Orange County NC Website
d. Adoption of the 1999-2000 County Commissioners' Goal -Affordable Housing <br />The Board approved a goal to promote a collaborative and effective approach for addressing <br />affordable housing in Orange County which ensures long-term affordability. The Board has expressed a <br />continuing interest in promoting a collaborative, countywide approach to addressing the affordable housing <br />problem in Orange County. The preparation of the Consolidated Housing Plan for Orange County <br />developed in 1995 as a federal requirement has provided a framework for this collaboration. The 1995 Plan <br />is a five-year plan which expires in June 2000, at which time, a new action plan will need to be developed. <br />VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA: UNANIMOUS <br />9. ITEMS FOR DECISION - REGULAR AGENDA <br />a. Evaluation Instrument for County Manager <br />The Board considered a response to the draft format and content of a revised evaluation <br />instrument for the County Manager. <br />Dr. Kurt Jenne of the Institute of Government presented a draft evaluation instrument for the <br />Board's review and comment. This evaluation instrument consisted of three (3) major parts. <br />Part One deals with the knowledge and skills necessary for effective local government <br />management. It contains criteria that are used to measure how well the County Manager carries out the <br />tasks for which he/she is responsible. These criteria generally reflect the knowledge and skills the County <br />Manager brings to the job. They should reflect, for the most part, what the Commissioners would expect of <br />the County Manager, no matter what specific tasks it assigned in a given year, even though the <br />Commissioners did not specifically adopt or communicate these to the County Manager at the beginning of <br />the evaluation period. <br />Part Two deals with the management of the Commissioners' priorities for the current year. It <br />contains specific objectives that the Commissioners assigned to the County Manager when it adopted the <br />current year's budget. These criteria reflect outcomes or results for which the Commissioners hold the <br />County Manager responsible. One item to consider when rating the County Manager's performance by <br />these objectives in February, prior to the anniversary date, is that progress up until that time would be for six <br />(6) out of the 12 months of the fiscal year. <br />Part Three deals with summary comments on the County Manager's performance. It <br />provides the opportunity to express general observations about the County Manager's overall performance <br />as a whole and gives the Commissioners a place to make an overall rating. <br />For each criterion in the evaluation, the Commissioners are asked to rate the County <br />Manager on a scale from one (1) to five (5), according to how well he/she has met expectations for that <br />criterion. There are three (3) reference points on the scale which are: <br />Exceeds Expectations (5): The County Manager's performance clearly exceeds the <br />Commissioners' expectations, even of somebody fully qualified to do the job of Orange County Manager. <br />Meets Expectations (3): The County Manager's performance meets your <br />expectations of someone fully qualified to do the job. <br />Does Not Meet Expectations (1): The County Manager's performance does not meet <br />the Commissioners' expectations of someone fully qualified to do the job and needs to significantly improve. <br />Beside the rating scale for each criterion is a place to mark Unable to Rate. This option is <br />offered to the Commissioners so they are not forced to make a numerical rating when it is felt that there is <br />not enough valid information with which to make a fair judgment. <br />Dr. Jenne said that he has a list of questions for the Board's written response that will be <br />helpful to both him and the County Manager in developing a final draft for the Board's final review and <br />approval after the summer break. Dr. Jenne is interested in knowing if this is the general approach that the <br />Board wishes to take. He noted that for most boards, this evaluation instrument is not static, but changes <br />from year-to-year, based on specific objectives. Dr. Jenne stated he would include all comments in the <br />final document. He also made reference to the Manager's evaluation of other staff. He believes that the <br />Board can state this in a general way and that during the course of the evaluation, the Board can go into