HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 08-03-1981 AGENDA
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY AUGUST 3, 1981
10:00 A. M.
COMMISSIONERS' ROOM, ORANGE COUNTY COURTHOUSE
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA
1 . Does any Board member desire to modify this agenda?
2. Does any member of the audience desire to address the Board about:
A. Matters on the agenda;
B. Matters not on this agenda?
3. The clerk submits minutes of meetings held May 4, 1981 ; June 1 , 4, 8, 9,
10 & 10th, 11 , 15, 16, 17, 18, 1981 and July 2 and 7, 1981 for Board
consideration.
4. Will the Board approve Proposed Principles for the First Year of Block
Grants as adopted by the Human Services Advisory Commission?
5. The Manager recommends that the following positions be unfrozen:
A. Two eligibility Specialist I's in the Department of Social Services;
B. Dispatcher in the Communications Department;
C. Veterans Service Officer;
D. Child Support Officer;
E. Public Health Nurse II and Public Health Nurse I in the Health
Department;
F. Courier - Part-time in the Central Services Department.
6. The Social Services Board submits for Board consideration the following items:
A. Reduction in Force Proposal ;
B. Reduction in Services Proposal ;
C. Legal Services Contract with the law firm of Northern, Little & Bagwell.
7. The Commission for Women will present to the Board their recent publication
"A Guide to Seeking Quality Child Care in Orange County".
-
8. Will the Board apply again for Balanced Growth Designation from the
State of North Carolina?
9. Board discussion regarding the sale of alcohol to minors.
10. Will the Board certify Chapel Hill Fireman as required by the North. Carolina
Fireman's Pension Fund? (Has already been certified by the Chapel Hill Town
Council on July 13, 1981)
11 . The Planning Board recommends:
A. Approval of the preliminary plan for Elizabeth Pegg Latta Subdivision;
B. Approval of the minor subdivision of the property of Carl and June Lowe;
C. Approval of the minor subdivision of the property of Roy C. Belon;
D. Approval of the preliminary plan for the property of Gary and Gail
Barker Subdivision.
12. The Road Naming Advisory Committee requests that the Board hold a Public
Hearing on the naming of remaining State maintained roads on September 21 , 1981
13. The Manager recommends that the Board approve a Mutual Aid Agreement concerning
Emergency Management.
14. The Manager recommends changes in the Personnel Policy concerning Annual
Accrued Vacation Leave.
15. The Tax Supervisor will present to the Board information concerning tax
refunds and releases heard in the July 22, 1981 meeting.
16. The Finance Director presents Budget Amendments for Board consideration.
17. Will the Board adopt a Resolution authorizing execution of an Annual
Contributions Contract for the Orange County Housing Assistance Payments
Program - 33 additional units?
18. Will the Board appoint the voting delegate for the Annual Conference of
the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners?
19. Appointments:
A. OWASA - 1 vacancy;
B. Energy Commission - at large vacancy;
C. Chapel Hill Board of Adjustment;
D. Personnel Advisory Board;
E. Board of Adjustment - 1 vacancy;
F. Board of Health - two appointments expire, both eligible for re-
appointment.
G. Planning Board - Little River Township
fr.isp 3O
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 4
ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Room No 12
106 EAST MARGAREI LANE
HILLSBOROUGH. N. C.
27278
ANNE BAINES,Ch.:,
NORMAN GUSTAVP.SON
NORMAN WALICIIR
RICILAID WH1ED
DONALD WILLMOIT July 28, 1981
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ms. Anne Barnes, Chair Orange County Commissioners
Mr. Norman Gustaveson
Mr. Norman Walker
Mr. Richard Whitted
Mr. Don Willhoit 1A)4
FROM: Mr. William F. Baxter, Jr.
Chairman, Orange County Human Services Advisory Commission
SUBJ: Proposed Principles for the First Year of Block Grants as Adopted
by the HSAC, July 22, 1981
Attached is a copy of subject Principles for the Board's consideration and
action. This document supplements the Block Grant position paper adopted on
June 1, 1981 by the Commissioners.
It was felt that a brief review of the activities which have resulted in the
above Principles might be helpful to the Commissioners in their deliberations of
same.
HISTORY AND PURPOSE
By May of this year, it had become obvious that some form of the Block Grant
approach to funding public services would be enacted by Congress and in an effort
to prepare for this, several people got together and discussed what actions might
be taken to impact on this process.
The persons involved in these discussions were Bill Woodward, Peggy Pollitzer,
Bill Baxter, Ted Parrish and Norman Gustaveson.
This small group thought that it was very important to assume a pro-active
leadership stance relative to Block Grants without necessarily taking a position
on the merits of Block Grants per se.
The position developed by the group contained two basic tenets:
1. The crucial need to try and influence the development of state policy
regarding the implementation of Block Grants at the local level and
2. The desire to assist the Commissioners in developing criteria which
could be used in allocating Block Grant funds at the local level.
JE t:
, .
-2-
HSAC INVOLVEMENT
The small group mentioned above met on several occassions for the purpose
of developing a position paper on Block Grants which incorporated the above
Principles,
The basic purpose of the position paper was to provide the Commissioners
with a mechanism tobetter cope with the Block Grant process.
The position paper as amended by a second ad hoc group including Wes Hare,
and Dick Taylor was discussed in some detail and approved in the HSAC meeting
on June 24, 1981, The position paper was discussed again in the July 22, 1981
HSAC meeting. During the meeting, there were recommendations that several sections
of the position paper be clarified.
A special ad hoc HSAC committee was established to do so and a further meeting
was held to carryout the clarification, The attached Principles represents the
document as recommended and amended by the HSAC and finalized by the special ad
hoc committee.
ACTION TO DATE BY COMMISSIONERS
As you know, the Orange County Board of Commissioners approved and adopted the
basic position paper which is also attached, on June 1, 1981. This paper provided a
basic statement of principles and was designed to serve as a general set of guide-
lines regarding Block Grants.
However, since the position paper was a general statement of principles, it was
thought we needed to provide more specific details related to the criteria for actual
allocation of funds. The attached Principles addresses this need,
REVIEW OF PRINCIPLES
A brief review of the proposed Principles follows:
GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS -
The human services system in Orange County includes both public and private
agencies. In the possible confusion likely to result in the first year of Block
Grants, these Principles are offered as assistance to the Commissioners in
making the transition to the new system, whatever it may be.
The permanent Block Grant decision making system should be based an:
1. A needs assessment process and
2. Reflect a high degree of cooperation by aad between public and
private agencies.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRINCIPLES
Any regulations should be the minimum required by state and federal law.
Sufficient reporting requirement to satisfy accountability would be necessary.
3-1.1
-3-
Administrative costs, in so far as possible, would be reduced commensurate with
reductions in direct services.
ALLOCATION PRINCIPLES
A. F",.,'NTS:1:;.: ASSUWPTIONS. The county has not been able to restore state
and federal budget cuts. The county must meet its legal and administrative
mandates for service delivery.
B. BLOCK GRANT ALLOCATION'. In the first year, agencies receive proportional
cuts. All categorical programs included in Block Grants receive cuts
proportional to total Block Grant in which program is located.
Exceptions to these allocation principles which might be considered,
e.g., in cases of program termination, needs of special populations,
and special local. priorities.
C. TRANSFER POTENTIAL. As provided by state and federal laws, tranfer of
funds between Block Grants should be allowed.
D. DISCRETIONARY FUNDS. A limited amount of money should be reserved for
competitive grants to local public and private agencies. Conditions for
the grants should include;
a. Access for not-for-profit agencies
b. High priority for programs that show evidence of coordination
between agencies
Criteria for the grants should include:
a, Innovative programs within human service agencies
b. Advocacy programs
c- Prevention programs
If the state sets aside monies for "competitive grants to local
government or private organizations", Orange County should request its
proportional share.
MINORITY REPORT
The whole Block Grant issue, as you are already aware, has caused controversy
within our citizenry and at all levels of government.
Within the HSAC, as in the rest of society, there are differences of opinions
about the merits of Block Grants as well as what the desired ultimate impact may be
on the local service delivery system.
During our review of the Block Grant position paper and the supplemental
Principles in the two HSAC meetings, there was an extended discussion by several
members of their concerns about the ultimate impact of the Principles, if adopted
by the Commissioners, upon their agencies.
I am attaching a memorandum from Jerry Robinson which reflects his and Tom
Ward's position relative to the attached Principles.
•
d
-4-
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?
I believe we are now at a point where we need to have a reaction from the
Commissioners as to their interest in HSAC's continuing with its efforts in this
area of endeavor.
Will, for example, the Commissioners approve and adopt the attached Principles
as an approach they wish to use in allocating Block Grants in the first year?
If the Commissioners do approve the attached Principles, the HSAC will continue
its planning efforts and will be coming up with additional recommendations and
procedures in this most important area
Additionally, there is the upcoming Association of County Commissioners meeting
which will be held on August 13, 1981 addressing the Block Grant issue. It is very
possible that the Commissioners may wish to either use the Block Grant position
paper or possibly involve the HSAC in this meeting,
Certainly, I and other members of the HSAC Block Grant Planning Group will be
happy to assist in whatever way we can.
We lbok forward to an opportunity to make a brief presentation on the attached
Principles on August 3, 1981 at the Commissioner's meeting.
Enc.
cc: HSAC
WF3/loc
•
Principles for the First Year of Block Grants
as Adopted by the Orange County HSAC
July 22, 1981
•
I. GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS
A. The human service system in Orange County includes public and private
agencies. All of these groups and the county should agree on the final
list of principles. Local funding sources besides the county should
be familiar with these principles.
B. The first year of block grants is likely to be chaotic and confusing.
The principles are intended to guide the transition from the present
system to a more effective system that will be defined when state and
federal laws and procedures are better understood.
C. The permanent bloCk grant decision making system should be based out:
1. A practical needs assessment process.
2. A better working relationship between the county, the municipalities,
and the United Funds.
• II. ADMINISTRATIVE PRINCIPLES
A. Regulations - County regulations should be at the minimum level to comply
with state and federal law.
B. Requirements - County reporting, auditing, and other requirements should
be aimed at assuring accountability and program performance.
C. Administrative Costs - In so far as possible, administrative costs should
be reduced commensurate with reductions in direct
services,
III. ALLOCATION PRINICPLES
A. Funding Assumptions
1. The county has not been able to restore state and federal budget cuts.
2. The county must meet its legal and administrative mandates for service
delivery.
B. Block Grant Allocation
1. For the first year, agencies will generally receive proportional cuts.
2. All categorical programs included in block grants should receive cuts
proportional to the total block grant in which the program is included.
3 1
Exceptions to these allocation principles should be considered:
e.g., in cases of program destruction, needs of special populations,
and special local priorities.
C. Transfer Potential
As provided by state and federal laws, transfer of funds between block
grants should be allowed.
D. Discretionary Funds
1. A limited amount of money should be reserved for competitive grants
to local public and private agencies. Conditions for the grants
should include:
a. Access for "not-for-profit" agencies
b, High priority for programs that show evidence of coordination between
agencies
Criteria for the grants should include:
a. Innovative programs within human service agencies
b. Advocacy programs
c. Prevention programs
2. If the state sets aside monies for "competitive grants to local government
or private organizations", Orange County should request its proportional
share.
! ^/ ?
ORANGE CoDrrry COMIVEISSIONERS
Room No 12
- 106 EAsrMAmGAREr LANE
mLLSBOROT.JGH. N. C.
27278
ANN"»RUM.CI.:
N mow,Gvn..."eso°
w"U^AN�~~"
RICHARD W^==
DONALD��on
POSITION STATEMENT REGARDING
STATE FUNDING TO THE COUNTY FOR HUMAN SERVICES
This statement was adopted unanimoutly by the Orange County Board
of Commissioners on June 1, IBBI.
•
Statement of Concern
1. Federal budget reductions have severely reduced Orange County's
ability to provide human services.
2. State government appears to be delaying budget decisions until
the final federal budget is passed, creating additional un-
certainty about local programs and services.
3. Federal and state funding reductions could force counties out
of compliance with mandatory regulations, threatening to shift
the burden for compliance to the local property tax payer.
4. Regulatory reform, which could provide more flexibility for
local government, is still being discussed and offers little
assistance for the near future.
5. It appears likely that federal funds will be attached to block
grants provided to the state, But how the state will provide
funds to the counties remains undecided.
6. Maintenance of Effort clauses, such as that put on In-home
services, restricts the County's ability to respond responsibly
to budget cuts in other areas.
