Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 05-24-2018 Budget Work Session1 APPROVED 6/19/2018 MINUTES BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BUDGET WORK SESSION May 24, 2018 7:00 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a work session on Thursday, May 24, 2017 at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, N.C. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Dorosin and Commissioners Mia Burroughs, Mark Dorosin, Barry Jacobs, Earl McKee, Mark Marcoplos, Renee Price and Penny Rich COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Deputy County Manager Travis Myren and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) Chair Dorosin called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. 1. FY 2018-19 Budget Discussions with: • Durham Technical Community College, Pg. 152 and Attachment G Matt Williams, Durham Tech Vice-President of Finance and Administrative Services, introduced Tom Jaynes, Executive Director, and Jaclyn Krohn, Director of Orange County Campus. County Support of Orange County Campus of Durham Technical Community College (DTCC) The recommended funding for the Orange County Campus of Durham Technical Community College, located at the Waterstone Development in Hillsborough, provides current expense funding of $655,144, recurring capital of $75,000, and debt service payments of $251,080. In addition, the recommended budget includes $200,000 for 200 scholarships (student tuition for Orange County Residents), which will be paid from Article 46 Sales Tax proceeds instead of through Current Expenses. As with local school districts, counties in North Carolina are responsible for supplementing state and federal appropriations to community colleges. For the most part, counties are responsible for day-to-day operating costs such as utilities, security and custodial services. The Counties are not responsible for funding of teaching staff. Details regarding recommended funding levels for local school districts and Durham Technical Community College are located in the Education section of the budget document, beginning on Page 152. Commissioner McKee arrived at 7:05 p.m. Matt Williams made the following PowerPoint presentation: 2 Durham Tech 2018 – 19 Orange County Budget Presentation Orange County Campus Enrollment Highest Enrolled Programs Durham Tech’s Orange County Campus programs with the highest enrollment include our Arts, Sciences, and University Transfer programs; Public Safety programs; and our Health programs. We also serve a large group of students who come to take one or two courses (visiting students). Recent High School Graduates Enrollment of recent high schools graduates has increased dramatically since Orange ConnectFunds became available. For 2016-17 academic year, a total of 167 Orange Connect fund scholarships were awarded totaling $83,500. In the 2017-18 academic year, 298 scholarships were awarded totaling $149,000, not including summer 2018 term. Dual-Enrollment Students Durham Tech continues to experience enrollment increases for students who are dually- enrolled in high school and Durham Tech. In the Fall Semester 2016, 56 Career and College Promise (CCP) students enrolled at Durham Tech from Orange County. In the Fall Semester of 2017 we had 78 CCP students from Orange County. In addition, there are 51 high school students from the two school districts in Orange County currently enrolled in our Middle College High School program. Early Fall Semester 2018 enrollment data indicate this number will increase again. Orange County Enrollment (table) Note: Total Seats Used represents the overall number of students enrolled in all the curriculum and Con Ed classes each academic year. Unduplicated headcount for curriculum students also indicates significant growth as there were 611 OCC students in 2008-2009 compared to 1,066 OCC students in 2016-2017. ConnectFunds Recipients Demographics (table) A total of 178 students have received Orange County ConnectFunds this academic year. Orange ConnectFund recipients represent graduates from Orange county high schools, with the largest groups coming from Orange High School, Chapel Hill High School, and East Chapel Hill High School. Commissioner Rich asked if there is a reason why more males are receiving scholarships. Matt Williams said it is not that more males are receiving scholarships, but just that more males are coming from the high schools to Durham Tech. Student Retention – Term to Term (table) Durham Tech provides a range of supports so that our students stay in college and complete what they start. These data represent the retention rates for three groups of students: a) first- time Durham Tech enrollees (all ages) for a given fall term; b) first-time recent high school graduates enrolled at the college; and c) first-time Orange ConnectFunds recipients. 3 Student Retention – Year to Year (table) Durham Tech provides a range of supports so that our students stay in college and complete what they start. These data represent the retention rates for three groups of students: a) first- time Durham Tech enrollees (all ages) for a given fall term; b) first-time recent high school graduates enrolled at the college; and c) first-time Orange ConnectFunds recipients. Orange County Education Navigator A pilot project between Durham Technical Community College and Orange County Department of Social Services (DSS) was initiated in December, 2016. The initiative provides an Education Navigator,(EN) onsite in Orange County to work with Food and Nutrition Service’s Employment and Training (FNS E&T) team and participants. The EN recruits, counsels, prepares and enrolls participants in classes ranging from GED/HSE, short term credentials, essential/soft skills and associate degree programs. The EN also coaches students to completion and connects them to employment opportunities through DSS, OrangeWorks and NCWorks. Outcomes from December 2016 to present: 189 FNS E&T participants provided career counseling, career pathways and labor market information.  