/or approve the minutes as submitted for consideration: • March 11, 1985..- Special Meeting March 19, 1985 - Regular Meeting March 20, 1985 - Continuation of March 19 Meeting NEED: Approval so the minutes may be entered into the official minute book in the Clerk's office. RECONVENDATION: As the Board decides. • 002 ORA,'\= COONT:a BOARD OF ccumrssioNERs Action Agenda Item No. AcrIoN AGE\1DA. ITEM ABSTRACT . MET.EgG DATE_May G, 1985 Subject: APPOINTMENTS Deparbrent: BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS x Attach:matt(s): Information Contact: Beverly. A. laythe "UNDER SEPARATE COVER Phone. Number: 132-8181, 968-4501 or 227-0321 PURPCSE: To maintain membership at effective levels on Commissioners' appointed. Boards. NEED: The following vacancies are announced for the first time for information only: A-4 - COMMISSION FOR WOMEN - 7 vacancies (expiration of terms for Alethea • Burt, Ann McPherson, and Judith Wegner; resignations received from Gail McClain Hayes, Elaine Parker, Dana Baldwin and Bettye Clark). Br-1 - BOARD OF HEALTH - 1 vacancy - due to termination of Eli Ross. B-10 - NURSING HOME COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE - 2 vacancies (expiration of terms for Nary Mn Matteson and Carol S. Weissert. C-7 - ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT - 2 vacancies (expiration of terms for Jim Carter and. Joseph Suggs). The following vacancies are announced together with the indication of the status of securing candidates for possible appointment consideration. All vacancies have been duly advertised. - COMMISSION FOR WOMEN - 3 vacancies. 3 resumes have been received. A-6 — INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BOND AUTHORITY - 4 vacancies. 1 resume has been received. A-13 - RECREATION AND PARKS ADVISORY COUNCIL - 3 vacancies. No resumes have been received. A1-14 - SECONDARY ROAD IWPROvEMENTADVISORY COMMITTEE - 1 vacancy. No resumes have been received. • B-5 - DOMICILIARY HOME ADVISORY COMMITTEE - 3 vacancies. I resume has been received. B-11 - SOLID WASTE TASK FORCE - No new resumes have been received. B-15 - SCHOOL MERGER STUDY COMMISSION - 10 resumes have been received. IMPACT: To maintain 100% membership on Commissioners' appointed Boards and Commissions. RECOMMENDATION: As the Board decides. 003 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Item No. F..1. • Meeting Date: May 6, 1985 SUBJECT: RESCUE SQUADS ANNUAL REPORT DEPARTMENT: EMERGENCY SERVICES PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Bobby Baker TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsbrough - 732-8161 Chapel Hill - 929-8109 PURPOSE: To allow Rescue Squads to report,on their own, their accomplishments and goals related to providing emergency medical services for Orange County. NEED: To inform the Board of Commissioners of the Rescue Scruad's involvement in providing emergency medical services and of future need. IMPACT: This report would not have any impact on the County budget. Funding request for this service is included in the Emergency Services . Budget. RECOMMENDATIONS: • • MANAGER' S REPORT Orange County's Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action ilk Program has been in effect for the past four years for the purpose of MP, insuring fair and equitable hiring and employment opportunities. The employment objectives of the program are two-fold: • 1. All persons hired by the County shall meet • the stated qualifications for the position; and • 2. The County's work force will match as closely • as possible the make-up of the County's available labor force in race and sex. Provided below is a chart illustrating a comparison of Orange County torkforce to the Orange County available labor force by race and sex. SUMMARY OF THE ORANGE COUNTY WORKFORCE BY RACE AND SEX • Total number of employees 343 100% Total non-minority 250 73% Total minority 93 27% Total females 198 58% Total males 145 42% *SUMMARY OF THE ORANGE COUNTY LABOR FORCE BY RACE AND SEX Total available labor force 111/1 45,340 100% Total non-minority 37,990 84% Total minority 7,350 16% Total females 22,320 49% Total males 23,020 51% *Source: N.C. Employment Security Commission 1980 Census Data Clearly this illustrates that overall the County has been successful in • achieving the stated employment objectives. While progress has been made county-wide, continuing efforts are under- way to assure that each department of County government will reflect the make-up of the County's available labor force in race and sex. To that end, January 1985 Orange County set forth placement goals by departments to be achieved during a five year time period. The goals were established in conformance to guidelines prescribed and used by the State of North Carolina. The following process was used in establishing placement goals by departments: • -an analysis of the County's workforce compared to labor force • • availability data was conducted to discover job classes or • occupational groups in which minorities and/or females are underrepresented in the jurisdiction; 411111k -projection of job opening estimates, based on average attrition, III, where the analysis showed underrepresentation to measure the County's capacity to improve the representativeness of the workforce; and • -through mathematical formula establishment of goals and timetables for improved minority and/or female representation • in the workforce. The placement goals established reflect the change necessary to assure that the department's workforce will meet the labor force standard for each occupational category. Meetings were held with all county department heads to communicate goals and re-affirm the County's commitment to affirmative action. I am pleased to report that, the response was positive and further progress has been made in achieving our goals since January. Provided herein is a summary of the Affirmative Action Placement Goals established for all departments that have areas of underrepresentation. • - . SUMMARY OF PLACEMENT GOALS BY DEPARTMENTS OF ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT JOB CLASS GOALS ( 1985-1989) • REGISTER OF)DEEDS Office/Clerical one minority COUNTY MANAGER Officials/Administrators one female; *one minority *progress made - one minority placed since 1/85 TAX SUPERVISOR 111/1 _ Professional Technician one minority *two females; *one minority *progress Trade - one female and one minority placed since 1/85 • PLANNING Professional one female; one minority Technician one female Office/Clerical one minority SOCIAL SERVICES Professional • *one minority • *goal achieved since 1/85 Paraprofessional *one minority *goal achieved since 1/85 HEALTH • Professional • two minorities Protective Services one minority Ash AGING Office/Clerical • one minority •411, EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Technician one female; one minority DEPARTMENT JOB CLASS GOALS (1985-1989) PUBLIC WORKS Skilled Craft two females Service Maintenance four females . HOUSING & COMMUNITY Professional one female DEVELOPMENT RECREATION Professional one female one minority SHERIFF Protective Services *two females; *three minorities *progress made - one female and one minority placed since 1/85 Office/Clerical one minority While placement goals have not been established with respect to those over 55, due to a lack of sufficient data, they represent 11% of our workforce. The establishment of placement goals by departments is only one of many components of our EEO/AA Program. Other improvements measures to the program that have been started included: _ 111/0 (1) Evaluation of the EEO/AA achievements of all management personnel as a part of their overall job performance; (2) An applicant pool of minority and female candidates for selection referral; (3) Refinement of the County's recruitment and selection process; (4) Validation of testing instruments; and (5) Publication of an EEO/AA annual report. Efforts are currently underway to begin training on affirmative action and management skills effective July 1985. We plan to offer the training to all management and supervisory personnel. Our primary goal in the program is to help all staff recognize the application of equal employment opportunity principles as tools of sound management rather than mandated responses to • government regulations. I appreciate the continuing commitment of the Board of County Commissioners and staff to the provision of equal employment opportunity through affirmative action efforts. ,..„... -- . Kenneth R. Thompson 1110 Attachments w BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DEPARTMENT WORKFFORCE BY OCCUPATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE . FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS - PERCENT PROFESSIONALS PERCENT . TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS 1 2 I PERCENT 100.0 100.0 ' too.0:*: 1 OFFICE & CLERICAL PERCENT 100.0 200.0 100.0 I SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT « : TOTAL WORKFORCE 2 2 2 2 . 100.0 100:0 100.0 ' BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS .L ADMINISTRATORS (_) PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS (_} PARAPROFESSIONALS (_} Minority 0.0% 46.3% Minorities -46.3% OFFICE & CLERICAL. a . Minority 0.0% 19,0% Minorities -19.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PLACEMENT GOALS ' BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD x IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY b PARITY 100 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS X 100 PROFESSIONALS X 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS Minority 46.3 K 1 100 .46 OFFICE & CLERICAL Minority 19.0 X 1 .36 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS t` :�. X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS R 100 **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP 14ORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '8.3 - '84 = O.O$ FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 198° OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS, (NET INCREASE).r OPENINGS (NLT INCREASE)* UNDERREPRESENTATION** r� N/A It .r lE **Itldicate which pro- tected group (minority, taxmen, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS i ty "ales. etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." ( . arnount of underrepre- ,,"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority groupworicers, women., and/or bandi capped sent tion, persons which become necessary cause of turnover,'to keep their representation at p . ent levels. ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION i OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 1 i 100.0 ' PROFESSIONALS PERCENT TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 2 2 2 PERCENT 100,0 100.0 2 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS 100.0 PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT '+=• ETOTALORKFORCE 3 3 3 • 3 . 100.0 100.0 100.0 ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE-. STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS (_} Minority '0.0% 21.2% Minorities -22.2% PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS {-} PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. t_} Minority 0.0% 19.07 Minorities -29.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS a a-= SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS �_} Admmm PLACEMENT GOALS ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY = PARITY 100 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS Minority 21,2 x 1 i .2I2 100 PROFESSIONALS X . 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL Minority �g,p x 2 • .38 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS . ;;. X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS X 100 Adak **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPA'T'IONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUT? WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR I'Y183 - 184 = 0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT COALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NL:T INCREASE')* f UNDERREPRESENTATION** ,f N/A f i ,r 7 `Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black f females, other minor- TOTALS ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and ** p Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include lacements'of minorit sen ion. P y group workers, women, and/or handicapped persons which become necessar ecause of turnover, to keep their representation at p ent levels . SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL . TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PERCENT PROFESSIONALS i PERCENT TECHNICIANS .1 1 2 1 1 2 PERCENT 50.0 50,0 100:0 s0 0 50 0 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 1 1 Z 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 - 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 1 2 3' 1 2 3 33.3 66.7 100.0 33.3 66.7 SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- .� STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS {_} PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS Minority 0.0% 20.1 Minority - 20.1 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS {_} PARAPROFESSIONALS {_} OFFICE & CLERICAL. {-} Minority 0.0% •19.0 Minority -19.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS {_} a i SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WOMERS . ... ........................ ' PLACEMENT GOALS SOIL & WATER DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD R IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY • PARITY 100 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS X 100 PROFESSIONALS X 100 TECHNICIANS Minority 20. 1 X 2 .402 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL Minority I9.0 x 1 .19 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS . X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS X 100 **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED CROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR ry 183-184 = ().0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED ' PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED P-LACEMENT GOAL`- OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET. INCREASE)* TECHNICIANS OFFICE & CLERICAL t U-\DERREPRESENTATION** dF N/A **Iridicate which pro- tected group (minority, women'. handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS ity.males, etc.) is un- dvrreprescnted, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net increase" does not include placements of minorit senLation. y gx�oupworkers, women, and/or handicapped persons which become necessary&cause of turnover, to keep their representation at pffent levels- REGISTER OF DEEDS DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP 'NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PERCENT PROFESSIONALS PERCENT TECHNICIANS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT • 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT , OFFICE & CLERICAL 6 6 1 1 7 7 PERCENT 86.0 96.0 14.0 14.0 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 6 6 2 2 8 8 75.0 75.0 25.0 25.0 100.0 Allk ------- --=------------------------- --------------------------------- REGISTER OF DEEDS DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION Oft UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE— STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS (_} PROFESSIONALS (_} TECHNICIANS PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS (_} OFFICE & CLERICAL. • Minorities 14.0 (_} 19.0% Q Minorities -5.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS {_} SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS . ...... ... PLACEMENT GOALS REGISTER OF DEEDS - DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD •X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY a PARITY 100 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS X 100 PROFESSIONALS ' X 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL Minorities 19.0 X T Minorities 1.33 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS p �. X 100 SERVICE—MAINTENANCE WORKERS X 100 •**PLACEMENT• GOALS i'OR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED REGISTER OF DEEDS DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE-FOR FY °83-=84 =-0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS • ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)' OFFICE/CLERICAL 1 l Minority i UNDERR PRESENTATIOl+** OFFICE'CLERICAL 4.1 Minority i J {1 *Indicate which pr'o- i tccted group (minority, women. h indicapped) or i sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS 1 1 Minority i tv males.. etc.) is un- -__-- de',represented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals.." amount of undexrcpre- :':"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or harAicapped yenta persons which become necessary, ause of turnover, to keel their representation at present levels mill COUNTY MANAGER DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31, '1989 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP •NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE. TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 2 2 2 2 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0- PROFESSIONALS PERCENT TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT 2 1 3 2 1 3 TOTAL WORKFORCE 66.7 33.3 100.0 66.7 33.3 ....._..__._.......... . COUNTY MANAGER DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- • STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE O.OX 45,2% FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0.0% 21.21. MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. MINORITY 0.04 l9sORS MINORITY —19.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS (_) SERVICE—MAINTENANCE WORKERS PLACEMENT GOALS COUNTY MANAGER DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD K IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2% 3 FEMALE 1:36 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2% % 3 MINORITY .64 100 PROFESSIONALS K 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS K 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 19.0% $ 1 MINORITY .190 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS '' X 100 . SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS S 100 **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED� , • t COUNTY MANAGER DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY •'83 - '84 0.03 f FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB GLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* ' OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* Officials S Administrators OFFICIAL'S & ADMINISTRATORS i 1 FEMALE 2 1 MINORITY ' � M MINORITY i 1 UNDERREPRESENTATION** ! _r 1 FEMALE 3 MINORITY I **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, womcn, handicapped) or ? sub-group (e.g. , black femiales, other minor- TOTALS 1 1 k'EMALE 2 1 FEMALE j it ralea, etc.) is un- 1 MINORITY c:^—epresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Not,Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or n 'capped sentagan. persons ;vnich become necessary} cause: of turnover, to keep their representation at'prese nt levels 11111111 IN,, PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL CROUP NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 1 1 I 1 2 2 PERCENT 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 100.0 TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT. OFFICE & CLERICAL PERCENT SKILLET? CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 1 1 2 2 . 3 3 33.3 33.3 66.7 66.3 100.0 Am qw ......____.__.......... PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE, LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 0.0$ 45.0 FEMALE -45.0 TECHNICIANS FEMALE 0.0% (-} 20.1 MINORITY -20.1 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS (_} OFFICE & CLERICAL. (-} SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS Et _ SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS f A- ?LAMMENT GOALS PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT. OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN'THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD x IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS x 100 PROFESSIONALS x 100 TECHNICIANS FEMALE 45.0 1 FEMALE .450 MINORITY 20.1 x 1 MINORITY .201 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS x 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL x 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS : x 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100. "PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY 183-184 = 0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS . ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOATS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS WT INCREASE)* UNDERREPRESENTATION** tc N/A :r JL • It **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other rianor- TOTALS icy rules, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and "Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include lacements of minority g rou aorkers women, and/or handicapped sentation. persons which become necessar ecause of turnover, to keep their representation at Sent levels. 1111111,1 Mg, FINANCE DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31, 1954 OCCUPATIONAL CROUP 'NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 1 1 1, 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 TECHNICIANS 2 2 f 2 2 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.01 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 2 2 1 1 T 3 3 PERCENT .66.7 66.7 33.3 33.3 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 1 4 5 1 1 2 2 5 7 14.3 57.1 71.4 ' 14.3 14.3 28.6 28.6 71.4 FINANCE DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 45.26 FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS {_) MINORITY 21.2% a MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 0.0%': { ) 45.a�; ° F-EMALE -45.296 TECHNICIANS MINORITY . 0.0% 20.1% MINORITY -20.1% PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS {_) PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS ills PLACEMENT GOALS FINANCE DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2 1. FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS X MINORITY 21.2 1 MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 45.2 . 1 FEMALE .452 • X 100 TECHNICIANS MINORITY 20.1 X 2 MINORITY .402 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL % 100 ' SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS }•. X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS X 100 Ask 1p **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP. WORKERS'ARE UNDERREPRESENTED FINANCE DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83-'84 = 14.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 -/ 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT COALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)' OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRA- TORS UNDERREPRESENTATION** N/A T� lj **Indicate which pro- te.cted 'group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- O'Net Increase" does not include placements of•minority group workers: women, And/or handicapped 'Aft sentation. persons which become necessary cause of turnover, to keeg their representation it I. levels. PURCHASING & CENTRAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31,• 1984 i QCCUPATIONAL CROUP NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 1 100:0 PROFESSIONALS PERCENT TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 1 3, 2 2 2 1 3 4 PERCENT 25.0 25.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 25.0 75.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL. WORKFORCE, 2 1 3 2 2 2 • 3 5 • 40.0 20.0 60.0 40.0 40.0 40:0 60.0 PURCHASING & CENTRAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP X IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE ; FEMALE 0.0%• 45.2X FEMALE . -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0.0% (-) 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS {-). PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS (_) OFFICE & CLERICAL. (_) SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS I 1.. P` SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PLACEMENT GOALS PURCHASING & CENTRAL S"DEPARTMENT' OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP. TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY a PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2 X 1 MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS X 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS % 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL X 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS % 100 **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED CROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED PURCHASING & CENTRAL SsRV DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83-'84 = •25.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1489 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS . (NET INCREASE)' OPENINGS (NET INCHEASE)* OFFICIAL & ADMINISTRATORS i UNDERREPRESENTATION** N/A Jc - 1 �r I � 1� **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS ity finales, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or 11andieapped sent- ion. persons which become necessary cause of turnover, to keep their representation atp' igent levels I� Tax Supervisor DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION December 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP •NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE LUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 2 1 3 2, 1 3 ' PERCENT -66.7 33.3 100.0 66.7 33.3 TECHNICIANS 2 2 2 2 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 7 7 1 1 8 8 PERCENT 87.5 87.5 12.5 12.5 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 5 8 13 1 1 S 9 14 35.7 57.2 92'.9 7.1 7.1 35.7 64.3 Amok TAX ,SURERVI,SOH DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0% 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY '0,0X {-} 21.2% - MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% ' MINORITY -21.2% TECHNICIANS FEMALE 0.0% (_� 45.0 FEMALE -45.0% MINORITY 0.0% 20.1 MINORITY -24.1% PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS (_) OFFICE & CLERICAL. (-) MINORITY 12.5% 19.0% MINORITY -6.5% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS 4 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS Pill I PLACEMENT GOALS TAX SUPERVISOR ' DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY a PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2 1 FEMALE . OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2 X 1 MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 21,2 X 3 MINORITY .636 •100 TECHNICIANS FEMALE 45.0 4 FEMALE 1.80 MINORITY 20.1 X 4 MINORITY •804 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 19.0 X 10 MINORITY 1.40 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS :�. X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS X • 100 Ask **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED TAX SUPERVISOR DEPARTMENT TURIOVER RATE FOR FY"83 - '84 0.0% FOR 1988 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: 30B CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NL'r lyCREASE)* Professionals 1 Female 2- Female Technicians 2 1 Mifiority 3 1 Minority UNDERREPRESENTATION** Professionals ?. 1 Minority Office and Clerical 1 1 Minority 1 1 Minority Technicians # 1 Minority # 2 Female . a Office & Clerical lc 1 Minority **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black 1 Female 2-Females females, other minor- TOTALS 3 j 2 Minorities 5 3 Minorities ity rules, rtc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals' c11110unt at undcrrepre- *"Nei: Increase" clogs trot include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped setita ''on. persons which become necessary, ause of turnover, to keep their representation at pre wt levels. **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP- WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED TAX SUPERVISOR DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY"83 - '84 = 0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 ' OCCUPATION:. JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT COALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* Professionals 1 —1-Minority I Female 2 Female Technicians 2 1 Minority 3 1 Minority UNDERREPRESENTATION** Professionals ?� 1 Minority Office and Clerical 1 1 Minority 1 1 Minority Technicians 1� 1 Minority 2 Female r _ Office & Clerical !b 1 Minority, **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black 1 Female 2 Females females, other minor- TOTALS 3 2 Minorities 5 3 Minorities ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." ' ,mount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped sentation. persons which become necessary, Ouse of turnover, to keep their representation at pre levels, LAND RECORDS DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP !, -NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 TECHNICIANS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 • 100.0 100.0 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 1 3 4 1 3 4 25.0 75.0 100.0 25.0 75.0 LAND RECORDS DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0$ 45.25h FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0.0!h {-} 21.2% ' MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS {-) MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% TECHNICIANS' MINORITY 0.0% 20.1% MINORITY -20.1t. PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL C-) MINORITY 0.08 19.0% MINORITY -19.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS {-} PLACEMENT .GOALS LAND RECORDS DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD x IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY = PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2% 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2 x 1 MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS ' MINORITY 21.2 x 1 MINORITY .212 100 TECHNICIANS MINORITY 20.1 x 1 MINORITY .201 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x ' 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS x 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 19.0 x 1 'MINORITY .191 100. SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS x 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100 .......... ... ....._...__............. **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WIICH PROTECTED GROUP 14ORICERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED LAND RECORDS DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83- 89 = 0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENING$ (NET INCR)ASE)* OPENINGS (N4T 1NCHE'ASE)-, LAND RECORDS UNDERREPRESENTATION** N/A �6 Sf . 1 J} **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females,. other minor- TOTALS ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *''Net Increase" does not include Placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped sentation. persons which become necessary, Wanuse of turnover, to keep their representation at pre t levels. REVENUE DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE 'BY OCCUPATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL, MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS i 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 PROFESSIONALS 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 TECHNICIANS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 1 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 1 1 1 I 2 PERCENT 2 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT 2 2 4 1 1 2 3 TOTAL WORKFORCE 5 40.0 40.0 80.0 20.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 REVENUE DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE i FEMALE 0.0% 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS (-) MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS MINORITY .0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% FEMALE 0.0% 45.0% FEMALE -45.0% TECHNICIANS (-} MINORITY 0.0% 20.11 MINORITY -20. 1% PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS {-} PARAPROFESSIONALS {-} OFFICE & CLERICAL. SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS {-) ti..; F SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS Alk Will I • PLACEMENT GOALS i REVENUE DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY = PARITY 100 FEMALE •45.2 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2 X 1 MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 21.2 X 1 MINORITY .212 100 FEMALE 45.0 FEMALE . TECHNICIANS MINORITY 20. 