7. Although the immediate impact of budget cuts can be predicted in
terms of services hours, staff and dollars, there are likely
to be unforeseen consequences to the human services system.
� As a result, Orange County finds itself in a position of facing serious
reductions in services while having little flexibility to respond cre-
atively and to reshape its programs to best meet local needs.
Policy Statement
Orange County takes pride in its history of providing human services
to its citizens. Despite the reduction in funds, the County can continue
to provide effective services if it can have flexibility in determining
local need and allocating funds. To this end the Orange County Board of
Commissioners supports the following policies:
t:
r •
144 E Margaret Lane
Hillsborough N.C.27278
I twill au= UtolUlfirry 732-8181,Extension 215
From Chapel Hill 967.925-
141W HEALTH DEPARTNIENT 19 Eastgate Shopping Cen
Chapel Hill.N C.27514
942 4158
Jerry Robinson, M.A,
Health Director
MEMO
To: Bill Baxter
From: Jerry Robinson 4?
Date: 07/27/81
Re: H.S.A.C. Block Grant Committee Meeting
Neither Tom Ward or I will be able to attend the committee meeting tomorrow morning.
Enclosed is a memo from us from which the Committee could become aware of certain other
ideas relevant to its deliberation.
Thank you for distributing it.
r" !
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 5A
@range Tountu Bel:turfman eruires
300 W TRYON STREET
HILLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 27278
BOARD
TELEPHONE
- MAE McLENOON 0•••■■■■•••••■■ HILLSOOROUCH OFFICE e 999-.551 957 MT
nILLSOOROUGm OFFICE 752436L 7524101
SAM ENOLI5H
JANICE SCHOPLEA CHAPEL HILL OFFICE SP9-04.6
ANNE aARNU•
• MURPHY M
• ECTOA.
THOM•5 M WARD
July 22, 1981
TO: Orange County Commissioners
SUBJECT: Current Vacancies in two frozen positions
FROr..: Social Services Director 11.14-4A1
It is gy recommendation that the agency fill the two positions listed
beloW as soon as possible for the remainder of the 1981-02 fiscal year.
Position #06185 - ligibiity Specialist I in Food Stamp Unit. Position
vacant since July 17, 1981. Two positions were deleted
from this unit for FY 81-81, therefore, it is essential
to fill the remaining positions to accept and process
applications as required by policy.
Position #0,6235 - 7ligibility Specialist I in the t:edicaid Unit. Eedicaid
is a very complex program to administer. One vacancy
in this unit of four employees is critical. Eligibility
errors in this unit involve very large sum of money.
We currently have an Orange County resident wishing
to transfer from another county who will accept the
• position if unfrozen for FY 81-62. This position has
• been vacant since July 16, 1981.
� �n �
�� ��� «� u� ^
3 �
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 5B
ORANGE COUNTY PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT
106 E.
Hillsborough, N C 27278
BEVERLY M Wn«ITsHzAo
PERSONNEL DIRECTOR
MEMORANDUM
TO, Bill Laws
Acting County Manager
FROM: Beverly M. Whitehead
Personnel Director
DATE: July 21, 1981
SUBJECT: Request to unfreeze designated positions
Please be advised that my office has received requests to unfreeze the following
positions:
(1) Communications Dispatcher- position vacant due to a voluntary resignation;
position is critical to continued departmental
operations.
(2) Veterans Service Officer- new position in the FY 81-82 Budget.
(3) Courier - new part-time position approved in the FY 81-82
Budget.
(4) Child Support Officer - new position approved in the FY 81-82 Budqet,
None of the above positions are subject to State and Federal funding cutbacks. My office
has reviewed the requests and recommend that you request board authorization to unfreeze
the positions. In addition, I have prepared job specifications For each of the positions
which provide a description of the tasks assigned to each position.
If you need additional information or clarification, please let me know.
ATTACHMENTS
An Equal Action Employer
��° �� '�� �
� �p
, 3_1�
--u
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 5E
L~-f� - - g - county e Margaret Lane
Hillsborough.N.0 27278
732.8181,Extension 215
(prom
Chapel Hill 9sm25n
HEALTH DEPARTMENT
19 Eastgate Shopping Center
4 , Chapel Hill,wnz,s,^
v^e*,on
Robinson,Jerry MA PA
wplp Health Director
TO: Bill Laws
FROM: Jerry Robinson qg
DATE: 7/24/81
RE: Unfreezing of Vacated Nursing Position
County position number 0847-3 is a Public Health Nurse II-Child Health
Services Coordinator. the person vacating this position on August 7, 1981
is Susan Hillis, who is leaving to become a missionary in Columbia, South
Ap=zica, The Board of Health and I discussed this on July 16, 1981 .
We request that unfreezing of this position be placed on the Commissioners
Agenda of August 3. Secondly, we will consider promotion of a PHN I and if
a promotion is epbrppriate, we would like the action to extend to unfreezing
the secondary vacancy of a promoted PHN I.
I could advise the Board of no reason based on present knowledge to not
unfreeze the position. Secondly, the position is essential and is budgeted.
cc: Paulette Pridgen-Pond
39(
M ff. • I sP,/
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 6
(! range (Lrountg Dpartment . Eruirr.s
300 W.TRYON STREET
HILLSBOROUGH.NORTH CAROLINA 27278
aaAno TELEPHONE:
MAE McLENOON 01IL,SEOROUCIA OFFICE MO 4E01 9,37.9
NILLSEOPIOUGH OP FIC1 737,0361.)33.4,
E...1
JANICE SCHOOL/A , Chairperson CHAPEL HILL OF F FCE 939-0446
ANNE EAFINEE
MURPHY II D.
DIRECTOR,
THOMAS E4 WARD July 2,3 1981
MEMOMMMEi
TO: COVITTfccuasaroiis.
SUBJECT: Planning for Reduction In Force; Reduction in Services
FRO::: Thomas II. Ward.
This agency is submitting a pr000sed plan for reducing our FT 81-82 budr-et
to a.just for the anticipated loss of about ;:.90,000 in Federal Title
funding. Option I of this Reduction In Force ProPosal was unanimously
aporoved by the four Social Services board members present for the July 22,
1901 meeting. We feel this plan should be placed in effect ir-mediately.
Should unforseen events take place 'which would negate or lessen the need
for staff reductions, this agency needs the flexibility to make adjustments
in the plan. Such events would include unanticipated revenues and/or addi-
tional str.ff vacancies orior to placing the plan in effect. Option I is
brought before you because it deviates from the County Personnel Ordinance
which re:mires special aoproval to alter the 5 day 40 hour work-week. C::tion
1 is presented in this manner to demonstrate the agency can make such a plan
work. It is my home that the agency can be authorized to proceed with Option
I as a basic plan and reconcile any necessary changes with the manager's
office as long as these changes fall within the intent of the plan. The em-
ployees affected are defined in Section 2-b of the agency Reduction-In-Force
policy which is attached to this memo.
US feel the Reduction In Services plan is self-explanatory and is in response
to your request during budget hearings for information on reduction in service
levels and justification for release of the $16,000 held. in contingency.
4
tp/91e I-3 j32 ;.
(! rung Ojountg Department of ada1 =-5.eruim
BOO W TRYON STREET
HILLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 27278
HOARD
TELEPHONE'
MAE McLENDON HILLSBOROUGH OFFICE 9E6..601 967 9251
SAM ENGLISH HILtSBOROUGH OFFICE 737.975, 72-EFIRI
JANICE SCHOPLER Chairperson CHAPEL HILL OFFICE 9704A-PE
ANNE BARNES
R I MURPHY MO
DIRECTOR
THOMAS M WARD
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICE REDUCTION-IN-FORCE POLICY
This policy is the first steo in reducing the manpower cost of the agency
to conform to decreases in available funding. It is a permanent policy to
be revised as needed in the future in response to reductions in Title XX
allocations. Once this policy is approved subsequent steps may include
( 1) a detailed plan for reducing hours and/or terminating employees.
Note: Any plan containing employee hours deviating from 40 hour work
week must be approved by county commissioners. (2) an agency plan for
the reduction of service delivery. This plan must take into consideration
legal and administrative mandates for service delivery levels. (3) the
final step may be the actual re-assignment of remaining personnel to
conform as closely as possible to the revised service delivery plan.
1. General Policy:
The agency Director may separate an employee whenever it is necessary
due to shortage of funds, abolishment of a position, or other material
change in duties or organization. The selection of the position or
positions to be abolished will be made by the agency director in con-
junction with the Department of Social Services Board and will be base'
on budget reouirements, sources of funds and program needs, however,
the prime factor in selection will be length of service with this ageni
since date of last employment. Any employee terminated will have
priority for employment in any vacancy which occurs within his/her
supervisory unit for one year.
Voluntary reduction in hours of staff within each supervisory unit wil:
be offered as an alternative to this reduction in force policy. When
a vacancy occurs within a unit those who have voluntarily reduced hour!
will have priority to increase hours to 100% prior to re-hiring a first
time appointee.
2. Specific Policy Statements:
a. This agency currently has no temporary, probationary or trainee
appointments, therefore permanent status employees must be con-
sidered under this policy.
b. Personnel in agency supervisory units effected by Title XX reduc-
tions in funds only will be considered for Reduction-in-force.
These are (1) Adult Services and Supportive Services Unit (2) Day
Care Unit (3) Protective Services for Children (2 Units) (4)
Adoption and Foster Care Administration Unit. No clerical employee
within these units will be affected by this policy. Total employee
equivalency to full time (40 hours per week) is 28.6 employees.
32
3. Definition of Terms:
a. Length of Service - all full time or part time service with
this agency since date of last employment.
b. Permanent status - an employee satisfactorily completing a
probationary period of 3 to 9 months has attained permanent
status.
c. Related classes - defined as outlined in policy statement
2 - b above.
4. Appeal Rights:
Appeal rights will be the same as for any agency grievance.
This policy was approved by the Social Services Board on June 25, 1981.
TMW/mjm
//IF ,'; 3 -7/ 9�
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 6A
4 rnit c tuaruntg !P}TtirtTit2ltt aSerttit£S
248 SOUTH CAMERON STREET
BOARD HILLSBOROUGH.NORTH CAROLINA 27278
MAE MCLENOON.ONAIRPBABON TELEPHONE:
CLEM JOHNSON
JANICE SCHOPLER HILLSBOROUGH OFFICE 468-001 CHAPEL HILL
ANNE BARNES 1981 HILLSBOROUGH OFFICE 702.9767 HILLSBDROUGH
0,W,LAMBERT July 22, 1981 CHAPEL HILL OFFICE 9290.6 CHAPEL HILL
DIRECTOR:
THOMAS M WARD
REDUCTION IN FORCE PROPOSAL,
•
Option I: Terminating one employee 9/30/81, and reduction of hours by other
employees to reduce spending to budgeted amounts.
Following passage of the agency 81-82 budget, the staff has re-computed
the budget to conform with an anticipated 18.75% reduction in Federal
Title XX funding for Ft'-81-82. This computation revealed the need
to reduce staff size by 6,1 employees for a 12 month period to assure
adequate funding is available. This figure includes the $16,000 held
in contingency by County Commissioners.
There are 2,080 hours per year for each worker which computes to a
needed reduction of 12,688 hours for 81-82 (6.1 x 2,080). the reduction
of 12,688 hours can be accomplished by termination of employment of
the social worker who has the least agency seniority, since the last
date of employment and a voluntary reduction in hours by additional
staff members.
These are as follows:
Termination of Employemnt:
Total 81-82 hours reduced
Social Worker II Joyce Tabor effective 9/30/81 1,560
Voluntary Reduction in hours:
Social Worker II Kathy Putnam (10 hours x 47 weeks) 470
Steve McDevitt (10 hours x 47 weeks) 470
Sara West (8 hours x 47 weeks 376
Jane Maske (8 hours x 47 weeks) 376
Renee Bynum (4 hours x 47 weeks) 188
Sandy Davis (4 hours x 47 weeks) 188
Social Worker I Steve Durham (8 hours x 47 weeks) 376
Carol Bangle (4 hours x 47 weeks) 188
Leave of Absence without pay
Social Worker II Ann Warren (2 months) 346
Social Worker II Renee Bynum ( 1 month) 173
Social Worker I Carol Bangle (1 month) 173
Announced resignations and vacancies
Frances Whitt (12 months) 2,080
Martha Britt (12 months) 2,080
Dale Cox (50 weeks) 2,000
Ruth Boorman (44 weeks) 1,760
Total Hours 12,804
With a reduction of 12,688 hours needed, the 12,804 as calculated
above gives a slight overage for pay differentials below the average
needed,
3 2
Option II:
Terminate 3 Title XX staff members with least seniority effective 9/30/81.