60 participants have enrolled each semester in stackable credential programs that lead to living wage employment  16 Curriculum students  50 Short term credential students  10 GED/HSE students  52 Essential/soft skills students 14,510 hours of Durham Tech courses, classes and workshops. Durham Tech and DSS’s pilot is being used as a role model and will be rolled out across NC’s Community Colleges and their Social Service partners as it has proven to successfully in alleviating poverty and providing sustainable career pathways for FNS E&T participants. Orange County Public Safety Training Emergency Medical Science Training in 2016-17 156 EMS Courses Offered 4,003 Students Enrolled Fire Protection Technology Training in 2016-17 48 FIP Courses Offered 757 Students Enrolled Basic Law Enforcement Training Initiatives in 2016-17 55 CJC Courses Offered 1,360 Students Enrolled 3 BLET Academies with Orange County Sheriff’s Office since 2015 48 Cadets Graduated 14 Cadets Currently Enrolled in 4th Academy Orange County Campus Partnership Highlights UNC Air Care Paramedic Competition-May Day Trauma Orange County Department of Social Services 4 Education Navigator Position and Navigator Training Orange County Government Planning and Inspections Government Academy Town of Hillsborough Citizens Academy Local Chamber Events Orange County Schools Accounting Competition CTE Regional Meetings Senior Information Days Morinaga Hiring and Training Events AKG of America West Rock Computer Training Summit Engineering FY 18-19 Operating Budget Request FY 17-18 request $641,751 FY 18-19 request $655,144 • $13,393 or 1.59% increase in operating funds • $7,779 (2.5%) for salaries and benefits to match the expected increases for state paid employees and to pay all employees a livable wage. Recognized as an Orange county living wage employer. • $3,114 projected increase of 3% for utilities. An increase of $2,500 to cover the increased costs of operating supplies. Travis Myren made the following PowerPoint presentation: Budget Work Session #1 Education and Outside Agencies May 24, 2018 Whitted Meeting Facility Durham Technical Community College • Operating Costs (non-instructional) – page 152 Recommended Change Current expense $655,144 $13,393 Recurring Capital $75,000 $0 Debt Service $251,080 ($9,304) Total $981,224 $4,089 • Recurring Capital Detail 5 $75,000 consistent level of investment Retention Pond Upgrade – fencing, silt removal, swale repair Replace brick pavers at crosswalk • Capital Investment Plan – page 136 of CIP o Health Technology Building Expansion  Estimated at 56,000 square feet  Additional 250 parking spaces o Project Design in FY2021-22 - $714,290  County match for the $1 million 2016 State Connect Bond o $23.6 million total estimated project costs o Current Debt Service Satisfied in FY2027 • Orange Connect Scholarship Program – page 63 o $200,000 recommended appropriation for FY2018-19 o Funds annual scholarship of $1,000 per student o Recent high school graduates and GED recipients qualify o Paid through Article 46 Sales Tax revenue Commissioner Price said DTCC means a lot to the community. Commissioner Jacobs expressed his appreciation to DTCC for working with the Board of County Commissioners on programs like the Navigator and Connect Programs. Travis Myren resumed the PowerPoint presentation: Chapel Hill High School Project Updates • Critical Path Approvals (table) • Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) and Project Budget- table-page 6 Debt Service Requirements and Incremental Tax Increase - graph - page 7 (long term debt service) Recommended School Funding • Operating Budget School Funding – page 152 FY 2018-19 Operating Budget- Total Recommended School District Funding- table Current Expense $84,957,670 Total Projected Students 20,398 Total Per Pupil Allocation $4,165 Commissioner McKee asked if this number excludes the charter students. Travis Myren said no, this number includes the charter students. • Operating Budget Funding Target - graph • Capital Budget School Funding - page 97 CIP- Long Range Capital moved to CIP in FY2017-18 Recurring Capital moved to CIP in FY2018-19 Chair Dorosin asked if Travis Myren could explain the difference between something falling in to the long-range capital, versus the older school improvements, versus the recurring capital. 6 Travis Myren said the recurring capital items are smaller items, and the long-range capital/older school improvements are the larger items. Todd LoFrese, Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools’ (CHCCS) Assistant Superintendent, said recurring capital is for smaller ticket items such as service contracts on HVAC; improvements to playgrounds; mulch; painting projects, etc. He said CHCCS uses article 46 dollars to support technology. Chair Dorosin asked if CHCCS could use long-range capital dollars for an improvement project in an older school. Todd LoFrese said yes. Orange County School (OCS) agreed. Chair Dorosin asked if there is a reason that there are two pots of money, as opposed to one. Travis Myren said these two pots of money probably came into existence at different times, and are, thus, two separate pots. Bonnie Hammersley said that is correct, and the capital for older schools is the $5 million added to the bond, and was an intended $1 million for five years. She said the $3 million deferred maintenance plan will also be used for older schools. Chair Dorosin said the aging facilities are a frequent concern, and if one looks at the budget, it appears that some money is dedicated to these needs, while other funds are not. He said it could look like the County is not prioritizing the needs of the aging facilities, which is inaccurate. He said the Board may want to discuss this in the future, and unless there is an accounting reason to keep the pots separate, it may be wise to combine them. Travis Myren said the other difference is the funding source. He