1 X I MINORITY .201 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL X 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS f X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS X 100 Rp Will .._...._._.................... ... "PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED REVENUE DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83-'84 = 0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS 01'L'NINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS {NI:T INCREASE)* OFFICIALS & ADMIN , PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS { UNDERREPRESENTATION** N/A if **Indicate which pro- ; tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- "Net Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped sentation. Aft persons which become necessary, cause of turnover, to keep their representation at pr t levels .........___............... CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL. MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PERCENT 1 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS PERCENT TECHNICIANS PERCENT. PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS • 1 1 2 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 OFFICE & CLERICAL 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS , PERCENT "'. TOTAL WORKFORCE, 2 2 1 1 3 66.7 66.7 33.3 33.3 100,0 3 I rHIT.D ,SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP X IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS (-) a MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2X PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS {-} PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. {-) MINORITY 0.0% 19.0 MINORITY -19.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS (-} PLACEMENT GOALS CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES j IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY Q PARITY 100 1 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21,2 X 1 MINORITY .212 } 100 PROFESSIONALS ' X 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X loo PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 19,0 X 1 MINORITY , 190 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS p X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100 I **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED rHTT.n SITPRORT ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83-'84 = 0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OFFICIALS & ADMIN OFFICE & CLERICAL UNDERREPRESENTATION** # N/A 1 I **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS ity males, etc.) is un- derrepres•ented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amopnt of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped sentation. persons which become necessary, cause of turnover, to keep their representation at pr t levels. , DARER PROCESSING DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 i PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 1 } 2 1• 1 2 PERCENT 50.0 50.0 100.0 50.0 50.0 TECHNICIANS 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT ` OFFICE & CLERICAL PERCENT SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT I SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 3 1 4 3 1 4 75.0 25.0 100.0 75.0 '25.0 Aft i . DATA PROCESSING DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0%. 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% ! BFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0.0% (�} 21.2% a MINORITY -21.2% f PROFESSIONALS {-) _ FEMALE MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% TECHNICIANS {-} MINORITY 0.0% 20.1% MINORITY -20. 1% PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS {-) OFFICE & CLERICAL, (�) SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS ' pr SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PLACEMENT GOALS DATA PROCESSING DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER-OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD K IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY = PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS . MINORITY 21.2 K 1 MINORITY .212 3 100 ._.---•-_-- PROFESSIONALS - K MINORITY 21..2 • 2 MINORITY 100 TECHNICIANS MINORITY 20.1 X 1 MINORITY .402 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS K 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL R 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS .�: X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100 **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP 14ORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED DATA PROCESSING DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83-'84 = 0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET INCREASE')* OFFICIALS & ADMIN PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS UNDERREPRESENTATION** N/A JC **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and . **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre-. *"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or lhandicapd sentation. persons which became necessary Mikcaus e of turnover, to keep their representation at piont levels. PLANNING DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS• 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 3 1 4 3 1 4 PERCENT 75.0 25.0 100.0 75.0 25.0 TECHNICIANS • 4 2 6 1 1 . •2 5 3 •8 PERCENT 50.0 25.0 75.6 12.5 12.5 25.0 62.5 37.5 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT •PAltAPP.OFESSZONALS - PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 2 2 2 2 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 8 5 13 1 1 2 9 6 15 53.4 33.4 86.8 6.6 6.6 13.2 60.0 40.0 Ah qw PLANNING DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP - % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0% 45.2E FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS (-) a MINORITY 0.,0% • 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 25.0% (_} 45.2% . = FEMALE -20.2% MINORTTV 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% TECHNICIANS FEMALE 37.5% (-) 45.0% FEMALE -7.5% PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. MINORITY 0.0% 19.0% MINORITY -19.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS (-) r PLACEMENT GOALS PLANNING DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD R IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS _ X MINORITY 21.2 1 MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 45.2 4 FEMALE 1.808 MINORITY 21.2 X 4 100 MINORITY . . 848' TECHNICIANS FEMALE 45.0 X 9 FEMALE 4.05 MINORITY 20.1 9 MINORITY 1.809 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 19.0 X 3 ' MINORITY .00 • 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS ` X L 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS X 100 AM **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED 'CROUP 14ORICERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT. TURNOVER RATE FOR FY 183-184 6� FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1982 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACL'.1JEKT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* � 1 FEMALE PROFESSIONAL 2 1 MINORITY t TECHNICIAN 1 1 FEMALE ] 1 FEMALE i UNDEkREPRESENTATION* 1 PROFESSIONAL �• I MINORITY OFFICE CLERICAL 1 1 MINORITY 1 1 MINORITY ;r 1 FEMALE, TECHNICIAN I t F FEMALE • OFFICE CLERICAL ?i 1 MINORITY -Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or ' sub-_group •(e.g. , black 1 FEMALE 2 FEMALES fe.�.ales, other minor- 1 2 1. MINORITY 4 2 MINORITIES it :°.°.les , etc.) is un- ' derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply. "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Incxease"does not include placements of minority groupwcrkers, women, .and/orhandicapped sentad n. persons which become necessary, ause'of turnover, to keep their representation at ' r ntleve2s. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION i I • r OCCUPATIONAL GROUP ' NON MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL 1 MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 PROFESSIONALS PERCENT TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT ' OFFICE & CLERICAL I 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT 2 2 " 2 TOTAL WORKFORCE 2 100.0 100.0 100.0 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS (-) MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2X PROFESSIONALS {-} TECHNICIANS {-} PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS (_} i ! PARAPROFESSIONALS (_} t , • OFFICE & CLERICAL. (-} MINORITY 0.0% 19.0X MINORITY -19.Q SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS {-} SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS {-} ................. .. ..... IN liiiiii Illig 011111111 PLACEMENT GOALS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP . TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD S IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2 x 1 MINORITY ,212 100 PROFESSIONALS K 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS g 100 . PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 19.0 g 1 MINORITY . 190 • 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS R 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS g 100 i **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS' IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83-'84 = 0.0% FOR 1989 FOR 19BS - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPGNiNcs. WT INICREASE)* QFVTr_I•AT.S f AI)MTN OFFICE & CLERICAL UNDERREPRESENTATION** �i N/A :r **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women: handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females,* other minor- TOTALS ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Ne•tIncrease" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped sentation. persons which become necessary cause of turnover, to keep their representation at pjwnt levels. SOCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP -NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 1 00.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 4 23 27 3 3 6 7 " 26 33 PERCENT 12.1 69.7 81.8 9.1 9.1 18.2 21.2 78.8 TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS 12 12 8 S ' 20 20 PERCENT 60.0 60.0 40.0 40.0 100.0 OFFICE & CLERICAL 10 10 2 2 12 12 PERCENT 83.3- 83.3 16.7 16.7 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 5 45 50 3 13 16 8 58 66 7.6 68.2 75.8 4.5 19.7 24.2 12.1 87.9 qw SOCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMAL$ 0.0% 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% OFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0.0� {-} 21.28 MINORITY -21.28 PROFESSIONALS {"} MINORITY 18.2% 21.2% MINORITY -3.0% TECHNICIANS {-} PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS {-} PARAPROFESS1014ALS MINORITY 40.08 46.3% MINORITY -6.38• OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 16.7% 19.0% MINORITY -2.38 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS {-} a Milli PLACEMENT GOALS DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP X TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY s PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2 1, FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2 X 1 MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 21.2 R' 34 MINORITY 7.208 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE 14ORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X MINORITY 9.26 MINORITY 46.3 20 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL X 12 MINORITY 2.28 MINORITY 1c) 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS X 100 SERVICE—MAINTENANCE WORKERS X 100 qp **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED CROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED SOCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY t83-184 = 14% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1986, OCCUPATION: JOB CUSS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASW OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OFFTciAT,s z ADMINISTRA TORS PROFESSIONALS PROFESSIONAL 1 1 MINORITY 1 1 MINORITY PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL PARAPROFESSIONAL 1 1 MINORITY UNDERREPRESENTATION** PROFESSIONAL I MINORITY PARAPROFESSIONAL # 1 MINORITY F **Indicate which• pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS ity males, etc.) is un- 1 1 '-MINORITY 1 2 1 2 MINORITIES derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped sentation. ANk perso ns which beddifid iiedegg, dust;dust; bf turnbVerj to keep theif representation at pr t levels. IN ______..................... HEALTH DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP . -NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 Z 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 1 12 13 Z 1 1'• 13 14 PERCENT 7.1 85.8 92.9 7.1 7.1 7.1 92.9 TECHNICIANS ' 4 3 7 1 Z 2 5 4 9 PERCENT 44.•4 33.4 77.8 11.1 11.1 22.2 55.5 44.5 , PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS 3 3 3 3 PERCENT . 100.0 100.0 100.0 PARAPROFESSIONALS 3 3 3 3 PERCENT. 100.0 100.0 100.0 OFFICE & CLERICAL 3 3 2 7 9 2 10 12 PERCENT 25.0 25.0 16.7 58.3 75.0 16.7 83.3 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 9 18 27 3 12 15 12 30 42 21.5 42.8 64.3 7.1 28.6 35:7 28.6 7Z.4 IN HEATH DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0%• 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0.0% (-} 21.2% s MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS (-) MINORITY 7.1% 21.2%' MINORITY TECHNICIANS FEMALE 44.5% (-) 45.0% - FEMALE -•50� s PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS FEMALE 0.0% (_} ,14.6% FEMALE -14.6% MINORITY 0.0% 28.5% MINORITY -28.5% PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. (-) SKILLED. CRAFT WORKERS k- at- SERVICE-MAINTENANCE VORKERS (-} • i PLACEMENT GOALS HEALTH DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY a PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2 X 1 '•MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 21.2 X 15 MINORITY 3.18 100 TECHNICIANS FEMALE 45.0 x 9 FEMALE 4.05 100 FEMALE 14.6 FEMAT F .438 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS . MINORITY 28.5 X 3 MINORITY .855 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL x 100 i. SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS ' x 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100 **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED HEALTH DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY 183-84 = 28,0$ rOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* ' OPENINGS NET INCREASE)* OFFICIALS & ADMIN PROFESSIONALS PROFESSIONAL 1 1 MINORITY 2 2 MINORITIES TECHNICIANS PROTECTIVE SERVICE PROTECTION SERVICES 1 1 MINORITY UNDERREPRESENTATION** PROFESSIONALS r 2 MINORITIES PROTECTIVE SERVICES �F 1 MINORITY **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- -TOTALS. 1 1 MINORITY 3 3 MINORITIES ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped sentation. persons which become necesgat3ocause of turnover, to keep their representation at P ent levels. AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 PROFESSIONALS 1 3 4 1 1 2 2 4 6 PERCENT 16.7 50.0 ' 66.7 16.7 16.7 33.3 33.3 66.7 TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS 1 1 1 PERCENT 1 100.0 100.0 100.0 OFFICE & CLERICAL 2 2 1 1 3 PERCENT 66.7 66.7 33.3 33.3 100.0 3 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS - PERCENT. TOTAL 14ORKFORCE 2 5 7 1 3 4 3 8 • 11 18.2 45.4 63.6 9.1 27.3 36.4 27.3 72.7 AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0% 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS {-) TECHNICIANS (-} PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS {-} PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS (-) • SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS ........................... PLACEMENT GOALS AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD R IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY Q PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS X • MINORITY 23..2 I , MINORITY .212 100 i PROFESSIONALS X 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL X 100 .SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS R 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS X 100 **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83-184 9.0% �- FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS . (NUT INCREASE)* OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRA- TORS UNDERREPRESENTATION** N/A JL dr . i 70 **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS itv males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **'Refers to Placement goals., NOT simply. "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped sentation. persons which become necessary cause of turnover, to keep their representation at p nt levels. f RECREATION DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE AY OCCUPATION AECEMBER 31r 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 10010 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 3 1 4 3 PERCENT 75.0 25.0 100.0 75.0 25.0 4 TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT 4 2 6 4 2 6 TOTAL WORKFORCE 66.7 33.3 100.0 66.7 133.3 RECREATION DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZAT.ION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0% x+5.2% FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0.0% (-) 21.2% MINORITY -2I.2! PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 25.0 (_} 45.2 FEMALE -20.2 MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% TECHNICIANS (-) PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS (-} PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. MINORITY 0.0% 19.0% MINORITY -24.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS (-) Y'• SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS ._..._..__................ -PLACEMENT GOALS RECREATION DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES I IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD R IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY = PARITY 100 i FEMALE 45.2 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS i MINORITY 21.2 X 1 , MINORITY .212 ` 100 FEMALE 45.2 4 FEMALE 1.808 PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 21.2 X 4 MINORITY .848 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS g I 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS % 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 19.0 R 2 MINORITY. .38 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS X ; 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS g 100 **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED RECREATION DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83-'84 = 29.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 •- 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEINEXT GOATS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)*. OPENINGS . (NET INCREASE)- OFFICIALS & ADMIN 1 FEMALES PROFESSIONALS PROFESSIONALS 2 1 MINORITIES OFFICE & CLERICAL UNDERREPRESENTATION** ,PROFESSIONALS # n f FEMALES MINORITIES **indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black 1 FEMALES �enmales, other minor- TOTALS 2 1 MINORITIES ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, andf or handicapped sentation. persons which become necessarti cause of turnover, to keep their representation at p nt levels. AGING DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER 4 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 . 1 PERCENT 100.0 lb`0.0 100.0 1 PROFESSIONALS PERCENT 100.0• 100.0 100.0 TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT 1 I 1 1 100.0 100.0 100.0 OFFICE & CLERICAL 3 3 3 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 3 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 1 5 6. 1 5 6 16.7 83.3 100.0 16.7 83.3 Aftk AGING DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION { OCCUPATIONAL GROUP IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0% 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0.0% - t-? 21.2% a MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% TECHNICIANS PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS t-) - MINORITY 0.07. 46.3% MINORITY -46. 3% • OFFICE-& CLERICAL. t-) MINORITY 0.0% 19.0% MINORITY -14.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS ' 4 - SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS t-) _ qp MI PLACEMENT GOALS AGING DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD x IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2 x 1 MINORITY 212 100 PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 21.2 x 1 MINORITY .212 100 TECHNICIANS x 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x ' 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS MINORITY 46.3 X 1 MINORITY .463 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 19.0 X 3 MINORITY .570 100 v. SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100 "PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED Aging DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY 183 184 =17.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS -7, 1 ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACED�IRXT G(0)ALS 0 iNGS (NET INCHEASE)* OPENINGS (N1-1' 1NC141-A.S1`)* Officials & Admin. office & Clerical 1 Minority Professionals Paraprofessionals Office & Clerical UNDERREPRESENTATION** office & Clerical I Minority # **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS 1 Minority ty 'males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include placements aE minority gi P�ou workers, women, and/or hindicappvd nentation, persons which become necessar2ftecause of turnover, to keep their representation at Abent levels. Commission For Women DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION December 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP -NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL -MALE_ FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PERCENT 'PROFESSIONALS PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL PERCENT SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 Alk --------------- --------- ------- ------- -- ----- COMMISSION FOR WOMEN DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUT' % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% TECHNICIANS i PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS {-) PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. FEMALE 0..0% {'� 74.3y ° FrMAL -74.3% MINORITY 0.0% 19.0% MtN01tTY -14.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS (-) SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS (-) nnu�rmmonn�ui�nn�nnnne�n PLACEMENT. GOALS COMMISSION FOR WOMEN DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD x IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS x 100 . PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 21.2 X 1 MINORITY .212 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS x 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL FEMALE 74.3 FE14ALE .743 MINORITY 19.0 X 1 MINORITY . 190 100' SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS X 100 SERVICE—MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100 ......__.___._......... JOB OPENING ESTIMATES AND PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED COMMISSION FOR WOMEN DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR ,FY '83 - '84 = 50.0% _ FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* PROFESSIONALS • OFFICE & CLERICAL Office and Clerical 1 1 Female 1 1 Female UNDERREPRESENTATION** Office & Clerical # 1 Female # **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- Totals 1 1 Female 1 1 Female ity males, etc,) is un- derrepresented-, and amount of underrepre- '*11Net Increase" does not include placements of minority groupworkers, women, and/or handicapped sentation. persons which become inecessar demise 6k tiirrioirer, to keep their representation at p ent levels. Sheriff DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION December 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP 'NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PERCENT PROFESSIONALS PERCENT TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS 36 3 39 10 3 13 46 6 52 PERCENT 69.2 5.8 75.0 19.2 5.8 25.0 88.5 11.5 PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE &CLERICAL 3 3 3 PERCENT 100.0 IOO.Q 100.0 3 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 TOTAL WORKFORCE 36 7 43 10 3 13 46 10 64.3 12.6 76:9 17.8 5.3 23.1 82.1 17.9 56 . SHERIFF DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP Y IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE— STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS s PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS {—) FEMALE 11.5% 14.6% FEMALE —3.1% PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS MINORITY 25.0% 28.57. MINORITY —3.5% PARAPROFESSIONALS {—) OFFICE & CLERICAL. MINORITY 0.0% 19.0% MINORITY —19.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE—MAINTENANCE WORKERS MINORITY 0.0% 48.0% MINORITY —48.0% PLACEMENT. GOALS SHERIFF DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY . PARITY 100 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS X 100 PROFESSIONALS R 100 TECHNICIANS g 100 FEMALE 14.6 56 FEMALE 8.176 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X MINORITY 28.5 56 MINORITY' 15.96 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS g 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 19.0 x 3 MINORITY .57 100 x•. SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS f' 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS MINORITY 48.0 x 3 MINORITY .48 . 100 "PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED Sheriff DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR '83 184 +18.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* orENiNcs (NET INCREASE)* 2 Females 2 Females Protective Services 4 2 Minorities 5 3 Minorities Office & Clerical 1 1 Minority UNDERREPRESENTATION** Protective Service # 2 Females # 3 minorities Office & Clerical Minority **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black 2. Females 2 Females females, other minor- TOTALS 4 2 Minorities 6 4 Minorities ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals; NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority grpupwarkers, women, and/or handicapped I sent ion. persons which become necessary cause of turnover, to keep their representation at plWne levels EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31 , 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP 'NON—MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PERCENT 100.0 10x.0 100.0 1 PROFESSIONALS PERCENT TECHNICIANS 13 '8 21 If 3 4 14 11 25 PERCENT 520 32.0 84.0 4.0 12.0 16.0 56.0 44.0 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL PERCENT SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE—MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT 14 8 22 1 3 4 15 11 TOTAL WORKFORCE 26 53.8 30.8 84.6 3.9 11.5 15.4 57.7 42.3 Aft lam- EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP Y IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0% 45.2 FEMALE -45.2% i OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS C-} _ MINORITY 0.0% 21.2 MINORITY -2I.2% i PROFESSIONALS I FEMALE 44.0% 45.0 FEMALE -1.6% TECHNICIANS (-} MINORITY 16.0% 20.1% MINORITY PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS 1 PARAPROFESSIONALS (-) i r OFFICE & CLERICAL. (-) r . SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS {-) SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS Adak I PLACEMENT GOALS EMERGENCY-MANAGEMENT SRV DEPARTMENT t OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES ` IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY i 200 FEMALE 45.2 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2 X 1 MINORITY .212 100 i PROFESSIONALS X 100 FEMALE 45.0 26 FEMALE 11.7 ' TECHNICIANS ' MINORITY 20.1 X 26 MINORITY 5.3 . i 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 t PARAPROFESSIONALS R 100 : OFFICE & CLERICAL X 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS X 200 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE'WORKERS X 100 Aft **PLACEMENT COALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83 - '84 =401 FOR 1185 FOR 1985 - 1484 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT COALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* 1 1 MINORITY TECHNICAIN 1 1 FEMALE i f OFFICE & CLERICAL UNDERREPRESENTATION** TECHNICIANS 1 FEMALE 1 MINORITY ' Tr _ **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black 1 FEMALES females, other minor- TOTALS 2 ity males, etc.) is un- 1 MINORITY derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply. "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, -ind/orhandicapp sentation. persons which become necessar" dcaijse dt trnovex, to keep their representation at cent levels. FUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEM13ER 31 , 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP •NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 -100.0• 1 PROFESSIONALS 1 1 1 i PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 i TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 1 1 1 PERCENT 1 100.0 100.0 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS 5 5 3 3 8 8 PERCENT 62.5 62.5 37.5 37.5 100.0 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS 4 4 10 4 14 14 4 18 PERCENT 22.2 22.2 55.6 22.2 77.8 77.8 22.2 TOTAL WORKFORCE 10 1 11 14 4 18 24 5 29 34.5 • 3.4 37.9 48.3 13.8 62.1 82.8 17.2 Amok PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0% 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS (_) MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 0.0% (-) 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% TECHNICIANS PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. (..) MINORITY 0.07. 19.0% FEMALE -19.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS FEMALE 0.0% (-} 25.8% = FEMALE -25.8% SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS FEMALE 22.2% ?' t-) 42.47 FEMALE i PLACEMENT GOALS PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2 X 1 MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 45,2 X 1 FEMALE .452 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS R 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS R 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 14.0 X 2 MINORITY .38 100 t. SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS FEMALE 25.8 � X 8 FEMALE 2.064 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS FEMALE 42,4 g lg FEMALE 7.632 100 ' | "PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83 '84 19.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1989' OCCU I PATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS— SKILLED CRAFT 2 '2 FEMALES * SERVICE MAINTENANCE 4 4 FEMALES SKILLED CRAFT SERVICE MAINTEMANCE **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or females, other minor- TOTALS 6 11 FEMALES ity lytales, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and .