Joyce Tabor (9 months) 1,560 hours
Steve Durham (9 months) 1,560 hours
Kathy Putnam (9 months) 1,560 hours
Total 4,680
Announced vacancies 7,920
12,600 hours
The above calculation is 88 hours less than needed, therefore, two employees
can be terminated one week prior to 9/30/81.
ReinstateMent of hours:
In accordance with the Agency Reduction In Force Policy, a terminated
employee will have priority for re-employment when additional hours become
available due to agency vacancies. The next priority will go to staff
members on a seniority basis who have reduced hours voluntarily.
4
8. 3 - I/ �2
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 6B
(rung Creauntg Bepartment of Social Seruires
300 W TR"(ON STREET
HILLSBOROUGH NORTH CAROLINA 27278
00.013 OO4R ,Iul 22 1981 TELEPHONE'
Y 22, MIL LSOOROUOM OFFICE 9611-.501 967 0751
SAM ENGLISH HILLSOOROUGH OFFICE 733 6361 77]91111
JA NICE SCMOPLER, Chairperson CHAPEL MILL OFFICE 939 04.6
ANNE BARNES PROPOSED REDUCTION IN SERVICES
R J MURPHY M O
DIRECTOR:
THOMAS M.WARD
This proposal attempts to take into consideration the Legal and Administrative
mandates listed as well as some caseload re-assignment factors. A detailed
description of services is contained in County Budget package.
LEGAL MANDATES
1. Adoption Services
The level of service is not mandated, therefore, the current 40 hours per week
is recommended to be reduced to 32 hours, a 20% cut in services level.
Deletions:
10% of time currently spent on Permanency Planning
5% of time by recruiting volunteers to organize "Christmas for Foster Children"
5% cut in number of home studies completed each year.
2, Foster Care for Adults (Administration)
An adequate level of service must be maintained to supervise and license
I.5 rest homes and respond as a community resource regarding vacancies and
assist with placements in protective service cases. One staff person spends
about 20 hours per week in this function.
Delete:
10% Reduce contacts with Rest Home operators to licensing compliance issues,
3. Foster Care for Children (Administration)
The level of service is not mandated. One staff person works full time in
this program. A 20% cut in services is recommended.
Deletions:
5% - a savings can be realized by using group recruiting and orientation
methods in homes with no foster children in placement. To be assisted by
graduate student as available.
5% - Setting up new programs will be handled by other staff as the need arises.
New programs not funded will be rejected due to lack of staff,
5% -- Checking monthly foster Care printout and organizational tasks in foster
care licensing to be assigned to Clerical staff,
5% - Recruit volunteers to handle "Christmas for Foster Children" Project.
4. Protective Services for Adults
As in other mandated services the quality of services is not mandated, there-
fore, the assumption is that with reduced hours available compliance with
the law can be maintained with quality of service declining. The Chore Program
is an effective protective service plan which has been reduced significantly.
Two staff persons have carried responsibility for this service which is
recommended to be reduced 20%.
32t
Deletions:
20% - Reduce follow-up contacts as case reaches point of stability. Solicit
volunteers to report regularly on "high risk" cases when practical.
5. Protective Services for Children
This service carries restrictive legal responsibilities and consumes approximately
5u.i; of the man hours paid for by direct Title XX funding. The projected service
level cut-backs are much less proportionately for this service than for other
services due to utilization of $16,000 placed in contingency by County Commissioners
and transfer of man hours from other units. The manpower assignment for 80-81
was 13.5 positions.
Additions:
15% - 1 equivalent full time position with $16,000 contingency (funded 80-81)
.8 equivalent full time transfer from Supportive services to cover 4 full
day's Intake and/or General Assistance
.2 re-assignment of clerical duties to assist with Title XX paperwork.
Deletions: ,
25% - Childrens service responsibility for Intake and General Assistance will be
reduced by transfer of time listed above by about 60%. Individual and Pamily
Adjustment Services and Delinquency Prevention services, Public Speaking and Public
Education activities will be curtailed by 5056.
Note: The combination of additions and deletions reduces service level by about
10%. The $16,000 contingency funded position is an important factor in not
reducing mandated services.
ADMINISTRATIVx; MANDATES
6. Day Care for Children
Day Care funding is increased for 1981-82, therefore, staff will have full load
of certifications and re-certifications. Cost is increasing which should stabalize
the number of eligibles. The Supervisor of Day Care has had a fewer number of
staff to supervise in recent years and has spent considerable amount of time with
Center and Day Care Coalition work. Deletions in this service area are aimed at
technical assistance, community involvement and education. Manpower assignment
for 80-81 was 3.1 positions in this unit; a 20% reduction in service level is
recommended.
Deletions:
10% - Transfer time of Day Care Coordinator into Contract management, and to oversee
monthly reimbursements for service. This will reduce the technical assistance
available to day care centers. Time available for establishment of additional
Centers will be limited, as well as public education and community involvement.
10% - Day Care Supervisor assume responsibility of Supervision of additiorP, staff.
Revised Intake system will reduce number of applications taken by unit staff.
Li
7. Family Planning
Staff time can be reduced by termination of time now spent attending Health Department
Clinios.
Deletions:
- Take applications only in DSS office. Request Health Dept. Staff to distribute
applications to be filled out by applicants at Health Dept.. These would be sent
to DSS office for eligibility determination.
8. Health Support; Individual and Family Adjustment; EPSDT; Transportation-.
This service Ilas no mandated levels and can be reduced significantly.
Deletions:
140% - Transportation to Title XX eligibles will be deleted. Transportation for
Medicaid Eligibles continued.
1(% - Cutback on Health support services; Individual and Family Adjustment Services
and money management by Adult Service Staff.
20% - Reduction in staff time in Supportive Service Unit spent on EPSDT. Current
worker to supervise program with clerical staff Processing necessary paper-work.
9. Chore Services
Financial resources for this program declined sharply for 80-81 and are stabilized
for 81-82. Spending levels have been reduced by 50% in the past two years, however,
80 clients continue to receive the service as spending reductions were accomplished
by reducing hours rather than terminating cases.
Deletions:
10% - Applications will remain at a low level; recruitment of Chore Workers will
not be needed with declining resources. Less on site supervision will be provided.
3
ply '1413
2
Ve G
kl
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
IHIS AGREEMENI, made and entered into this the 1st day of July, 1981,
. by and .between NORTHEN, LITTLE & BAGWELL, Orange County, North Carolina, a
1 partnership organized under the laws of the State of North Carolina engaging
in the practice of law, hereinafter referred to as ATTORNEYS, and ORANGE
COUNTY, hereinafter referred to as the COUNTY:
W I T N E S S E T H :
WHEREAS the Orange County Department of Social Services (hereinafter
referred to as the DEPARTMENT) has need of special legal services, not
otherwise provided by County government agencies, in connection with its
services to needy and dependent persons in Orange County, the administration
of its functions under the provisions of Article 8, Chapter 110 of the
General Statutes of North Carolina and other laws of the State and
representation of the DEPARTMENT, its caseworkers and employees before the
various courts and agencies of the State of North Carolina; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the COUNTY and ATTORNEYS to enter into a
contract, one with the other, for the purposes and considerations as set
forth herein for a period of July 1, 1981 through June 30, 1932;
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual terms and
agreements hereinafter set forth, the COUNTY and ATTORNEYS do contract, each
with the other, as follows:
1. Ihat ATTORNEYS shall perform such services and render such advice
1 to the DEPARTMENI on such occasions as shall be required by the Director of
the DEP,-.NT ENT and with the approval of said Director, employees and
caseworkers shall requite the services of ATTORNEYS.
2. That ..T10' shall be compensated for all r
Ifi � services �a:c_ered in
connection with Paragraph .;r• 1 above based on an 7..
hour_ rate ::or services
I
performed of Forty-Five Dollars (t45.00) per hour, such hours and arc:;i,ts to
be furnished to the F;County
' _:,arse Officer or her designate for peti•nent
Ida AT_oR.NEYS shall x.11 also be compensated for and reimbursed for the services
'_ Cc:5
:!1THEu. t77_e II or clerks and legal assistants hired by them to assist the,* in ttia
b "5 Ott
performance of their duties to the ' ...L b:±`based
F:. ;:,:r DL Ai i.e-..:I, on an hourly rate of
services performed of Ter. Dollars
( 10.00) per hour. The COC:9I'_' shall b�
responsible for all costs and er.pe incurrua in the performance of the
f?.
1 • _
-2-
services rendered the COUNTY pursuant to this Contract. All costs and
expenses advanced by ATTORNEYS on behalf of COUNTY shall be reimbursed to
ATTORNEYS.
3. That ATTORNEYS shall keep an itemized record of work performed
for the DEPARTMENT on a case-by-case basis and shall submit its bill
therefor showing a breakdown of those services performed and the cost.
4. That this Agreement shall exist and continue from July 1, 191i1 to
and including June 30, 1982, unless sooner terminated by thirty (30) days
written notice to the other party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the COUNTY and ATTORNEYS have hereunto signed
this Agreement in duplicate originals, one of which is retained by each
party hereto and either of which is sufficient as the original.
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
By:
ANNE C. BARNES, Chair
Orange County Board
of Commissioners
Attest:
eet-' (-
'aulette Pridgenzpond
Clerk of the Orange County Board
of Commissioners
NORIHEN, LITTLE & BAGWELL
1 Attorneys at Law
1 By: rrj
J. AJEI:EZFLITTLE
V
This instrument has been preaudited in the manner required by the
Local Government Budget and Fiscal Control Act.
1
NORTHEN LITTLE
6AGVIELL
;770 4NE1S AT C.,' KATHY BATTER , Orange County Finance Officer
411 74 NI:,`I.f.Lr/57
L MILL !1 C 215“
33C
Aft: �
� fw � ~ ~,��- ���'
�`.. � .
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 9
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Commissioner's
FROM: Anne Barnes, Chair
DATE: July 27, 1981
RE: Sale of Alcohol to Minors
In a July 14 memorandum from Mayor Joe Nassif, the Mayor reports
that the Chapel Hill Town Council has discussed action which might be
taken to reduce sale of alcohol to minors and consumption of alcohol by
minors, The Council is especially troubled by the possibility of perso-
nal tragedy that exists when minors mix drinking and driving, and would
like to use the resources and influence of the Town to prevent such acci-
dents.
The Mayor plans to contact local vendors of beer and wine, to in-
troduce them to the Council 's concern, and to invite them to an August
meeting to discuss the problem and the importance of their cooperation.
The memorandum encourages the support of the Town of Carrboro, the
Chapel Hill-Carrboro School Board, and the Board of Commissioners,
In subsequent conversations with Mayor Nassif, I agreed to bring
this matter to your attention at the earliest opportunity.
The Board of Commissioners may wish to convey its support of the
Town's effort by resolution. The Board may also wish to initiate a simi-
lar effort for those areas which lie outside the Town's jurisdiction,
�` /
31
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 10
TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL
FIRE DEPARTMENT
11 1
-.;
302 NORTH COLUMBIA ST.
CHAPEL HILL,N.C. 27514
(919) 942-3360
July 7, 1981
Town Manager
County Courthouse
106 Margaret Lane
Hillsborough, N.C.
Dear Sir:
Chief Lloyd has requested that I send you the enclosed form
and roster for the annual certification of firemen required by
the North Carolina Firemen's Pension Fund. Please complete the
enclosed form. It would expedite matters greatly if you would
send the enclosed form and roster directly to the N.C. Firemen's
Pension Fund.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely yours,
CQA.aji.
Carol B. Warren
Secretary to Chief Lloyd
/cbw
4
332
p/9
N. C. FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND
DIVISION
DEPARTMENT OF STATE AUDITOR
116 REST JONES STREET
RALEIGH,N. C.27611
ANNUAL CERTIFICATION OF FIREMEN
General Statutes, Chapter 118-23, requires that all certified fire departments certify
annually to the N. C. Firemen's Pension Fund a complete roster of its qualified firemen.
The following certification along with a complete roster of all active firemen* as of
June 30 of each year must be submitted to the N. C. Firemen's Pension Fund, 116 W. Jones
St., Raleigh, N. C. on or before July 31. Failure to submit this certification along
with a complete roster will result in the loss of the death benefit provided by the State.
