Browse
Search
Minutes - 19820622
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Minutes - Approved
>
1980's
>
1982
>
Minutes - 19820622
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/3/2017 2:23:26 PM
Creation date
8/13/2008 12:34:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
6/22/1982
Meeting Type
Special Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Document Relationships
Agenda - 06-22-1982
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1980's\1982
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
that before the person could be hired, the Federal cuts took effect and the Social <br />Services Board had implemented a reduction in Staff and Servite; if the Commissioners <br />had not set aside the $16,000 two positions would have been lost, rather than the <br />anticipated one-position. <br />Social Services Director Tom Ward said that his department did anticipate <br />an additional $39,856 due to a change in the formula for Medicaid reimbursement; <br />that leaves about $10,000 needed for Sacia] Services. <br />County Manager told tt~e Board that the County had had the roofs at Stanford <br />School inspected today. The inspection was done by Board of Education Staff, County <br />Staff and Mr. Pickard of Pickard Roofing in Durham_ The Manager said~Mr. Pickard's <br />estimate of $38,000 considered the damage, corrective action far the damage (re- <br />roofing both sides of the gym and the connecting areas) and added insulation; he. <br />added that thiS.~roof would be guaranteed for 20 years. <br />Dr. Lunsford, Board of Education Staff, told the Board that: <br />1) there were a number of areas regarding the Stanford roof wherein both <br />the Board of. Education consultant and County consultant agreed; 2) areas of dis- <br />agreement are based on two paints. He continued that .it was pouring rain when the <br />roof was inspected and that the Board of Education consultant had gone over all <br />three structures, not just one and parts of the others, and had taken up portions <br />of the roof and "gone down to the decking." Dr. Lunsford said that Mr. Pickard <br />himself had today agreed that he had had to replace the same type of shingles, as <br />currently are on the Stanford roofs. Dr. Lunsford read from the consultant's <br />letter which said that they had cut down to the jepdeck and it.wa5 split; pr. <br />Lunsford said this had not been done by the County consultant. pr. Lunsford said <br />that based on his consultant's work, which he feels was more thorough than that <br />conducted on this date, he feels there are more extensive problems which the <br />$38,000 spent an one part of the roof will not correct. He said there was a <br />"difference of opinion" here and there was no problem with such a difference, <br />however, on behalf of the Board of Education he had to "continue to advocate" <br />for the entire $300,000 for the Stanford roof and the additional moneys for <br />--- I capital as requested by his Board. <br />The Manager told the Board the problem was "not so much the pitch of the roof <br />i <br />but rather the type of material used in the shingle" according to Mr. Pickard. <br />The Manager said Mr. Pickard had said such a shingle would split and this was <br />i what had occured in the gym on one side and may well occur in other areas later. <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.