**Refers to ,Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Inc.reasc" does not include placements of minority groupworkers, women, and/orhandicapped persons which become necessaMbecause of turnover, to keep their representation atosent levels | Housing/Community Ddvelopment DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP 'NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 PROFESSIONALS 3 3 .3 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 3 TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS 1 1 2 PERCENT 33.3 33.3 66.7 66.7 100.0 3 OFFICE & CLERICAL PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 2 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT .SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE Z Z 4 4 8 4 11.2 11.2• 44.4 44.4 88.8 44.4 55.6 9 Ask COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ___ DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS FEMALE o.ox 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% ' {_} i PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 0.0% 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% TECHNICIANS -� PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS {_} PARAPROFESSIONALS -} OFFICE & CLERICAL, {_} SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS {-} SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS � {_} 1p PLACEMENT GOALS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP x TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY F- PARIrTY • 100 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS FEMALE 45.2 x FEMALE .452 100 PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 45.2 x 3 FEMALE 1.356 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & 'CLERICAL X loo SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100 "PLACEMENT COALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORT(MRS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED Housing and Community DevelopmenMEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83 '84 + 14.0% FOR 1985. FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT COALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINCS (NET INCREASE)* Professional 1 Female LINDERREPRESENTATION** Professional Female A JLL **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women. handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS ity males, etc.) is un- Female derrepresented, and *•Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." ama.unt. of underrepre- *"Net increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped se il tt,atton. persons which become ncdess because or turnover, to keep their representation a e sent levels, W 004 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF CCMMISSIONERS Action Agenda ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Item No. El Meeting Date: MAY 6, 1985 SUBJECT: OLDER AMERICANS MONTH PROCCAMATIal DEPARTMENT: AGING PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATICN CONTACT: JERRY PASSMORE X282 TELEPHONE NUMBER: YES Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 PURPOSE: To proclaimfty 1985 as Older Americans Month in Orange County. NEED: To show appreciation to the older citizens who reside in the County. RECGOIENDATION: Board to declare May as Older Americans Month by giving the Chair authorization to sign proclamation. 00b PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, According to the latest population figures, there are over 9,000 persons over 60 years of age in Orange County; and, WHEREAS, Orange County is proud of the older adults who live here and wishes to show appreciation for what they have given and for what they have contributed to their County, State and Nation; and, WHEREAS, Because of them, the rest of the citizens enjoy the fruits of their visions and their labors, and their example is an inspiration to continue to make Orange County a good place in which to live; and, WHEREAS, Our President and Governor have proclaimed May as Older Americans Month, Orange County wishes to set aside a special month for recognition of the older segment of its citizenry; NOW, THEREFORE, We, the Orange County Board of Commissioners, join the Governor of North Carolina and the President of the United States in PROCLAIMING May, 1985 OLDER AMERICANS MONTH AND, further, . do encourage all citizens to join us in honoring our older Americans. Don Willhoit, Chair Orange County Board of Commissioners • O5i ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Item No. FICI Meeting Date: MAY 6, 1985 SUBJECT: OLD COURTHOUSE ORANGE ORDER DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEAPING: __Yes _X_No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE X501 TELEPHONE NUMBER: YES Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham _- -.. _6118-7331 PURPOSE: To add $6,231.50 in the form of a change order to the contract of Durham Construction Company. This would bring the contract total to $253,931.50. NEED: In order for the stairway to fit within the room the concrete must be removed. It was believed to be plaster on brick or wood lath. Once the plaster was removed the concrete was discovered. IMPACT: The impact of this change order is $6,321.50 and an additional fifteen days extension to contract. RECOMMENDATION: Approve change order. 05• • ''t� Ifiune v i ii:471-407 Durham Construction Company. Inc. 112 Brilama Avenue i Pusi Office Box 15028 N.C.Lic.#6533 Durham, North Carolina 27704-0028 April 30, 1985 Mr. Roman Kolodij , Architect • 701 East Rosemary Street Chapel Hill , North Carolina 27514 Re: Orange County Courthouse Hillsborough, North Carolina Dear Mr. Kolodij: The rooms on the main floor that_were shown to have 12" of _masonry facing are actually 12" of solid concrete and 5" of concrete ceiling. (400 s.f.) To remove this concrete is going to be very time consuming and costly. I am providing you with a •breakdown of costs below. COST BREAKDOWN: 1) Labor to remove 900 s.f. of wall concrete $ 2,900,00 2) Air compressor and accessories ..0,0.....0...00.,..0.0.00 800.00 3) Labor to remove 400 s.f. of ceiling concrete 1,200.00 . 4) Shoring and securing ceiling concrete 250.00 5) Removing flooring on second floor (400 s.f.) 300.00 6) Reinstalling second floor wood flooring 500.00 7) Credit for removing specified masonry wall (800.00) F-- • SUBTOTAL .............e..0000.e...0...................Mo5,150.00 8) Durham Const. Co., Inc., overhead (10%) 515.00 9) Durham Const. Co., Inc. , profit (10%) OOOOO 000.0 OOOOOO of 566.50 TOTAL ADDITIONS ..0000........0........0.00000.....0.......0 $ 6,231.50 ** Additional twenty (20) days needed. As you are aware from our meeting on April 22, 1985, this portion of the demolition work needs to be started now. Please issue us a change order to do this work if there are no other problems that might ' hinder us. • If I can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely yours, ir.;g >"1— Kenneth A. Hunt President KAH/l rs • 056 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda ACTION AGENDA IIEM ABSTRACT Item No. Ea Meeting Date: MAY 6, 1985 SUBJECT: AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE--MPFDRANDER OF UNDERSIANDING DEPARTMENT: MONTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEAPING: Yes _X_No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFOESIATICNO3NTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE X501 TELEPHONE NUMBER: YES Hillsborough -732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 - Mebane - 227-2031 Durham -688-7331 PURPOSE: lb consider approving a revised Memorandum of Understanding between the North.Carolina Extension Service and the Board. NEED: Over the past several months the Board has expressed an interest in modifying the recruitment and selection process for agricul- tural extension positions. Determining the level of salary, percentage of funding split and the time for extending the job offer are the specific areas of concern. Items 4 through 8 under Agriculture Extension Responsibilities and Relationships have been revised in accordance to the Board's previous recomr. nendation. IMPACT: A revised Memorandum of Understanding between the North Carolina Extension Service and the Board would better clarify the State and County roles. RECOMMENDATION: To approve the attached Memorandum of Understanding and submit same to the North Carolina Extension Service. 057 4'F rt f; f ' OF UNDERSTANDING Between the N. C. Agricultural Extension Service North Carolina State University A&T State University and the Board of County Commissioners • 058 MEMORANDUM of UNDERSTANDING qualifications for between employment in Extension work. The N. C. Agricultural Extension Service N.,C. State and A&T State Universities , 2. Receive and examine and applications for employment. The Board .-f County Commissioners . 3. Interview and screen The North.Carolina Agricultural Legislation provided that applicants to determine their Extension Service was Agricultural Extension work be a qualifications and availability established as a part of the partnership among three levels 4. Review with the County School of Agriculture and Life of government—Federal,State Manager the most qualified Sciences of North Carolina State and County. Extension Agents applicant or applicants' University by Federal and State are officially appointed as qual ifications, existing legislation for the specific purpose members of the U. S. salary and salary of extending' the educational Department of Agriculture and requirements service of the University to the charged with carrying out 5. Determine jointly--between people of the State on subjects educational work of the _ District Extension Chair- people Upon acceptance man, County Extension _ relating to agriculture,home eP by Chairman, and County economics,4-H and youth, and the Board of County Manager--the 'salary to be community and natural resource Commissioners,they are also offered, taking into development.The laws creating designated as field faculty - account its compatibility members of either North salaries of other Extension were specificially employees within the designed to ensure that the Carolina State University,with State and County. findings of research in these professional rank,or A&T State . areas were communicated to the University. people. Under the To assure that educational 6- Determine jointly with Appropriations Act of 1972 programs offered by Agricultural the Board of Commissioners funds were provided to the 1862 the share of salaries to P Extension at both land-grant be paid by each and Land Grant Universities to institutions meet the needs of provide the State and enhance the extension outreach local clientele, it is important that Federal share of these of the 1890 Universities,of both elected and appointed salaries. which A&T State University is officials of each level of 7. Extend the job offer. one The Food and Agriculture government understand their Act of 1977 stipulated that these respective responsibilities and 8. Recommend the sal ari es funds would be appropriated relationships in the conduct of of Extension secretaries directly to the 1890 Institutions this work and pay the State portion and formalized the Extension according to the State program as an official part of the Responsibilities and Personnel Pay Plan. • School of Agriculture at this Relationships g, Prepare and submit an institution. However,to provide annual budget request to effective coordination, The North Carolina the Board of Commissioners administrative contacts will be Agricultural Extension for the county's share of funds for sal ari es and handled by the county and Service and the A& T operating expenses district chairmen of North State Agricultural Carolina State University with gn appropriate attention given to A Extension Program will &T State University personnel. 1_ Establish minimum requirements and : 1g. Proud a funds for official 15. Provide Extension workers travel necessary in the with training programs as 1 The.North'Carolina conduct of Extension work • needed to maintain ! Agricultural Extension - to the extent that funds effective program delivery. Service and the A&T are available and for purposes authori zed by 16. develop and maintain a State Agricultural State and Federal County Advisory Leadership . ensign Program and policies. System to insure that ' the Board of County county Extension programs Commissioners •11. Provide Extension agents are based on the mutually with official envelopes, particular needs of people 9 bulletins (designated for in their respective county. free distribution), leaf- 1. That all county Extension lets, and other publ i•ca- appointments and separations tions for educational are to be worked out jointly purposes, between the North Carolina 12. Accept responsibility and Agricultural Extension Service provide the leadership and the Board of County for administration and The Board of County Commissioners,and that no supervision for Extension Commissioners will official action will be taken by programs and personnel, either party regarding including compliance with the requirements of 1. Provide the county's share of appointment or separation Affirmative Action and salaries for Extension prior to discussion of the Equal Employment personnel. matter with the other party. Opportunity guidelines. 13. Develop and admi ni star a 2. Provide office space and 2. That the policies established personnel management pl an equipment, utilities, by the State of North Carolina that will provide for; telephone,office supplies, and followed by the University a. The annual review of demonstration materials and be used as a guide in granting each worker's other items needed for annual,sick, civil and military performance. b. Counseling for job efficient operation of the leave for Extension personnel. improvement where County Extension Office and • needed. program. 3. To cooperate in applying c. Periodic county program Affirmative Action and Equal reviews. 3. Review and consider the Employment Opportunity 14. Provide a staff of annual budget request from plans of the North Carolina opeci al i sts to continuously the Extension Service and Agricultural Extension Service. train agents in current take appropriate action by technol ogy and other July 1 of each fiscal year 4. That Extension agents will not changes affecting be classified under a county agriculture, home economics, 4-H and youth, 4. Confer and advise with the clasAification system. communi ty and natural District and County Extension resource devel opment and Chairmen and Extension 5. That Extension agents will to assist them in the • Advisory Council relative to follow County policies relative conduct of work in these county Extension programs. to office hours and holidays. areas, y W ., F We are in agreement with the above description of the responsibilities and relationships,and that this memorandum of understanding maybe reviewed at any time but shall be reviewed once each four years. Date: .,Chairman Board of . County Commissioners . Date: ,Director North Carolina Agricultural Extension Service 061 ORE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Ran No.FIP, Meeting Date: MAY 6, 1985 SUBJECT: SEC= YEAR FUNDING OF THE SCHOOL RF2AIR/REPLACEMT PROGRAM EEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEAPING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATTON CONTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE X501 TELEPHCRE NUMBER: YES Hillsborough -732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham 688-7331 PURPOSE: To consider giving the school systems assurance of an appropria- tion for the program in the 1985-86 County budget. NEED: Cm April 29, 1985 the Orange County School Board approved the Agreement (with accompanying Exhibits A and B) to proceed with a consolidated bidding process. Chapel Hill-Carrboro Schools tabled action on the Agreement until May 6, 1985. While bids have been let in anticipation of both boards approving the Agreement no contract award or awards can be made without the assurance of County funding for the work under the 1985-86 County budget per North Carolina General Statute 115C-432(a) (4). IMPACT: The fact that the school system incorporated general and special conditions recommended by the County into their specification gives added safeguard for the investment that will be made. Moreover, the consolidated bidding process could result in cost savings to the County while not posing a financial disadvantage to either system. In return the schools need the assurance of funding in order to get the work started in a timely fashion. RECOMmENDATI(N: Subject to Chapel Hill-Carrboro School system's approval of the Agreement, adopt the attached resolution assuring funding of the six school system roofs (Cameron Park Elementary School, Central Elementary School, Glenwood Elementary School, Carrboro Elemen- tary School, Estes Hills Elementary School, Chapel Hill Senior High School-B Building) as an appropriation in the 1985-86 County budget exclusive of the appropriations for other current and long-range capital needs. 061 RESOLUTION mammas, upon completion of a 1984 survey of County and school system roof conditions by Law Engineering the County committed to a three year, repair/ replacement program, and WBERF,AS, the County appropriated $360,500 in 1984-85, and WHEREAS, an estimated expenditure of $767,000 is needed in 1985-86 to carry forward the second year of the repair/replacement program, and WHEREAS, both school systems have developed specifications and terms for a joint bidding of the total work to be done, and WHEREAS, if contracts can be awarded May 20, 1985 construc- tion can be completed between June and August 1985, and WHEREAS, without the assurance that the funds will be appro- priated to the school system by Orange County the school systems are prevented under North Carolina General Statute 115C-432(a) (4) from awarding bids. Nan, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Commissioners authorizes the Chapel Hill-Carrboro and Orange County School Systems to proceed with the letting of a contract or contracts according to attached Agreement conditions including Exhibits A and B, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Commissioners assures the boards of education that funds will be appropriated for the six school roofs in the 1985-- 86 County budget exclusive of the appropriations for other current and long range capital needs. Adopted this sixth day of May, 1985. Don Wilihoit, Chair Board of Commissioners ATTEST: Beverly Blythe Clerk to the Board of Commissioners • , 062 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 1985, by and between the Orange County Board of Education, a body corporate of the State of North Carolina (hereinafter referred to as the "County Board") and the Chapel Hill/Carrboro Board of Education, a body corporate of the State of North Carolina (hereinafter referred to as the "City Board") : WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the County Board and the City Board must undertake the repair of certain school roofs between June and August 1985, as described in Exhibit A attached; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners has agreed to allocate the necessary funds for the repair of said school roofs through a project ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners has indicated its desire that bids for completing the repair of • 06& said roofs be solicited through a consolidated bid process, as described in Exhibit B attached, for the purpose of reducing construction costs; and WHEREAS, the County Board and the City Board have determined that engaging in the consolidated bid process as described may result in cost savings to the County and will not result in any financial disadvantage to either school board, given the method of funding for the aforementioned roof repair projects; NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to N.C.G.S. 1160A-460 and in consideration of such other mutual promises and covenants as hereinafter are contained, the County Board and the City Board do hereby agree as follows: The Orange County Board of Education and the Chapel Hill/Carrboro Board of Education shall engage in a consoli- dated bid process as described in Exhibit B attached and incorporated herein by reference for the solicitation and -2- _ . 064 acceptance of bids for the repair of certain school roofs as described in Exhibit A attached and incorporate herein by reference. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Orange County Board of Educa- tion has caused this Agreement to be signed in its name by its Chairman, attested by its Secretary, and sealed with its corporate seal, and the Chapel Hill/Carrboro Board of Education has caused this Agreement to be signed in its name by its Chairman, attested by its Secretary, and sealed with its corporate seal, and all by authority duly given, the day and year first above written. ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF CHAPEL HILL/CARRBORO EDUCATION BOARD OF EDUCATION • By: By: Mr. Norman Haithcock Mr. Theodore Parrish . ATTEST: ATTEST: Dr. Dan G. Lunsford Dr. Pamela S. Mayer Secretary Secretary -3- 013E NORTH CAROLINA WAKE COUNTY , a Notary Public in and for the aforesaid State and County, certify that Dan G. Lunsford personally appeared before me this day and acknow- ledged that he is Secretary-Superintendent of the Orange County Board of Education, a body corporate under the laws of the State- of North Carolina, and that by authority duly given and as the act of the corporation, the foregoing instrument was signed in its name by its Chairman, sealed with its corporate seal, and attested by himself as its Secretary-Superintendent. Witness my hand and notarial seal this day of , 1985. Notary Public My commission expires: • NORTH CAROLINA WAKE COUNTY The undersigned, a Notary Public, hereby certifies that Pamela S. Mayer personally appeared before me this day and, being duly sworn by me, acknowledged that she is Secretary/Superintendent of the Chapel Hill/Carrboro Board of Education, a body corporate under the laws of the State of North Carolina, and that by authority duly given and as the act of the Corporation, the foregoing instrument was signed in its name by its Chairman, sealed with its corpor- ate seal and attested by herself as its Secretary. Witness my hand and notarial seal this day of , 1985. • Notary Public - My commission expires: -4- • 066 EXHIBIT A ROOF REPAIR PROJECTS A. Orange County Public School System 1. Cameron Park Elementary School 2. Central Elementary School B. Chapel Hill/Carrboro Public School System 1. Glenwood Elementary School 2. Carrboro Elementary School 3. Estes Hills Elementary School • 4. Chapel Hill Senior High School--B Building • • . - EXHIBIT B 067 CONSOLIDATED BID PROCESS A. Solicitation of Proposals 1. One advertisement is issued requesting proposal for repair to the roofs of both school systems. 2. The bid documents consist of: a. one set of instructions to bidders and common general conditions governing work to be per- formed. b. two sets of specifications: one for Orange County Schools' roofs prepared by its engineer, and one for Chapel Hill/Carrboro Schools' roofs prepared by its engineer. c. a bid form eAewi,9430414. requesting bids as follows: 1) Part I: A single bid for repair of all listed Orange County School roofs, and/or 2) Part II: A single bid for repair of all listed Chapel Hill/Carrboro School roofs, and/or • 3) Part III: A consolidated bid for repair to all listed Orange County School roofs and Chapel Hill/Carrboro School roofs, reflect- ing subtotals for the separate school system jobs. B. Bid Award 1. Each school system shall accept the lowest respon- sible bid for work to be performed on its roofs and enter into a separate contract with that bidder if the following condition exists: The lowest consolidated bid submitted for repair to Orange County Schools' and Chapel Hill/Carrboro Schools' roofs is equal to or greater than the sum of the separate lowest responsible bids submitted for parts I and II. 2. If the lowest consolidated bid is less than the sum of the lowest bids for parts I and. II, then this bid shall be accepted by both boards of education upon agreement by both boards that this is the lowest responsible bid. • 06E ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Item No. V:15 Meeting Date: MAY 6, 1985 SUBJECT: CETA REPAYMENT DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: __Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORWTICIst CONTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE, X501 TELEPHONE NUMBER: NO Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 PURPOSE: TO consider repaying Fiscal Year 1978-79 di ]lowed Comprehenr sive Employment and.Training Act (CA) costs to the N. C. Department of Natural Resources and Comaunity Development (MD). NEED: In October 1983 NRCD auditors conducted a financial, audit of County CETA contracts covering fiscal years 1978 through 1983. Auditors questioned $1.5 million of expenditures because of insufficient documentation. During calendar year 1984 the finance staff reviewed five years of voluminoug COM records and net with NRCD periodically to reduce a major portion of the questionable costs. In February 1985 NRCD informed the County $7,453 of costs remain disallowed. The specific cost relates to 1978-79 OJT subgrantee contracts in which County initiated contract provisions stipulated a reimbursement rate greater (80% to 100%) than the prescribed federal reimbursement rate (50%). The subgrantees paid CETA participants the correct amount, however, the subgrantees received 30% to 50% more funds than required by federal regulations. Although the finance staff and NRCD have been engaged in numerous conversations since February, the disallowed costs have not been resolved or reduced. IMPACT: All avenues for dal have been exhausted. NRCD has requested repayment of funds.• RECOMMENDATION: Authorize expending $7,453 from Commissioners Contingency Account to repay NRCD for 1978-79 disallowed CETA costs. _ 4. 06E 1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Item No.F.A. Meeting Date: MAY 6, 1985 SUBJECT: BUDGET WORE SESSION SCHEDULE DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATICiN CONTACT: MANAGER'S OFFICE X501 TILEPHONE NUMBER: YES Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331- PURPOSE: Tb establish dates to consider requests and different aspects of the proposed budget for 1985-86. NEED: Attached is the budget calendar. Yet to be established are dates for Board work sessions prior to the projected adoption date of June 18, 1985. With agency representatives making remarks at the June 4 public hearing on the budget and revenue sharing separate meetings may be desired to discuss: 1. Schools' current expense requests 2. Revenue projections 3. Capital requests--schools and County 4. Tax rate increase requests--Hillsborough Fire Districts and the Special School Supplemental Tax IMPACT: REOMENDATICN: As the Board decides. 071 - ,- • . . - . - . . 1985-86 . . _ BUDGET CALENDAR COMPLETION PERSON . • DATE RESPONSIBLE . . 1. Distribute BudgeePreparation Manual and Calendar to Board. - ' 2/04/85 County Manager 2. Issue Budget Guidelines; distribute. Budget , County Manager Manual, - . nual, Personnel Detail, and 1/31/85 Revenue and and Expense to. Department Heads 2/08/85 Budget Office 3. Meet with Chapel. Hill-Carrboro and Orange 2/13/85 County Mapager/ County Schools' Superintendents and - - Finance Director • . Finance Directors to discuss value base information, financial outlook, and status • - - of capital planning. . . . • 4. Return "Personnel Detail" printout to Per- _ • . - _ sonnel Department (with corrections noted). Submit "Request for New Position or'Reclass- . ification of Existing Position" request to • . Personnel Department. • 2/15/85 Department Needs• . . . . - ' - • • , - 5. Return corrected "Personnel Detail" print- out to Department Heads. 3/01/85 Personnel Dept. • . 6. Submit "Departmental Revenue Up-Date" for - . current year and "Estimated Departmental Revenue" for upcoming year to Budget Office 3/08/85 Department Reads 7. Submit revenue estimate43(using data furnished . . on 3/08/85 by Department Heads) to Manager. 3/15/85 Finance Director • 8. Submit 2 copies of completed Departmental, Agency, Department Heads, and Fire District Budget requests for fiscal year Agency Heads and • 1985-86 to Budget Office. - • 3/18/85 Fire Chiefs I 9. Review Budget Requests with Department Heads, 4/01/85- County Manager . Agency Heads and Fire Chiefs. 4/16/85 10. Submit Superintendents' Preliminary School - Orange County and Budgets • • 4/12/85 Chapel Hill-Carrboro Schools i • • 071 1985-86 Budget Calendar Page 2 11. Notify Department Heads, Agency Heads and County Manager Fire Chiefs of Manager's Recommended Budget; compile Preliminary Budget. 4/26/85 12. Decide dates for Board Work Sessions with County Manager Department Heads, Agency Heads, and Fire and Chiefs on Manager's Recommended Budget. 5/06/85 Board of Comm. 13. Hold Budget Work Sessions. 5/13/85 thru Board of Comm. 6/07/85 14. Hold Budget Work Sessions with Schools: Orange County 5/13/85 Board of Comm. Chapel Hill-Carrboro 5/14/85 Board of Comm. 15. Submit Manager's Recommended Budget to Board County Manager of Commissioners. 5/24/85 16. Advertise Public Hearing on Budget and Revenue County Manager Sharing. 5/24/85 17. Hold PUblic Hearing on Budget and Revenue Board of Comm. Sharing. 6/04/85 18. Complete revisions to Budget. 6/10/85 County Manager 19. Public Hearing on the Revised Budget. 6/18/85 Board of Comm. 20. Hold Board Meeting to adopt Budget, Tax Levy 6/19/85 Board of Comm. and Resolution. • ...dr..... vouni . BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS • . . ACTION AGENDA . .ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT ITEM NO.F1S • MEETING DATE ,may 6. 1985. 072 ' . 4 . . . . SUBJECT: BUDGET AMENDMENTS . . . ... . c - DEPARTMENT: FINANCE 1 PUBLIC HEARING: YES x NO .. . . - - • , • . ATTACHMENT(S): Proposed Budget Amendments INFORMATION CONTACT: DONNA CLAYTON ' • - • PHONE NUMBERS: HILLSBOROUGH — 732-8181 • • HILLSBOROUGH — 732-9361 • . • CHAPEL HILL — 967-9251 --, • MEBANE — 227-2031 - * • - . - • . . DURHAM — 688-7331 • - -• . . . . . PURPOSE: Consideration Of proposed budget amendments. ' • i . , . . . • . . • . . NEED: • GENERAL FUND. . . - - • • . - . . • 1. To appropriate funds -for unanticipated increase- in costs for "umbrella" insurance • policy coverage. • . . . . . - . . 2. To appropriate funds by project, from the School Capital Reserve Fund to . - the Chapel Hill - Carrboro Schools. . . SCHOOL CAPITAL RESERVE FUNDS . • . * . . To appropriate funds, by project; to the General Fund for the Chapel Hill- , . . Carrboro Schools. • , . • IMPACT: GENERAL FUND ' . . - . - . 1. This amendment will increase funds available in the Central Services 'Insurance account while it reduces funds available in the Commissioners' . Contingency account.. . , . . 2. This amendment will increase the Chapel Hill - Carrboro Schools' capital • . appropriations for the architectural design schematics and design develnpMent. • . . SCHOOL CAPITAL RESERVE FUND . . • - • This amendment will decrease the School Capital Reserve Fund for architectural.design schematics and design development for the Chapel Hill - Carrboro Schools. - . . . . - RECOMMENDATION(S): Approve motion to amend 1984-85 budget ordinance by proposed budget amendments. • . , - . O7;:]; ORANGE COUNTY PROPOSED 1984-85 BUDGET AMENDMENT The 1984-85 Budget Ordinance of Orange County as adopted on June 28, 1984, and subsequently amended, is hereby amended as follows: GENERAL FUND Before After Amendment Amendment Amendment 1. Appropriation: Central Services $276,638 $33,221 $309,859 Source: Contingency 99,880 33,221 66,659 To budget for unanticipated increase in costs for "umbrella" insurance policy coverage. 