CERTIFICATION
We, the Orange County Board of Commissioners in our capacity as the governing
(Governing Body)
body of the Chapel Hill Fire Department Fire Department, certify that we have examined
and find that attached is a true and accurate list of all active firemen* of the
Chapel Hill Fire Department, address County of
Carolina.
Signed
Title Chair, Orange County Board of Commissioner
Date
For Fire Department Chief Only
I, 4'C IA.2112.170-- 00-44A-tert , Chief of the i Fire
Department, certify he attac d roster is a true and accurate st of all eligible fire-
men. (Eligible firemen are firemen who have met the required 36 hours of meetings and
drills during the last calendar year (July 1 - June 30). In addition, the term "eligible
firemen" shall mean those firemen who have joined the fire department within the calendar
year and are in the process of completing the required 36 hours of meetings and drills.)
AI,
AK&
— do r, •Ch"ef
Date
ROSTER MUST BE ATTACHED WITH NAMES IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER.
Firemen on authorized "Leave of Absence" are to be included on the roster.
Pil-C 1-3 - 7/
, .1
.,; :
Page 1 of 3
FFIAE OEPAiir1. 7- - '' coupqr(
ROSTER Orange
-
CMIEF Everette L. Lloyd
Chapel Hill
-
E -
p9!TE :42-6602 "gY17/81
NAJAF ADDRESS SOCIAL SECURITY NC.
_________ •
j Austin, Chesley T. -ITT,---$7 Morris Grove Hgts. 'Ci.
Atwater, Lewis Jr. 107 Barrington Hall Rd. , CH . 21412 7 ,2 Op 0
3 Blackwood, Geary 50S Pritchard Ave. , C.H. 2; /1.1 3 86 7: Z 3
, - _
4 Blakenev. Michael Antioch Church Rd., C.H. 4; Z 06 :0 1, 19 ,0!
araefiej24._,Et Jay • '27 Dublin St. , Rt. 8, C.H. 2: 1, 4 !2 3141!
6, Brinkley, Albert Eastgate Gulf. Service, C.H. 2i3:9 4 :6 4 :6 :11
7---5rinkleyr-Gr-o\ter__ -RI, .4.., ,Box 123, f., -L.H. _____ 25 '7 5 4 9: 2 5 A
,--pr.,-.1... ---.... -
8__Bynum, DeLaon ' - • 305 Prince St,,, Carrboro_ 22 215 ,6,94 .0.04
9 cannady, Landis A. , Jr. 1400 Biscayne Rd. , Durham 2, 4 0 11 ) J 3 4
1 i
A Corvel", JiMMY • Rt. 2, Box 201, HideawFv Dr. , CH 24 :1 84 13 r7,5
u Clark, Marvin F. 606 N. Greensboro St. , Ca7rboro 2p 9 90 0: 9 17
• Coffey, Timothy L. Elkins Hills Apts., No. 11, Lri 24 4 D 0ä 9,2,3
, Crabtree, Eric R. Rt. 5, Mountainside ',9‘.=1 , CH 24 b 68 t70,71
• Dail, Jennings 112 Estes Dr. , C.H. 2: 4,1 5 9;
i.
• Dawson, Grayling Rt. 7, Durham, NC 2IQ 904. 6 3133
,
....
15 Downey, Ronald R. 1609 Euclid Ave. , DurhFm, : 2-416 910 01180
1
17 Durham, Charles Rt. 1, Box 1A, CH 21; 4 d 18 59 p;3
19 Dilrham, Lamont Rt. 1, Box 87-A, Highway 5 , CH 2: Lo 1. 84 7: 27.1
19 Easter, Randall 1611 Old Oxford Rd., Apt. 2, CH 2't4. p 76 1,7 ,5, 3
20 Elliott. Michael P.O. Box 243, Carrboro 3■7 :5 44 4.7 : 1
21 PArrinEtnn._aaraari 105 Glosson Circle, Carrboro 23 !,7 74 d7 • . ! 1
27, Farrin,zton, Charles R. 602 Hunn St. , Chapel Hill, 24 :I 78 4,15 8
23 Farrow, Reginald G-5 Carolina Apts. , CL?.pel Hill 243 -86 93' 0
24_ Fearrinzton, Beverly Rt. 4, Box 505, CH 24 :5 17 7,621
25 FlPtch , Arnold 3207 Holloway Dr. Durham . 24i5 -7:8 A3 ,9! 0
25 Frick, Robert H. ht. 7, Lot .7.77Tinborougn 4. ;27O 971; 8
27 Hayps, Mice 015 Dacien Ave. , Durham P 'A :3 119 51 !8, 9
a m,ymq, Thldolph 5705 Old Well St..., Durham :215I 2 0,1; 7j
I ;
29 _ Tiendersor, L.m,IP' 401 Hillsborouph St. , Corx.boo ' 4 .1 814 d510 !
n Hester, James C. P.O. Box 929, Hillsborough
IMMO 13 - 8_
_
31 Hewett, Odell _ Box 354, Carrboro
Man - '• i',1
32 Hoffman, Wayne P. #2 Town Terrace 0 1
73 Hollowell, James 1421 N. Greensboro, Carrboo ' '14 ,2 -IS
34___Honeycutt, Larry D. Rt. 7, Box 227, C.H. 2 ' 12 9' 23: 9. 61
35 Hnrne, Charley a. Rt. 7, Box-152, 'Durham 2 :3 ;818' 2
Rt. 2, Lot 4, JJ Mobile Ct. JH 2 :33 7: :
37 J_acksont Norman 011 Kings Mill Rd. , CH 2 ;39 1: 10 : 4!,? 7
38 Johnson, Larry 13-8 'derKshif.1-Manner J-Tts. , .,arr.4 .
39 Johnson, Sandra Colonial Arms, Cl-- - MEW )7
40 Keller, John 13 Oakwoo65F7.7777 - Mir: 71 7
..._ .. ....___. . ._...„_ .
3 3 4 '
FlgE DEPARTMENT '11 cowry age oi
Chapel Hill Orange
CMIEF ----
Everette L. Lloyd Dr9! .2-6602 06'717/81
NAME ADDRESS SOCIAL SECURITY NO.
-r-r---r--- ,--.---m---':1
11.-Kirhy-Th... , hr, ., D-1 Camelot Apts. , CH 2 4'6 04 6 9 9 4
Knig. MOO ' 11 .Rt. 1 Box L2 Oh . 1111111121161E1
3 Lewis, David Rt. 4, Box 418-B, CH Eigp 80 14,2 !4
4 Lloyd, Everette • Hayes Rd. , Cif ' 24. 2 42 973 '4 4
5 u .. . G,i1 128 University Lake Apts. , CH EIBM12111=1
5 Maynor, Currie M. 'Rt. 1, Box 253-B, CH 2; . :8 45 : 7
7 McKaskel, Laura 5-2 Estes Park Apts. , Uarrboro 2: 4' • 8 8, 4
E Merricks Frederick Rt. 4, Box 42.-C, CheiFea "i Emu 81q 2,
9 Minton, William, 2 Fidelity Apts. , Carr.oro , , I *o • ,( 1-..
1 .
la Moraven, Carl 805 Lorraine Dr. , Durham 2, 4, 7 ,f) 2: 2 7
t . .
11 Mo ris. Jerry Rt. 1, Box 190-B, CH 2' 44 8 :0
: Morris, Marvin 108 Cathy Rd. , Carrboro, NC 2 3 4 :4 9; u6
:3 Murray, Rodney _ 200 Quail oost pr. , • In :0 4; ,-: l 4
:4 Neville, Early C. Rt. 4, Box 2 8 11111 2;
15 Pannell, Ronald D. N-11 Royal Park Apts. , Carrboro 2y+ 0 0 :* S: 4 z
Is Parks, John D. Rt. 2, Lot 6, J&W Trailer Park, , 2415 c) L:2 :9! 5
17 --.. -D: • obb ' 509 Lindsay Street, Carrboro 44. ,5 62 q il: 4
iPorterfield, Keith . S. Laaalle St..4_ Apt. 50-L 2 39. . * •.
19 Porterfield, Ma'r7.- 828 Airport Rd. , CH
2 99 6 58 6_ 91„,
70 Pressley, Tim '2 Fidelity Court, Carrboro . 2.3 7 9 4214 3
21 Price, Sam '.0. :ox 7-L, unape 0
:2 Riddle Steven K. 509 . i ton t. , :2. s'o '': Elni9,01num
z3 Robertson, Joseph 112 Lynn Dr., L.arreoro, 1 4 ;0I
24 Rounds, William E. Rt. 3, Box 197, 3 ,9 :0
zs Roberson Charles Rt. 1, Box 418, Chapel Hill 46 , 6 4/: 9!
26 Sink, Ted
B-9 Greenbelt Apts., Carrboro ) 1 , , , 1
27 Smith, Bg.hv L. 84 Laurel Ridge Apts. CH 1 i9 7) ; ;4: 5!
a • . . ,_ 1., Rt. 8 Box 432-A, C.H. d ,8 88 45, 0: -
29 Smith, Ricky Rt. 3, Box 54E, Chapel Hill 3:7 88 :211: :I
m Smith Suzanne S-2 Estes Park Apts. , Carrboro 2 : : 0: 1416,
31 .illett Rory D. Rt 1 Box 99-A Cha.el Hill
WILIEUMW
22 Ta.. Jimm Rt. 2, Cha.el Hill, " 214. 3; ; -5;0,6
33 IIMMEIR Rt. 2, Box , U ape '3. 2 519 '9 o 16(5,
34 - r Bill Rt. 5, Box 374, Chapel Hill gam; : mou
35 Thomas, Phil Rob - 7, B. 24.., 0 " Kilaillig=
36 _hempson Bill F. 50: Edwards St. ,
MIN
37 _ Thompson, Randall 1- ame at 'pts. ,
Q"
! 1111111111121111
381 Upton, Erie 9 • 'ittsooro Rd. ,.. Ii. a
James
39 Whitfield, Jes R. Rt. 3, Box 135A, hilisoorough 1 3' - 4 79.' /
40[ThIliarns, Albert - :1, Bo' _
Iwo ,
COUNTY
FIRE DEPARTMENT
Chapel Hill Orange
_ 1
rO-1-11EF Dr9ITTE 1:142-6602 06717/81
Everette L. Lloyd
.. ._
I NAJAF
1 Williams, Carney E. • ___- ADDRESS
Rt. 7, Box 308-7T7F-
/ 1 • • SOCIAL SECURi 7-
2z3 ..2-S7I-89'
Z 11i2laC :og-T, : 112 Lindsay St.' 2arrboro — Euligim4: 0, ,
3 *, • 1 • _ 0-,,,.• • a*- Rt. 5, Box 92C G.H. MIKE17: 8.;! I+
4 ,••. I id 1 202 Bobcat Rd. C.H. . ;2L ; 6 96
MM
s61lMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIijMMI
11111.1111111111
78=11111111111111111111111111MMIMMI
1111111100=111
9 IIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMIIIII
1 0 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHIII
II MOB , 1
, 1
12 1 I
III
. I 1: ■ "
:3 ,
1.4 MIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEIIIIIIIIEIII
15 1111111111111011
16 IIIIIIIIIIIMIMMIMIIII MIMI 1 '
1 7 1 II !
1 8 1
1 g I I ,
20
2 i MEM —
:7 111111111111111111M
2 3 1 i
2 4 i
i
25 1
26 1111 I
27 I
2B t I
29 , 111
30
31 11111111/1111111/1
- --
37 11111111111111111111
33 111111111111111
11111111111111111111
... _
35 . 1 : : 11111111111.
36 I 1111111
.
37 11111111111 i i
38 111111111111 :
39 11111111111
40 1.11111 t ,
- --- . _ _
.3_,/ 33
Pi/ I
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 11A
OR.A.NGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
HILLSBOROUGH
NORTH CAROLINA.
27278
40.1,
Ai' '4 fd. ••I
MZMO
TO: Bill Laws, Acting County Manager
FROM: Orange County Planning Department
DATE: July 22, 1981
RE: Planning Board recommendation on Preliminary Plan for Property of
Elizabeth Pegg Latta
-------------
This case was referred to the Planning Board for their consideration
at the July 20, 1981 meeting of the Planning Board.
The Planning Board recommends: Approval of ti.E Preliminary Plan for
the 'Property of Elizabeth Pegg Latta subdivision as a major subdivision.
433.'
' 4
Planning Board Minutes
July 20, 1981
Page 2
2. Page 4 guarantee should read guarantee.
Cleary moved approval of the July 7, 1981 minutes with the
corrections. Lansford seconded. Motion carried unanurcusly.