resumed the PowerPoint presentation: Total Recommended School Funding FY2018-19 - graph Combine Operating and Capital Budget= $120,000,000 available - graph Total Recommended School Funding History- table- page 12 - graph Total Recommended School Funding History-table- page 13 - graph Chapel Hill-Carrboro Funded Students - table- page 14 Chapel Hill-Carrboro Funded Student History - table- page 15 Commissioner Price asked if there is a process for when a student comes from Durham County to Orange County charter. Travis Myren said if a Durham County resident comes to an Orange County Charter School, Durham County would pay for that student. Commissioner Price asked if this would remain the same, if the student came into the traditional public school first, and paid tuition, and then went to a charter school. Todd Wirt, OCS Superintendent, said he is unsure if this situation has ever occurred, but the billing takes place based on the student’s residency. Travis Myren asked if an out-of-County student, who is not a child of an employee, is allowed to attend OCS and pay tuition. Todd Wirt said yes, this is called discretionary admission, and if it is an open school, then the student can attend. He said employees do not pay tuition. 7 Commissioner Jacobs asked if the demographic breakdown of the charter students that attend charter schools in Orange County is known. Todd Wirt said the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) data indicates that the two largest charter schools in Orange County are 88% are white, and both are 5% free and reduced lunch. CHCCS said its data is similar. Travis Myren resumed the PowerPoint presentation: Chapel Hill-Carrboro Charter Students by Grade Level – table - page 16 Orange County Total Funded Students - table – page 17 • School Facility Enrollment Decreased by 2.6% • Charter Students Increased by Nearly 25% and Comprise 9.6% of Total Funded Students • Overall 0.8% Decrease in Funded Students • Percentage of Total Enrollment Decreased by 0.63% • Lower Proportion of Funds Allocated by Average Daily Membership (ADM) Orange County Funded Student History - table Commissioner Rich asked Travis Myren if he could explain charter school funding. Travis Myren said as part of the ADM calculation, the charter student is funded as if he/she is in the school, and the funds follow the student to the charter school. He said if the student was not included in the funding formula, then the school districts would have to take that out of their current expense budget, and have a lower effective ADM for everybody else who is left in the school facilities. Commissioner Rich said there is confusion of how the money is funneled into the charter schools. She said Orange County is paying for the students, and the school districts are not being penalized for these students leaving. Travis Myren said yes, the per pupil is funded by the County, so that the school districts do not have to take it out of their current expense budget. Commissioner Rich asked if the County is paying double for the charter school students. Travis Myren said there is $4,165 given to the schools, which is then given to the charter school; $8,330 is not given to the schools. Commissioner Price clarified that the County reimburses the schools for the Charter students. Travis Myren said the County gives the schools $4,165 per student, and the school districts pay that to the charter schools. Commissioner Price asked if “hold harmless” could be defined. Travis Myren said if the County did not pay the $4,165 per student, then the school districts would have to take it out of their current expense budget, and, therefore, the money available for all other students in the district would be less. He said there is no state requirement that any County must provide school districts funds for charter students. He said in every other district around the state, the superintendent must take money from the current expense budget to pay for charter students. Todd Wirt said Orange County gave OCS $3991 per student this past year, which includes students in the seats at OCS, as well as those at charter schools. He said the $3991 received per charter student is passed through OCS to the charter schools. He said all other counties do not receive the $3991 for charter school students from their local government, but 8 rather have to pay the charter schools out of current expense budget, thus reducing the remaining funds available for students in the seats of the traditional public schools. Chair Dorosin said all other counties do not give the monies for the students that go to charter schools. Chair Dorosin said holding the schools responsible for the charter school funds not only means less per pupil for the remaining students, but there is often less allocation for teachers, resulting in larger classes, and a reduction in quality curriculum. Travis Myren resumed the PowerPoint presentation: Orange County Charter Students by grade level – table - page 19 Commissioner Rich asked if the charter school students are coming back to graduate from traditional public schools. Todd Wirt said no. He said the greatest return of charter school students does happen at the high school level, but the lower high school numbers in the graph reflect a phased in growth approach at Eno River Academy, where a grade has been added per year. He said 12th grade will be added by 2020. Commissioner Rich said the number of charter students at the high school level could change dramatically as the charter schools add those remaining upper grades. Todd Wirt said it is possible, but OCS hopes to avoid increasing numbers going to charter schools. Travis Myren resumed the PowerPoint presentation: Recommended School Funding • Current Expense – page 152- ( page 20 – slide) • Recommended Current Expense- $84, 957, 670 Current Expense Increase of $4,211,823 Per Pupil Allocation History-table- page 21 CHCCS Per Pupil Allocation History with District Tax – table - page 22 