2. Appropriation: Chapel Hill-Carrboro- Schematics & Design 0 $48,452 $ 48,452 Source: Transfer from School Capital Reserve 368,520 48,452 416,972 To appropriate funds by project, to Chapel Hill-Carrboro Schools from the School Capital Reserve Fund. ' I SCHOOL CAPITAL RESERVE FUND Appropriation: Transfer to General Fund $368,520 $48,452 $416,972 Source: Remittance to School Capital Reserve Fund 341,080 48,452 292,628 To appropriate funds, by project, to Chapel Hill-Carrboro Schools from the School Capital Reserve Fund. Approved this day of , 1985. -006 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Meeting Date MAY 6, RAM Item No. _ &]BJECT: REVISED PRELIMINARY REPORT--EFLAND SEWER DEPARTMENT: C( JNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: Yes ..LNo ATIACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGER°S OFFICE X 501 TELEPHONE NUMBER: YES Hillsborough -732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham *'s;!a8-7331 PURPOSE: 7.b consider findings by Hazen and Sawyer P.C., the new engineer- ing firm commissioned for the project. NEED: Before beginning detailed design work the Engineer was to examine the layout of lines, line size, pump stations and cost estimates as proposed for the project by the John R. McAdams Company. If changes were to be made in project-scope or cost they were to be presented for review and approved by the County and Farmers Home before proceeding to the design phase. Preliminary analysis shows a need for revisions to be considered. Findings and alternatives will be presented at the May 6 meeting. IMPACT: RHCCMM 20l: As the Board decides. HAZEN AND SAWYER, PC. ENGINEERS MAILING ADDRESS:P.O.BOX 30428 RALEIGH,NORTH CAROLINA 27622 (919)782-8333 OFFICE LOCATION:302 COTTON BUILDING 4505 CREEDMOOR ROAD CRABTREE VALLEY May 3, 1985 Mr. Kenneth R. Thompson County Manager - County of Orange 106 East Margaret Lane • Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear Mr. Thompson: In accordance with our agreement dated February 21, 1985, Hazen and Sawyer, P.C. is pleased to present herewith our report on the Phase 1 Sewer Improvements for Cheeks Township in Orange County. Our report makes specific recommendations concerning modifications to the proposed sewer improvements plan and includes a comprehensive financial analysis of construction costs and anticipated user charges. Based on our study, we have determined that the estimated cost to construct those facilities included in the Phase 1 Sewer Improvements is significally greater than previously reported. • It would appear that it is not presently economically viable to proceed with construction of the complete Phase 1 Improvements. For consideration by the County, we have developed information • concerning a reduced construction program and the associated cost. Information pertaining to anticipated user charges will be provided in detail during the oral presentation of this report. During the course of our study, we have explored several possible sources of additional grant funding, primarily from the Farmers Home Administration. It is our judgement that the prospect of additional grant funding from the Farmers Home Administration, now or in the immediate future, is quite remote. We recommend that the County consider a course of action that will permit phased construction of the proposed facilities to the limit of the currently available funding: If desired, we have been advised that the additional Farmers Home loan funding required for construction of Alternates A and C can be secured if the County acts promptly to request such funds. OFFICES IN NEW YORK,RALEIGH,AND HOLLYWOOD,FLORIDA • • Mr. Kenneth R. Thompson May 3, 1985 Page 2 We appreciate the opportunity to have worked for the County on this assignment. The assistance extended to us by yourself and Mr. William T. Laws is sincerely appreciated. We would be glad to respond to any questions you might have and are anxious to proceed with the design if the County determines that this is the appropriate course of action. Very truly yours, HAZEN AND SAWYER, P.C. /LicAag44zAP Donald L. Cordell, P.E. Associate DLC/jhl Enclosure TABLE OF CONTENTS REVISED • PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT " CHEERS TOWNSHIP SEWER IMPROVEMENTS • PHASE 1 • Background • Project Description • Recommended Modifications to the Proposed Plan • Estimated Construction Cost • Financial Considerations • Projected User Changes • Possible Methods of Rate Reduction LIST OF TABLES AND ATTACHMENTS Table 1 Comparison of Total Project Costs Original vs Revised Plan Table 2 Projected Sewer Customers Table 3 Preliminary Financial Analysis Table 4 Comparison of Various Methods for Reducing the Typical Monthly Sewer Bill Attachment 1 and 2: Map of Phase 1 Sewer Improvements Attachment 3: Alternate Construction Phasing REVISED PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT CHEEKS TOWNSHIP SEWER IMPROVEMENTS PHASE I Background The proposed sewer improvements for Cheeks Township are described in a report prepared by the John R. McAdams Company, Inc. of Chapel Hill, N. C. dated February 1984. Hazen and Sawyer, P.C. of Raleigh, North Carolina was retained by Orange County in March of 1985 for the purpose of designing and administering construction of those facilities included in Phase 1 of the improvements recommended in the McAdams' report. Per the terms of the engineering agreement between the County and Hazen and Sawyer, the initial Hazen and Sawyer effort was to be directed to a general review, of the overall sewer system plan, technical evaluation of certain elements of the proposed plan and a review of the project cost estimate and financing plan. The purpose of The Revised Preliminary Engineering Report is to summarize the conclusion and recommendations relative to Phase 1 1 . . Project Description The study area for the proposed project as described in the McAdams' report generally consists of the area bounded by the Town of Hillsborough on the east, by Buckhorn Road (SR 1114) on the west, by Seven Mile Creek on the south, and by McGowan Creek on the north. For planning purposes, the study area is further divided into two sub-areas; the immediate planning area which consists of that area generally lying along US 70 in the center of the total study area where development already exists and the future planning area which consists of the area in the McGowan Creek basin to the north of the immediate planning area and the area to the south of the immediate planning area along the 1-85 corridor. The proposed sewer improvements for the immediate planning area consists of various elements to be constructed in six phases. Phase I of the recommended plan was intended to • provide the primary interceptor system, pumping stations and force mains to collect the wastewater from the Efland Estates Subdivision, the Efland Cheeks School , the central Efland area, and Graham' s Trailer Park near Maple Street. Wastewater thus collected would be pumped from a main pumping station off Brookhollow Road via a force main along US 70 East to the point of tie-in with the Town of Hillsborough collection system. Phases II through VI of the recommended sewer improvements would 2 gradually extend sewer service to all areas of the immediate planning area. Recommended Modifications to the Pro.osed Plan Attachments 1 and 2 are taken from the McAdams Report to illustrate the Phase I sewer improvements as originally proposed and the specific modifications recommended by Hazen and Sawyer. In order to evaluate the feasibility of the proposed Phase I sewer improvements, Hazen and Sawyer has reviewed the data contained in the McAdams' Report, made a windshield survey of each of the proposed pipeline routes, performed preliminary engineering surveys at critical points and discussed the project at length with the County staff to define overall objectives. Based on our assessment of these factors, we believe that one of the major objectives of the sewer facilities constructed during Phase I should be to provide sewer service to the existing development along US 70 to the extent possible based on current financing while at the same time maintaining the maximum flexibility for future extensions to service the McGowan Creek basin to the north and possible industrial development along the 1-85 corridor. If this objective is to be fully realized, then we recommend that the County consider several modifications to the Phase I sewer improvements: 3 1. Construction of a 12-inch diameter interceptor in the McGowan Creek basin from Tinnin Road (SR 1313) to Brookhollow Road (SR 1338) in lieu of the force main and pumping station included in the McAdams report. This outfall would have the immediate benefit of eliminating a pump station at Tinnin Road and the approximately 7500 • feet of 6-inch force main through. the central part of Efland along US 70. We further believe that the gravity outfall can be constructed at a comparable cost, to the present pump station force main concept. Future benefits are potentially much more significant and include: a. The outfall will provide an initial key component for extensions of sewer service into the transition area north of Efland. b. The presence of the gravity outfall will permit extension of gravity sewers into the central part of Efland thus eliminating an additional pump station that would have been required in Phase II of the original sewer plan. c. Service to those areas included in Phases III and IV in the original plan and the industrial corridor along 1-85 would be readily available provided that the wastewater is pumped across the 4 ridge line along the southern railroad track. The proposed 12-inch outfall would have sufficient hydraulic capacity to accommodate the existing development in Phases III and IV as well as industrial growth along the 1-85 corridor provided that the industries that might locate there are not heavy water users. 2. . Construction of a gravity collection sewer and pumping station to serve the existing mobile homes in Graham's Trailer Park and the houses alon. US 70 East to the ridge line west of Lloyd Dairy Road which was not included in the previous report. The force main from the proposed pump station would discharge into the gravity sewers tributary to the main pumping station on Brookhollow Road. Under the original plan, it is not clear how sewer service would have been provided to this area, even though the area is located within the Phase I boundary. It has been suggested that individual house pumps at each residence would have discharged into the main force main along US 70 to Hillsborough. Given the anticipated operating pressure for this force main, the technical feasibility of such a solution is questionable, and at best could present long-term maintenance problems. There are a significant number of 5 potential customers in the area and the gravity collection system and single pumping station represents a much more technically viable solution. 3. The .um. station sro•.sed to serve Efland Cheeks School and Efland Estates Subdivision should be resized to.ether with a reali.nment of the •ro,osed force main to reduce the total length required. Under the original plan, wastewater collected from the Perry Hills area • (Phase VI) would have been"pumped into the gravity collection system tributary to the pump station below • Efland Cheeks School. By extending the force main from Perry Hills further along US 70, it is possible to discharge into the gravity sewer tributary to the proposed interceptor on McGowan Creek allowing for a significant reduction in the size of the Efland Cheeks School pump station. Extension of the force main would • also avoid the cost of repumping wastewater from the Perry Hills area resulting in lower annual operational costs. It is also feasible to significantly reduce the force main length required for the Efland cheeks School pump station. The pump station lies only some 800 feet west of a- proposed gravity sewer in School House Road that will be tributary to the interceptor on McGowan Creek. By securing an easement across private property, 6 it is possible to eliminate approximately 2 ,500 linear feet of 4-inch force main at a cost savings of at least $10,000. 4. The existing topography along the unnamed street east of, Gaines Avenue will not .ermit a •ravit sewer flowin. in a westerly direction since the east end of the street is approximately 15 feet lower than the west end. In order to provide sewer service to the existing residences along this street, it is recommended that a gravity sewer be extended along the existing draw to the north crossing US 70 and connecting to the proposed interceptor on McGowan Creek. Likewise, the existing gravity sewer off Tinnin Road tributary to the originally proposed Pump Station No. 2 does not appear to be feasible due to topographic restraints. In order to construct a gravity sewer in this area, it will be necessary to pivot the line further to the east in the direction of more favorable topographic features. 5. Other less significant modifications to the proposed Phase I sewer improvement are indicated below: a. In The Efland Estates Subdivision, it is recommended that the gravity sewer shown on private property behind the existing houses on Gregg Street be relocated to the right-of-way on 7 Gregg. Street to avoid the expense of easement acquisition. b. The gravity sewer shown at the intersection of Richmond Road and US 70 should be relocated to utilize the public street right-of-way. While the present alignment appears to be most favorable given the existing topography, we have conducted preliminary field surveys at this intersection to establish the feasibility of extending the sewer along the existing street right-of-way. Granted the depth of excavation will be somewhat greater, but the cost of excavation should be more than offset by avoiding the need for acquisition of easements. c. The original boundaries for the Phase I sewer improvements along US 70 on both the west and east ends are inconsistent with the existing topography. The boundry lines shown on Attachment 1 have been shifted to reflect the prevailing topography. Sewer service to those residences shown outside the new boundry could be provided by individual house pumps to the closest gravity sewer manhole. 8 , I We believe that implementation of the above improvements will significantly improve the reliability of the proposed sewer improvements by reducing the dependence on raw sewage pumping. The revised plan can be readily expanded to serve future development in the transition areas and the industrial development along the 1-85 corridor. Estimated Construction Cost One of the primary objectives of the additional study by Hazen and Sawyer was to evaluate the construction cost estimate for the proposed Phase I sewer improvements. Our initial assessment indicated that the prevailing construction costs in the Orange County area were significantly higher than the unit prices used in the previous report. In order to confirm this possibility, we collected cost data from the Farmers Home Administration for a number of similar projects constructed over the last several months. The cost data was analyzed to determine typical or average construction prices for each element of the proposed sewer construction. These costs were then used to develop updated construction cost estimates for both the original Phase I sewer improvements plan and the Phase I improvements as modified by Hazen and Sawyer. The tabulated construction costs are included herein in Table 1. As suspected, the analysis indicates that the construction costs for both the original plan and the modified plan 9 recommended by Hazen and Sawyer are substantially greater than the previous report had indicated and well above the current available financing. This information was reviewed with the County staff and it was generally agreed that it is not presently viable to proceed with construction of all the facilities included in Phase I of the recommended plan. Financial Considerations We recognize the financial constraints the County faces in attempting to extend sewer service into the Cheeks Township. Regardless of the long term benefits of any project, there can be no substitute for the lack of capital financing. in these situations, we feel the best approach is to develop a sequenced construction program that preserves to the maximum extent possible the long-term objectives of the overall plan without exceeding available financial resources. The County presently has commitments from the Farmers Home Administration for both grant and loan funding to defer a portion of the construction cost for the Phase I improvements. Representatives of Hazen and Sawyer and the County met with officials from the Farmers Home Administration to discuss the possibility of additional Farmers Home participation. - Unfortunately, the Farmers Home Administration regulations concerning distribution of grant funds have changed since the County's original grant request was approved. Specifically, the 10 medium family income in Cheeks Township based on the salary survey conducted by the County exceeds the minimum income level that triggers eligibility. for Farmers Home grant funding. The original grant amount ($598,300) is not in jeopardy but the County is not eligible for any additional grant funding. The project would be eligible for additional Farmers Home loan participation provided that financial resources are available to • offset the additional debt service payment required. Any additional Farmers Home loan would be at the prevailing market interest rate (presently 9.5%) . Other possible sources of grant funding have been explored and discussed but no promising sources have been identified. The prospect of additional grant funding during the next fiscal year was also discussed with the Farmers Home Administration. Based on their assessment of the prevailing attitude and anticipated federal funding, it appears that Farmers Home participation (both grant and loan) could be substantially reduced in the upcoming fiscal year. It is no secret that the current Administration is attempting to reduce the Federal budget deficit by substantially cutting certain existing Federal programs, including the Farmers Home Administration. We believe the possibility of additional Farmers Home Administration grant participation in this project during the next fical year and the foreseeable future is extremely remote. 11 It would appear that the County is faced with having to make the best use of the currently available financing. While it will not be possible to construct all of the sewer facilities included in Phase I, it is feasible to construct certain key elements of the overall plan. In Attachment 3, we have identified various portions of the Phase I sewer improvements that could be constructed in an initial phase to reduce the capital funds required while maintaining the long-term plan and concepts. For purposes of consideration •by the County, the particular segments are identified as follows: Base Bid - includes those facilities serving the Efland Estates Subdivision, the Efland Cheeks School, and the existing residences west of the central part of Efland served by the collection system shaded in green on the attachment. A pumping station would be constructed at the upstream end of the proposed McGowan Creek interceptor with a force main along US 70 to the original point of tie-in with the existing Hillsborough collection system. The facilities included in the base bid would provide service to those areas with the most severe septic tank problems and eliminate the existing package treatment plant at the Efland Cheeks School. Also, sewer service to the economically disadvantaged areas would be maintained. 12 ' - Alternate A - would consist of the upstream portion of the proposed McGowan Creek interceptor. The pumping station included in the base bid would be relocated to the downstream end of the proposed interceptor. A six-inch force main would connect to the force main constructed under the base bid along uS 70. This alternative readily lends itself to extension of gravity sewers into the central Efland area at a later date. Alternate B - includes the remainder of the proposed McGowan Creek interceptor and the Brookhollow Road pump station which discharges into the force main along US 70 constructed under the base bid. This alternative will readily lend itself to extension of sewer service to serve Graham's Trailer Park and the surrounding area Alternate C - consists of the gravity collection system in the central Efland area. 13 The estimated project cost (derived from Table 1) for the base bid and the various combinations of alternatives available are shown below. Alternative/Combination Estimated Project Cost Base Bid $1,104,000 Base Bid + Alt A 1,210,400 Base Bid + Alt A+B 1,285,600 Base Bid + Alt A+B+C 1,443,000 Base Bid + Alt A+C 1,369,400 The project cost shown for the base bid is less than the current committed funding and the project cost for several of the alternative combinations does not greatly exceed the committed funds. While the capital resources would appear to be available to construct at least some portion of the Phase I sewer improvements, additional analyses must be made to determine projected operating costs and the projected user charges. Projected User Charges The user charges applicable to the Phase I sewer improvements should provide sufficient revenue to offset the cost of operating the collection system, the cost for treatment paid to the Town of Hillsborough and the annual debt service payment 14 required to retire the loan secured from the Farmers Home Administration. The following costs must be accounted for Treatment Cost - $1.16/1000 gallons of wastewater treated; includes $0.05/1000 gallons blanket tap fee Billing Charges - approximately $100/month Electricity - $3800/year to operate two pumping stations plus individual house pumps Maintenance and Repair - $5000/year paid to a reserve fund to provide for maintenance expenses Debt Service - to retire the loan(s) from FrnHA. The current loan amount of $200,000 is repayable over 38 years at 7.75 percent interest. Any additional FmHA loans would be subject to market interest rates which are currently 9.5 percent. We recommend that the County adopt a user charge system that subdivides the above cost into "fixed" and "variable" components with factors to reflect the hydraulic capacity dedicated to large 15 • volume users. Fixed costs would be those costs that do not vary with the amount of wastewater generated. Variable costs vary directly in portion to flow and in this case consist of the treatment charge paid to the Town of Hillsborough. All other costs do not vary appreciably with a flow volume and can be reasonably- assumed to be fixed. By developing the user system based on this separation of charges, the County is assured of developing sufficient revenue to offset the fixed expenses. Assumptions as to the quantity of wastewater to be treated are not critical to the budget process. The remaining unknown in establishing a projected user charge is to determine the number of customers that will be served by the sewer system. Table 2 was developed from information furnished to us by the County staff and is based in part upon the commitments received from the residents in the area concerning connection to the sewer system. The table shows the anticipated number of customers that could be served by the various combinations of alternate projects. You will note from the table that we are recommending that the user charge analysis be based on a slightly higher customer count than the number of present commitments. While we admit that there is some financial risk in this assumption, we believe it is reasonable to assume - that the availability of the sewer will be an inducement to some 16 . _ of the existing customers that failed to commit to sewer service during the previous survey. Table 3 (to be furnished at oral presentation) was prepared using the previously developed data concerning project cost and the estimated sewer customers from Table 2. The table is intended to reflect the typical monthly sewer bill for the low volume user in the system. For the larger volume user, the fixed cost component of the monthly bill would be the same and the variable portion of the bill would be computed at a rate of .$1.16 per thousand gallons of water used. The financial analysis is preliminary in that the monthly rates must be adjusted at a later date based on the actual number of sewer customers connected to the system. If the County elects to proceed with some combination of the alternatives for the Phase I construction, we believe the rates shown in Table 3 are representative of the cost likely to be incurred by the end user. Possible Methods of Rate Reduction In meetings with the County staff, various methods for reducing the typical monthly sewer bill have been examined. Several of these methods are discussed below relative to the anticipated impact on the typical sewer bill. (a) Modest growth in the number of sewer customers which is to be expected or the policy of mandatory sewer hookup would have the immediate effect of increasing 17 " - the number of rate paying customers. As to the latter, the concept of required connection to an available sewer system is not uncommon and is mandated by many sewer use ordinances in effect in North Carolina. (b) Waiver of the 0.05 per thousand gallon blanket tap fee would reduce the rate for computation of the variable portion of the typical bill to $1.11 per thousand gallons. Based on 3,000 gallons per month usage, the net savings per customer would be $0.15 per month. This savings would be applicable to the base bid and all combinations of alternatives. (c) The original financial plan called for a cash contribution from Orange County based upon the anticipated cost of the malfunctioning wastewater treatment plant at Efland Cheeks School. The cost to repair this plant was estimated at $50,000. Although Hazen and Sawyer has not made a detailed inspection of the plant, we suspect that the cost to repair the existing plant is likely to approach $75,000. The higher cost is attributed to the need for flow equalization facilities to reduce peak hydraulic loading on the plant, the addition of phosphorous removal based on the nutrient sensitive is classification of the receiving stream and the need to protect elements of the plant that have experienced past problems with freezing. An increase in the County cash contribution would directly reduce the amount of the Farmers Home loan required and result in lower debt service payments. (d) Optional financing for those sewer facilities included in Alternate C is a possibility. It might be feasible to generate the capital resources required for construction of the gravity sewers to serve the central Efland area by assessing the cost to the land owners that would benefit from the . facilities. This type of financial arrangement is not uncommon and is used by many municipalities and County sewer systems to recover all or some portion of the cost of extending sewer into previously unsewered areas. In this case, we envision that the County would make a loan to cover the cost of the sewer construction and recover this money from the individual land owners over some specified time period. The exact formula to be used to recover the cost is beyond the scope of our study, but several varied systems have been used. Typically, the cost allocation is based on acreage owned or "front 19 footage" , or some other method that varies relative to the amount of wastewater generated by a given user. Assuming that the cost of construction for those facilities included in Alternate C is financed in this manner, the amount of any increased loan from the Farmers Home Administration would be reduced by approximately $159,000. 20 ..........._.._._.._... TABLE 1 COMPARISON OF TOTAL PROJECT COSTS CRIGINAI, VS. REVISED PLAN PHASE I SEKM IMPROVEMENTS Item Unit Price Original Plan modified Plan Extended Estimated Estimated Extended Quantity Total Quantity Total Clearing and Grubbing 3500/ac 105a 360800 10.5 $ 36,800 Surface ,Restoration 1500/ac 326a 48,900 32.6 48,900 Gravityy Sewer Pipe 12" dia. 23/lf - b -- b 6600 151,800 8" dia. 15/lf 34,900c 523,500 37,235 558,500 Force Main 2 V2" dia. 3.25/lf 1100 3,600 -- b N b 3" dia. - 3.75/lf 1200 4,500 -- b -- b 4" dia. 4.00/lf -- b - b 2,300 9,200 6" dia. 6.00/lf 7,500 45,000 b b 8" dia. 8.00/if 15,700 1-25,600 16,200 129,600 4' dia. manholes 950/ea 133 126,400 153 145.400 Rock Excavation 35/cy 3175c 111,000 3175 111,000 House Services 30 0/ea 241c 72,300 241 72,300 Bored Highway Crossing 90/if 290 26,100 -- -- 90/if -- -- 330 30,000 Sewage Grinder Pumps 300 0/ea 23 69,0003 6 3,000e Sewage Pump Station is 4 200,000 3 160,000 Misc. Construction LS - 66,600 -- b -- b SUBTOTAL, ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST 1,459,300 1,456,500 Technical 145,300 145,000 Legal and Administrative 21,000 21,000 Real Estate Interest 20,000 30,000 Interest During Construction 46,000 46,000 Contingency (10%) 146,000 146,000 TOTAL ESTIMATED P.RQJBCT COST $1,837,600 $3,849,500 Cost for this item not included in .original report. Quantity added by Hazen and Sawyer. b Not required for this alternative c Original quantity adjusted by Hazen and Sawyer based on field study. d Although a cost is shown for this item, it is not clear that the intended plan of individual house pumps discharging into a high head force is technically viable. e Since these units would discharge into a gravity manhole, a lower unit cost has been assumed. Y Table 2 PROJBCIW SEWER CUSTOMERS CHEEKS TOMSHiP SEWER IMPROVEMENTS Alt/ Camdtted Uncamni.tted Subdivision Oranges Total Potential No. of Customers Combination Customers Customers Lots Heights Existing Customers Used for Analysis Base Bid 101 18 18 34 171 130 Base Bid + Alt A 101 18 18 34 171 130 Base Bid + Alt A+B 101 18 18 34 171 130 Base Bid + Alt A+B+C 116 23 18 34 191 150 Base Bid + Alt A4C 116 23 18 34 191 150 a The proposed tie-in point with the existing Town of Hillsborough collection system is .located in the orange Heights Subdivision. Since this area is not presently sewered, it is recamrended that sewer service be made available to this area. . ...... .. .. . .._ . . ,- .. * .-- - _. .... -__. -....' '' tt' ;- ' ��JJJ . Courttp of /Durban' S,{� \�r PLANNING,ZONING & INSPECTION DEPT. ma. _ c Teo a. �urfjam. art j c� ro1(na a0. .�. v: � ► 4 1 May 16, 1985 • - Susan Smith,. 'Planner Orange County Planning Department - - • - Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 - . • - Dear Susan: • - • This letter is in response to the proposed single family • • subdivision "Hearts- Ease" on the west side of Craig- Road and . • ; straddling the Durham County/Orange County -line. Oakwood Estates , was' formerly proposed for this property. . • _ • Durham County see• no conflict with this :subdiv .sion or the streets . which shall cross over Durham County• to Craig Road. This • subdivision shall be- included on the Agenda for the -June 4, .1985 Planning Commission-meeting and reviewed as a courtesy. • . , . Thank-you for contacting me concerning this subdivision -and the . cooperative spirit you have expressed towards Durham County. - Respectfully yours; : - - * .CCIaeit' CCV-". • - . • Susan Suggs - _ Operations Planner SS:jh - • • • - I ORANGE COUNTY HILLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA Ji 4anageti Officz EStatilU 1752 May 13, 1985 Mr. Thurman Murphy, Jr. Farmers Home Administration 630-A South Garnett Street Henderson, North Carolina 27536 Dear Mr. Murphy: Orange County transmits herewith a revised preliminary engineering report prepared by Hazen and Sawyer, P.C. relative to the proposed sewer improvements for Cheeks Township in Orange County. This report is transmitted to the Farmers Home Administration for comments and acceptance of the revised project scope. The report prepared by Hazen and Sawyer, P.C. concluded that the cost to construct all of the facilities originally included in Phase 1 of the sewer improvements would be significantly greater than the currently available funding. Based on this determination, the Orange County Board of Commissioners has agreed to a reduced scope of construction which will maintain most of the project objectives and can be constructed without exceeding the currently available funding or placing an undue burden on the end users of the system. The County is most anxious to proceed with the revised project. We would appreciate your earliest attention to the enclosed information. If you have any questions, representatives of the County and Hazen and Sawyer, P.C. would be happy to meet. with you. Sincerely yours, Kenneth R. Thompson County Manager KRT/dve Copy to Board Members Don Cordele, Hazen & Sawyer Engineers PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, According to the latest population figures, there are over 9,000 persons over 60 years of age in Orange County; and, WHEREAS, Orange County is proud of the older adults who live here and wishes to show appreciation for what they have given and for • what they have contributed to their County, State and Nation; • and, WHEREAS, Because of them, the rest of the citizens enjoy the fruits of their visions and their labors, and their example is an inspiration to continue to make Orange County a good place in which to live; and, • WHEREAS, Our President and Governor have proclaimed May as Older Americans Month, Orange County wishes to set aside a special month for recognition of the older segment of its citizenry; NOW, THEREFORE, We, the Orange County Board of Commissioners, join the Governor of North Carolina and the President of the United States in PROCLAIMING May, 1985 OLDER AMERICANS MONTH AND, further, , encourage all citizens to join us in honoring our older Americans. ki4.14,/ Don Willhoit, Chair Orange County Board of Commissioners • NAIY z../ • ( - \ T• r 4 • I • ASSESSMENT ROLL IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE FINANCING AND ASSESSING BY ORANGE COUNTY OF THE LOCAL SHARE OF THE COST OF PAVING NORTH CAROLINA STATE ROAD #1803, ALSO KNOWN AS WILKII■ DRIVE, IN CHAPEL HILL TOWNSHIP, ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA pe The property described below, the names of the owners of said p property, the assessment levied against each parcel of property, the basis for the assessment levied against said parcel and the terms of payment of the assessment all set forth below, together with tax maps of the project, constitute the assessment roll for the paving of North Carolina State Road #1803, also known as Wilkins Drive, in Chapel Hill Township,. Orange County, North Carolina. • _ • BASIS FOR ASSESSMENT . • The basis for assessment against the property described below is frontage abutting the road at an equal rate per foot of frontage which represents the total local share of the cost of this project. TERMS OF PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENT A. Within thirty (30) days after notice of the confirmation of assessment roll is 'published each owner of assessed property may pay his or her assessment in full without interest. B. Any assessment p aid in full a s provided o vi de d abo ve shall be paid in five ( 5) equal annual installments with the first such • installment, with interest, due sixty (60) days after the date that the assessment roll is confirmed, and the remaining installments, with • • interest, due on the same date in each successive year until the assessment is paid in full. Map, Property Owners Amount of • Block & Mailing Address Assessment & Lot 15.A.1 Clyde A. William, Jr. $ 81 4.6 0 Ger da Williams 100 Wilkins Drive Durham, NC 27705 15.A.3 Joseph B. Slaughter $ 3 2 6. 