Agenda Item #3 Elizabeth Pegg Latta Subdivision.
Cannity addressed some general concerns. He cited that the
Commissioners had changed the regulations to allow for adminis-
trative approval of minor subdivision by the staff.
In the case of the Latta Subdivision the developers felt that it
should be approved administratively. However, staff felt it
should be considered as a major subdivision. He added that staff
can refer any subdivision to the Board.
Kirk gave a presentation on the Elizabeth Pegg Latta Subdivision.
Steve Yuhaszaddressed the Board in objection to consideration of
the subdivision as a major. He objected on the basis of the
second part of the definition of subdivision.on page 4 in the
Subdivision Regulations. He added that lots over 10 acres should
not be involved given the definition. His second objection con-
.
cerned the fee differentials between minor and major subdivisions.
Alois Callermin added that they wiled to know how to advise their
clients in the fUture, if the Board set a precedent in this case.
Geoffrey Gledhill addressed the issue of whether a single 10 acre
lot takes the entire proposal out of the jurisdiction of the
Subdivision Regulations.
He explained that the definition in question refers to a subdivision
where every tract is more than 10 acres. If a single tract is less
than 10 acres than all lots are subject to Subdivision Regulations.
The intent is to prevent uncontrolled development through large lot
subdivision. The definition is from the enabling Legislation of
the general statutes.
Gordon requested clarification from Gledhill on the following
issues: 1) regardless of history all lots are considered, even
if one is greater than 10 acres; and 2) are the regulations applied
in a given subdivision at a single point in time or are they applied
as a process overtime.
Gledhill responded that that is the biggest problem and that the
Staff approach was the most sensible to assure a good planning
process. He cited III-C-2 in the Subdivision Regulations.
Gordon clarified that all land divisions since the Subdivision
Regulations were put into affect should be considered. Gledhill
noted that this did not include those tracts which were exceptions.
q6t
Planning Board Minutes
July 20, 1981
Page 3
He added that there were additional problems when roads are
involved.
General discussion followed.
Kizer motioned that the Latta Subdivision be considered as a
major subdivision. Irvin seconded.
Gledhill cited two policy issues: 1) the fee issue and 2) the
policy for describing the subdivision process. He noted that
these are separate issues on which the Planning Board could take
the initiative. He added the Board needed to decide whether or
not to treat this Subdivision as a major or minor.
Gordon asked what precedent would be set with this motion. Gledhill
clarified that this was merely a staff referral which could be
approved without addressing the question. Callemyn noted that they
had chosen this subdivision to highlight their concerns but that
there will be similar cases in the future.
Cleary noted two items: 1) the subdivision was referred to the
Board by the staff for action, and 2) the Board has given previous
instructions to the staff to refer any questions on the use of the.
minor subdivision process to the Board. Kizer added that the
Board would not be inconsistent in taking this approach. Irvin
concurred. Shanklin also cited past interpretations.
Crawford asked if the fee issue was applicable as a separate item.
Gledhill responded affirmatively and added that the Commissioners
usually requested Planning Board input prior to their action.
Greer felt the Board had the responsibility to apply the regulations
as written as well as to change the regulations as needed.
The Board voted on the motion. 'Tie motion carried. Opposed:
Cleary. Abstention: Lunsford.
Gordon suggested that the problems with the minor subdivision process
be addressed by the Staff as quickly as possible. The Board
concurred,
Cannity indicated that the revision of the Subdivision Regulations
would be the Staff's next project.
Kizer moved to recommend approval of the Latta Subdivision. Cleary
seconded. The motion carried unanimously.
Agenda Item #4 Gary and Gail Barker Subdivision.
Kirk gave a presentation on the Gary and Gail Barker Subdivision.
He noted that Carrboro recommended denial of the subdivision because
of its location in University Lake watershed. Carrboro requested
a minimum of 5 acre lots. H.e added that the Planning Board
r'
MINOR SUBDIVISION CHECKLIST
NAME OF SUBDIVISION rr 7 LPt c G TsATTA OWNER OR DEVELOPER snrsr•.
ADDRESS CHESTNUT RIDGE RQ F nN FT-EE 0I1�1� rrr�p�n
TOWNSHIPr TAX MAP 3 BLOCK LOT
NAME OF SURVEYOR OR ENGINEER ALOIS CALL MJyN_
Total number of lots 4 To be developed in__, _phase(s) Total number of acres 2. 49
Typical dwelling units at present. NONE or proposed SINGLE FAMILY
WATER SUPPLY: Public(name) Community Individual X r
SEWAGE TREATMENT: Public Community Individual septic tank x
SCHOOL DISTRICT ORANGE COUNTY
Access onto State Roast ## 1125 Road Standard: Public__X___„_,_,or Private Class A , B , C
Existing critical areas such as streams( } , flood prone areas( } , historic Sites( } . Other( ) ,
Explain:
Land Uses in the general area: ttf O
FINAL PLAT RECEIVED (Date)
( } All lots were approved y the Health Departments tipr.ni�nv nvvuntrrn_T.,r a
( X } Lots tailing health Department's approval, are combined or listed proper y on t e plat
( X } Board of Education approved. Date DM LUNSFORD
X } Erosion Control. Officer approved. Date
( } Road Maintenance Agreement submitted (w ere applicable . Approved
{ } Improvements have been provided for; completed, bond, letter of creel t, cas Date
( } OWASA approval (where applicable) Date
.fit 1
00
34 C
9 July 1,181
Mr. Rick Cannady
Orange County Planning Department
Orange County Courthouse
Hillsborough, N. C. 27278
Dear Mr. Cannady;
I am afraid that I cannot accept the decision of the Orange County
Planning Department in denying my application for a minor subdivision
of my property in Bingham Township.
My understanding and interpretation of the definition of a subdivision
and a minor subdivision as set forth in the Orange County Subdivision
Regulations, Section 11, Page 4, is precisely what I presented to you
on my plat.
I would like to be heard on this subject at the next Planning Board
meeting.
incerely,
Elizabeth Pegg Gat
cc: Alois Callemyn, R. L. S.
341
ORANGE COM•TTY PLANNENTG DEPARTMENT
prIT.TABOROTTGEC
NORM CaROLMA.
27275
(4204
.1,44
REMO
TO: Orange County Planning,Board
FROM: Orange County Planning Staff
DATE: July 16, 1981
RE: Subdivision of Property of Elizabeth Pegg Latta
The Orange County Subdivision Regulations allow the Planning Staff to approve
minor subdivisions (see III-C) provided that no more than four (4) new lots are
created out of a tract. The lot of record would be the configuration of lots as
of March 13, 1978. It is the Staff interpretation that divisions of a lot of record,
after 1978, whether through the minor subdivision process or through a process
exempt from subdivision regulation effects the nimher of Lots that may be created.
This particular tract was divided to create an 11 + acre tract after March. 1978
The buyer of the remainder non wishes to create five (5) additional tracts. An
Interpretation other than the above would allow individuals to use the minor sub-
division process and avoid the scrutiny of the major subdivision process.
It is the Staff's recommendation that this subdivision be considered a major
rather than a minor as reauested by the developer.
/nsw
342
o .„ o
o•
o °-
w
P P
ca
la
CHEEKS ill
F/7::: ::: 1\
3HAM ill e V
1 %? 1ti i`� g�62 43 v Taw
■
5876 `w
1.25 AC.
• 48 oast 111
TA. $
:� 32A _
44 1�
12.11 AC. T. C.5e93 II
1 2R�
4.57 AC, �\ .
45
zoee 15.92 AC.
109 ;�V� v'z53 40
• 40 'r �'
•
2. 11,5 AC,
r , 98:g i. 1 ��11 5.d C0
�1` 4E
R�Rq< R�Rq� 5 2,3 AC„ ` 4F
9635 1 3. 15.83 AC
s aa.
— Pi, fi'/R, �\� � � 2573'
y �, 10.93 AC..
5..01 AC. 1 , 7.c r ea4e
• 32 \TR7 l ii �i
T
�Ri\
r J I
' 33 �soo �1 1
I � r { ! I = II
10.Sr/� i�5T 5 / r- ._�_ ORANGcr
,a/4) 4,18 AC. ��� • ?..4 AC. 4C z
5 AC. I ,/ �_ 7509
�, + 549 40 �7/ 37 3551 1� �
4.37-)4C. f�/ 4.98 AC, �
�.� a 161 f 9 I//
0 .3109 4
„05 AC' 6 8 AC., O S `
\ //
�6
148
10 ; �f I
I �63
/i' 6936 aC,
____/
' H
1l 1
/i \
�/ ,, 8 I A C.. �� ��
343
piq 9 -3 -i//
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 11B
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
HILLSBOROUGH
NORna. CAROUNA
27278
.r
, dy
MEMO
TO: Bill Laws, Acting County Mana&c.r
FROM: Orange County Planning Department
DATE: July 22, 1981
RE: Planning Board recommendation on the minor subdivision for Property of
Carl Lowe and wife June
This case was referred to the Planning Board for their consideration
at the July 20, 1981 meeting of the Planning Board.
The Planning Board recommends: Approval with the road as Presented
with negotiations to be continued with the Episcopal Diocese property to
obtain the reauired ri2 t of way and that an exception to the required
riaht of way be granted so that the plat could be recorded.
4
344
Planning Board Minutes
July 20, 1981
Page 5
Cleary motioned approval of the subdivision with Class C road
from Highway 514 to this lot. Kizer seconded. Motion carried
unanimously.
Agenda Item #7 Carl and June Lowe Subdivision.
Kirk gave a presentation on the Carl and. June Lowe Subdivision.
Mr. Lowe described the property including existing road and house,
and spoke of his attempts to gain right of way from the Episcopal
Diocese.
Cleary cited the state statute requiring that landlbeked parcels
be given access. Lowe indicated he wanted legal access. Cleary
felt it was a legal problem. Lowe indicated he wished only a
recommendation from the Board and not a ruling. Alternatives were
discussed.
Cannity described the "Cartway" law and indicated that future
subdivision of the Walker property would require a 60 foot right
of way.
General discussion followed.
Lowe indicated he could not get his deed recorded without the road
maintenance agreement signed by all parties. Kirk cited a past
subdivision where the Commissioners waived a right of way require-
ment in approving a subdivision. Cannity cited that use of the
"Cartway" law would not net the Subdivision Regulations.
Cleary motioned approval of the subdivision with the road as
presented, where the required right of way could be acquired
lacking the section crossing the Episcopal Diocese property, but
that negotiations would continue to be pursued for such purpose
as to acquire said right of way, and with the recommendation that
the Commissioners grant exception to the proposed right of way so
that the plat could be recorded. Kizer seconded the motion. The
motion carried. Opposed: Gordon. Gordon asked that the minutes
reflect that by law no further subdivision of the Walker property
could occur without a 60 foot right of way as discussed by the
Board.
Agenda Item #8 Discussion of 2.2.3 of the Zoning Ordinance.
The Board identified changes in this section from the original.
These included changing the minimum representation from two to
• one and deleting "County's Planning Jurisdiction".
Gordon moved to restore the requirement for residence in the
County's jurisdiction. Irvin seconded the motion.
Lunsford expressed concern for representation of residence in the
extra-territorial areas. Cleary also cited this concern for the
MINOR SUBDIVISION CHECKLIST
NAME OF SUBDIVISION PROPERTY OF CARL LOWE AND WIFE JUNE OWNER OR DEVELOPER CARL AND JUNE LOWC
ADDRESS potrrr 1. ID t,tuRORfIUGH. NC FIP, a.jRjL1_M- 'H
t
TOWNSHIP^__ENQ_ _ TAX MAP sdi I BLOCK LOT VAnm nF 7A
NAME OF SURVEYOR OR ENGINEER
Total number of lots i To be developed in___l phase(s) , Total number of acres 1.62 acres
Typical dwelling units at present or proposed
WATER SUPPLY= Public(name) Community Individual X .
SEWAGE TREATMENT: Public Community indiv dual Septic tank x
SCHOOL DISTRICT ORANGE
Access onto State Road IaAa Road Standard: Public or Private Class A , B r C x
Existing critical areas such as streams( } , Flood prone areas{ } , Historic Sites( ) , Other( ) ►
Explain:
Land Uses in the general area: sATNT MAgy,.q
FINAL PLAT RECEIVED (Date) 1-2R-81 -—
€ X } All lots were approved by the stealth Department DOUG IIOLYFIELD.11- -79
( ) Lots tailing stealth Department's approval are combined or listed properly on the plat
( X } Board of Education approved. Date DAN IJINSFORD A-14-RI
( x } Erosion Control Officer approved. Date
( x } Road.Maintenance Agreement submitted (w ere app ..ca le) Approved
} Improvements have been provided for; completed, bond, letter of creel t, cash. Date
{ ) OWASA approval (where applicable) Date
CID
34t:
ORANGE COUNTY PLA4 NNE-N.0 DEPARTMENT
TrJ.SBOROUGH
NORTE( CAROLINA
27278
E.11:ELFi
goo
MEMO
TO: Planning Board
FROM: Planning Department
DATE: July 15, 1981
RE: Property of Carl Lowe and Wife June
To obtain administration approval of this minor subdivision Mr. Lowe would need
to acquire a 60 foot right-of-way over an existing road through three different
tracts of land. The owners of the Educational Opportunities, Inc. tract and the
owners of the Walker property have agreed to work with Mr. Lowe in obtaining a
60 foot right-of-way, The Episcopal Diocese however, will not grant an easement
across-their tract of land.
The Orange County Planning Department recommends approval of this minor subdivision
with the restriction that no further subdivision of the Walker property may occur
without a 60 foot right-of-way existing to all new lots.
/nsw
6 LI'd
44) i
50.07AC :
,1 3
i
e ..
, .
32,51 AC.
C)
92 g
\ ___ 57.72
...-'
.■(1,,t i
i 1
.
„
:.:=.
i
..-/
/
I \ /
i . ..
1 .
•• i
Vs /
31..15 AC.
jr/i/
, › 29 07 AC
t.
/17
.:4P:2-5i Vo. l
,,,,:,,,,,,,r,iM
4C 1
i '..'\t,e:,
■
-----_—- 1
i
. ‘ '-,•, ST M A 9YS :-.1—-_,------::::—
tr+
S.7i 7
::"1.-:7.,..--: .;::DiSTRV:-,1 '..-7.,•_
.0 A,,1, r--- ' ■061.--- - :J
...," -
' PLAT REFERENCES
1,
POSES
NIEL2A_C,TILLE:,..)'3 RALPH ts 57-7.i. :-7ca N 2,
•,,,,:..ri:,.: F „:',H,7--EC„ -.'-'1 .._ _ ,„ „15,- i73.,
:.: it .:=-„,!...ii .:,:.:, '...,, .',.:.:t.•:'-_.-L. 2.7 -;L-4,,,_ .
... ... _ . _.. ...
......
r-,-1-4'', 37R:::II-ICFN :='',- !?
..., ..--. .. _............. . . . . . . .„.„.. ..
.N AVE:.
. .. _
.... . ,
34h
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 11C
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNLNG DEPARTMENT
HILLSBOROUGH
NORTH CA.ROLINA.
27278
0019 •
,
'11F1Le,"
ME40
TO: Bill TRws, Acting County Manager
FROM: Orange County Planning Department
DATE: July 22, 1981
RE: Planning Board recommendation on the minor subdivision for Property of
Roy C. Belon and Velma L. Parker Belon
This case was referred to the Planning Board for their consideration
at the July 20, 1981 meeting of the Planning Board.
The Planning Board recommends: Approval with the road to be constructed
to "Class C" standards from Highway 54.
34.'
Planning Board Minutes
July 20, 1981
Page 4
recognized their zoning, but could not make a similar recorrnrenda-
tion until the recommendations of the Water Resources Task Force
had been adopted for the County's watershed areas.
General discussion followed.
Irvin questioned whether the irregularly shaped lot had adequate
frontage. Kirk responded affirmatively.
Kizer moved approval of the subdivision. Laszlo seconded. The
motion carried. Opposed: Cleary.
Agenda Item #5 C.M. Mayse Estate Subdivision.
Kirk gave a presentation on the C.M. Mayse Estate Subdivision.
Mr. Mayse indicated that the land could not be sold except to
other heirs as specified in the Will. Cleary clarified that the
purpose of the subdivision was to meet the specifications of the
Will and for tax purposes.
Shanklin moved approval of the Subdivision with a Class C road.
Lunsford seconded. The motion carried unanimously.
Agenda Item #8 Roy C. Belon Subdivision.
Kirk gave a presentation on the Roy C. Belon Subdivision. He noted
that the lot was sold by deed arxi never went through the subdivision
process. Cannity added that the individual could only obtain a
30 foot right of way and therefore could meet the Subdivision
Regulations except with the partial right of way.
Cleary asked what type of road was recommended. Staff indicated
that a Class B road was recommended. Kizer indicated it was a
trade off between a Class B road and allowing a 30 foot right of way.
Cleary motioned approval of the subdivision with a partial 30 foot
right of way. Kizer seconded the motion.
Gordon cited the letter from Carrboro. Cannity indicated Carrboro
failed to recognize it was also in the University Lake watershed.
Cannity noted that in the Staff's +view the road was a public road.
Cleary asked for clarification on this point. Cannity responded
that the deed line was also the edge of the right of way and
constituted a motion toward public dedication. He added the
subdivision was drawn in 1949 and recorded in 1956.
The Board discussed combining the 2 issues of subdivision approval
and road improvement requirements. General discussion followed
regarding public, private and non-state maintained roads.
3 5 t;
Planning Board Minutes
July 20, 1981
Page 5
Cleary motioned approval of the subdivision with Class C road
from Highway 54 to this lot. Kizer seconded. Motion carried
unanimously.
Agenda Item #7 Carl and dune Lowe Subdivision.
Kirk gave a presentation on the Carl and June Lowe Subdivision.
Mr. Lowe described the property including existing road and house,
and spoke of his attempts to gain right of way from the Episcopal
Diocese.
Cleary cited the state statute requiring that landlOcked'parcels
be given access. Lowe indicated he wanted legal access. Cleary
felt it was a legal problem. Lowe indicated he wished only a
recomendation from the Board and not a ruling. Alternatives were
discussed.
Cannity described the "Cartway" law and indicated that future
subdivision of the Walker property would require a 60 foot right
of way.
General discussion followed.
Lowe indicated he could not get his deed recorded without the marl
maintenance agreement signed by all parties. Kirk cited a past
subdivision where the Commissioners waived a right of way require-
ment in approving a subdivision. Cannity cited that use of the
"Cartway" law would not meet the Subdivision Regulations.
Cleary motioned approval of the subdivision with the road as
presented, where the required right of way could be acquired
lacking the section crossing the Episcopal Diocese property, but
that negotiations would continue to be pursued for such purpose
as to acquire said right of way, and with the recommendation that
the Commissioners grant exception to the proposed right of way so
that the plat could be recorded. Kizer seconded the motion. The
motion carried. Opposed: Gordon. Gordon asked that the minutes
reflect that by law no further subdivision of the Walker property
could occur without a 60 foot right of way as discussed by the
Board.
Agenda Item #8 Discussion of 2.2.3 of the Zoning Ordinance.
The Board identified changes in this section from the original.
These included changing the minimum representation from two to
one and deleting "County's Planning Jurisdiction".
Gordon moved to restore the requirement for residence in the
County's jurisdiction. Irvin seconded the motion.
Lansford expressed concern for representation of residence in the
extra-ter-ritorial areas. Cleary also cited this concern for the
f
MINOR SUBDIVISION CHECKLIST
SELON
NAME OF SUBDIVISION PROPERTY OF ROY C. DELON S VELMA L. PARKCR OWNER OR DEVELOPER nny r= BCLoN
ADDRESS 9=IRE DJSTRICI in C}RANGE
TOWNSHIP CHAPEL BILL TAX MAP 112A BLOCK LOT GA
NAME OF SURVEYOR OR ENGINEER F .
Total number of lots 1 To be developed in 1 phasets) , Total number of acres 1
Typical dwelling units at present p or proposed 1
WATER SUPPLY: Public(name) Community Individual x r
SEWAGE TREATMENT: Public Community Individual Septic tank x
SCHOOL DISTRICT CHAPEL HILL
Access onto State Road 0 54 Road Standard: Public k or Private Class A , B x , C
Existing critical areas such as streamst ) , Flood prone areast } , Historic Sites( } , Other( } ,
Explain:
Land Uses in the general area: RESIDENTIAL
FINAL PLAT RECEIVED (Date)
t x ) All lots were approve by the Health Department RON 11OLMAY
( ) Lots failing Health Department's approval are combined or listed properly on the plat
( x ) Board of Education approved. Date 7-15-81 Llampr
t ) Erosion Control Officer approved. Date
t } Road Maintenance Agreement submitted (wnere applica le) . Approved
t ) improvements have been provided for; completed, bond, letter of credit, cash. Date
( ) OWASA approval (where applicable) Date
4
_1
y y
r;
352
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPA_RMEENT
FrrnrsBOROUGH
FrOkr.r.u. CAROLINA
27278
AI Qt.
MEMO
TO: Planning Board
FROM: Planning Department
DATE: July 15, 1981
RE: Property of Roy C. Belon
There is an existing 30 foot right-of-way on Broadwell Road from NC 54 through
Mr. Belon's property. This right-of-way is shown on as existing plat of record,
recorded in Plat Book 8 at page 78, Mr. Belon has informed us that he, has tried
and cannot obtain the additional 30 feet required to obtain a 60 foot right-of-
way. He is therefore requesting approval with a 30 foot partial width right-of-
way is set out in Section rv-B-3-C-2, of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations.
The Planning Department recommends approval, of this subdivision with a 30 foot
Partial width right-of-way, and the road to be upgraded to "Class B" standards.
/nsw
35
, " '
...-
! /
'4.: .." 5008 ___\24., '3•''''," .;..--47-7,7..,:..
:
'
'4-
„.._.k.4..... , 4
. '\.
, _...,
,..
i .....„
i 7504 ,
1
■
/ ® 7871
11
68.96 AC.
t.'
\ ..... --
—--———
—— —
.5827 17084 i 1
SEE 9913 194t . (:)4885
/0 1 . II , 1 ,• \\
MAP H24 0 'Ii,„7„) 1428 AC
1
\ 11..6 A•V , :r ■ y5 11
I; \ ._--5.,w __
___ ____ zza s I. •AC ' 110 __---
--—
---
t .
C\0
0
_
t-
o)
• 1•: ...
9CR PLAT REFERENCES 9759 1 1°
::cc rimi v 1 --T....
354
TOWN OF CARRBORO
*64,,
• .15%
NORTH CAROUNA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
• , •
July 17, 1981
Mr. Eddie Kirk, Planner
Orange County Planning Department
Hillsborough, NC 27278
RE: Roy C. and Velma L. Belon Property
Highway 54 West
Dear Eddie:
We have reviewed the referenced property and recommend approval of the
plating of this previously existing lot with the following conditions:
1) That legal access (public or private road) be obtained to N,C. 54
2) That if a private road is used for access, a road maintenance agreement
be approved by Orange County
If I can be of further assistance to you, please let me know.
Sin -rely,
AIP
Ann L. English
Interim Planning Director
tp
P 0 BOX 337 WEST MAIN STREET,CARRBORO,NORTH CAROLINA 27510
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
____.....
,
a
ION
-1 •
i
;
..,
— 1 .. .
,..
;
.•
i ..11.,.1.
51
I k
I ....V
"It
„
. .
•
/ .. ":„t•
.-... '
.
VII
N
••':: ''"..:r:.......,. ..,:?1, ,
CO
"
. ,.••• ,• ._
' - ''" '','., -. .'..,..-;-.'•',.!:.t
....; ....,-....._:
_....
• ;',•.>"',A
•_..,
• ' -
.: '•'1',...'....
.. .
. .. ,
••
• ■
.._,
, .4..
.....
.. .. .
':- :,:-.."-•1
1-1 \
• "...
. .
• .-
...'•-
V? •
..„, .
5,..5.
ux ....
..s..
0.,
..5.
..
54.
0 5M,
`1.,......11,„
,
...
..
. . .
\\:\ZN 1. Ni:•
..
..
.•
-........„.
I
:,..- .
-•".......,..........
. .
• •
...
•
....,
..,;.:2\ \••1\,. .,
•
...
. „...
....
/
•
q, ,)
.../
.... .
•
.-
/
u...4 %
../
....,
11 .-■ .. 41,, ....
. •,,,
... •
.21.,
, = :. •
I . '
....,
Nr..
...'5
7 •.. •,-.- .."."
