Laserfiche WebLink
~on1 13 <br />was adopted by the flowing vote: <br />Aye: Cox, Dossenbach, Matthews, Stafford and Wicker <br />Nay: None <br />The Chairman ruled the motion carried unanimously. <br />The County Manager reported on a letter from Mr. Brad <br />Barker of the Triangle J Council of Governments, dated June 28, <br />1990. The letter states basically that they will service us this <br />year . to avoid any disruption of services to the elderly <br />clients in Lee County...." They also passed a resolution to <br />review the Council's allocation formula for the distribution of <br />aging funds. According to Mrs. Pam Adams, Director of the <br />Department for the Aging, this means that they are proposing to <br />do some inter local agreements that would hold all the counties <br />harmless except Lee County in a re-distribution formula. Mr. <br />Cowan advised that he is not sure if the Division of Aging would <br />approve this or not. It is something that would be decided by <br />the Division of Aging and not the Triangle J Council of <br />Governments. Also, they took action to review the service area <br />boundary for TJCOG with a view toward realignment of the service <br />area to a five county region. In order to do that they have to <br />petition the State to remove Lee County from that Triple A. <br />There would have to be a Public Hearing held and it has to be <br />demonstrated that the elderly population would not be affected by <br />that move. If it can be demonstrated that this would have an <br />adverse effect on the Lee County elderly, the State would more <br />than likely deny that request. <br />The County Attorney reported that he had checked with other <br />counties concerning contracts between counties and architects. <br />Most architects draw the agreement and use an AIE form which is a <br />contract drawn by architects for architects. Some counties still <br />use it and take out the arbitration clause. The State of North <br />Carolina uses another contract (Mr. Hoyle distributed copies of <br />the State Contract). This incorporates some planning procedures <br />which lists state agencies that have to approve the plans. Those <br />20 pages have been deleted and we have inserted that the <br />architect has to get approvals from all the state, local and <br />federal agencies. Mr. Hoyle concluded that since the Board has <br />discussed contracts with two architects that a committee may be <br />appointed to review and finalize this document. The Chairman <br />appointed Commissioner Cox to serve on a committee with Mr. Hoyle <br />and Mr. Cowan to review and finalize this document. <br />Commissioner Stafford moved to enter an executive session <br />to discuss a contractual matter. Commissioner Cox seconded the <br />motion and upon a vote the results were as follows: <br />Aye: Cox, Dossenbach, Matthews, Stafford and Wicker <br />Nay: None <br />The Chairman ruled the motion carried unanimously and the <br />Board was in executive session. <br />9 <br />