10 Estelle Slaughter • 101 Wilkins Drive • Durham, NC 277 05 15A.A.5 Labarre Weston 21 7. 40 Maurine Weston 172 Carol Woods Chapel Hill, NC 27514 15A.A.5A Labarre Weston $ 804. 38 Maurine Weston . 172 Carol Woods Chapel Hill, NC 27514 15A.A.5C An Labarre $ 108.70 234 Daniel Drive Auburn, CA 95603 15A.A.5D Thomas Price, Jr. $ 326. 10 Sandra Price 116 Wilkins Drive • Durham, NC 277 05 15A.A.6 • Mary Garner McKeel $ 1 0 8,70 120 Wilkins Drive Durham, NC 27705 -2- 15A.A.6A Mary Catherine C. Mc Keel $ 217. 40 120 Wilkins Drive Durham, NC 277 05 15A.A.7 Mary Catherine C. MeKeel $ 2 1 7. 40 120 Wilkins Drive Durham, NC 277 05 15A.A..8 Wade C. Parrish $ 32 6. 1 0 Nancy Parrish Route 5, Box 525 • Shaw Road Durham, NC 277 04 15 A.A.11 Wade C. Parrish 2 4 Nancy Parrish 50 . 1 • Route 5, Box 525 Shaw Road Durham, NC 27704 15A.B.1 • Joseph B. Slaughter Estelle C. Slaughter • 953. 73 3. 101 Wilkins Drive Durham, NC 277 05 15A.B.2 John C. Kluttz $ 1 0 8. 70 Lucille Kluttz • 2308 Woodrow Street • Durham, NC 27705 K• 15A.B.3 Frances Ann Nichols $ 326. 10 107 Wilkins Drive Durham, NC 27705 15A.B.4 Frances Ann Nichols $ 217.40 107 Wilkins Drive Durham, *NC 27705 - 15A.B.5 Clarence Edward Wiggins $ 217. 40 . Tarlouh H. Wiggins • 111•Wilkins Drive Durham, NC 27705 I5A.B.6 Thomas Johnson Price • $ 434.80 • Margie Price 115 Wilkins Drive Durham, NC 27705 15A.B.7 A. B. Ray, Jr. $ 1 81 . 16 117 Wilkins Drive • Durham, NC 27705 15A.B.8 Albert Byron Ray • $ 180. 79 Helen Ray 117 Wilkins Drive Durham, NC 27705 15A.B.9 Albert Byron Ray $ ! Helen Ray 181 . 16 . • 117 Wilkins Drive Durham, NC 27705 15A.B.10 • William R. Baucom, Jr. $ 217. 40 • Route 1, Wilkins Drive Durham, NC 27705 - • 15A.B.11 Clyde A. Williams, Jr. $ 652:2 Ger da Williams 100 Wilkins Drive Durham, NC 27705 • • I • RESOLUTION WHEREAS, upon completion of a 1984 survey of County and school system roof conditions by Law Engineering the County committed to a three year, repair/ replacement program, and WHEREAS, the County appLopriated $360,500 in 1984-85, and 1 WHEREAS, an estimated expenditure of $767,000 is needed in 1985-86 to carry forward the second year of the repair/replacement program, and WHEREAS, both school systems have developed specifications and terms for a joint bidding of the total work to be done, and WHEREAS, if contracts can be awarded May 20, 1985 construc- tion can be completed between June and August 1985, and WHEREAS, without the assurance that the funds will be appro- priated to the school system by Orange County the school systems are prevented under North Carolina General Statute 115C-432(a) (4) from awarding bids. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Commissioners authorizes the Chapel Hill-Carrboro and Orange County School Systems to proceed with the letting of a contract or contracts according to attached Agreement conditions including Exhibits A and B, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Commissioners assures the boards of education that funds will be appropriated for the six school roofs in the 1985- 86 County budget exclusive of the appropriations for other current and long range capital needs. Adopted this sixth day of May, 1985. a-V.040a, Don Wilihoit, Chair Board of Commissioners ATTEST: _ 1 .4410. .14111'; rly ythe - Clerk to the Board of Cbmmissioners MANAGER' S REPORT ' I Orange County's Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Program has been in effect for the past four years for the purpose of insuring fair and equitable hiring and employment opportunities. The employment objectives of the program are two-fold: 1. All persons hired by the County shall meet the stated qualifications for the position; and 2. The County's work force will match as closely as possible the make-up of the County's available labor force in race and sex. Provided below is a chart illustrating a comparison of Orange County workforce to the Orange County available labor force by race and sex. SUMMARY OF THE ORANGE COUNTY WORKFORCE BY RACE AND SEX Total number of employees 343 100% Total non-minority 250 73% Total minority 93 27% Total females 198 58% Total males 145 42% *SUMMARY OF THE ORANGE COUNTY LABOR FORCE BY RACE AND SEX' Total available labor force 45,340 100% Total non-minority 37,990 84% Total minority 7,350 16% Total females 22,320 49% Total males 23,020 51% *Source: N.C. Employment Security Commission 1980 Census Data Clearly this illustrates that overall the County has been successful in achieving the stated employment objectives.. . While progress has been made county-wide, continuing efforts are under- way to assure that each department of County government will reflect the make-up of the County's available labor force in race and sex. To that eud, January 1985 Orange County set forth placement goals by departments to be achieved during a five year time period. The goals were established in conformance to guidelines prescribed and used by the State of North Carolina. The following process was used in establishing placement goals by departments: -an analysis of the County's workforce compared to labor force availability data was conducted to discover job classes or occupational groups in which minorities and/or females are underrepresented in the jurisdiction; 11111 -projection of job opening estimates, based on average attrition, where the analysis showed underrepresentation to measure the .County's capacity to improve the representativeness of the I workforce; and -through mathematical formula establishment of goals and timetables for improved minority and/or female representation •in the workforce. The placement goals established reflect the change necessary to assure that the department's workforce will meet the labor force standard for each occupational category. Meetings were held with all county department heads to communicate goals and re-affirm the County's commitment to affirmative action. I am pleased to report that, the response was positive and further progress has been made in achieving our goals since January. • Provided herein is a summary of the Affirmative Action Placement Goals established for all departments that have areas of underrepresentation. • SUMMARY OF PLACEMENT GOALS BY DEPARTMENTS . OF ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT JOB CLASS GOALS ( 1985-1989) REGISTER OF)DEEDS Office/Clerical one minority COUNTY MANAGER Officials/Administrators one female; *one minority *progress made - one minority placed since 1/85 TAX SUPERVISOR 111/1 Professional Technician one minority *two females; *one minority *progress made - one female and one minority placed since 1/85 • PLANNING Professional one female; one minority Technician one female Office/Clerical one minority SOCIAL SERVICES Professional • *one minority • *goal achieved since 1/85 Paraprofessional *one minority *goal achieved since 1/85 HEALTH • Professional • two minorities Protective Services one minority , Aft AGING Office/Clerical • one minority•, 1111, EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Technician one female; one minority 1 DEPARTMENT JOB CLASS GOALS (1985-1989), PUBLIC WORKS Skilled Craft two females Service Maintenance four females HOUSING & COMMUNITY Professional one female DEVELOPMENT ... , RECREATION Professional one female one minority • SHERIFF Protective Services *two females; *three minorities • *progress made - one female and one minority placed since 1/85 Office/Clerical one minority While placement goals have not been established with respect to those over 55, due to a lack of sufficient data, they represent 11% of our workforce. The establishment of placement goals by departments is only one of many components of our EEO/AA Program. Other improvements measures to the program that have been started included: 111/1 - (1) Evaluation of the EEO/AA achievements of all management personnel as a part of their overall job performance; (2) An applicant pool of minority and female candidates for selection referral; (3) Refinement of the County's recruitment and selection process; (4) Validation of testing instruments; and • (5). Publication of an EEO/AA annual report. Efforts are currently underway to begin training on affirmative action and • management skills effective July 1985. We plan to offer the training to all management and supervisory personnel. Our primary goal in the program is to • help all staff recognize the application of equal employment opportunity principles as tools of sound management rather than mandated responses to • government regulations. I appreciate the continuing commitment of the Board of County Commissioners and staff to the provision of equal employment opportunity through affirmative action efforts. -.\---.. Kenneth R. Thompson 111/1 - Attachments 100000111111O■N■ BOARD OF COMMISSI0NERS DEPARTMENT TIORmaORCE BY OCCUPATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON—MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE . FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NU,iBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS - PERCENT PROFESSIONALS ' PERCENT . TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS 1 1 2 PERCENT 200.0 100.0 x,00.Q:* � OFFICE & CLERICAL 1 1 , I PERCENT 100.0 100.0 10O,0 1 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE—MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 2 2 2 2 100.0 100:0 100.0 Admull ' BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP Z IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS {_) PROFESSIONALS ! TECHNICIANS (_} a PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS {_) PARAPROFESSIONALS Minority 0.0% 46.3% Minorities -46.3% OFFICE & CLERICAL. Minority 0.0% 19.0% Minorities -19.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS n+: fir SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS {-} PLACEMENT GOALS BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD x IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY b PARITY 100 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS x 100 PROFESSIONALS x . 100 TECHNICIANS x 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS Minority 46.3 x 1 100 .46 OFFICE & CLERICAL Minority 19.0 x 1 .3B 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS :E. X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100 **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83 - '8A = 0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS- (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NL'T INCIIEASL')* UNDERREPRESENTATION** r� NSA x ;r J� *Igdicate which pro- tected group (minority, toomen, handicapped) or sub-;group (e.g. , black females, other minor- ity males.. etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." � . amount of undo rrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women., and/or handicapped sent tion, persons which become necessary cause of turnover,*to keep their representation at p . ent levels. ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE SY OCCUPATION [OFFICIALS CCUPATIONAL GROUP NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER & ADMINISTRATORS ' 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 1 i 100.0 ' ' PROFESSIONALS PERCENT TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 2 2 2 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 2 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT }=• ETOTALKFORCE 3 3 3 • 3 • 100.0 100.0 100.0 ........... ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS {_} Minority 0.0% 21.2% Minorities -21.2% PROFESSIONALS {-} TECHNICIANS {-} PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS {_} PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. {_} Minority 0.0% 19.0% Minorities -19.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS Q a' SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS �• �_} PLACEMENT GO.ALS ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED CROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY = PARITY • 100 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS ' Minority 21,2 X 1 .212 100 PROFESSIONALS X . 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL Minority .19.0 X 2 .38 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS . ;;. X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS X 100 "PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED CROUP WORT(ERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED —ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT ' TURNOVER RATE FOR FY183 '84 = 0,0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT COALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* UNDERREPRESENTATION** aF N/A **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, s women, handicapped) or ub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS ity males, etc.) is un- dorrepresented, and 'r **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply o amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include hiring goals." I serot&tion. placements*of minority grpupworkers, women, and/or handicapped AM, qW persons which become necessarAnecause of turnover, to keep their representation at pMent levels , SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31, 1384 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON-MINOftiTY MINORITY TOTAL . TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PERCENT i PROFESSIONALS PERCENT TECHNICIANS 1 1 2 1 1 2 PERCENT 50.0 50.0 100.0 50 0 50.0 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 1 1 ' 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 1 2 3' 1 2 3 33.3 66.? 1QO.O 33.3 66.7 lw MEN SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS {_} PROFESSIONALS {`} • a TECHNICIANS {_} e Minority 0.0% 20.1 Minority : -20. 1 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS • m - PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. {-} Minority O.O� I9.0 Minority -19.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS a i SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WOMERS PLACEMENT GOALS SOIL & WATER • DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY 100 PARITY OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS X 100 PROFESSIONALS X 100 TECHNICIANS Minority 20. 1 R 2 .402 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL Minority 19.0 X 1 19 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS � X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS X 100 **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED CROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR ry '83-'84 = 0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED ' PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACLNEENT COALS TECHNICIANS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET. INCREASE)* OFFICE & CLERICAL UNDERREPRESENTATION** N/A **Iridicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g• , black fenales, other minor- ity.zilales.. etc.) is un- derrepresented, and "Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- sentation. *"Net Increase" does not include Placements of minority groupworkers, women, and/or handicapped 141h, Am persons which become necessary cause of turnover, to keep their representation atpdWent levels- REGISTER OF DEEDS DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP -NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PERCENT PROFESSIONALS PERCENT TECHNICIANS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 6 6 1 1 7 7 PERCENT 86.0 86.0 14.0 14.0 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 6 6 2 2 8 8 75.0 75.0 25.0 25.0 100.0 REGISTER OF DEEDS DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION 09 UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP , % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS a PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. Minorities 14,0 {-) Q 19.0X Minorities -5.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS r' Akk n�� PLACEMENT GO.kLS REGISTER OF DEEDS - DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP X TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY 100 PARITY OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS X ' 100 PROFESSIONALS X 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x 100 • PARAPROFESSIONALS "- X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL Minorities 19.0 X 7 Minorities 1.33 • 100 S WORKERS 4� .: X 100 SERVICE—MAINTENANCE WORKERS X 100 •**PLACEMENT• GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED REGISTER OF HEEDS, DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RAW FOR FY 183-=84 =•0.01, FOR 3985 FOR 1985 - 1989 {}CCLi'AiIAA't JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS UPL'NINGS (NET INCKEASE)* OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OFFICE/CLERICAL 1 I Minority i UN ERREPRESENTATION** OPFICE `CLERICAL '=1 Minority s . ' Gt °*Indiczte which pro- i tccted group (minority, Women. 1111ndicapped) or sub-B—ZOUp black fes^ales, other minor- ity ;sales; etc.) is un- TOTALS 1 i Minority d^;iep:cse;Tted, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring amount of underrepre- ;„ „ g goals-." senta *"Net Increase does not include placements of minority groupcuorlcers, women, and/or ha 'capped persons which become necessary, ause of turnover, to keep their representation at present levels I couriTy MANAGER DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION * DECEMBER 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP 'NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 2 2 PERCENT 10010 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS PERCENT TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 2 1 3 2 1 3 66.7 33.3 100.0 66.7 33.3 COUNTY MANAGER DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS FEMALE 0,0% 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% � MINORITY 0,0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS TECIINICIk%NS PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS {_} PARAPROFESSIONALS {_} OFFICE & CLERICAL. MINORITY 0.04 19.0% MINORITY SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS {_} SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS {_} - AWL PLACEMENT GOALS COUNTY MANAGER DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD x IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY - - = PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2% 3 FEMALE 1:36 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS X MINORITY 21.2% 3 MINORITY .64 100 PROFESSIONALS X 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 19.0% X 1 MINORITY .190 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS X 100 , SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS R 100 *PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED COUNTY MANAGER DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '183 '84 0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* - OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* Officials S .Adminarators OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS I FEMALE 2 .1 FEMALE I MINORITY UNDEPREEPRESENTATION** FMIALE MINORITY **Indicate which pro- tacted group (minority, woman, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black L erilal.es, Other minor- TOTOTALS 1, FEMALE tV i males; etc.) is un- I FEMALE 2 1 MINORITY do_,reprcsented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals amount of underrepre- *"Net,Increase" does not include2lacements of minority group workers, women, and/or bqU 'capped persons whicb becone necessary.wcause of turnover, to keep their representation at'present levels PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION .DECEMBER 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 1 1 1 1 2 2 PERCENT 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 100.0 TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT. OFFICE & CLERICAL PERCENT SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 1 1 2 2 . 3 3 33.3 33.3 66.7 66.3 100.0 PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS FEMALE 0.0 45.0 MINORITY 0.0% 20.1 FEMALE -45.0 MINORITY -20.1 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL, SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PLACEMENT GOALS PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT. OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD' x IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS X • 100 PROFESSIONALS X 100 TECHNICIANS FEMALE 95.0 1 FEMALE .950 MINORITY 20.1 X 1 MINORITY .201 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS x 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL X 100 • ti . SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS f: x 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100• 1p "PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY 183-184 = 0.0% 7 FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMMENT GOATS OPENINGS (NE'r INCitEASE)* OPENINGS (NET INCREASE')* UNDERREPRESENTATION** l N jA 1 i • *Indicate uhich pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g, , black females, other ru.nor- TOTALS ity rules, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase's does not include placements of minority rou workers women sentation. Y g p. , , and/orltandicappcd ARL persons which become necessar ecause of turnover, to keep their representation atAment levels. FINANCE DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31, .1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP 'NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 1 1 1. PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 TECHNICIANS 2 2 2 2 PERCENT 100-0 100.0 100.0• PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS . PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 2 2 3 3 PERCENT .66.7 66.7 33.3 33.3 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 1 4 5 1 1 2 2 • 7 14.3 57.1 71.4 - 14.3 14.3 28#'6 28.6 71.4 FINANCE DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL CROUP IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 45.21 FEMALE -45.26 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS FEMALE FEMALE -45.2% pr _45.2* !'MALE TECHNICIANS MIN.ORITY 0.0%' 20.1% 0 1% MINORITY -20.1% PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL, SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PLACEMENT GOALS FINANCE DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 1. OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS FEMALE 45.2 FEMALE .452• MINORITY 21.2 X 1 100 MINORITY .212 -`-' PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 45.2 . X 1 FEMALE .452 • 100 TECHNICIANS MINORITY 20.1 X 2 MINORITY .402 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL X 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS p� �. X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS X 100 "PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP, WORKERS'ARE UNDERREPRESENTED FINANCE DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY 183-'84 = 14.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT COALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (t LT INCREASE)* OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRA- TORS UNDERREPRESENTATION** N/A 7-k **Indicate which pro- lected 'group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, I * and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped sentation. A& persons which become necessary cause of turnover, to keep their representation atp' rWnt levels. PURCHASING & CENTRAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31,• 1984 OCCUPATIONAL CROUP NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PERCENT 100.0 loo.'o 100.0 PROFESSIONALS PERCENT TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 1 1 2 2 3 4 PERCENT 25.0 25.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 25.0 75.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL. WORKFORCE, 2 1 3 2 2 2 . 3 5 40.0 20.0 60.0 40.0 40.0 40.'0 60.0 PURCHASING & CENTRAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS FEMALE 0.0%• 45.2% FEMALE . -45.2% • MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PLACEMENT GOATS PURCHASING & CENTRAL SRV DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP. X TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS • •MINORITY 21.2 x 1 MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS X 100 TECHNICIANS 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL X 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS . X 200 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS X 100 Boom "PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED CROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED PURCHASING & CENT,AL sgv— DEPARTMENT TORNOVER RATE FOR FY '83-'84 .25.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATE PLACEMENT GOALS OFFICIAL OPENINGS , (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET INCREASE) ADMINISTRATORS * UNDERREPRESENTATION** N/A Jr **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals-.0 amount.of underrepre- *IIN*et Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, nqd/ ed sent=ion. or handicapp AM persons which become necessary cause of turnover, to keep their representation at piWent levels 1.0 p • — I Tax Supervisor DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION December 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL CROUP 'NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 2 1 3 2 3 PERCENT "66.7 33.3 100.0 66.7 33.3 TECHNICIANS 2 2 2 2 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL ' 7 7 1 1 8 8 PERCENT 87.5 87.5 12.5 12.5 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS , PERCENT TOTAL, WORKFORCE 5 8 13 1 1 5 9 14 35..7 57.2 92'.9 7.1 7.1 35.7 64.3 TAX PERVISOH DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0% 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY '0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% • MINORITY -21.2% TECHNICIANS FEMALE 0.0% 45.0 a FEMALE -45.0% MINORITY 0.0% 20.1 MINORITY -20.1% PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE. & CLERICAL. MINORITY 12.5% 19.0% MINORITY -6.5% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS Am PLACEMENT GOATS TAX SUPERVISOR DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2 FEMLE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2 X 1 MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 21.2 X 3 MINORITY .636 •100 TECHNICIANS FEMALE 45.0 4 FEMALE 1.80 MINORITY 20.1 X 4 MINORITY •804 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS $ 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL . MINORITY 19.0 X 10 MINORITY 1.90 100 µ SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS X ' 100 "PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED TAX SUPERVISOR DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY"83 '84 = 0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* Professionals I Minority I Female 2- Female Technicians 2 1 Minority 3 1 Minority UNDERREPRESENTATION** Professionals Minority Office and Clerical 1 I Minority 1 I Minority • Technicians 1 Minority 2 Female Office & Clerical Minority **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black I Female 2.F?mal?s females, other minor- ity males, etc.) is un- TOTALS 3 2 Minorities 5 3 Minorities derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals' :1111ourit of tinderrepre- O'Net Increase" does not include placements of minority groupworkers, women, and/or handicapped sctiLat' n. persons which become necessary, ause of turnover, to keep their representation at pre wt levels'. "PLACEMENT GOALS FOR occumrws IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP- WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED TAX SUPERVISOR DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY"83 - '84 = 0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 • OCCUPATION:. JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMME NT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OVENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET 1N(;KEAsr,)-.'. Professionals 1 I Minoritv I Female, 2 Female Technicians 2 1 Minority 3 1 Minority UNDERREPRESENTATION** Professionals Minority Office and Clerical 1 1 Minority 1 I_Minority Technicians Minority is 2 Female Office & Clerical Minority **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS I Female 2 Females ity males, etc.) is un- 3 2 Minorities 5 3 Minorities derreorcsented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals' awount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not.include placenicnts of minority group workers women, and/orhandicapped sentation. Ah persons which become necessary, b&ruse of turnover, to keep their representation at pre MW levels. LAND RECORDS DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP M. -NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 TECHNICIANS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 ' PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE•-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 1 3 4 1 3 4 25.0 75 .0 100.0 25.0 75.0 Aft LAND RECORDS DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION ' OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE— STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0% 45.2sh FEMALE —45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0.0% 21.'2P6 MINORITY —21.2$ PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY —21.2% TECHNICIANS* MINORITY 0.0% 20.1% MINORITY —20.1% PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS (_} PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 0.0* 19.0% MINORITY —19.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE—MAINTENANCE WORKERS (_� PLACEMENT GOALS LAND RECORDS DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD R IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY = PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2% 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2% x 1 lao MINORITY .212 PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 21.2 x 1 MINORITY .212 100 TECHNICIANS ' MINORITY 20.1 % 1 MINORITY .201 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS x 140 OFFICE & CLERICAL ' MINORITY 19.0 x 1 'MINORITY .191 100. SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS $ 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100 "PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED LAND RECORDS DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR ry '83- 84 = 0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTINNATED PLACEIENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLAC621ENIT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NUT INCHE'ASE)* LAND RECORDS UNDERREPRESENTATION** N/A !,*Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females,• other minor- TOTALS ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresertted, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women., and/or handicapped sentation. persons which become necessary levels. cruse of turnover, to their representation at pre 1 , REVENUE DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON-MINORITY • MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 2 PROFESSIONALS PERCENT 100.0 200.0 1 100.0 TECHNICIANS 1 1 2 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 a 1 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS 100. PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 1 1 1 2 2 2 PERCENT 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT 1 1 TOTAL WORKFORCE 2 2 4 2 3 5 40.0 40.0 80.0 20.