Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
additional time to meet with them and to learn mare about it because it is a new concept. He <br />was confused because he thought he was being asked to subsidize housing far employees of <br />Weaver Street Market. <br />Commissioner Carey said that they all have questions about the Weaver Community <br />Housing project, and there is no doubt that they need opportunities for public/private <br />partnerships, especially for special needs. He thinks it is worth the risk to mobilize people with <br />this kind of vision and have the ability to address the critical need for affordable housing. He <br />thinks this will achieve the goal of long-term affordability. <br />Commissioner Jacobs said that he respects Commissioner Halkiotis' concerns, <br />because some of the issues were unclear and now there is clarity and he agrees with <br />Commissioner Carey. <br />Chair Brown asked Commissioner Jacobs to modify the motion and vote on each <br />project individually. Commissioner Jacobs preferred to leave the motion as is. <br />Commissioner Gordon said that the motion should include the staff recommendation <br />that if money is awarded to OPC Foundation, then the Foundation must provide a letter of <br />financial commitment before entering into a development agreement with the County. <br />Commissioner Jacobs agreed with this. <br />VOTE: Ayes, 4; No, 1 (Chair Brawn said that she would have supported OPC and Affordable <br />Rentals. She feels strongly that the County bond money is there for the expectation of having a <br />very specific public purpose. She thinks the Weaver Community Housing is a wonderful idea, <br />but there are no units set aside far special needs.} <br />b. Personnel Ordinance Revision -Drug and Alcohol Testing <br />The Board received a report on possible revisions to the Orange County Personnel <br />Ordinance to update the policy covering employee drug and alcohol testing and to implement <br />the Board's direction as to handling positive drug and alcohol tests. <br />Personnel Director Elaine Holmes said that the purpose of this item is to consider <br />revisions to the County's personnel ordinance covering drug and alcohol testing, and to receive <br />any comment or direction from the Board. Because the County is a federal contractor, it is <br />covered by the Drug Free Workplace Act of 1988, which requires that the County maintain a <br />drug free workplace. The County is also covered by the Transportation Employee Testing Act <br />of 1991. She gave reasons the County has a drug free workplace policy. The County's written <br />policy gives advance notice to employees of the policy and the drug and alcohol testing <br />requirements. There are also strict guidelines far the administration of the test. The revision of <br />the policy is a result of a request from the Board of County Commissioners to look at positive <br />alcohol tests the same as for a positive drug test; and also that dismissal not be the only option. <br />The other reason is to reflect updated federal regulations covering transportation related <br />functions. As written, the policy provides the same handling for a positive alcohol test as far a <br />positive drug test. In the case of a positive test, it provides that the employee is subject to <br />disciplinary action, which may include dismissal, under the discretion of the Manager. If the <br />employee were allowed to stay, it would be done under the terms of a written Return to Duty <br />Agreement. The employee will be dismissed if a follow-up test is positive. <br />Commissioner Jacobs asked haw the County treated medical records and who could <br />request them. Elaine Holmes said that medical retards are kept separately and in a locked <br />location, only accessible by certain employees. <br />John Link said that the County does not keep medical records on any employee. It <br />would be a rare occasion to have a medical record in a personnel file. <br />Commissioner Jacobs made reference to page 16 - 11.1 Q.7 and read, "Records will <br />be released if requested by a federal, state, or local safety agency with regulatory authority over <br />Orange County or any of its employees." He said that this seems inclusive and vague at the <br />same time. Elaine Holmes said that this is a requirement under NCDOT. She cannot recall <br />