". .'l %." ''• - r-:
''..7.:;.,'-:.•''' ,.'':.,;.-:,lk - '- - ' '. ,.', ... •\.5.,',... + I, i',-..". cd
. 1 .
, CI
I
.
...
• . sa.
.•••.","..,..-1
..
..
'G ,7
. _.
/10
;
',.
\
...
,
35E'
.,/..t •r ,
.■ C - '-
—
........... —.... A .......ii .0
n • . 4,,,,t. ' i
I
i
i
-. ...,.. ,....r.
i
1
. vitz
... I
In to .
t
• . ' i
„ .
. .
.■ N: ' ,.." 1:,..' ,, .. .
1-.., \ „ .. - •- -
, , . . •.
• %':77'i
-— ,,..:, . ,.".7.::.::•`•
'.:•,.,.,8..., ;'''' -7... ,..'.. f?,:..". -'i:-.' '''
.„.....,-,
..0.,, ....
„... ., .....,..
1.'
S‘. . .7.
. .1,•:,1
-••_-........•
7' :•7,17'":
11 ••••X...1e-A, ,:. .
.;-.
. .,
.•.
s.v1
0.....,q. . .
.4. ....:
• .
"S,.. t:••••\.:6„
f. ..
.. •
. ,
. ...
,....7.,
).....„
.....„.
••S,a
I ..".
*....e...a
............ .
. ,
\ v.'
ya'... .. : ' '• ''',.. ;
.f. .1. !
"...\ "'"6• -
, ,.... „.
. :
i . .4.
/
/
..7. .
'''r. -0
u.■ .., ' ' \ t,S> • .. - ...,
„
1:.: '.•1
.. , . ,
.— . ,... . . •'. .' ,*
• '• -•
• • .
.,,,„ . :. c--,,4.- ", . ' •-..;',—`-':=-.": -...`.-"" •;-.'
- ,,,,- ,--...-.-r'...--7.,.,..--..,:•..?.... .,.4..- :,,,,, .;:.::-.--.-.:7"---7.--
) • . ::i4.....:7.;::::.::47.:',..:i.7.:,,,--::4;";;L.,. .. 74,-,":.-...:.'..t'.?:...,:.-",.:;.:4-,:f0.,;,:t;:c:::5-:-!.... .:,,-,,, .. -:';-..,::. ::',7,;;+:::1:77.t.........-::tA,.::....7'..":'..:.•'
.:. '"i''.'::,,,:',:;.-.."'''.:'....::-.;F.F!'-';.:',;Z:',..' '..'.'" '''•'"''' ,'"" ' ^.•", fly. ' ., .7 a- ■›,...... •■at.:f
'.—....:1,...:-'..!-";-..ri...:....1',t'::'?'4". . . i•..,..'"::''''',7:..41.,.....''':',' - '.‘,..eri", • '.' 'al.F...,11' i'0"......'-' . t
,' ''''. '"'i:'' -"' : '':." --'',7 ::,...'",...';',:',",.'", '''.•'?', ":--4,-..;.- ',0...:,-- , i . r•I
•
.X !....-:,,,.1...:4
.--
ftt).•-.. -:,..:.:,,,,e,.•:t
• , .
.....
1 . . ..
-.,i.''s,...
";•.:
..,
. .... ...... -, . . . ••
,..„
.., .
. .•
. .
I.)t) e"
.........,
.-
i
,
i r
1
,..1 7.
I
.i
..„
i
' 1
Lk,
,„.., .,.•
.1'. , ":, •,.....,,
,..t. ,
. .
S1'
‘.6, S.3.1
.-f- 1,-
..1 .4.' -\\\k\\\ -A.
,... --\\\\\\ ,,s s-
'E.
-
-...,.....
"...' '
................., \
/1 ?..,
1 ..?
,
..,
.. ,
."... \lz.°:i■ i
-.=. \ •;,,,
.- .
• .:.
/ P11 4L. • ..
,
/ I \'-•
•
‘,:.. ,.., 1
•.:+
",1.■ 41., ti,% .
sa
*..13. ..
-- ...- •
... .___. .
... ,,. . .„4:„.. .......,:_vi.....:1„,
1 ,. ... . ......,,,..,.....-47. _ : -,0:7-:,.:':."J '•. ,.?.." 4..-ft..•':‘.;"??.?? :'",rl/*5 ' %,,4
-, •',";. -;:1,-..' :....,• ' -' '.*:A.- ... , *\-:,7,:o. (PI-i-112, f\t4:."'' ' t
• . ::, 1,, , ' :,''`:* -, • it.,4.-; r11' 3,,,, , 1
I
...
- . .
\ i
. _
. .
_ .
358
. .. .. k
._
wffniaimi:', .
74 51> i
S ,
...
■17
r,:t7•",
....:-`•. ..„,.."„O^7P, ..' , ...,,, - 4.„,,,;,,',„..........- .,
' ......01';'. i.,..,:f'7:1;:,! ::. ' + icA,A;*:4:.'':=/' ' " •... n$!,7.....,....,..-:„..,.,,,,— .., '
"r..-0-, ".,'‘. 'y 7'• ' . ---...... ,a 0 ''''' ::''.''': *-.
"--' . 7.1,, --:. '••-';'''... -''''
•=. •
.94 .....
i
Cf. '24 us
,.."
. -
.7-Cs
7....cL, CZ..., 1...V9,..
.'
i
It tsw
% "` 1
\ i
:_.
,
...
...
..„
a
.. .. ,
\ a
•
I
:.-
:4
i .,..,\ .„\\\\\...,\\\\""' ...-..".....".••••.....
-.......,
'... '.-+
_ .
. .
•',.-.:, :
It....1: T.
7,-
Ci
tO, -Gs
—43 ''''' t.e.
',..„7.:::.• 7,
'''''''-47.jt7r.
.•-,
... .
-.... ..z
i,...t
7,7
\
•••!
,.... .. ' .. .
!......".:„......
, .
';.:'•-r.;,"; , Ef . . .
.1......).
)7" '''..: ,•
' I-4.-i • F.
;.'SI
.•
43°1
$1
•
I ' .
I -
i
el In,
.- --
...1" I
,..
c.,,..4,c,......,,
i
s>,,,,...........,,,,,...........s
I
I
MI
. ...?-...--
I -
- .,..t,,,
35::, ' - '
_
.,. .... ._
..r. -•.,.,..; t ,-..••,..,
..
Z-1
•;-,
7,-.' 7.
0'3?
. .
"C\s„
,..,. .\\.,
c. ,.
:..".77 . ' 77..7 ".
-‘...,... .'471_''7:;;;.,''
!r• ,'''''sr":" :77:7. .7+:...'....:... -----......,:.;.,,..:....... .....
-
. .
12.1..
-.. .
, ..:,,...... . , I
in
---".•
•
71, t'' ...■.•
I
\ I
,f. /
,t..,.
...z
. '
.„.
. ..
1,... ....
/ \\\
: .,.. .
,..
,„ \\c„
, ,..,..
i . ............„.
.......,
,.. ....,
. 4....„......,.... ::
„.,...t., ...
i.-.
;., .
..,
,
..,,
.
,..,:.....;.
,.........",.,. \\-;....,-,..ti.,\.... .
..:,
..,...,
.•;-•,;2:7 ,: -
'fi,
..p.
V:7%.
tr,
rft
-
7z... -
rq
t.'.
-+A
: •-:'
■
! ',t,•--. ' •
„., .
-,...: •'-'- -' . '
• .
....t.,-a.,
'..:;":"Si:'.'•"
''.7,,,,,,,t,„" _
;., .
,.
\\10
Ir' : .t,.3
i -
,'..•...... ,
,i•
4
..1 ...
/.
.. 0)
. .
k
F
.
$...
4, -
A
i
I. .
2 1
, .
1
1 ,
r.
„a
i .
Al,..
z..-._ --
„.
I
c.,..3,C.........,.
1•-e.,,,
■).,..*‘..■,‘.,.N.,,, s t
MS
1...t.t '
. , 1...
...
36c
-PhiC 8 -3 -e/
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 12
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
HILLSBOROUGH
NORTH CAROLINA
27278
krI2:
MEMO
'ID: Mr. Bill Laws, Acting County Manager
FRCM: Orange County Planning Departaent
DATE: June 25, 1981
RE: Road Naming Advisory Committee recommendation on Public Hearing
for September 21, 1981
The Faad Naming Advisory Committee (RONAC) requests to hold a
public hearing on the r- ' public state-maintained roads.
RONAC recolmends the following roads to be reviewed for approval:
CAL WELL NEW HOPE WHITE CROSS EFLAND ORANGE RURAL
1604 1738 2028 1393 Ext. 1331
1880 2029 15414
1881 2030 1599
ENO SOUTH ORANGE
1600 2016
1601 2027
1602 2031
1603 2032
1605 2033
1715 2036
1817
1877
1892
1883
361
ORANGE COUNTY PLAI .NNING DEPARTMENT
AlrLtSBOROUGH
NORTH CAROLINA.
27278
o It
Ff;
ZEIT)
TO: Mr. Bill Laws, Acting County Manager
FRUI: Orange County Planning Department
DATE: June 25, 1981
RE: Road Naming Advisory Committee recormendation on Public Hearing
for September 21, 1981
The Road Naming Advisory Committee (RONAC) requests to hold a public
hearing on the remaining public state—maintained roads.
RDNAC recommends the following roads to be reviewed for approval:
CALDWELL NEW HOPE WHITE CROSS
1604 1738 2028
1880 2029
1881 2030
EFLAND ORANGE RURAL SOUTH ORANGE
1393 Ext. 1331 2016
1594 2027
1599 2031
1389 2032
2033
2036
ENO ORANGE GROVE
1600 1877 1128
1601 1882
1602 1883
1603
1605
1715
1817
362
MUTUAL. AID AGREEMENT
Recognizing the existing and ever present possibility of the
occurrence of disasters of significant size and destructiveness, and
desiring to foster the complete and efficient use of all of Orange
County's resources during times of disaster, We, the officers of our
several independent agencies and subdivisions agree with and recognize
the responsibility and authority of the County Commissioners of Orange
County through the Office of Emergency Management of Orange County to
coordinate to the maximum extent possible all of the emergency resources
available during disaster or potential disaster situations. We therefore
agree to cooperate with this effort to manage disaster situations by
making the resources of our agencies available to the extent feasible,
so as not to interfere with the commitments of the agency, to the
Office of Emergency Management during times of disaster. We also agree
to participate in planning and training exercises aimed at making the
coordination of resources during times of disaster as effective as
possible.
We understand that this agreement will not relieve any agency of
its authority, nor will it adversely interfere with the execution of
any agency's responsibilities.
The execution of this agreement by the County and these agencies
will not give rise to any liability or responsibility for failure or
delay on the part of any agency in responding to any request for
assistance,
No charge shall be made to any party entering into this agreement
for services rendered by one of the parties for the benefit of the other
under the provisions of the same.
3 ;.;
r"
There shall be no reimbursement for loss or damage to equipment that
occurs while an agency is engaged in activity in accordance with this
agreement; nor shall there be any reimbursement for any indemnity award
or premium contribution assessed against an agency or subdivision for
Worker's compensation benefits arising by reason of injury or death
to a member of an agency or subdivision while engaged in rendering
service under this agreement.
Attest:
DATE__________
Mayor, Town of Chapel Hill
Chapel Hill Town Attorney
Approved as to Form
Attest:
DATE
-
Mayor, Town of Carrboro
Attest:
DATE-
Mayor, Town of Hillsborough
Attest:
DATE
Sheriff, Orange County
4
Attest:
DATE
University of North Carolina
•
r
__-_------ '
Attest:
DATE
--
Hospital Administrator
For the North Carolina Memorial Hospital
Attest:
DATE g-
66,Lyoyetz. get,..„,„,;„,....,a„ Chairman
Orange County Board of Commissioners
Attest:
DATE
Coordinator
Office of Emergency Management
�����
~ " ^� ~� ��
�� . ~ 'p
� �� ��� / ' '
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 14
PROPOSED ANNUAL VACATION LEAVE POLICY
1. The Personnel Policy states in Sec. 7, page 10 that the maximum
accumulation of leave may not be greater than thirty days. However
under "note" it states that employees with more than thirty uays will
be permitted to retain all accumulated leave until July l , 1979.
Personnel records of the County indicate accumulated leave in excess
of 30 days for some County employees.
2. The intent of this recommendation is to dissipate this leave within
three years.
3. Thirty days after adoption of this recommendation, additional leave
will not be accrued by any employee with thirty days or more leave
time.