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 REVENUE DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE .0.0% 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS (_) MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% TECHNICIANS FEMALE 0.0% 45.0% FEMALE -45.0% � (-) MINORITY 0.0% 20.1% MINORITY -20. 1% PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS (_) PARAPROFESSIONALS {-} i OFFICE & CLERICAL. SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS (_) SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS i PLACEMENT GOALS REVENUE DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY = PARITY 100 FEMALE •45.2 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2 X 1 MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 21.2 X 1 MINORITY .212 100 FEMALE FEMALE TECHNICIANS MINORITY 20. 1 ' X MINORITY I ' ,201 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS x 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL X . 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS x 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100 Qp **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED REVENUE DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83-184 0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1989 OCCUPATION. JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT COALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OFFICIALS & ADMIN PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS UNDERREPRESENTATION** N/A 11H-Indicate which pro- ; tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black femiles, other minor- TOTALS ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and "Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- sentation. *"Net increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped Am Aftk persons which become necessary,ALcause of turnover, to keep their representation at pr levels CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEPARWNT WORKFORCE By OCCUPATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL- F MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE T FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PERCENT 100.0 100.0 1 100.0 PROFESSIONALS PERCENT TECHNICIANS PERCENT. PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS 7T PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 OFFICE & CLERICAL PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 2 2 1 1 3 66. 7 66.7 33.3 33.3 100.0 3 CHIT 1) t;ijpppRT ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP X IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL, MINORITY 0.0% 19.0* MINORITY -19.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PLACEMENT GOALS CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES ! IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD x IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY a PARITY 100 i OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY •21,2 x i MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS x 100 TECHNICIANS x 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x 105 PARAPROFESSIONALS x 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 19,0 x 1 MINORITY .190 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS f' i x 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100 "PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR PY '83-'84 = 0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OFFICIALS & ADMIN OFFICE & CLERICAL UNDERREPRESENTATION** N/A t **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black femalet, other minor- ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement amopnt of underrepre- Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." sent at *"Net Increase" does not includi! placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped persons which become necessary, cause of turnover, to keep their representation at pr4wt levels. mr DATR PROCESSING DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 10010 0 0 PROFESSIONALS 1 1 2 1 1 2 PERCENT 50.0 50.0 100.0 50.0 50.0 TECHNICIANS PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL PERCENT SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS t (. PERCENT I SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 3 1 4 3 1 4 75.0 25.0 100.0 75.0 •25.0 AM qp DATA PROCESSING DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0%. 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% a MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS {-} FEMALE MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% TECHNICIANS {-} MINORITY 0.0% 20.1% MINORITY -20. 1% PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS {-} PARAPROFESSIONALS {_} OFFICE & CLERICAL, {�} SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS • pr SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS , PLACEMENT GOALS DATA PROCESSING DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP x TOTAL NUMBER -OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS x FEMALE .452 INORITY 21.2 MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 21.2 x MINORITY loo .424 TECHNICIANS MINORITY 20.1 x 1 MINORITY .402 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL X 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS X 100 SERVICE MAINTENANCE WORKERS X 100 Am **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP 14ORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED —DATA PROCESSING DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83-'84 = 0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1984 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OFFICIALS & ADMIN PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS UNDERREPRESENTATION** J� N/A .r xf . Jt T: **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and , **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre-. *"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/orbandicapped sentation. persons which become necessary NAG cause of turnover, to keep their representation at ntlevels. PLANNING DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP ..NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE INUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS- PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 3 1 4 3 1 4 PERCENT 75.0 25.0 100.0 75.0 25.0 TECHNICIANS 4 2 6 1 1 2 5 3 PERCENT 50.0 25.0 75.6 12.5 12.5 25.0 62.5 37.5 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 2 2 2 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE a 5 13 1 1 2 9 6 is 53.4 33.4 86.8 6.6 6.6 13.2 60.0 40.0 PLANNING DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP - % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0% 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0;0% (-� . 21.2% � MINORITY -21.21 PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 25.0% (_} 45.2% . = FEMALE -20.2% MINORTTV 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% TECHNICIANS FEMALE 37.5% (-} 45.0% Q FEMALE -7.5% PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS (_) PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL• MINORITY 0.0% 19.0% MINORITY SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS (-} 4•. SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS r PLACEMENT GOALS PLANNING DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY =PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS - R MINORITY 21.2 1 MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 45,2 4 FEMALE 1.808 MINORITY 21.2 R 4 100 MINORITY . .848* TECHNICIANS FEMALE 45.0 9 FEMALE 4.05 MINORITY 20.1 R 9 MINORITY 1.809 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS R 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS % 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL ' MINORITY 19.0 X 3 ' MINORITY .570 ? 100 . SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS ' X L 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS X 100 **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED 'CROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED, PLANNING DEPARTMENT. TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83-184 6% FOR 1985 FOR 1983 - .1'.989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACE.MENT' GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS WT INCREASE)* 1 FEMALE PROFESSIONAL 2 I MINORITY TECHNICIAN 1 1 FEMALE • 2 I FEMALE UNDERREPRESENTATIONft PROFESSIONAL MINORITY V, OFFICE CLERICAL 1 1 MINORITY I 1 MINORITY F EMALE. TECHNICIAN ek - 1 FEMALE OFFICE CLERICAL MINORITY **Indicat'e which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group -(e.g. , black 1 FEMALE r"males, other minor- TOTALS 2 1. MINORITY 4 2 MINORITIES it males . etc.) is un- derrepresented, and "Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply. "hiting•goals.11 amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase"'does not include placements of minority grpupworkers) women, and/or handicapped sentat persons which become necessary, fkause'of turnover, to keeg their representation at P' rWnt levels. t ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION , i i OCCUPATIONAL GROUP ' j NON MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 PROFESSIONALS PERCENT TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL I 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 2 2 2 2 100.0 100.0 100.0 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 6 MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS (-} a j - PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. MINORITY 0.0% 19.0% MINORITY -19.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS (-} a �t- • SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS • {_} qp PLACEMENT GOALS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP x TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2 x I MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS X 100 TECHNICIANS 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x 100 . PARAPROFESSIONALS x 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 19.0 x 1 MINORITY . 190 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100 AM "PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS' IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT — DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83-'84 = 0.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS -A 0PENlNGS (NET INCREASW OPENINGS * . (NET INC14EASE) QPVTrTA S ADMTM _ OFFICE & CLERICAL UNDERREPRESENTATION** N/A **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black femeles,, other minor- ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include ' lacerients of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped sentation. AWL persons whichbecome necessary cause of turnover, to keep their representation at pJWnt levels. SOCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 4 23 27 3 3 6 7 26 33 PERCENT 12.1 69.7 81.8 9.1 9.1 18.2 21.2 78.8 TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS 12 12 20 20 PERCENT 60.0 60.0 40.0 40.0 100.0 OFFICE & CLERICAL 10 10 2 2 12 12 PERCENT 83.3• 83.3 16.7 16.7 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 5 45 50 3 13 16 8 58 66 7.6 68.2 75.8 4.5 19.7 24.2 12.1 87.9 A& SOCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0% 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0'.0% {-} 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS {•-) . MINORITY 18.2% 21.2% MINORITY -3.0% TECHNICIANS (-} PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS MINORITY 40.0% 46.3% MINORITY -6.3$• OFFICE & CLERICAL (-} MINORITY 16.7% 19.0% MINORITY -2.3% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS {-) a PLACEMENT GOALS DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP x TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY s PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2 Z FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS x MINORITY 21.2 I MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 21.2 x 34 MINORITY 7.208 100 TECHNICIANS x 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS —MINORITY 46 x 20 MINORITY 9.26 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL x MINORITY 2.28 —MINORITY 12 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS x 100 SERVICE—MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100 NMI **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED CROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED SOCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83-'84 = 14% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 19816 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OFFICIALS-r—ADMINISTRA OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINCS (NET INCREASL)* PROFESSIONALS TORS PROFESSIONAL l 1 MINORITY 1 I MINORITY PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL PARAPROFESSIONAL 1 1 MINORITY UNDERREPRESENTATION** PROFESSIONAL i MINORITY JL PARAPROFESSIONAL # 1 MINORITY V1, **Indicate which• pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS ity males. etc.) is un- 1 1 'MINORITY 2 2 MINORITIES derrepresented, and **Refers; to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped sentation. persons which bddd6d hedas§ bf EiirnbVer j td keep �them' representation atyr�jwtlevels. HEALTH DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION 'DECEMBER 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP . -NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS I PERCENT [!!T . 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 1 12 13 1 1 1'• 13 14 PERCENT 7.1 85.8 92.9 7.1 7.1 7.1 92.9 TECHNICIANS ' 4 3 7 •1 1 2 5 4 PERCENT 44.4 33.4 77.8 11.1 11.E 22.2 55.5 44.5 , PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS 3 3 3 3 PERCENT . 100.0 100.0 100.0 PARAPROFESSIONALS 3 3 3 3 PERCENT. 100.0 100.0 100.0 OFFICE & CLERICAL 3 3 2 7 9 2 10 12 PERCENT 25.0 25.0 16.7 58.3 75.0 16.7 83.3 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 9 18 27 3 12 15 12 30 42 21.5 42.8 64.3 7.1 28.6 35.1 28.6 71.4 HEA7.Tl4_ DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE, 0.0%. 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 7;1% 21.2%* MINORITY -14.1% TECHNICIANS FEMALE 44.5% 45.0% FEMALE •50% PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS FEMALE 0.0% •14.6% ffi FEMALE -14.6% MINORITY 0.0% 28.5% MINORITY -28.5% PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL SKILLED. CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE-MAINTENANCE YORKERS AIL qw PLACEMENT 'GOALS HEALTH DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCRNT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD X IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY ' lao FEMALE 45.2 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2 '� 1 '•MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 21.2 X 15 MINORITY 3.18 100 TECHNICIANS FEMALE 45.0 x 9 FEMALE 4.05 100 FEMALE 14.6 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS FEMALE .438 MINORITY 28.5 X 3 MINORITY .855 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE 6 CLERICAL X 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS '. X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x•. 100 Ah "PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED HEALTH DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83-84 = 28.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1989' OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASEW OPENINGS WT INCREASE)--, OFFICIALS & ADMIN PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS PROFESSIONAL 1 1 MINORITY 2 2 MINORITIES PROTECTIVE SERVICE' PROTECTION SERVICES 1 MINORITY UNDERREPRESENTATION** PROFESSIONALS 2 MINORITIES PROTECTIVE SERVICES MINORITY **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- -TOTALS. 1 I MINORITY 3 3 MINORITIES ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped sentation. Awk Alk pertions which become necessat5&cause of turnover, to keep their representation at p*Went levels. AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 1 3 4 1 1 2 2 4 PERCENT .16.7 50.0 66.7 16.7 16.7 33.3 33.3 66.7 6 TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 .OFFICE & CLERICAL 2 2 1 1 3 PERCENT 66.7 66.7 33.3 33.3 100.0 3 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT. TOTAL WORKFORCE 2 5 7 1 3 4 3 8 18.2 45.4 63.6 9.1 27.3 36.4 27.3 72.7 Adak r1momm AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0% 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS TECHNICIANS PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS {-} PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE &CLERICAL. SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS f= SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PLACEMENT GOALS AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP x TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS x MINORITY 21.2 1 MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS x 100 TECHNICIANS x 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS x 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL x 100 •SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS x 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100 "PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY 183-1134 9.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* -OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRA- TORS UNDERREPRESENTATION** W/A 4 ",*Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS itv males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals•, NOT simply. "hiring goals." amount of underrep,re- *"Net Increase" does not include sentation, placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped persons which become necessary�&cause of turnover, to keep their representation at pWt levels. RECREATION DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE AY OCCUPI,TION AECEMBER 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP 'NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS • • 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS 3 1 4 3 1 PERCENT 75.0 25.0 100.0 75.0 25.0 4 TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL 1 1 1 I PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT 4 2 6 4 2 6 TOTAL WORKFORCE 66.7 33.3 100.0 66.7 33.3 RECREATION DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0% A5.2% FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 25.0W 45.2% FEMALE -20.24 MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% TECHNICIANS PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. * MINORITY 0.0% 19.0% MINORITY -19.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PL CEMENT GOALS RECREATION DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD R IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY = PARITY i 100 FEMALE 45.2 1 FEMALE .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS i MINORITY 21.2 A 1 , MINORITY .212 100 FEMALE 45.2 4 FEMALE 1.808 PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 21.2 R 4 MINORITY .84B 100 TECHNICIANS X l 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X I 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS % I • 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 19.0 X 2 MINORITY .38 100 �0- SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS X 100 **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP U16KERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED RECREATION DEPARTNCNT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83-'84 = 29.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)*. OPENINGS (NrT INCREASE)* OFFICIALS & ADMIN PROFESSIONALS FEMALES PROFESSIONALS 2 1 MINORITIES OFFICE & CLERICAL UNDERREPRESENTATION** PROFESSIONALS FEMALES MINORITIES **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black FEMALES females, other minor- TOTALS 2 1 MINORITIES ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped sentation. AM persons which become necessary cause of turnover, to keep their representation at p&nt levels. W_ AGING DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 . PERCENT 100.0 10+0.0 I00.0 1 PROFESSIONALS 1 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0• 100.0 100.0 TECHNICIANS PERCENT ' PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT 1 1 1 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 , OFFICE & CLERICAL 3 3 3 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 3 r SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 1 5 6. 1 5 16.7 83.3 100.0 16.7 83.3 6 AGING DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0% 45.2% FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS (-) - MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% � MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS (-) MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% TECHNICIANS PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS MINORITY 0.07. 46.3% MINORITY -46. 32 ' OFFICE-& CLERICAL. (-) MINORITY 0.0% 19.0% MINORITY -19.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS 4•. SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS (-) AOL 1p PLACEMENT GOALS AGING DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED CROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD x IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY n PARITY 100 1 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS FEMALE 45.2 FEMALE .452 MINORITY 21.2 X 1 MINORITY ,212 100 PROFESSIONALS . MINORITY 21.2 x 1 MINORITY .212 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS MINORITY 46.3 X 1 MINORITY .463 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 19.0 X 3 MINORITY .570 100 u. SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS *' x 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100 *'PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED Aging DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83 - 184 =17.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1489 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT COALS 0VENINCS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (Nt.T 1NCREASE)* Officials & Admin. Office & Clerical 1 Minority Professionals I Paraprofessionals Office & Clerical UNDERREPRESENTATIONit* Office & Clerical 1 Minority *Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS 1 Minority ity ;dales, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and "Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Not Increase" does not include placemcitL of minority r;roupworkcrs, womnn, and/or iinndic;ipprc! eentation, - AMh AWL persons which become necessa ecause of turnover, to keep their representation at levels. Commission For Women DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION December 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE, FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PERCENT 'PROFESSIONALS PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL PERCENT SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 100.0 100.0 100.0 ASk COMMISSION FOR WOMEN DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS (-) PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY -21.2% TECHNICIANS (-} I . PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS {-) PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. FEMALE 0.0% 1901 M O TY %MINORITY 0.0% . -19.0 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS K. SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS (-) PLACEMENT GOALS -COMMISSION FOR WOMEN DEPARTMENT' OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP x TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS x 100 PROFESSIONALS MINORITY 21.2 X 1 MINORITY .212 100 TECHNICIANS x 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS x 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL FEMALE 74.3 FEMALE .743 MINORITY 19.0 x I MINORITY . 190 loo. SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100 Alhk JOB OPENING ESTIMATES AND PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED -COMMISSION FOR WOMEN DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR • Y '83 '84 = 50.0% FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED�-PLACEMENT GOALS OPJ�OINCS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* PROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL Office and Clericil 1 I Female 1 1 Female UNDERREPRESENTATION** Office & Clerical Female **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented; I Female I Female females, other minor- 'totals and amount of underrepre- does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped sentation. persons which become heces§drA&dc8L'§e of btifto-Very to keep their representation at pont levels • _ Sheriff DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION December 31, 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP 'NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PERCENT PROFESSIONALS PERCENT TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS 36 3 39 10 3 13 46 6 52 PERCENT 69.2 5.8 75.0 19.2 5.8 25.0 88.5 11.5 PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE &CLERICAL 3 3 3 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 3 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS 1 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 TOTAL WORKFORCE 36 7 43 10 3 13 46 10 64.3 12.6 76:9 17.8 5.3 23.1 82.1 17.9 56 . SHERIFF DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PROFESSIONALS (_) TECHNICIANS (_) PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS FEMALE 11.5% 14.6% FEMALE -3.1% ' (-} a MINORITY 25.0% 28.5% MINORITY -3.57 PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. MINORITY 0.0% 19.0% MINORITY -19.0% SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS (_} SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS MINORITY 0.0% 48.0% MINORITY -48.07 PLACEMENT. GOALS SHERIFF DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS x 100 PROFESSIONALS R 100 TECHNICIANS x 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS FEMALE 14.6 56 FEMALE 8.176 MINORITY 28.5 x 56 MINORITY* 15.96 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS x 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 1910 x 3 MINORITY .57 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS X 100 SERVICE MAINTENANCE WORKERS MINORITY 48.0 x I MINORITY .48 100 vp "PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED Sheriff DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR '83 - 184 +18.01 FOR 1985 FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: J08 CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT COALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINCS (NET INCREASE) 2 Females 2 Females Protective Services 4 2 Minorities 5 3 Minorities Office & Clerical 1 1 Minority UNDERREPRESENTATION** Protective Service 2 Females # 3 Minorities office & Clerical # 1 Minority **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- •• 2. Females 2 Females . ity males , etc.) is un- TOTALS 4 2 Minorities 6 4 Minorities . derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals; NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority group workers, women, and/or handicapped sent ion. persons which become necessar} cause of turnover, to keep their representation at p nt levels. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE By OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31 , 1984 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP 'NON-MINORITY I MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 PROFESSIONALS PERCENT TECHNICIANS 13 .8 21 h 3 4 14 11 PERCENT 25 52;0 32.0 84.0 4.0 12.0 16.0 56.0 44.0 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL PERCENT SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 14 8 22 1 3 4 15 11 26 53.8 30.8 84.6 3.9 11.5 15.4 57.7 42.3 ANIL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0% 45.2 FEMALE -45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0.0% 21.2 MINORITY -21.2% PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 44.0% 45.0 FEMALE -1.0% TECHNICIANS MINORITY 16.0% 20.1% MINORITY PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS Rp PLACEMENT GOALS EMERGENCY-MANAGEMENT SRV DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD x IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY loo. FEMALE 45.2 FEMALE 52 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2 x 1 MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS X 100 FEMALE TECHNICIANS 45.0 26 FEMALE 11 .7 MINORITY 20.1 x 26 MINORITY 5.3 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS R 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL x 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE'WORKERS x 100 ANk w **PLACEMFhIT COALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83 '84 =407 FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* Oft-NINCS (NET INCREASE)* 1 MINORITY TECHNICAIN 1 1 FEMALE A OFFICE & CLERICAL UNDERREPRESENTATION*I, TECHNICIANS # i FEMALE 1 MINORITY Tr **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black FEMALES females, other minor- TOTALS 2 1 MINORITY ity males, etc.) is un- I I t - -_ derrepresented, and **Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply. "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority groupworkers, women, and/or handicapped sentation. Amb' persons which become n6de6tar edautd df�turnover, to keep their representation.at pmcent levels. rUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION DECEMBER 31 , 19B4 OCCUPATIONAL GROUP MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 1 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 -100.0, PROFESSIONALS I 1 1 " PERCENT . 100.0 100.0 100.0 TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS PERCENT OFFICE & CLERICAL PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS 5 5 3 3 8 8 PERCENT 62.5 62.5 37.5 37.5 100.0 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS 4 4 10 4 14 14 4 18 PERCENT 22.2 22.2 55.6 22.2 77.8 77.8 22.2 TOTAL WORKFORCE 10 1 11 14 4 18 24 5 29 34.5 ' 3.4 37.9 48.3 13.8 62.1 82.8 17.2 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE— STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0% 45.2% FEMALE —45.2% OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 0.0% 21.2% MINORITY —21.2% PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 0.0% 45.2% FEMALE —45.2% TECHNICIANS PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL. MINORITY 0.0% 19.0% FEMALE —19.07. SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS FEMALE 0.0% 25.8% FEMALE —25.8% of SERVICE—MAINTENANCE WORKERS FEMALE 22.2% 42.4% FEMALE —20.2% Alk PLACEMENT GOALS PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP X TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 FEMALE 45.2 1 FEMALE, .452 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS MINORITY 21.2 x MINORITY .212 100 PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 45.2 X i FEMALE .452 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS X 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & CLERICAL MINORITY 19.0 x 2 MINORITY .38 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS FEMALE, 25.8 x 8 FEMALE 2.064 100 SERVICE-IM AINTENANCE WORKERS FEMALE 42.4 x 18 FEMALE 7.632 100 **PLACEMENT GOALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY 183 '84 = 19.Ot FOR 1985 FOR 1985 1989' OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED P-LACENENT GOALS OPENINGS (NET INcim.ASW OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* SKILLED CRAFT 2 '2 FEMALES - SERVICE MAINTENANCE 4 4 FEMALES UNDERREPRESENTATION** SKILLED CRAFT # 2 FEMALES' SERVICE MAINTENANCE A 4 FEMALES **Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS 6 6' FEMALES ity males, etc.) is un- derrepresented, and .**Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amount of underrepre- *"Not Increase" does not include placements of minorit se ation. y group workers, women, and/or handicapped n.t persons which become necessai&because of turnover, to keep their representation atis sent levels Housing/Community Development DEPARTMENT WORKFORCE BY OCCUPATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP 'NON-MINORITY MINORITY TOTAL TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE TOTAL MALE FEMALE NUMBER OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS 1 -PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 PROFESSIONALS 3 3 .3 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 3 TECHNICIANS PERCENT PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS F- PERCENT PARAPROFESSIONALS 2 2 PERCENT 33.3 33.3 66.7 66.7 100.0• 3 OFFICE & CLERICAL 2 2 2 PERCENT 100.0 100.0 100.0 2 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS PERCENT .SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS PERCENT TOTAL WORKFORCE 1 1 4 4 8 4 5 11.2 11.2• 44.4 44.4 88.8 44.4 55.6 9 Ask Aft COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT _�� DEPARTMENT UTILIZATION OR UNDERUTILIZATION OCCUPATIONAL GROUP % IN WORKFORCE LABOR FORCE WORKFORCE- STANDARD LABOR FORCE FEMALE 0.0% 45.2% FEMALE -45.2! OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 0.0% 45.2% FEMALE -45,2% TECHNICIANS {_} C PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS .i PARAPROFESSIONALS OFFICE & CLERICAL, SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS i - SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS {_} PLACEMENT GOALS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OCCUPATIONAL GROUP PERCENT OF PROTECTED GROUP TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN THE LABOR FORCE STANDARD x IN OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY PARITY 100 OFFICIALS & ADMINISTRATORS FEMALE 45.2 - x - 2 FEMALE .452 100 PROFESSIONALS FEMALE 45.2 x 3 FEMALE 1.356 100 TECHNICIANS X 100 PROTECTIVE SERVICE WORKERS x 100 PARAPROFESSIONALS X 100 OFFICE & 'CLERICAL X 100 SKILLED CRAFT WORKERS X 100 SERVICE-MAINTENANCE WORKERS x 100 ' PLACEMENT COALS FOR OCCUPATIONS IN WHICH PROTECTED GROUP WORKERS ARE UNDERREPRESENTED Housing and Community DevelopmerOEPARTMENT TURNOVER RATE FOR FY '83 '84 + 14.0% FOR 1985. FOR 1985 - 1989 OCCUPATION: JOB CLASS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT GOALS ESTIMATED PLACEMENT COALS OPENINGS (NET INCREASE)* OPENINGS (NEE' INCREASE)* Professional 1 1 Female UNDERREPRtSENTATIONw• Professional Female I if *f�-Indicate which pro- tected group (minority, women, handicapped) or sub-group (e.g. , black females, other minor- TOTALS Female ity males. etc.) is un- derrepresented, and "Refers to Placement goals, NOT simply "hiring goals." amc).un t. of underrepre- 'A"Net Increase" does not include placements of minority s t on, group workers, women, and/or handicapped persons which become nedess;& because of turnover, to keep their representations Wesent levels 007 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date May 6. 1985 Action Agenda Item 4%5 SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT RESOLUTION-WILKINS DRIVE DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING _K_Yes No 0.1.••••.• •■•,••••••••■•■•■■••••411.00.....1■■• 04••■•■• Attachment(s) Information Contact: SUSAN SMITH a) Preliminary Assessment Resolution b) Final Assessment Resolution c) Certificate of Meeting Telephone Numbers Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE: To obtain public comment on the Preliminary Assessment Resolution approved by the Board of Commissioners on April 16, 1985 and to take action on the adoption of the Final Assessment Resolution for Wilkins Drive (SR1803) . To schedule the public hearing on the Preliminary Assessment Roll for April 21, 1985. NEED: To fulfill the legal requirements for the program. Public input on the assessment basis of an equal amoumt per foot as described in the Preliminary and Final Assessment Resolutions is required. The Clerk to the Board has filed a Certificate of Mailing which will certify that the notices of this public hearing were mailed on or before April 26, 1985 to each property owner subject to assessment. The Certificate of Mailing is an attachment to this item. To provide for continuation of the Participatory Paving Program procedures for this project. IMPACT: If the Board finds the Preliminary Assessment Resolution satisfactory, then the Board can by subsequent action adopt the Final Assessment Resolution for the project. 008 •Upon adoption of the Final Assessment Resolution, the • Preliminary Assessment Roll can be prepared and a public hearing set to obtain public comment on the Roll. In addition, the Department Of Transportation can be forwarded • the local share of the construction cost of the project with an anticipated paving date for Wilkins Drive during the summer/fall of 1985. RECOMMENDATION: Adoption of the Final Assessment Resolution for Wilkins Drive. Accept the Certificate of Mailing offered by the Clerk to the Board and attached to this agenda item. Schedule the public hearing on the Preliminary Assessment Roll for April 21, 1985. • • • .t'r �.. 009 CERTIF!CATE OF MAILING I , Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that on or before the 26th day of April, 1985, I mailed, by first-class mail, postage prepaid, a copy of the Preliminary Assessment Resolution for the financing by Orange County of the local share of the cost of paving North Carolina State Road # I803, also known as Wilkins Drive, in. Chapel Hill Township, Orange County, North Carolina, to each owner, as shown on the County tax records of property subject to assessment if the project is undertaken. WITNESS my hand and official seal of the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina, this the _ day of April, 1985. • BEVERLY LITHE, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina (SEAL) 01.0 • • .A meeting of the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina, was held at Chapel Hill, North Carolina, the regular place of meeting, at 7:30 o'clock p.m., on the 16th day of April, 1985. - Presen t: • • Absent; ************************************************************************** The following resolution was read to the Board: PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT RESOLUTION FOR THE FINANCING BY ORANGE COUNTY OF THE LOCAL SHARE OF THE COSTS OF PAVING NORTH CAROLINA STATE ROAD #1803, ALSO KNOWN AS WI LKINS DRIVE, IN CHAPEL HILL TOWNS HIP, ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. WHEREAS the Board of County Commissioners of Orange County has received a petition requesting the paving of 'North Carolina State Road #1803, also known as Wilkins Drive, in Chapel Hill Township, Orange County, North Carolina, which petition has been signed by at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the owners of property adjoining the said roads, which property represents at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the lineal feet of frontage of the lands abutting the said roads, pursuant to North Carolina General Statute Section 153A-206(c); and WHEREAS the Board of Commissioners of Orange County has elected to finance the local share of the costs of paving the said roads, as permitted by North Carolina General Statutes Section 153A-185(4) and as provided for in North Carolina General Statute Section 153A-205; - IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED THAT • -1- all • 1. Orange County shall undertake financing of the local share of paving North Carolina State Road #1803, also known as Wilkins Drive, - in Chapel Hill Township, Orange County, North Carolina. 2. That the basis for assessment for the local share of the costs of this project shall be frontage abutting the road at an equal rate per foot of frontage. 3. Orange County will assess the total local share according to the basis set out in number 2 above which local share represents approximately thirty- three percent (33%) of the total project cost. 4. No assessments of this project will be held in abeyance. 5. The assessments shall be paid in the following manner: a. Within thirty (30) days after the notice of confirmation of the assessment role is published, each owner of the property may pay his or her assessment in full. b. Any assessment not paid in full as provided above shall be paid in five equal annual installments with the first such installment, with interest, due sixty (60) days after the date that the assessment role is confirmed, and the remaining installments, with interest, due on the same date in each successive year until the assessment is paid in full. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED AND ORDERED that a public hearing on all matters covered by this preliminary assessment resolution will be held on the 6th day of May, 1985, at 7:30 o'clock p.m., during the regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, Orange County • -2- 012 Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina. The Clerk to the Board of Canmissioners is hereby authorized and directed to cause a notice of the public hearing to be given by pubication one time, not less than Ten (10) days prior to May 6, 1985, the date set for the hearing, in a newspaper having a general circulation in Orange County. Such notice shall be in substantially the•following form: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY • THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS TO FINANCE THE LOCAL SHARE OF THE CCSTS OF PAVING NORTH CAROLINA STATE ROAD #1803, ALSO KNOWN AS WI LKI I5 DRIVE, IN CHAPEL HILL TOWNSHIP, ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to Article 9 of Chapter I53A of the General S tatutes of North Carolina, the Board of Commissioners of Orange County has adopted a Preliminary Assessment Resolution as follows: 1. Orange County shall undertake financing of the local share of paving North Carolina State Road #1803, also known as Wilkins Drive, in Chapel Hill Township, Orange County, North Carolina. 2. The basis for assessment for the local share of the costs of this project shall be frontage abutting the road at an equal rate per foot of frontage. 3. Orange County will assess the total local share according to the basis set out in number 2 above which local share represents approximately thirty- three percent (33%) of the total project cost. • 4. No assessments of this project will be held in abeyance. -3- • 013 5. The assessments shall be paid in the following manner: a. Within thirty (30) days after the notice of confirmation of the assessment roll is published, each owner of the property may pay his or her assessment in full. b. Any assessment not paid in full as provided above shall be paid in five equal annual installments with the first such installment, with interest, due sixty (60) days after the date that the assessment role is confirmed, and the remaining installments, with interest, due on the same date in each successive year until the assessment is paid in full. A public hearing will be held at 7:30 o'clock p.m., on the 6th day of May, 1985, at the Orange County Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina, the regular place of meeting of the Board of Canmissioners of Orange County, North Carolina, in order to discuss all matters covered by the preliminary assessment resolution. At the time and place above stated any resident of Orange County. or any other Interested person may appear and be heard. This the of April, 1985. BEVERLY BLYTHE, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for Orange County, North Carolina The Clerk to the Board of Commissioners is hereby authorized and directed to cause a copy of this Preliminary Assessment Resolution to be mailed by first-class mail to each owner, as shown on the county tax • -4- a .r 014 • records of property subject to assessment if the project is undertaken, not less than Ten (10) days prior to May 6, 1985. The Clerk to the Board of Commissioners is hereby directed to file fvith the Board of Commissioners a certificate that the Preliminary Assessment Resolution was mailed as directed using a. form substantially as follows: CERTIFI CATE OF MAILING I , Beverly Blythe, -Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that on or before the 26th day of April, 1985, I mailed, by first-class mail, postage prepaid, a copy of the Preliminary Assessment Resolution for the financing by Orange County of the local share of the cost of paving North Carolina State Road # 1803, also known. as Wilkins Drive, in Chapel Hill Township, Orange County, North Carolina, to each owner, as shown on the County tax records of property subject to assessment if the project is undertaken. WITNESS my hand and official seal of the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina, this the day of April, 1985. • BEVERLY BLYTHE, Clerk to the .Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina (SEAL) This resolution is effective upon its passage. Thereupon Commissioner moved the .passage of the foregoing resolution and Commissioner seconded the motion, and the res ul tion was passed by the following, vote: -5- • 015 Ayes: • Noes: ************************************************************************** I , Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for' Orange County, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of the proceedings of said Board of Commissioners at a meeting held on the 16th day of April, 1985, so 'far as the same relate to the Preliminary Assessment Resolution for the financing by Orange County of the local share of the cost of paving North Carolina State Road #1803, also known as Wilkins Drive, in Chapel Hill Township, Orange County, North Carolina, as such proceedings are recorded in Minute Book WITNESS my hand and the offical seal of said Board, this the day of April, 1985. • BEVERLY BLYTHE, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina (SEAL) -6- o -E A meeting of the Board of Commissioners for Orange County, North Carolina, was held at Hillsborough, North Carolina, the regular place of meeting at 7;30 o'clock p.m., on May 6, 1985. Present: Absen t: *******************s*s**************************************************** The following resolution was read to the Board: FINAL ASSESSMENT RESOLUTION FOR THE FINANCING BY ORANGE COUNTY OF THE LOCAL SHARE OF THE COST OF PAVING NORTH CAROLINA STATE ROAD # 1803, ALSO KNOWN AS WILKINS DRIVE, LOCATED IN CHAPEL HI LL TOWNSHIP, ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. WHEREAS the Board of County Canmissioners of Orange County has elected to finance the local share of the cost of paving North Carolina State Road #1803, also known as Wilkins Drive, located in Chapel Hill Township, Orange County, as permitted by North Carolina General Statute Section 153A-185(4) and as provided for in North Carolina General • Statute Section 153A-205. IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED THAT: 1. Orange County shall undertake financing of the local share of paving North Carolina State Road #1803, also known as Wilkins Drive, in Chapel Hill Township, Orange County, North Carolina. • 2. That the basis for assessment for the local share of the costs of this project shall be frontage abutting the road at an equal rate per foot of frontage. 3. Orange County will assess the total local share according to is the basis set out in number 2 above which local share represents approximately thirty-three percent (33%) of the total project cost. 4. No assessments of this project will be held in abeyance. 5. The assessments shall be paid in the following manner: a. Within thirty (30) days after the notice of confirmation of • the assessment role is published, each owner of the property may pay his assessment in full. b. Any assessment not paid in full as provided. above shall be paid in five equal annual installments with the first such installment, with interest, due sixty (60) days after the date that the assessment role is confirmed, and the remaining installments, with interest, due on the same date in each successive year until the assessment is paid in full. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED AND ORDERED that: The total project cost and the amount to be financed and assessed by Orange County is $7,639.25, as follows: Local _Costs Total To Be Financed Costs By Orange County construction cost $23,000.00 $7,040.00 legal services 500.00 500.00 publication costs 75.00 75.00 mailing and other 24.25 24.25 Total project cost $23,599.25 $7,639.25 The County Manager is hereby directed to prepare a preliminary assessment roll which roll shall contain a tax description of each lot, parcel or tract of land assessed, the basis for the assessment, the amount -2- • 018 • assessed against each lot, parcel or tract of land assessed, the terms of payment and the name of the owner of each lot, parcel, or tract as far as can be ascertained from the County tax records. • After the preliminary assessment roll is corn plete d, it shall be filed in the office of the Clerk to the Board of Canmissioners, there to be ' available for public inspection until a public hearing is held on the said preliminary assessment roll. .A public hearing on the preliminary •assessment roll shall be held on 1985 at .m. , during the regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, , North Carolina. • The Clerk to the Board of Commissioners is hereby authorized and directed to cause a notice of the public hearing to be given by publication one time, not less than Ten (10) days prior to 1985, the date set for the hearing, in a newspaper having a general circulation in Orange County. Such notice shall be in substantially the ' following form: • NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL FILED WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF ORANGE COUNTY PURSUANT TO THE DIRECTION OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BC2ARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND PURSUANT TO THE BOARD'S DECISION TO FINANCE THE LOCAL SHARE OF THE OCST OF PAVING NORTH CAROLINA STATE ROAD #1803, ALSO KNOWN AS WILKINS DRIVE, IN CHAPEL HILL TOWNSHIP, ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Notice is hereby given that pursuant to Article 9 of Chapter 153A of the General Statutes of North Carolina, the Board of Commissioners -3- tX 019 of Orange County. has completed and filed a Preliminary Assessment Roll. • Pursuant thereto: 1. Orange County shall undertake the financing of the local . share of paving North Carolina State Road #1803, also known as Wilkins Drive, in Chapel Hill Township, Orange County, North Carolina. The amount to be financed by Orange County is estimated to be Seven Thousand Six Hundred Thirty- nine and 25/100 Dollars ($7,639.25), including costs and attorneys fees. That portion of the costs of paving . the above roads not financed by Orange County will be borne by the Department of Transportation or the State of North Carolina. 2. The assessment roll completed is on file with the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, and available to the public for ins pection. 3. The Public Hearing will be held at o'clock .m. on 1985, at the ^, • , North Carolina, the regular place of .meeting of the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina, in order to discuss all matters pertaining b the Preliminary Assessment Roll. At the time and place above stated, any resident of Orange County or any other interested person may appear and be heard. Dated, this the __ day of , 1985. • Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina • The clerk to the Board of Commissioners is hereby authorized 02C and directed to cause a notice of the hearing to be mailed by first-class mail to each owner of property as listed on the roll, not less than Ten (10) days prior to , 1985, the date set for the hearing. The notice shall be in substantially the following form: NOTICE TO: [owner and property description from assessment roll) SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ' DECISION TO FINANCE AND ASSESS THE LOCAL SHARE OF THE CCST OF PAVING NORTH CAROLINA STATE ROAD # 1803, ALSO KNOWN AS WILKINS DRIVE, IN CHAPEL HILL TOWNSHIP, ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that a Public Hearing will be held by the Orange County Board of Commissioners on , 1985 at o' clock .m. , at the -, -, North Carolina, to discuss all matters pertaining to the subject Preliminary Assessment Roll. The Preliminary Assessment Roll has been filed with the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County at the Orange County Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina, and is available for public inspection. Please note that the amount of assessment on the property • described in this Notice is $ , as shown on the Assessment Roll on file in the Office of the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina. Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina -5- • • 021 The Clerk to the Board of Commissioners is hereby directed_ to file with the Board of Commissioners a certificate that the notice of the public hearing on the preliminary assessment roll was mailed as directed using a form substantially as follows: F ~ CERTI FI CATE OF MAILING 1 , Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that on or about , 1985, I mailed, by first-class mail, postage prepaid, a Notice to each property owner of the Public Hearing to be held on the • Preliminary Assessment Roll for the financing by Orange County of the local share of the cost of paving North Carolina State Road #1803, also known as Wilkins Drive, located in Chapel Hill Township, Orange County, North Carolina. The Notice mailed set the date and time of the Public Hearing and also the amount of assessment on the property owned by the person to whom the Notice was sent according to the County tax records. WITNESS my hand and official seal of the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina, this the day of 1985. • Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina This resolution is effective upon its passage. Thereupon, Commissioner moved the passage of the foregoing resolution and Commissioner seconded the Motion, • -6- r— mismanor • • - 022 and the resolution was passed by the following vote: • Ayes: Noes: ************************************************************************** I , Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of the proceedings of said Board of Commissioners at a meeting held on , 1985, so far as the same relate to the Final Assessmen t Resolution, determination of the project costs and preparation of the Preliminary Assessment Roll for the financing by Orange County of the local share of the cost of paving North Carolina State Road #1803, also known as Wilkins Drive, located in Chapel Hill Township, Orange County, North Carolina, as such proceedings are recorded in the Minute Book. WITNESS my hand and the official seal of said Board, this the day of , 1985. Beverly Blythe, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of. Orange County, North Carolina (SEAL) • • -7- • 023 ORANGE COUNTY • BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS • ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date flay 6. _1985 Action Agenda Item tiF4- SUBJECT: HEART'S EASE SUBDIVISION DEPARTMENT: PLANNING - PUBLIC HEARING Yes X No Attachment(s) Information Contact: Eddie Kirk Checklist Vicinity Map Plan DOT Letter Draft April 15, 1985 Planning Board Minutes Telephone Numbers Hillsborough.- 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 - Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE: To consider approval of the Preliminary Plan for Heart's Ease Subdivision, NEED: Chuck Sneed has requested a subdivision for 34.7 acres of land from a 40.0 acre tract located west of SR 1450 Craig Road in Eno Township. The purpose of this request is to permit construction of a 33-unit subdivision. The property in question is known as lot 24A of Tax Map 16 in Eno Township. The property is partially located, within Lebanon Township in Durham County. 5.3 acres of the 40.0 acre tract is within Durham County. The applicant is requesting approval of those lots wholly within Orange County. Public roads constructed to state standards are proposed for the subdivision. The property is located within an Agricultural-Residential area designated in the Orange County Land Use Plan. That designation permits single-family residential. housing. The present zoning classification of the property is Agricultural- Residential (A-R) . This tract was originally proposed as Oakwood Estates, a planned development-housing project that was submitted for the public hearing on February 28, 1985. The applicant has subsequently withdrawn his request for a special use permit in order to pursue this subdivision request. 024 IMPACT: Approval of the request would allow a 33-lot subdivision to be constructed on the site. Development of a 33-unit subdivision would add 178 trips per day to Craig Road. The 1982 average daily traffic count on Umstead Road is 1200 ADT. The Durham County division of DOT estimates that the traffic count at this point on Craig Road is 500 - 700 ADT. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Board recommends approval. ....._...._.. MAJOR SUBDIVISION CHECKLIST NAME OF SUBDIVISION HEART'S EASE SUBDIVISION OWNER OR DEVELOPER Bill Snead ADDRESS RT.6,Box 122, Hillsborough, NC 27278 732-4403 TOWNSHIP ENO TAX MAP 16 BLOCK LOT 24A NAME of SURVEYOR OR ENGINEER Phil Post B Associates Total number of lots 33 To be- developed in • 1 phases), Total number of acres 34.7 In Orange County . Typical dwelling units at present or proposed 33 WATER SUPPLY:• Public (Name) Commnuity Individual X SEWAGE TREATMENT: Public -Community Individual Septic tank X SCHOOL DISTRICT range FIRE DISTRICT 'Eno Rural ' Access onto State Road 1#� �Road Standard: Public �, or Private Class A_ , B , C Existing critical areas such as streams ( ), Flood prone areas ( ), Watershed. ( }, Historic Sites ( ), other { ) Explain: Land uses in the general area SKETCH PLAN RECEIVED (Date) Approved ( ) Recommended Changes ( } PRELIMINARY PLAN RECEIVED (Date) REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAN RECEIVED (Date) Preliminary Review by Health Department Shown od Qinn Erosion Control Officer -4-9-85 Board of Education c Department of Transportation 9-t -g. 4-tt}-I3� OT-79SA (if possible) other -Mebane (if possible) Hillsborough (if possible) -Orange/ATamance .(if possible) Preliminary Action 'by the Planning Board Recommended Approval 4-1545 . Preliminary Action 'by the County Commissioners FINAL PLAT RECEIVED (Date) ( } All lots were approved by the Health Department ( ) Lots failing Health Departments approval are combined or listed properly on the plat. ( } Road Maintenance Agreement- submitted' (where applicable) . Approved ( ) improvements have been provided fort completed; bond, letter of credit, cash. ' Date ( ) Final OWASA approval (where applicable) on'all plans & specifications, Date ( ) Final DOT approval on plat ; ( } Final action by the Planning Board O" . 0 2E • - • • r, T., .,1 O. •• • "poseur -,. �. �n.;b:a. / ENG i-:P.G X757 L/ r .y{y.IC ..• .b([�' �. -_, r • ti• --? • • • • ..... ...---- C fir„• - .• /.' .1,— .. .. .4... ...L. , . . ot • F �. . A A' ..T% di ® gig 73 c c tt _s..\ ....--.. . , • At e g Vi r 5 u 4i ref ■ — 0 0 i - ■• . N , 1_ O :•.1, •• n•: w V 0 d• : •. . �` -4 i c W" . w 4 057.."• •• a o 0 ••� • 0 r. . •. 21 ¢ �` � - :'�� S Q N •-J ) e v st •. •i A • (� r+ i- ti ri �V t • • -f•ice,•_..- J'`r__ '�.•�. - • •__g_.,,--....1 —� - ti n^„ I ~ Ct ...:..i:�a• v` - • • .....--.........+•..r.rv..nw._.:..•iM`[.'.h•IVr sNT4:4'"-n•+:11•:Irn.+i'•!•."ShY•a.,.o..i.!"Y.•...•'K.v:• !`!!:.!F-..,p44/+0.'.•.!•Iw.sww..........-.-_... • • • O2 7 • - "CV1:71.1:u .4 4'45 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION • February 14, 1985 JAMES G.MARTIN GOVERNOR • - DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS JAMES E.HARRINGTON • • SECRETARY —' • Ms. Susan J. Smith Orange County Planning Dept. • Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 • . Dear Ms. Smith: we have completed a traffic engineering study of your request concerning access from Oakwood Estates onto SR 1455 (Craig Road) in Durham County. • • . Based on this study, it is our recommendation that Oakwood Estates be limited to one access point for safety purposes and that Ad- equate sight distance should be reserved at the proposed entrance. • - A recommended'entrance design is shown on the attached plan. . If further information is needed, please advise. Yours very truly, W. D. Smart, P. E. DIVISION TRAFFIC ENGINEER • wps/JTG/ir Atta. cc: C. C. Painter - D. B. Kelly (Div. 7 CSf216) R. A. Smith • Ty -`11g5-- re Alidiv/5°72 • • • • • • . • OR4Fr 1/0/45- 7iAWN(6 2t01/21> Afrit/015 02S • 4 Motion: Kizer moved approval. Seconded by Shanklin. Vote: Unanimous. b. Loretta R. Smith - Final • Presentation by Kirk. The purpose- of this agenda item is to consider • approval of the Final Plat for Loretta R. Smith subdivision. The Planning Board recommended approval of the plan on 3-18-85. The County Commissioners approved the preliminaryplan 4-1-85. The property in question is located in Cheeks • Township on East Lebanon Road (SR 1306) . It is known as part of Lot 7, Tax map 14. There is one 7 acre lot proposed. The property is zoned A-R and is designated Agricultural-Residential and Water Supply Watershed in the Land Use Plan. The lot has state road frontage and is located in the Efland Rural Fire District. The addition of one 7 acre lot will have minimal impact. The Planning Staff recommends approval. This subidvision was originally five (5) acres but was increased to seven (7) acres to enable placement of a septic tank. Motion: Shanklin moved approval. Seconded by Yuhasz. Vote: Unanimous. C. Heart's Ease Subdivision Presentation by Kirk. The purpose of this agenda item is to consider approval of the Preliminary Plan for Heart's Ease Subdivision. Chuck Sneed has requested a subdivision for 34.7 acres of land from a 40.0 acre tract located west of SR 1450 Craig road in Eno Township. The purpose of this request is to permit constructionof a 33-unit subdivision. The property in question is known as lot 24A of Tax Map 16 in Eno Township. The property is partially located within Lebanon Township in 02S 5 Durham County, . 5.3 acres of the 40.09 acre • tract is within Durham County. The applicant • is requesting approval of those lots wholly within Orange County. Public roads constructed to state standards are proposed for the subdivison. The property is located within an Agricultural -Residential area designated in the Orange County Land Use Plan. That designation permits single-family residential housing. The present zoning classificatnion of the propertyt is Agricultural-Residential (A-R) . This tract was originally proposed as Oakwood esates, a planned development-housing project that was submitted for the public hearing on February 28, 1985. The applicant has subsequently withdrawn his request for a special use permit in order to pursue this subdivision request. Approvalof the request would allow a 33-lot subdvision to be constructed on the site. Development of a 33-unit subdivision would add 178 trips per day to craig road. The 1982 average daily traffic count on Umstead Road is 1200 ADT. The Durham County division of Dot estimates that the traffic count at this point on Craig Road is 500 - 700 ADT. The Planning Staff recommends approval. Gordon noted that the checklist was incomplete. The source of water supply was not check on the list and also the type of dwelling units that would be placed in the subdivision. Kirk responded that with a sstraight subdivisio there could be either mobie. homes or stick- built houses. The water supply will be individual wells. Pearson noted that since a straight subdivision could have either mobiles or stick-built homes, the question of type of dwelling units would not matter. Margison questioned 'individual wells and septci/tanks. The owner Mr. Sneed noted the lots would be sold as individual lots and would all have wells and septic tanks. Wer-- 03C 6 Smith added that there was no public water and sewer available in this area. Pilkey stated that she had questions on the LPP on the site plan. The Health Department told her that LPP menas Low Pressure Pipe system. According to Pearson, this kind of septic system is more trouble-free and takes up less space than -a traditional system. Pilkey also noted that Lot #14 was shown as questionable. Kirk responded that the Health Department had not yet found suitable sites. It is possible that the areas marked questionable may not be used at all. Mr. Sneed stated that only one site had been tested but that he was willing to pay permit • fees for the remainder of the acreage to be tested for suitability. • Kizer noted that the property could be subdivided even if some of the lots were not usable. Yuhasz inquired about lot 11. Smith responded that all those lots in were under Durham County's jurisdiction and the applicant has not yet applied to DurhamCounty for subdivisionof these lots. Motion: Pearson moved approval. Seconded by Shanklin. Vote: 6 in favor. 