slide Annual Changes in Per Pupil Allocation-graph • $102 average annual increase since FY1984-85 Per Pupil County Comparison State and County School Funding Annual Changes in Per Pupil Equivalent – graph State and County School Funding Annual % Changes in Per Pupil Equivalent – table – page 26 Recommended School Funding • Discussion Topic: Orange County Schools Reserve Policy – page 27 slide o Increase Allowable Unassigned Reserve Above 3% o Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Allowable Reserve – 5.5% o No Additional Funding Requested 9 Commissioner Jacobs thanked staff for providing additional information about State and county funding. He said it may be useful next year to fill in the recessions on the recommended school funding and average changes, as it makes the picture clearer. Commissioner Jacobs said he was previously unable to remember the issue about the differing reserve funds, but he was reminded that it was a period under a different CHCCS superintendent where CHCCS had a different pool of money above the 5.5%, and the County wanted to get this number to come down. He said those funds were a slush fund to allow the superintendent to do as he pleased with County money. Commissioner Jacobs said the County was funding more than it was getting, and there was a long discussion that Orange County was the guarantor should the school districts’ money run dry. He said the County would guarantee a certain minimum beyond the fact that the County is the backstop for the schools, and the schools would guarantee that if funds ran dry, no money would be held back in reserve, just in case. Commissioner Burroughs asked if there is a reason why OCS is thinking about raising the unassigned reserve fund balance. Todd Wirt said there are several reasons, with one being that, over time, the free and reduced lunch percentage has grown (43% overall), and OCS becomes more dependent on Title 1 funds. He said these federal funds can be delayed, so in order to get at least the four Title 1 schools up and running at the start of the year, sometimes a supplement of fund balance is needed. He said he does not anticipate needing 5.5%, but rather would like to flexibility in case there are circumstances like he just mentioned. Commissioner Burroughs said this proposal seems reasonable to her. Commissioner Price asked if there is a timeline for the BOCC to decide on the reserve balance proposal. Chair Dorosin said they need to decide on it right now. Travis Myren said staff can prepare an amendment for the Board package on June 12th. Chair Dorosin suggested taking the OCS reserve fund balance to 5.5%. The Board of County Commissioners agreed by consensus. Commissioner Marcoplos clarified that this change will have no impact on expenditures. Todd Wirt said in the past, OCS has used its general fund for various reasons: to balance the budget, pay for charter students, etc. He said OCS has stayed around 3%, and has this used to fund for one-time expenses, or to balance its budget in the last 3 years. Commissioner Jacobs asked Travis Myren if he would add an outline of the purposes for spending/not spending the fund balance to the agenda abstract. Chair Dorosin asked the school districts if there were any additional comments this evening. Todd LoFrese said the Chapel Hill High Project will begin with a groundbreaking ceremony on June 12th, and all are very excited to get this project started. Todd Wirt said charter students numbers have risen a lot, and OCS is taking what it is experiencing very seriously. He said it is difficult to predict why families are making the choice to pursue charter schools, but nearly 60% of the OCS eligible students that are enrolled in charter schools have never set foot into an OCS school. He said OCS is also getting some students back from charter schools. Todd Wirt said some of the information out there is not based on fact, and he read some statistics about OCS and charter schools. Todd Wirt said OCS is not failing, and the staff is doing very good work. He said he does not know why families are choosing other school options, but he said he does not believe families are running from a system that is doing well for 91% of families that make OCS their first choice. 10 Chair Dorosin said he hoped that no one takes the Board’s questions about charter schools as criticism of the school districts. He said he opened the Pandora ’s Box because he just did not understand the charter school process. He said both school districts are excelling, and are at the top of the best schools lists in N.C, and this is a powerful message. He said there is an equally powerful coordinated, well-funded attack on traditional public schools that is supported by corporations that are hired to run the charter schools, and by legislators who are well supported by those corporations. Todd Wirt says he knows he is “preaching to the choir”, and shared the statistical information for the benefit of the public. Commissioner Price suggested that OCS promote itself even more than it does. Todd Wirt said OCS is working on this, and letters/releases are sent to the media regularly. Commissioner Price said she gets regular reminders of events that are going on in CHCCS, but does not receive the same information from OCS. She encouraged OCS to include the BOCC on emails about events, accomplishments, etc. Commissioner Rich said the Board of County Commissioners is asked questions about charter schools all the time, and thanked OCS for all the information that it shared this evening, as it is helpful for the public. • Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools, Pg. 152 & 158 • Orange County Schools, Pg. 152 & 244 2. Discussion of Outside Agencies Funding for FY 2018-19, Pgs. 399-411 BACKGROUND: Each fiscal year, non-profit organizations that deliver community services have the ability to apply for program funding from Orange County. In December 2016, the Orange County Board of Commissioners adopted a funding target