Minutes 12-13-2011 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

agreement based on subsequent discussions between selective Chapel Hill Town Council members and County Commissioners. The Town of Chapel Hill is scheduled to discuss thfs agreement at its regular meeting on June 9, 2012: There will be a delay of the third quarter payment until after this meeting and pending the approval of the agreement. According to the revised agreement, it will still~be the intent of the County Commissioners to increase the level of funding County library operational costs at 3% in an amount proportional to the proposed increase in the funding provided to the Town library by the County each fiscal. year until the contribution reaches 30% of County library operational funding by June 30, 2015. Should this agreement be approved and signed by both governing bodies during FY 2011-12, the County will contribute a total of $342,986 to the Town for library services. The contribution will never fall below this amount. The contribution will be reviewed annually by staff in consultation with a representative group of elected officials beginning no later than October 15, 2012. Commissioner Yuhasz said that he had several questions. On page 5, the word "proportional" has been substituted for the word "equal." He asked for clarification on this. His concern is to make sure that the increase to the Chapel Hill Library is never any greater than the increase to the County library. Frank Clifton deferred this to the library committee members as to the intent of this change. Commissioner Jacobs said that the wording is unclear, because if you read it as equal then that would mean that the increase would be equal to the increase in the county funding. This is not the intent. It is a proportion of the total increase to the County library. He said that if "proportional" does not make sense, then they need to find better language. Commissioner Foushee said that the intent was that the proportional increase would never exceed in proportion to what happens to the Orange County Library. She said that they wanted it to be clear that "equal" was not the situation. Chair Pelissier said that it should say "proportional percentage." John Roberts said that adding "percentage" would alleviate the concerns. Commissioner Gordon asked that staff figure out the wording and fix it. Commissioner Yuhasz made reference to Section 3 on page 6 regarding interoperability and said that he had some concerns about this language, which suggests that interoperability is optional within this agreement. In his mind, interoperability is a requirement in this agreement within three years. -This is a critical part of the agreement to him. Commissioner Foushee said that the group found it difficult to define clearly interoperability. Each board has an opinion what it should look like and the entities are not on the same page. Lucinda Munger said that in September 2010 she included in her presentation the options for interoperability. There are many different levels of interoperability. What was stated at that meeting was that a person could go to any library in the County and use the same library card. Chair Pelissier said that one of the unknowns is cost of the interoperability. She would be reluctant to make it a strict requirement since it was not in previous drafts of the interlocal agreement. The agreement does indicate that the Board will receive a report on the agreement in November 2012, so it will not be stagnant. Commissioner Jacobs said that he recalled interoperability as being a major hang-up with the County and that this agreement captured what they wanted. Commissioner Yuhasz said that he has no question about Orange County's commitment to interoperability but he does have concerns about interoperability not. being a requirement of this agreement.