2 opposed. Pilkey opposed due to the feeling that more cars and more developmentare not needed on Craig Road. Gordon opposed due to incomplete information • regarding water and sewer. Smith explained the preliminary and final process for the benefit of new Board members. (Walters left at 8:05 p.m.) Item #7: Matters for Decision• Presentation by Smith. 031 • ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date May 6. 1985 Actionlrnda Item W SUBJECT: AMEND ORANGE COUNTY PRIVATE ROAD STANDARDS TO ELIMINATE REQUIREMENT FOR ROAD SIGN ON ROADS LESS THAN 500 FEET DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC BEARING Yes _11. No • Attachment(s) Information Contact: Janet Van Handel Orange County Private Road Keith Rosemond Standards -Page 1 & Page 5 Draft April 15, 1985 Planning Board Minutes Telephone numbers Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE: To amend Orange County Private Road Standards to eliminate the requirement for a road sign on Class C roads less than 500 feet in length. To receive the Planning Board's recommendation to delete this requirement. NEED: Since the revision of the Private Road Standards on July 5, 1981, Class C private roads under 500' do not have to be constructed or inspected by the Planning Department, However, a road sign is still required. The citizen is often required • to purchase a sign at a cost of $50 to $75 for a road that is never constructed. In most cases, the road sign is never erected. If we would require erection of the sign, it often would not indicate where a road .is located, but would be placed by a woods or field. This expense has been major complaint of citizens over the past nineteen months and it is difficult for staff to justify this requirement. When the Private Road Standards were reviewed by the Planning Board in July, 1983, there ws a discussion of road signs needed for Class C roads under 500 feet, At that time, the Board decided to require road signs on all, private roads. Since then staff experience has indicated a need to bring this requirement before the Board for reconsideration. 032 Approximately 20% of the private roads would be affected by this revision. There are an average of 30 private roads approved each year. The Planning Board considered this matter for recommendation at their April 15, 1985 meeting. The Board also directed staff to prepare information on road maintenance agreements and construction and/or bonding of private roads for the Board's consideration at a subsequent meeting. IMPACT: Citizens would not have to purchase a road sign for Class C roads under 500 feet in length. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Board recommends that the Private Road Standards section Road Name ang Sigm be amended to provide as follows; "Class C roads under 500' in length are required to be named, but are not required to have a road sign provided." rroposea may 114 Lats3 • _ • Approved July 5, 1983 / - • • ORANGE COUNTY PRIVATE ROAD STANDARDS Orange County allows the construction of Private Roads to serve lots within subdivisions that do not have accesd to state-maintained roads. The purpose of a Private Road is to insure that all lots have docUtdented legal right-of-way and to provide adequate access for residents and emergency vehicles. Private Roads may be permitted in situations where one- or more of the following conditions exist: • • 1. traffic volume would be small 2. the subdivision consists of less than 10 (ten) lots 3. the division would preserve a natural, area through deed restrictions and special design features 4. the division is adjacent to property using an existing Private Road for access 5• the property does not abut any important street 6. the road would not be accepted by the State even if built to their standards because of the low housing density or length • After initial construction of the Private Road, maintenance must be provided by the property owners that use the road. A Road Maintenance Agreement or Declaration between the lot owners is required to insure that the needed repairs are made. Since Private Roads are not constructed to North Carolina Department of Transportation standards, they will not be added to the Secondary Road System and-will not be main- -tained by- the State or Orange County. • The standards and specifications for Private Roads apply to subdivisions in Orange • County and the class of road required depends on the number of lots served by the road. A Class C road serves 1 to 3 lots, a Class B road serves 4 to 9 lots and a Class A road serves 10 or more lots. ' (Class A road requires approval of the Board of County Commissioners). Generally, subdivision with ten (10) or more lots are required to . construct a road to the standards of the North Carolina Department of Transpcirtation. (Exceptions to this may be allowed under the conditions listed above.) Before the final plat of the subdivision can be recorded, the Private Road must be built and approved, or the applicant must post a security imtrument with the County in an amount that would cover the cost of constructing- the roadliplass- C Private Roads that are 500' OZ- less in length are not required to be constructed to Orange County Standards or to be inspected before recordation of the final plat. However, Orange County recommends that these Class C roads Vbebuilttothesest&ndards in-order to provide adequate access, es.ecially for emeruenc- 'vehicles which reauire the clearances and turn areas shown on 111 tE_ERasi7 fications. *- Construction of the Private Road must be inspected ad approved by the Orange County Planning Depart-mint. The road should be inspected during construction in order that any changes necessary to insure approval can be made before the final inspection. ' In order for these inspections to be made during construction, the property owner must inform the Planning Department prior to the start of grading so that the inspections can be scheduled. The inspections by the Planning Department are made only to insure the road is built to the required dimensions, that an acceptable stone surface is pro- vided, any disturbed areas are seeded in permanent vegetation and the road sign is in place. The County does not assume responsibility for such qualityV control inspections as compaction of fill or construction materials. • The person having the road built should have a qualified grading •contractor to insure that adequate methods and materials are 'used. • 1 VV - - . • - . . . . . . 03 4 • . Drainace . • Ditches shall be constructed to psoaqide drainage frma the road and adjacent areas. The ditches shall be built with sufficient depth to carry the expected volume'of water. The side slopes shall be , -aded so that they can be stabilized ' and to prevent vehicles too= becoming stuck if they slide into the ditch. • Where the road crosses streams or minor watercourses, culverts shall, be installed to =event zonding and washouts of the road. Co streams where it is not economical to install a large culvert of the raszired size, the Erosion Conft.ol Officer may allow the installation of a smaller culvert if provisions are m.P.OA to protect the road surface and fill slopes from erosion when runoff tops the road.. Turn— rounds • • Vehicle turn-around areas shall be provided at the end of all, dead end roads. This can be accomplished by ending the road in a cul-de-sac or a "T". Cul-de-sacs shall have a min4m',m diameter of 70' . A "T" turn-around must conform to the dimensions in the diagram below. The "T" type turn-around is prefered. • The location of the turn-around will, depend on the arrangement of the lots in the subdivision. If the Private Road serves only one lot the turn-around should be located near the building site. In a subdivision with several lots the turn- around should be at the end of the road and the necessary right-of-way provided. • - : --I .0— • 50' . ' 1 - . 1- 40' a.1 . . 12' •Travelway _____ 40' 50' Wsbt,of-Way 1: 1.-_--- 1 . I 20' 1 . . . Road Name and Sico • • .. . The road nnvb shall be verified with the Orange County Planning Depa- m-nt to insure that the oroposed name doss not duplicate an existing name. 'Ille road sign must have one blade showing the name of the Private Road and anco-her showing the name of the existing State maintained road. Class C roads of any length are re- quired to be named and to have a road sign Posted * .. . . _ „...... . __ . . _.__ _ . . JAAFT lefr Fatki 4.3a4-Rb M/A/07e6 O. z tit 7 2,06: - 0 . I , • o_ $t wr: - t. • . _•• Elinlia-k-te--ReaRaglaant-- on RoadA l'ess The purpose of this agenda item is to amend Orange County Private Road Standards to eliminate the requirement for a road sign on Class C roads less than 500 feet in length. Since the revision of the Private Road Standards on July 5, 1981, Class C private roads under 500 ' do not have to be constructed or inspected by the Planning Department. However, a road sign is still required. The citizen is often required to purchase a sign at cost of $50 to $75 for a road that is never constructed. In most cases, the road sign is • never erected. If we would require erection of the sign, it often would not indicate where a road is located, but would be placed by a woods or field. This expense has been a major complaint of citizens over the past ninteen • months and it is difficult for staff to justify this requirement. When the private Road Standards were reviewed by the Planning Board in July, 1983, there was a dicussion of road signs needed for Class C roads under 500 feet. At that time, the Board decided to require road signs on all private roads. Since then staff experience has indicated a need to bring this requirement before the Board for reconsideration. • Approximately 20% of the private roads would be affected by this revision. There are an average of 30 private roads approved each year. Citizens would not have to purchase a road sign for Class C roads under 500 feet in length. The Planning Staff recommends that the Planning Board consier the following alternatives: 1) No change in the provisions of the Private Road Standards. 2) Amend Private Road Standards section Road_Namg• And Sign to provide as follows: "Class C roads under 500' in length are required to be named, but are not required to have a road sign•provided. " • 03€ 8 3) Amend Private Road Standards (page 1) to delete the provision regarding Class C roads less than 500' or less in length, thereby requiring that they be constructed. Gordon asked if staff had , spoken with the County Attorney. Smith, responded that they had, and that the attorney has raised questions regarding the matter of actual construction versus bonding of roads to be constructed. The Board discussed the difference private roads versus driveways. The Board discussed volunteer fire department needs for signs on private roads. Best indicate that each volunteer fire district maps the roads in the district. Yuhasz expressed concern of old roads having problems meeting current subdivision standards. Kizer emphasized that the key standard was the legal guarantee of access over time. He noted that even if the road is never built access is recorded for the future. Shanklin questioned requiring signs on private roads. The Board discussed this matter. Shanklin preferred that property owners have an option in providing road signs. Motion: Shanklin moved alternative #2 amend Private Road Standards section ' .a. N. ._to to provide as follows: "Class C roads under 500' in length are reqired to be named but are not required to have a road sign provided. Yuhasz seconded. Best inquired how roads were named. Smith responded, staff reviews proposed names to prevent road name duplication with road names in the County and surrounding area and indicated that staff maintained an available road name file. Yuhasz asked if the Board should consider deleting the road maintenance agreement for Class C roads under 500' . Kizer responded that it was premature to discuss whether other statutes are applicable, indicating a desire to discuss- the matter with the County Attorney. Gordon advised the Board to keep to the narrow 037 9 focus of the road sign question. She added that the Board could discuss the broader issues raised regarding the legal question about road maintenance agreements and constructions of Class C roads under 500' in length on April 29. The Board -discussed the value of private road signs in providing emergency services. . Vote: 5 in favor. 3 opposed. (Best, Gordon, Margison) O3 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date May §. 1985 Action Item Fr SUBJECT: ADVERTISEMENT OF PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS TEXT AMENDMENTS DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes JL No Attachment(s) Information Contact: SUSAN SMITH LEGAL NOTICE Telephone Numbers • Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE: To review the legal advertisements for matters to be presented to public hearing. To set a public hearing for May 28, 1985. NEED: The Board of Commissioners has expressed a desire to review any proposal for text amendments to. the County Ordinances and the legal notices advertising the same prior to advertisement. • The Planning Board reviewed the proposed text amendments and endorsed their submittal to public hearing at their April 29, 1985 meeting. The planning staff is proposing several ordinance amendments including: * provide for Non-Profit Educational Cooperatives as permitted uses with a Class A Special use Permit in the A-R zoning district * allow for the replacement of non-conforming mobile homes on individual lots outside of mobile home parks * revise minimum lot area requirements for the watershed districts to refer to square footage versus acreage in a manner consistent with lot area requirements for other zoning districts * add the definitions of No - o *tra_PrhIclucsitjsnals& and OgatilLeInlidental and delete the definitions of Farming and Bona-Fide Farm Oab revise the standards of evaluation for partial width rights- of-way for subdivisions. IMPACT: Review of the proposed advertisements would insure that the legal notice of the public hearing is in a form that can be understood by persons not familiar with the subject. RECOMMENDATION: Accept as to form. Schedule a public hearing on these matters for May 28, 1985. 04C 1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS OF ORANGE COUNTY, N.C. Pursuant to the requirements of the General Statutes of North Carolina, Chapter 153A, Section 323 and Section 34a, Article 20.5 and Article 20.6 of the Orange County . Zoning. Ordinance and Section VIII of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations, notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held in the Superior Courtroom of the Orange County Courthouse, 106 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, North Carolina on Tuesday, May 28, 1985 at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of giving all interested citizens an opportunity to speak for or against the adoption of proposed amendments to the Orange County Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Atlas and Subdivision Regulations. The amendments under consideration are as follows: 1. ZONINCz ORDINANCL TEXT AMENDMENTS a. Amend Section 4.3 Permitted Use Table to permit non-profit educational cooperatives with a Class A Special Use Permit in the Agricultural-Residential (A-R) zoning district. This use is not specifically permitted in the Zoning Ordinance. b. Amend Section 5.1.2 Schedule for Non-Residential Development to specify minimum lot area of 200,000 square feet for the Protected Watershed-Industrial (PW-I) zoning district. The minimum lot area for the PW-I district erroneously reads 400,00 square feet in the table of dimensional requirements, but is specified as five acres in the text describing the zoning district and applicable standards. c. Amend Sections 6.16.6.1 d) Home Occupap Lions in Ali, Rea dentiej Districts e pt AR_ and RR-1 and 6.16.2 c) some Occupations in the AR and R-1 Districts to clarify that only the on-premises sale of goods produced by a home-occupation or incidental to the provision of a service are permitted in a home occupation. The intent of the current provision in the ordinance is not clear. d. Amend Sections 6.23.5 Minimum Size regulated_ , 6.24.1 Miff Lot 51,2e Regulated, and 7.19.1 PD-PWI D,strict• De ined, ID ent Mere Permitted to provide for lot area minimums in the watershed districts in terms of square footage as opposed to acreage. Minimum lot area requirements elsewhere in the ordinance are provided in terms of square footage. 041 2 e. Amend Article 8 by adding Section 8.8.24 lionducAtjamsli Cooperative as a permitted use requiring a Class A Special Use Permit. This use is not specifically permitted in the Zoning Ordinance. f. Amend Section 11.9 on Confgrming Uses of Bajor Structurqs. or Structures an0 Premises in Combination by adding 11.9 e) which would allow replacement of individual non-conforming mobile homes outside of mobile home parks. The replacement of non-conforming mobile homes on individual lots is not currently permitted. g. Amend Article 22 Definitions to add definitions of a "Non-Profit Educational Cooperative" and "Goods, Incidental"; to delete the definitions of "Farming" and "Bona-fide Farm"; and to delete the reference to "Farming" in the definition of "Farming Definitions". The definitions of "Non-profit Educational Cooperative" and "Goods, Incidental" are required in association with proposed ordinance amendments. Orange County does not presently have the statutory authority to define "Farming" or "Bona-fide Farm". 2. 30 ‘,SRKGELAMDEs...232 ^ AT Amend Section 1V-B-3-C-2 Partial Widths to provide for additional standards of evaluation for requests for partial width rights-of- way in subdivisions. The current ordinance provides only for a 25' partial width right-of-way where the property subject to subdivision adjoins undeveloped land. All interested citizens are invited to attend this hearing and be heard. Changes may be made in the advertised proposals which reflect debate, objections and discussions at the hearing. • Citizens unable to attend the hearing may express their views by writing to the Orange County Planning Department, 106 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278. For your concerns to be fully considered, they must be received by the Planning Department prior to the public hearing. Questions regarding the proposals should be directed to the Orange County Planning Department. Copies of the proposed full amendments are available in the Planning Department for public review. The Planning Department is located in the New Courthouse, 106 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough. Office hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. , Monday through Friday. PUBLISH: May 15, 19o5 May 22, 1985 MARVIN COLLINS, PLANNING DIRECTOR 042 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD Ca4MISMONERS Action Agenda ACTION AGENDA l'ITN ABSTRACT Item No. Fl Meeting Date: MAY 6, 1985 SUBJECT: SMTE-LOCAL ACTION AGENDA, FALLS AND JORDAN WATERSHEDS DEPARTMENT': BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PUBLIC HEARING: __Yes A_No ATTACHRENT(S) : INFURIATION CONTACT: DON WILLHOIT X 505 TELEPHONE NUMBER: YES Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham _ - 688-7 3 31 PURPOSE: To update the Board on current status of the State's watershed protection efforts and request a study by the Planning Board and Planning Staff. NEED: Orange County has not fully responded to the State-local Action Agenda that has been adopted by the State and local governments. A copy of the Local Action Plan Matrix for each of the water- sheds is attached which indicates that Orange County has not completed action on the Local Hazardous Materials Inventory, nor have the 1/2" stormwater infiltration or the 50-foot stream buffer been made applicable throughout the Falls watershed in Orange County. IMPACT• Completion of the items cited above would place Orange County in full conlaiance with the resolution adopted by the Board on November 15, 1983. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Request the Planning Board and Planning Staff to complete their consideration of the hazardous materials inventory issue and report their reconmendation to the Board of Ccaudssioners. 2. Add for the May 28, 1985 Public Hearing, a proposed amend- ment to the Subdivision Ordinance which would incorporate the 1/211 stormwater infiltration and the 50-foot stream buffer protection measures within the Falls and Jordan Watersheds. O44 ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 106 EAST MARGARET LANE ITILLSBO ROUGH, N. C. 27278 RICA 1RD L.WIIITFFD UN LLOYD CHM FT F MARSHALL NORMAN WALKER PON WILLHOIT April 25, 1985 W. Lee Fleming, Jr. Water Quality Section Chief NRCD 512 North Salisbury Street Raleigh, NC 27611 Dear Mr. Fleming: We have reviewed the Local Action Plan Matrix for the Falls and the Jordan Watersheds and find that they indicate the current status for Orange County. The Orange County Planning Department has included in its 1985-86 Work Program, proposals for area studies of the two un- zoned townships. These studies will be addressing water quality protection issues as they relate to Little River and Cedar Grove Townships. Both drain into the Falls Watershed and have been designated, or considered, as potential water supply watersheds on the local level . We will also be considering amendments to the Subdivision Ordinance, which is applicable county-wide, as a means of addressing the water quality concerns in these townships. A Planning Department Intern recently completed a report on efforts of surrounding counties in hazardous waste control. The report also included suggestions for a model program which the Planning Staff will consider in its 1985-86 Work Program. Copies of ordinances enacted by the Orange County Board of Commissioners are enclosed for your information. If any addi- tional information is needed, please let me know. rerely, CALV8--, Don Willhoit, Chair LOCAL ACTION PLAN MATRIX FOR FALLS WATERSHED 044 MAY 9 ;1985 LEGEND NA. NOT APPLICABLE RACTION REJECTED •ACTION BEING IMPLEMENTED 01ACTION BEING CONSIDERED 4414CiTIZZONE240140LIC"OARD. ACTION ENDORSED BY POLICY BOARD ,i_kc 'pay A INTpuRnoti uFicouNTTNTED\ cz; CZ1 (S 44 4, ° 4.41 ,zt. N4 CI !ACTION , 'Zik; ,,st-/"" Ca iCt. /qv LOCAL SEDIMENTATION/EROSION 42) 411 • 0 0 0 42) 41, . PROGRAM COUNTY SOIL & WATER PLANS FOR I NA INA 40 41, 411 NA 410 CRITICAL EROSION AREAS INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT ,4A- 411 INA INA 411 INA INA 410 INA PROGRAM LOCAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS . (2) (z) 1/2" STORMWATER REQUIREMENT ( • 4!) 0 () A (:) S . 50-FOOT STREAM BUFFERS 00 , 00A00.0 WATER QUALITY CRITICAL AREAS INA 411 4!) (2) INA NA INA 410 410 ' DESIGNATED: 6% IMPERVIOUS LIMIT INA • e 0 INA NA I NA RESTRICTED • INA e C/I DEVELOPMENT NA NA INA _— NO SEWER EXTENSIONS INA * 4!)., (2) INA INA INA 410 410 12% IMPERVIOUS LIMIT: (UNSEWERED/NON—CRITICAL) -- 30% IMPERVIOUS LIMIT: (SEWERED/NON—CRITICAL) e AINA e) NA INA INA LIMITED INDUSTRY AREAS DESIGNATED 4!) 410 4!). NA iNA * ALLOW GRAVITY FLOW SEWER EXTENSIONS, BUT INCREASE STORMWATER REQUIREMENT TO 1". CH INDICATES RECENT CHANGES LOCAL ACTION PLAN MATRIX FOR JORDAN WATERSHED MAY 9 1985 LEGEND RA NOT APPLICABLE ACTION BEING IMPLEMENTED [!ACTION REJECTED I ACTION BEING CONSIDERED ACTION ENDORSED BY POLICY BOARD I IN,PORTION OF COUNTY ACTION ENDORSED BY POLICY BOARD iACTION BEING IMPLEMENTED IN PORTION OF COUNTY I . cam.. v .O • O '4 h /° 0 • ACTION' /a / r o /a i'c"ti /t7 % /a~' 3� LOCAL SEDIMENTATION/EROSION ® 0 -" 0 PROGRAM COUNTY CRITICAL OEROSION AREAS SANS FOR INA INA INA INA INA INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT NA • INA, I NA INA Q? INA LOCAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INVENTORY 040 1/2" STORMWATER REQUIREMENT 0 0 •DIVA 50-FOOT STREAM BUFFERS 000000. INA LA O'. • WATER •QUALITY CRITICAL AREAS ;NA NA INA INA ANA INA :NA. ' DESIGNATED: 6% IMPERVIOUS LIMIT INA INA INA" ® 411 0 INA NA INA INA RESTRICTED INA INA INA 0 INA INA INA INA C/I DEVELOPMENT NO,SEWER EXTENSIONS ANA INA INA 0 * , NA INA INA INA 12% IMPERVIOUS (UNSEWERED/NON-CRITICAL) A 0 . NA 30% IMPERVIOUS LIMIT: a (SEWERED/NON-CRITICAL) 'NA INA INA NA INA (� LIMITED DESIGNATED NA AREAS NA INA 410 Q INA INA INA (2) * ALLOW GRAVITY FLOW SEWER EXTENSIONS, BUT INCREASE , - STORMWATER REQUIREMENT TO 1". cN INDICATES RECENT CHANGES 046 • ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date May 6, 1_985 Action Agenda Item SUBJECT: ADDITION OF WINNINGHAM ROAD AND CAMP GROUND ROAD TO THE STATE MAINTAINED ROAD SYSTEM DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes g No Attachment(s) Information Contact: SUSAN SMITH a) (2) April 26, 1985 letters- Sam Jones b) DOT addition investigation report c) Location Map Telephone Numbers Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 PURPOSE: To consider NCDOT petitions for approval of the addition of Winningham Road in the Clyde Bowden subdivision and Camp Ground Road to the state-maintained secondary road system. NEED: Addition of Winningham Road, a paved road, to the state maintained road system. Addition of Camp Ground Road, an unpaved road, to the state- maintained road system. IMPACT: The Board's decision will be forwarded to the N.C. Board of Transportation for their deliberation on acceptance of the road to the state-maintained secondary road system. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the addition of Winningham Road to the state- maintained road system. Not recommend _addition of Camp Ground Road to the state- maintained road system due to excessive cost of approximately $5000.00 per house for improvements. RECID APR 2 9 1985 41, sw. Ci -14 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENTOFTRANSPORTAT1ON Graham, NC 27253-0766 JAMES C.MARTIN GOVERNOR April 26, 1985 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS JAMES E.HARRINGTON SECRETARY Orange County Mr. Kenneth R. Thompson, County Manager Orange County 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, NC 27278 Subject: Petition for Addition - Winningham Road, Property of Clyde H. Bowden Dear Mr. Thompson: Attached is Form SR-4, Secondary Road Addition In- vestigation Report, for Winningham Road, property of Clyde H. Bowden. • This is being forwarded to you for review by your Board of Commissioners. Yours very truly, 4=5:0 AOlfete.:410-1"teK4 S. H. Jones DISTRICT ENGINEER /jbh Atte. cc: Mr. J. W. Watkins An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer r I , 04E NORTH CAROLINA STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION . a DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS - SECONDARY ROAD ADDITION INVESTIGATION REPORT County Orange Co. File No. Date Township ch,ppi pm Div. File No. Local Name Winningham Road Subdivision Name Clyde U. Bowden Property Length 0.45 Width 20' Type G I Condition . Good Is this a subdivision street subject to the construction requirements for such streets? yes Recorded**see RemarkBOOk**See Remarlaage **Bee Remarks Is this a subdivision street subject to participation paving? jag _ Number of homes having entrances into road vino Other uses having entrances into road NnTy, • Does right-of-way obtained meet present Division of Highways requirement? Dedicated If not, why? __ Is petition (SR-1) attached? yes Is the County Commissioners' Approval (SR-2) attached? If not, why? • Does the road meet present minimum Division of Highways construction requirements? Yes If not, state what is needed to place the road in an acceptable maintenance condition under Remarks and Recommendations. Is a map attached indicating information for reference in locating road by the •Planning Department? Cost to place in acceptable maintenance condition: Total Cost $ 0.00 Grade, drain, stabilize $ , Drainage $ , Other $ Remarks and Recdmmendationsmeata minimum requirements; thence recommend addition. **Phase One - 01-16-78 - Book 27. Page 173 ***, - - 4 a - • -0'-79 - Book 30 Pale 15 **Phase Three 10-24-83 - Book 38, Page 1 Reviewed and approved • Board of Transportation Member ......_______ Reviewed and approved J. W. Watkins Sr R. Jones DIVISION ENGINEER DISTRICT ENGINEER '.I (Do not write in this space - i ...,_ :Tr For use of Secondary Roads Dept.) • . . ... .... 1-1 1' '-44 '.--- . , Ms • 19°' .-.. ... —1111t,,t •■ 44 .1 _op_ __ /.4.,,p •..7,-91-\,,,. Petition No. I ' ll n ma :•. -i-R-1 b' P.m! v - . pill 7 sum nm V ,of . .a•• A. 41. . ....... (Do not write in this space - For use of Planning Dept.) C H A T H A M • / REgq) APR 2 9 1985 0. • 0 4 Et lk STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Graham, NC 27253-0766 JAMES G.MARTIN GOVERNOR April 26, 1985 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS JAMES E.HARRINGTON SECRETARY Orange County Mr. Kenneth R. Thompson, County Manager Orange County 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, North Carolina 2727S Subject: Petition for Addition - Camp Ground Road Petition No. 12115 Dear Mr. Thompson: Attached is Porn SR-4, Secondary Road Addition In- vestigation. Report for Camp Ground Road. This is being forwarded to you for review by your Board of Commissioners. Yours very truly, cn5: 4,15/4: 0,22.46- S. H. Jone 4 DISTRICT ENGINEER /jbh At ta. cc: J. W. Watkins An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer ! s' , 05C Ft NORTH CAROLINA STATE.DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION = - ---," DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS SECONDARY ROAD ADDITION INVESTIGATION REPORT - County Orange Co. File No. Date Township Chapel Hill • Div. File No. x Local Name Camp Ground Road (Petition.No. 12115) Subdivision Name N/A, Length 0.55 Width 10' Type B Condition Poor t Is this a subdivision street subject to the construction requirements for such streets? No Recorded ---- Book -�--- Page --- - Is this a subdivision street subject to participation paving? .No Number of homes having entrances into road seven. (7) r Other uses having entrances into road churcl, Camp (trot used regularly) Does right-of-way obtained meet present Division of Highways requirement? No If not, why? Not acquired. Is petition (SR-1) attached? Yes Is the County Commissioners' Approval (SR-2) attached? If not, why? Does the road meet present minimum Division of Highways construction requirements? No If not, state what is needed to place the road in an acceptable maintenance condition under Remarks and Recommendations. Is a map attached indicating information for reference in locating road by the Planning Department? Yes Cost to place in acceptable maintenance condition: Total Cost $_34,000.00 Grade, drain, stabilize $33,000.00. , Drainage $ 1,000.00 , Other $- 1,000.00 Remarks and Recommendations Grade, drain, and stabilize. Meets minimum reguiremau-ts, however, cost too excessive for number of homes served; therefore, recommend do not add. Reviewed and approved Board of Transportation Member Reviewed and approved J. W. Watkins S.- H. Jones DIVISTnM cm"T"IER DISTRICT ENGINEER (Do not write in this space - a, Al . For use of Secondary Roads Dept. ) Jo d : 'A' �' Petition No. �ry � 4 (Do not write in this space - For use of Planning Dept.) oet r los , `_� 4 .. 051 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Item No.F7C‘ Meeting Date: May 6, 1985 SUBJECT: HANDICAPPED RAMP 911 CENTER DEPARTMENT: EMERGENCY SERVICES PUBLIC HEARING: YES X NO ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: BILL LAWS • YES TELEPHONE NUMBER: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 967-9251 EXT. 501 PURPOSE: To present drawing and cost estimates to the Board of Commissioners for approval. NEED:, The attached sketch is a result of our self evaluation of the ' facility for handicapped access. • IMPACT: The total estimate for this project is $2,150.00. Fundina would• come from the Handicapped Access Project in the 1984-85- Capital Fund. RECOMMENDATIONS: Board approve design and funding for ramp and slab for parking. • I It\ I) - • _-_ • _ . - ne. • • esti. )4f. ( . • . _ 052 • • • • • I • is _ P J•. fi