Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
a. Ms. Hammersley responded that her recommendation would probably not <br />be breaking news due to some of the issues that were cited. For instance, <br />she mentioned that one of the issues was the timeliness of complaints, but <br />when she looked into case timeliness for other agencies, Orange County's <br />processing time is not necessarily unreasonable in some cases. She stated <br />that her recommendation would likely get more attention when she goes <br />before the BOCC on December 41' and asks for them to make the new <br />department. She continued that in her discussions with members of the <br />BOCC she learned that a couple of them voted against merging Human <br />Rights with Housing and Community Development back in 2010 and <br />newer members have also expressed support, so the recommendation <br />could even go through the BOCC without much attention. <br />D. Ms. Hammersley reiterated that a performance improvement plan has been approved by <br />HUD and is in place. <br />E. Dr. Stroman expressed her thanks to Ms. Hampton for her work during the time she <br />assisted with the board. <br />F. Mr. Matt Case asked what the Fair Housing Assistant Program does. <br />1. Ms. May explained that the discussion from October's meeting about Fair <br />Housing Investigations with Complainants and Respondents is what the FHAP <br />agency does and that Fair Housing Assistance Program or FHAP is the <br />"technical" term used for the program when talking about HUD. <br />G. Mr. Case also asked for clarification on HUD's role <br />1. Ms. Hampton stated that HUD does provide funding for FHAP agencies and also <br />enforces the Federal Fair Housing Act. <br />2. Ms. May clarified that the Orange County Civil Rights Ordinance is a substantial <br />equivalent to the Federal Fair Housing Act. <br />H. Mr. Goldsmith asked how the HRC's rare responsibility for hearing Fair Housing case <br />appeals in a three - member panel would work under the new department. <br />1. Ms. May explained that the Civil Rights Ordinance does empower the Human <br />Relations Commission to hold appeal hearings for cases that were determined No <br />Cause by staff and the Complainant requested a reconsideration within 30 days of <br />the date of the Determination. In that case, a 3- member panel would be voted on <br />by the HRC and would hear the case with all its evidence to either overturn or <br />uphold the decision made by staff. She stated that she was not aware of any cases <br />that required the HRC to hear the appeal, as Mr. Goldsmith alluded to. Ms. May <br />referenced previous conversations about having the HRC obtain more training in <br />order to serve in that role if they are called to do so, and stated that opportunities <br />could be explored going forward. <br />L Mr. Marc Xavier asked if the misallocation of funds as cited by HUD in their assessment <br />would impact the HRC in requesting funds for events or other things. <br />1. Ms. Hammersley explained that it would not impact the HRC's event budget and <br />that the mistakes had already been rectified. She further explained that the <br />mistakes were simply an ineligible use of funds and HUD disallowed the <br />reimbursement of some expenses. <br />J. Mr. Goldsmith asked if the change would expand or impact the role of the HRC overall. <br />M <br />