4. In the event an employee terminates, retires or dies, accumulated
vacation time of up to thirty days will be paid.
5. A quarterly report of all employees with more than thirty days accumu-
lated leave will be reported to the Manager's Office for the purpose
of compliance with this policy.
+` Upon approval of this change in the Personnel Policy, it is recommended
that the Board of County Commissioners direct the County Attorney to pre-
pare a formal amendment to the Personnel Policy for Board review and
adoption.
���
4� �
� ��
���
•:7 . .-.
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 15
TAX RELEASE REQUESTS
(These were first presented to the Board on July 2, 1981)
Vickers Audio, Inc.
Recommendation: Confirm 572,000 as valuation of personalty
discovered for taxation for l980.
Aragon Discount Carpet
(Bill Skinner)
Triangle Communication Service
(Rev. George D. Stenhouse, sole proprietor
Recommendation: Reduce valuation of personalty discovered for
1980 from 510,000 to $3,465 (based upon description of property
provided by owner on July 2, 1981).
Fry and Youngblood
(Charles H. Fry, Jr. partner)
(Jonathan R. Childres, new partner)
(Robert Epting, counsel)
Recommendation: Allow reduction in valuation of timely listed
personalty from $19480 to $5600 for 1980 (based upon inspection
of property (7/27/81) and evidence provided by Mr. Epting (7/2/81).
Ellen Scott Foundation (Craig Manor property)
(Philip Scott, Secretary of the Foundation Board of Directors)
Recommendation: Allow exemption of house and ten (10) acre site
for 1980 (GS 105-282,1(c)).
�� ,� �� ��, ��~ �� �
��� �r � ~^ u� �
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 16
AGENDA ITEM
The attached budget and project amendments reflect the following
transfers:as recomended by the County Manager:
1. Transfer of consulting fee appropriations to H5AC ($6,000) and the
Industrial Commission ($5,000) from the County Commissioners Intergovernmental
Participation to the County Manager's budget. Transfer of the County
Commissioners Task Force ($4,000) to the responsibility of the County
Manager.
2. Reduction of the AFDC Day Camp allocation by $6,000 to be transfered
to the Contingency. The remaining $3,000 Daycamp allocation to be reclassified
out of Social Services operations.
3. Increase of the appropriation and revenue for South Orange Fire
District to reflect the recent annexation of Heritage Hills and
Farrington Hills,
4. Project Ordinance to record the CETA IV Summer Youth Employment
Program as approved by the County Commissioners in June 1981 .
37L
Orange County
Proposeo
1081-82 Budget Ordinance
8dmeodment
The 1981-82 Budget Ordinance of Orange County as adopted on June 22,
198I and subsequently amended, is hereby amended as follows:
Increase To
Appropriations (Decrease) Total
General Fund:
County Commissioners - Operations (14,000) 53,116
County Manager - Operations 14,000 25,558
Social Services - AFDC Operations ( 8,000) 239,634
Day Camp - Operations 3,000 3,000
South Orange Fire District - Operations 7,358 65,586
Revenue:
South Orange Fire District 7,358 65,586
Contingency - General Fund 5,000. 121.000.
°xwk�
Adopted this the (�— day of �N�/ ^ 1081.
0 /1
. `
Orange County
Proposed
1981-82 Project Ordinance
Amendment
The 1981-82 Project Ordinance of Orange County as adopted on December 1,
1980 is hereby amended as follows:
Increase
Fund-Item (Decrease) Total
Appropriations
Ceta - IV S.Y.E.P. Participant -Per. 155,790. 155,790
Ceta IV S.Y.E.P. -Training Staff - Pers. 3,504. 3,504
" " -Operation 3,550. 3,600.
Ceta - IV S.Y.E.P. - Service Staff - Personnel 2I,107 2I,107.
" " - Operation 8,400. 8,400.
Revenue:
Ceta IV '5,Y.E.P. 192,361. 192,361,
Adopted this the ,?" day of ,1981.
38
19,9
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 17
ORANGE COUNTY
HOUSING ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS PROGRAM
317 CALDWELL ST,EXT. CHAPEL HILL_NORTH CAROLINA 27514
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION
OF AN ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS CONTRACT
Whereas, the Orange County Housing Authority (herein called the "PHA")
proposes to enter into an Annual Contributions Contract (herein called the
"Contract") with the United States of America, DeparnTent of Housing and
Urban Development (herein called the "Government") .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the PHA as follows;
Section 1. The Contract, numbered Contract No. N2903, is hereby approved
and accepted both as to form and substance and the Chairperson of the Orange
County Commissioners is hereby authorized and directed to execute said Contract
in triplicate on behalf of the PHA, and the Chairperson of the Orange County
Commissioners is hereby authorized and directed to impress and attest the
official seal of the PHA on each such counterpart and to forward said executed
counterparts to the Government together with such other documents evidencing
the approval and authorizing the execution thereof as may be required by the
Governrent.
Section 2. The Executive Director is hereby authorized to file with the
Government from time to time, as nnnies are required, recuisitions together
with the necessary supporting documnt, for payment um-7pr the Contract.
Section 3. This Resolution shal take effect hnmdiately.
ell'
PHONE 955.4556 OUT OF CHAPEL. HILL DIAL.
IflVU NDUSIIG 0 ASK FOR WX-007
OPPORTUNITY
RESOLUTICN AUTHORIZIN EXECUTION
CF AN ANNUAL COMMLBUTIONS CONTRACT
WHEREAS, the Orange County Housing Authority (herein called the "PHA")
proposes to enter into an Annual Contributions Contract (herein called the "Con-
tract") with the United States of America, Department of Housing and Urban De-
velopment (herein called the "Goverment").
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the PHA as follows:
Section 1, The Contract, numbered Contract No. A-2903, is hereby approved
and accepted both as to form and substance and the Chair of the Orange County
Cammissioners is hereby authorized and directed to execute said Contract in tri-
plicate on behalf of the PHA, and the Clerk of the Orange County Commissioners is
hereby authorized and directed to impress and attest the official seal of the PHA
on each such-counterpart and to forward said executed counterparts to the Govern-
.
ment together with such other documents evidencing the approval and authorizing
the execution thereof as may be required by the Government.
Section 2. The Executive Director is hereby authorized to file with the
Government from time to time, as monies are required, requisitions together with
the necessary supporting document, for payment under the Contract.
Section 3, This Resolution shall take effect immediately.
***********************************************************************************
I, Paulette Pridgen-Pond, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for Orange
County, North Carolina, do hereby CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of
so much of the proceedings of the Board of Ccumissioners for said County at a
meeting held the 3rd day of August, 1981, as relates in any way to the Resolution
hereinabove set forth, and that said proceedings are recorded in the Minute Book
of the Minutes of said Board for said date.
WITNESS my hand and the official seal of said County this 4th day of August
1381.
aulette Pridgenz:Pond, Clerk
. _
3Th
4 �'o
AGENDA ATTACHMENT l9D
ORANGE COUNTY PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT
106 E. Margaret I. ne
Hillsborough, m 27278
BEVERLY M. W}iTEHEAD
PERSONNEL DIRECTOR
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM:
Beverly M. Whitehead, =��/���'
Personnel Director
DATE: July 27, 1981
SUBJECT: Recommendation to establish the Advisory Personnel Board
In accordance with Article I Section 7 of the Personnel Advisory Report, the Commissioners,
as authorized by GS 153A-95, will appoint an Advisory Personnel Board to conduct hearings
on employee grievances involving demotions, suspensions, and dismissals. The Personnel
Board will make determinations on employee grievances and forward its recommendations to
"..ho Manager, who will make final determinations. Provided below are the provisions of
:he section:
(1) The Personnel Board will consist of three (3) members. Two members
will be appointed for a one year term, with one member appointed for
a two year term. Thereafter, each member will serve a term of two
years and may be reappointed by the Commissioners. A member of the Per-
sonnel Board may be removed before the end of his term by the Commissioners;
however, the member must be given a written statement of the reasons for
his removal and the opportunity to respond in a public hearing. A vacancy
in an unexpired term will be filled by the Commissioners by appointment
for the remainder of the term.
(2) Each member of the Personnel Board will be a resident of Orange County,
and no county employee or officer will be eligible to serve on the
Personnel Board. At least one member of the Personnel Board will have
had experience in public or private management or personnel adminiotzotinn.
Members of the Personnel Board will serve without compensation, except
that they will be reimbursed fox expenses incurred on Personnel Board
business.
(3) The Personnel Board at its first meeting following the beginning of a
new term will elect one of its members as chairman, who will be responsi-
ble for calling and presiding at all meetingo. However, the Chairman of
the Board of Commissioners will call the first meeting of the Personnel
Board following its appointment For purpose of organization. All members
of the Personnel Board must be present at meetings to constitute a quorum.
The Clerk to the Board will serve ex officio as secretary to the Personnel
Board and will be responsible for maintaining records of Personnel Board
proceedings, determinations, and recommendations.
An Equal Opportunity/Affl'math'e Action Employer
/`!
; �
. �
MEJnRANDNp
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PAGE TWO
As you are aware,the Local Government Division of the State Office of Personnel, prepared
this Advisory Report for the County about five years agv. Since that time, they have
changed their policies regarding the make up and size of Personnel Boards. Provided below
are the significant changes:
(1) The membership of the Board will consist of not less than five
no more than seven persons appointed by the Board of Commissioners
with due regard to its nature and purpose, with the stipulation
that at least one member be chosen to represent the employees
of the cownty. Such appointments will not include the county
manager, county attorney, incumbent county commissioners, depart-
ment heads, or their family members or relatives.
(2) Further they recommend that the composition of the Board might draw
upon community resources in a nature consistent with its purpose.
Persons selected from business or industry who are enaaged in the
current practice of personnel administration, instructors of public
administration from institutions of higher learning, and persons
whose professional orientation would lend objective understanding
of employee concerns would be examples in keeping with this purpose.
Membership also needs to be enhanced by minority and female repre-
sentation.
I am recommending that the Board begin the process of establishing the Personnel Board
as soon as time permits, It is important that in the event of disciplinary action,
suspension, and dismissal, the county is in a position to provide permanent employees
with the right to appeal through a timely and impartial process.
If you have questions or concerns regarding this matter, I am available and pleased
to respond.
cc: Bill Laws, Interium County Manager
Mark Roes, Acting Assistant County Manager
3?
/0/9c ff- iw,p/
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 19E
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FrrisBOROUGEC
NORTH CAROLINA
27278
•
ie
4 et10."
MEMO
TO: Bill Laws, Acting County Manager
FROM: Planning Staff
DATE: July 13, 1981
RE: Board of Adjustment Term of Richard Ducker
Richard Ducker's term on the Board of Adjustment expires on September 25, 1981.
Be is not eligible for reappointment to the Board.
It is recommended that this position be advertised for applicants as soon as
possible.
BL/nsw
37 if -3— eV
AGENDA ATTACHMENT 19F
range county 144 E Margaret Lane
Hillsborough N,C 27278
732 8181, Extension 218
From Chapel Hill 967 92511
HEALTH DEPARTMENT 19 Easigate Shopping Canter
■4 Chapel Hill N C 27514
942.4168
Jerry Robinson,MA PA
Health Director
•
June 29, 1981
Ms. Anne Barnes, Chair
Orange County Board of Commissioners
100 West Margaret Lane
Dear Anne,
It has come to the attention of the Board of Health that one year terms
of two members will be over in August. It was an unanimous vote to endorse
these two members, Mrs. Winifred Prysock and Mrs. James "Pete" Boyd, for re-
appointment of the Board of Health. Mr. Boyd has particular sensitivity for
minority representation in the Health Department, both in staff and in Clinical
Services. He worked diligently on the personnel evaluation committee. Mrs.
Prysock brings thoughtfulness and humor to her Board representation. I per-
sonally have enjoyed working with them.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerly,
1,3CCQ:249
Ann R. Woodward
cc: all County Commissioners
Mr, James Boyd
Mrs. Winifred Prysock
(Board Chair-File)
dz° ��
�
MEMORANDUM
•
TO: Orange County Board of Commissioners
FROM: Bill Laws, Acting County Manager
DATE: July 24, 1981
RE: Manager's Recommendation
The Manager request that the terms of the Board of Equalization
and Review be extended to September 30, 1981, The members are:
Mr. Paul McAllister Mr. John McKee
Mr. James A. Wilde Ms. Elizabeth Walters
Mr. Watts Hill, Jr, Mr. George W. Meyer, Jr.
Mr. Kenneth Collins