Orange County NC Website
346 .Mr. Joseph W. Howland, Mr. Lucien Sellet and Ms. Ilse Sonnet. <br />Commiss,pner Garret'_nominated Ms. Tlse Sonnet to one of <br />these vacancies and Commissioner Gustaveson nominated Lucien <br />Sullet to one of the Vacanacies. <br />Upon motion of Commissioner Pinney, seconded by Commis- <br />sioner Whitted, it was moved and adopted that the nomination <br />be closed and that Ms. Ilse Sonnet and Lucien Sellet be ac- <br />cepted by acclamation as members to the Chapel Hill Board <br />Adjustment. <br />Item IV - A <br />The County Manager requested that the Bd., at this time, <br />receive the requested Budget Amendment from Tom Ward, <br />Social Services Director. The $d. agreed to defer from the <br />Agenda for the purpose of hearing Mr. Ward's presentation. <br />The Finance Director, Neal Evans, filed with the Board <br />a Memorandum concerning the Social Services Budget Amendment <br />request. <br />Social Services Budget Amendment <br />" Attached is a Proposed Budget Amendment that would <br />transfer funds to cover the County Share of increased Chore <br />Services and several smaller items, Sales Tax, Health <br />Insurance, and Janitorial Service, as well as redistributing <br />or budgeting some previously approved items including the <br />personnel increase of Dec. 1, 1975, Child Support, Enforcement, <br />and Title XX Legal Aid and Chore Service Support. <br />l) The Personnel amendment of December 1 included only <br />a local cost of $7,500 assigned to salaries. The actual cost <br />including State Shares was $28,000 and this is distributed <br />among Personnel, Travel, Equipment, and Fringe Benefits with <br />the additional $20,500 coming from State Aid to Administration. <br />2) Chore Service had an original appropriation of <br />$47,242 on the Chore Service -line item, and $15,750 in Personnel. <br />It should all be budgeted together for a line item of $63.000. <br />Through January $47,634 had been encumbered. By April 1, the <br />en~ire appropriation will have been expended. This over expend- <br />iture.:has come about because more than the budget number of <br />Chore Workers have been employed at an average cost above the <br />above the budget estimates. To budget sufficient funds for the <br />remaining months at the average cost of December and January will <br />cost $36,750, and I have included this figure in the Proposed <br />Budget Amendment as requested by the Department Head, as well <br />as transferring the item $15,750 from the Personnel budget. I <br />would recommend, however, that only $11,000 be approved for <br />additional funding which would place the Department in the position <br />of providing Chore Service at the monthly level originally <br />approved. Chore Servie is an optional service and any increased <br />optional services offered by the County ought to be approved <br />only in the context of County wide responsibilities in the <br />budget process. The Budget Amendment doss include the full <br />amount with a matching revenue item (75~): in State Aid to <br />Administration since the match comes from this source rather <br />than a specific line item match. The net effect is that AFDC <br />Day Care and Medicaid reduction would fund the local share of <br />Chore Service. <br />3) Sales Tax, Health Insurance and Workmen's Compens- <br />ation for employees, and Janitorial Services were underbudgeted <br />and the County Share, approximately $1700, to meet these additions <br />is recommended to come from a re-appropriation of Medicaid Funds. <br />4) Support Enforcement is a redistribution of funds <br />previously appropriated on 12/11/75. The Personnel and Fringe <br />Benefits are reduced and redistributed to Professional Services <br />and Telephones which were not included in the original budget, <br />