Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
County Cammissioners da with it. She said that we could go ahead and advertise the impact fee <br />ordinance in the legal advertisement, and if, on February 13th, the County Cammissioners decide not <br />to include it, the notice could be changed for its second publication. <br />Commissioner Brown asked for clarification on the fee schedule revisions issue and John <br />Link said that, considering the length of the agenda, there would be mare time to reflect an the fee <br />schedule if it was considered at a Board of County Commissioners' budget work session. The first <br />budget work session is April 16th <br />Chair Halkiotis said that the language model home text amendments almost implies that <br />something could be pulled in by a truck. He asked if it was open ended in that a home and/or a <br />mobile unit could be put an the lot. He said that it should be clearly stated in the amendments that <br />there would be additional requirements put an the model home. <br />Chair Halkiotis feels we should keep to the schedule on the impact fee ordinance and <br />make the analysis public. He agrees with delaying the discussion on the fee schedule revisions to a <br />work session in April. <br />Geoffrey Gledhill suggested a substantive change to not include the sentence, "In the past, <br />the percentage of the maximum calculation was considered." He said that this would limit the options. <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Carey that <br />Geoffrey Gledhill will work with the Planning Director to make the legal advertisement far the February <br />26, 2001 quarterly public hearing clear and concise and to make substantive changes. Geoffrey <br />Gledhill will fax it to the Commissioners before it is sent to the newspapers. <br />VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />c. Contract with Robert S. Segal, CPA, PA, for Expense Reduction and Revenue <br />Enhancement <br />The Board considered authorizing an agreement with Robert S. Segal, CPA, PA, to <br />conduct a review of County practices and operations to enhance the cost-effectiveness of its service <br />delivery. <br />Chair Halkiotis pointed out that the Innovation and Efficiency Committee endorsed this item. <br />Jahn Link introduced this item. He said that Mr. Segal has an impressive track record in <br />working with other municipalities and counties in North Carolina. <br />Rad Visser said that if Mr. Segal does not find any cast savings for the County that the <br />County Commissioners are willing to accept, then the County owes nothing to Mr. Segal. If savings <br />are identified, the County will be responsible for paying Mr. Segal 50°~ of the savings during the first <br />two years of operations. With regards to revenue enhancement and sales tax, Mr. Segal would <br />receive 25% of the first $200,000 of additional refunds obtained, 30% for the next $200,000, and 35°~ <br />for all additional refunds obtained. <br />Commissioner Brown asked several clarifying questions, which were answered by County <br />staff. She would like to see some reports of studies done in other governmental entities by Mr. Segal. <br />Commissioner Gordon made reference to agreement #2 and the language, "A sliding scale <br />based on the 1 % sales tax as follows," and said that it does not say how long. She said that it should <br />be specified in the agreement how long Mr. Segal would be compensated. She said that she realizes <br />these are revenues we would not ordinarily get but wonders if there should be a cap for the length of <br />time Mr. Segal would be compensated. She would like to specify in agreement #2 that the <br />compensation would last no more than two years. <br />Rod Visser said that there would probably not be a tremendous amount of money that <br />would come out of the sales tax. <br />A motion was made by Cammissianer Brown, seconded by Cammissianer Carey to <br />approve the agreements with Robert S. Segal, CPA, PA with the amendments as noted above, <br />authorize the County Manager to sign the agreements pending final review and approval by staff and <br />the County Attorney, and authorize the County Manager to approve any accessory agreements, which <br />may be necessary during this expense/revenueloperations review process. <br />VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />