Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
She said that she asked Purchasing and Central Services Director Pam Jones and <br /> Dave Stancil to be here tonight to discuss the background of this proposal. She said that she <br /> expects this to evolve. She is looking at the big picture and the opportunities to evolve. <br /> Dave Stancil and Pam Jones gave some background on this proposal and how it came <br /> about. <br /> Dave Stancil mentioned the potential partnership with the Soil and Water District. This <br /> is looking very promising. He hopes to bring back a memorandum of agreement for this <br /> partnership. <br /> The next step is for the Board to approve the creation of a new department and start <br /> working on a budget and making decisions on the office space. <br /> Commissioner Nelson made reference to page 3 of the memorandum and the issue of <br /> key staff being within 5-7 years of retirement. He said that he does not know how this <br /> reorganization helps to address this issue. Laura Blackmon said that the County has a lot of <br /> departments with 3-5 people, with little room for advancement. One of the benefits would be to <br /> create a deeper organization with a depth of over 50 employees. <br /> Commissioner Gordon made reference to three memoranda sent to the County <br /> Commissioners by advisory boards that oppose this reorganization, and she specifically cited <br /> the language in the memorandum from Allan Green, which is included below. <br /> To: Orange County Commissioners <br /> After reviewing the reorganization proposal at our November APB meeting I wrote the following <br /> memo to the BOCC expressing my concern that there did not appear to be a sufficient <br /> justification for implementing the proposed reorganization, nor a well-thought out plan for <br /> ensuring that the critical mission objectives of the ERCD would be effectively covered. <br /> (Obviously, every department has a critical mission but my particular focus is the ERCD). <br /> Since then further discussions with Dave Stancil and some of you have confirmed that a <br /> detailed justification and plan for the reorganization does not exist. Until you all are <br /> comfortable that: <br /> 1. you understand the need for and benefits of a reorganization; <br /> 2. detailed plans for meeting (and improving) on current missions are in place; <br /> 3. there is an accountability structure for making it happen; <br /> I once again strongly recommend that you take no action to implement the proposal. <br /> Thank you, <br /> Allan Green <br /> February 10, 2009 <br /> David, <br /> As presented, the reorganization proposal appears to have minimal benefit for the Environment <br /> and Resource Conservation Department and the mission of the Agricultural Preservation <br /> Board. No cost savings are outlined, and the overall objective of "streamlining" processes has <br />