of 1.2 percent of the county’s general fund expenditures, less the appropriation for education expenses, for the purpose of funding outside agency operations. Historically, the county had a funding target of 1.0 percent. Applications are reviewed by staff members for completeness and eligibility. The applications are then presented to a specific advisory board, depending on the subject matter. Each advisory board is responsible for scoring each application based on an application scorecard. The application scorecard is comprised of five weighted categories with a total possible score of 100. The five categories and the total possible points are: Mission (10 points), Collaboration Efforts (15 points), Customer Impact/Value (25 points), Results (25 points), and Plan for Implementation (25 points). The County Manager presents recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners, which approves the final allocations. Recipients are required to submit written program reports that include: goals, description of activities/challenges, revisions of timelines/budgets, and other relevant information. Funded projects are monitored for progress and performance, financial and administrative management, and compliance with the terms of Performance/Development Agreement(s). Monitoring may involve site and/or office visit(s). For fiscal year 2018-19, Orange County received applications from 59 agencies. The requests totaled $1,828,491, an increase of $462,750 above fiscal year 2017-18. The FY 2018-19 County Manager’s Recommended budget includes funding awards for 50 agencies with a total of $1,401,173; an increase of $35,432 from FY 2017-18 Commissioner Approved Budget. The 11 County Manager’s recommended funding levels are based on scoring completed by each advisory board. Agencies scoring between 90% and 100% received 30% of their requested increase. Agencies scoring between 80% and 89% received 15% of their requested increase, and agencies scoring between 70% and 79% received 10% of their requested increase. Agencies with scores of 69% and below are not recommended for an increase in funds. Consistent with the continuation budget approach, no new agency requests were recommended for funding. Based on the County Manager’s Recommended Budget, less the appropriation for education expenses, 1.2 percent equates to $1,400,896. Please refer to the Outside Agency section (Pages 399-411) of the FY 2018-19 Manager’s Recommended budget for discussion of Outside Agency funding. In addition, see Attachment 1 for an Outside Agency Funding Requests Book, which includes the Purpose/Mission, Program, Proposed Services, Performance Measures, and Agency Budget for each Outside Agency. Furthermore, see Attachment 2 for an Outside Agency Funding Report, which is organized by each agency’s primary function area. The following are the primary function areas: Arts, Community Services, Food/Nutritional Services, Health, Housing, Human Services, Juvenile/Adult Justice Services, Mental Health, Senior Services, and Youth Services. Bonnie Hammersley reviewed the changes in the Outside agency hand out book. Bonnie Hammersley made the following PowerPoint presentation: 12 Commissioner Price asked if the scoring process could be explained. Bonnie Hammersley said, in this case, the Arts Commisions provided oversight of this group. Commissioner Price asked if the other agencies were scored similarly. Bonnie Hammersley said there is an advisory board that oversees each part of County government, and if an outside agency falls within that function within government, the advisory board will oversee it. She resumed the PowerPoint presentation: 13 Chair Dorosin asked if the recommended increases reflect the scoring chart. Bonnie Hammersley said yes. Chair Dorosin clarified that no one got more than a 30% increase. Bonnie Hammersley said that is correct. Commissioner Jacobs said he was at a meeting last week in Hillsborough, and many outside agencies there did not realize that Orange County was the only government funder for many of these agencies in Hillsborough. He said it should be acknowledged that the County is helping to support some significant historical organizations in Hillsborough. Bonnie Hammersley resumed the PowerPoint presentation: Bonnie Hammersley said Our Wild Neighbors is a new agency, and this is their first time requesting funding. She said to be consistent with a no expansion budget, she did not recommend any funding for this agency; however, the Animal Services Department has an annual contract with a similar agency that offers some of the same services as Our Wild 14 Neighbors. She has directed the Director of Animal Services to do a Request for Proposal (RFP) with both services to give them an opportunity to get a contract. She said Our Wild Neighbors will no longer appear as an outside agency. Bonnie Hammersley said the Tide Center did not get funded this year, because they did not score well. She said one reason for the lower score was due to a change in their vision from working with youth to providing training for outside agencies. She said this is not a service that the County provides, and the reviewing advisory board did not deem this as a needed service to fund. Bonnie Hammersley said the Refugee Center requested less than it did last year, and were fully funded at the reduced amount. Bonnie Hammersley resumed the PowerPoint presentation: Bonnie Hammersley said all of these organizations scored well because they do important work for Orange County residents. She said all of these agencies are open to work ing together collaboratively. Commissioner McKee clarified that all of these are working toward better collaboration. Bonnie Hammersley said yes. She said Nancy Coston, Department of Social Services (DSS) Director, pulled together these groups for two meetings, and they will hold more meetings going forward. She said she hopes there will be collaboration with some of these agencies by this time next year. Commissioner McKee asked if staff could speak to these agencies about aligning their qualifications for service. Bonnie Hammersley said that is one of the goals. Commissioner McKee said there are differentials on eligibility requirements. Bonnie Hammersley said staff is aware of this issue, and is working on solving it. She resumed the PowerPoint presentation: 15 Bonnie Hammersley said the Board of Health reviewed the health agencies. She said none of them are new, and all ranked quite highly. She resumed the PowerPoint presentation: Bonnie Hammersley said the Centre for Homeownership was contracted with the Housing Department, and then requested funding as an outside agency. She said the County will continue to work with the Centre for Homeownership on a contract with the Housing Department. She said when staff met with the outside agencies in housing, staff heard that there is some redundancy in the Centre for Homeownership, who is doing training for new home ownership people. She said staff will look at this more closely for collaboration opportunities. She said there are different populations being served at different levels, and Sherrill Hampton, Housing Director, will contact the Centre for Homeownership to continue working with them. 16 Chair Dorosin said the Centre for Homeownership received a low score, and if the County plans to continue working with them on a contractual basis, he hopes there will be some discussion of how the low score can be improved. Bonnie Hammersley said some of the low scoring pertains to, “does the mission align with what the County needs?” He said this agency does other things that the County may need through the Housing Department. Bonnie Hammersley resumed the PowerPoint presentation: Bonnie Hammersley said Nancy Coston has identified some existing funds to assist the Diaper Bank. Chair Dorosin asked if the Diaper Bank is a statewide organization. Bonnie Hammersley said yes, but it started in Orange County. Bonnie Hammersley said the Ronald McDonald house was not funded because it is not something the County typically funds, and she is not recommending funding for new programs. She said this is not a reflection on the good work being done by this organization. Bonnie Hammersley resumed the PowerPoint presentation: 17 Bonnie Hammersley reviewed the programs above. She said Josh’s Hope Foundation was not funded as it is a new request, but Cait Fenhagen will try and work with this organization to see if it may be able to supplement some of the work Orange County is doing. Commissioner Rich referred to the Dispute Settlement Center’s lower score this year, and asked if the review boards tell these agencies why it received a lower score. Bonnie Hammersley said the Directors that sit in on meetings with the Manager are asked to share this information with the agencies. She said sometimes the rankings are based on the individuals who are doing the ranking, and a change in philosophy, but the goal is to help the agencies succeed in this process. Bonnie Hammersley resumed the PowerPoint presentation: 18 Bonnie Hammersley said the karate agency did not score well, but there may be an opportunity to participate in youth enhancement services with DSS. She said Orange County will reimburse the agency if any DSS kids want to participate. Chair Dorosin said it seems like there are some questions about the scoring, and if agencies are consistently scoring low, then staff may want to revisit if these agencies should receive any funds at all. He said the County’s needs evolve over time, and maybe some of these agencies’ services no longer match the County’s needs and should not be funded at all. Bonnie Hammersley said the agencies need to be doing what is good for Orange County, instead of the other way around. Commissioner Marcoplos referred to the advisory board assignment page, and said there is a point person at the top, and asked if this same person attends all of the meetings and witnesses all of the evaluations. Bonnie Hammersley said yes, and the Department Head is not scoring, but rather assisting the advisory board that is reviewing, etc. 19 Bonnie Hammersley said the Orange Partnership for Alcohol and Drug Free Youth was a new request, and therefore did not get funded. She said Orange County is providing meeting space for this group, as well brochure printing via the Health Department. Chair Dorosin said it would be good to have a dollar amount for these in kind contributions. Bonnie Hammersley said the SKJAJA is one that seeks to help the less fortunate. She said the County’s Youth Enhancement Services program already does this, and so SKJAJA did not receive funding, but there may be an opportunity for SKJAJA to coordinate with the County to be made aware of children who may have needs. Commissioner Price said she echoed Chair Dorosin’s concerns about low scoring agencies continuing to receive funding. Commissioner Price referred to the Food/Nutritional Services agencies, and asked if failing to fully fund these organizations will leave a lot of people hungry. Commissioner Price said it seems odd that Orange Congregations in Missions (OCIM) is getting an increase of $6300, but Orange County Rural Alliance (OCRA), who had a large increase in its request, is only receiving $8250 (for a total of $20,750). She said there is a clearly a need for food, and she worries how many meals are being missed due to a lack of funding. Bonnie Hammersley said OCRA’s large jump in its requested amount was in order to fund a staff position as well as some more meals. She said the total budget for an agency is also considered, and OCRA is a new organization with a much smaller budget. She said the more established agencies have funding sources other than the County, which is what the County wants to see occurring. Commissioner Price asked if staff can find out how many meals are being delivered through these Food/Nutritional services agencies. Bonnie Hammersley said the performance measures show how many people and meals are being served. She said this information can be found on page 20. She said this information may relate more to capacity than demand. Commissioner Price said she is more interested in the demand, and another issue is meal deliveries on holidays and weekends. Commissioner McKee said OCRA provides meals for those that are not on the Meals on Wheels route, or do not meet eligibility requirements of other agencies. He said OCRA also works in cooperation with a few local businesses and churches to increase the serviceability of these residents. Commissioner Price said she would like some numbers. Bonnie Hammersley resumed the PowerPoint presentation: 20 Bonnie Hammersley said there were two outstanding issues that did not come through the normal outside agency process, however she did receive requests. She said the Inter-Faith Council (IFC) capital campaign was not funded, as the Board does not fund capital campaigns, unless specifically voted upon by the BOCC. She said the Northside neighborhood request came outside of the agency process. Commissioner McKee said he appreciated the Manager’s direction on IFC capital campaign, since the Board has a policy on outside capital projects. He said the Board should insist that all providers need to follow the process, or else there is no point in having the process. Commissioner Jacobs asked if the Northside neighborhood understood the County’s process, but waited too late to make a submittal. Bonnie Hammersley said one of the group’s major funders unexpectedly reduced its funding. She said the group did not receive this information until after the outside agency process had closed. Commissioner Jacobs said he is more sympathetic to that type of request, as it is due to a crisis. He said he does like the Board’s policy about capital campaigns, but as he said in his email to all Board members, he is open to the possibility of a no interest loan for agencies that already receive funds for operating expenses. He said that may be a viable way to assist some agencies such as Club Nova, IFC and the Rape Crisis Center. He said he does not want to do anything that would adversely affect the County’s finances, but would like to promote the long term benefit of Orange County residents through these organizations that the County already recognizes as worthy of funding. Chair Dorosin said the Northside Initiative did not know that Chapel Hill was going to pull its funding, and if the County had received a timely outside agency request, it would have likely funded it. He said it is worth recognizing the work that the Northside Initiative is doing. He said this group has been able to leverage other funds, and have done well with other funding sources. He said this is an unusual scenario because of the timing, and he believed that this Initiative is an invaluable investment. Commissioner Burroughs asked if it is known why Chapel Hill did not fund this Initiative. Chair Dorosin said part of the reason is, because the organization is providing services more broadly, the Town wanted to see a commitment from other local governments. Commissioner Burroughs said she would support this request 21 Commissioner Burroughs said she also liked the no interest loan idea presented by Commissioner Jacobs. She said at any given time, agencies will be doing capital campaigns and the no interest loan would be a viable option. Commissioner Burroughs thanked Bonnie Hammersley and Travis Myren for organizing this process so well. She said the process respected these agencies, and has been taken to a whole different level. She said she cannot thank the staff enough for this process. Commissioner Marcoplos asked if there is a way to bring forward this Northside Initiative request. Bonnie Hammersley said she has it on the amendment list for the Board to vote on at the June 12th meeting. Commissioner Jacobs echoed Commissioner Burroughs’ comments about the outside agency process. He applauded Bonnie Hammersley, Travis Myren and all of the department heads that took the care to work with the agencies to find out what they are doing and what they need. Commissioner Jacobs suggested that when Paul Laughton, Finance and Administrative Services, sent this document to the BOCC, he sent a link to the actual applications. He suggested including this in the book, and also to have each agency’s website on their individual pages. Commissioner Rich echoed all these comments. She said when she f irst came on the Board, this process was very random, and it was like an auction for County funding. She would like to make sure that staff follows up with agencies when scores get off balance. Bonnie Hammersley said Allen Coleman is the person that drives this whole process, and nothing would happen without him. Commissioner Price referred to IFC’s request for capital funding, and asked if the Manager has a follow up plan. Bonnie Hammersley said she will check with the new IFC director to see if the agency has any interest in the interest free loan. Chair Dorosin said he appreciated Commissioner Jacobs’ suggestion about this interest free loan, but sometimes the Board needs to go outside of its policy. He said this IFC project will serve so many people, and he thinks it warrants the Board going outside of its policy to help fund the project. Commissioner Price agreed. Chair Dorosin said the Board should recognize that the IFC project meets so many of the Board’s goals. 3. Policy on Board Petitions and Board Members Requests to Staff BACKGROUND: At the Board of Commissioners’ March 20, 2018 regular meeting, a petition was submitted that the Board review its policy on Board petitions, requests from a single Board member, and the staff time commitment associated with the request. Members of the Board of Commissioners voice petitions for information, reports to be developed, letters to be written, etc. as part of regular Board meetings. The Manager documents these petitions and then reviews them with the Board Chair and Vice Chair for any additional information, concerns, and direction. The Manager then directs the subject matter to the appropriate County staff for follow-up, and the designated staff member(s) sends an acknowledgement to the entire Board confirming that the matter is being addressed. The staff member(s) subsequently reports back to the full Board with conclusions, outcomes, or other 22 information with a presentation at a Board meeting, an Information Item included on a regular meeting agenda, and/or via email. Members of the Board may also individually, or in conjunction with other members of the Board, be in contact with County staff outside of Board meetings and make requests to staff for information, reports to be developed, letters to be written, etc. Staff members move forward to address those requests and subsequently report back to the Board member(s) with conclusions, outcomes, or other information. Staff sharing the results sometimes occurs with a presentation at a Board meeting, an Information Item including on a regular meeting agenda, and/or via email. It also sometimes occurs only with the individual Board member or those members who joined in the request. In both instances above, the petitions and requests have an impact on staff responsibilities, priorities, and time. To address this concern, the Board of Commissioners adopted the attached “Guidelines for Commissioner Requests for Information from County Staff” in 2002. The Guidelines provide a framework to assess requests and a review process, especially as it relates to established priorities and duties and the staff time required to address a request. The process entails the Manager and the Board Chair reviewing the request and addressing any concerns identified. This item gives the Board the opportunity to discuss the Board’s process for addressing petitions made by Board members at regular meetings and requests that individual Board members may make to staff for reports, research data and/or information outside of regular Board meetings. The Board likely also needs to review the attached Guidelines for any updates or revisions. Chair Dorosin said he petitioned for this item, as he had some questions. He used Commissioner McKee as an example, since Commissioner McKee had asked if staff would look at other locations for a detention center, and how much staff time would be needed to do so. Chair Dorosin referred to a policy that addressed this issue, which was adopted in 2002, and provided delineation between less than 2 hours worth of work, and more than 2 hours worth of work. He asked if there is a formula for determining how long work will take. Bonnie Hammersley said if there is a request that is going to take a lot of time, then a department head will contact her to discuss it further, but that has not happened since she has been employed at the County. She said most Commissioners check with her before contacting staff. Commissioner Jacobs agreed, and said requests should include the Board Chair in the conversation. He said this policy came about due to Commissioners wanting to edit documents line by line, and staff waiting at the fax machine for the Commissioners’ final draft to come in. He said it would take hours. He said the policy took Commissioner personalities out of the process, and directed requests through the Manager and the Board Chair. Chair Dorosin said he is comfortable with that process, and did not know there was an existing policy when he first raised the petition. He said he has not received any requests, but if he did, he would bring the request to the full Board for input. Commissioner Rich referred to the example of Commissioner McKee wanting to look at other locations, noting that an email had been sent out at the staff level, but the rest of the board had not weighed in on the request. She asked if there is a process to handle this. Chair Dorosin said staff could produce two hours of work, and pass on any results to the Board. 23 Commissioner Rich clarified that staff and the Board will go by the timeframe of two hours. Chair Dorosin said the timeframe is a good check to see whether the topic is even worth being brought to the Board. Commissioner McKee said the Board was so close to making a decision, that there was no time to formally petition the Board. He said a possible alternate piece of property came to his attention, but it was not viable; but if it had been, he would have brought it back to the full Board. Commissioner Jacobs referred to his idea about interest free loan, and said he sent an email to the Board via the Manager. He said the Manager then proceeded with further investigation into the topic, of her own accord; and if it were to prove a timely endeavor, she could consult with the Chair and the Board about continuing further. He said the policy is in place to serve as a check and balance, and to avoid sending staff down rabbit holes. Commissioner Marcoplos said the main aspect is does a request fit into an already agreed upon process. He said if it is too big a request for the process, it will likely be obvious. He said the process seems to be working as is. Commissioner McKee said he has seen this only happen just a few times in his tenure on the Board, but should he have another request in the future, he will let the whole board know what he is requesting, and keep everyone in the loop. Chair Dorosin said he wanted to make sure that staff understands that a request from one Commissioner may not have the full support of the Board. Commissioner Price said there is a group called Artists United, and they are doing a month long series of events during Art Walk. She said on June 5th there will be a pride piper walk, taking the ram from the Arts Center to the Century Center in Carrboro. Chair Dorosin said there will be a closed session at the end of the June 7th meeting on the appointed employees’ evaluations. The meeting adjourned at 9:18 p.m. Mark Dorosin, Chair Donna Baker Clerk to the Board