HomeMy WebLinkAboutC.054.93010_1239 (2)problems that's happened, that we've been made aware of, was last year all you had to
do to qualify for farm use was basically to have 10 acres of land and say you produced a
thousand dollars off it. The General Assembly in Raleigh passed G.S. 105-296, which
makes this completely different now. There is literally dozens of new rules and
regulations that they've thrown on us for the farmer to prove that the land is in farm use.
I would like for this group, along with whatever staff that can be provided for them, as
far as Raleigh, and the tax office, to explain to the task force the procedures and show
them once and for all that the commissioners are not making these rules up. And also to
be able to hear sonic of the grievances that have been brought to you on a personal
level."
(Conclusion of Commissioner Williams' remarks and motion.)
Chairman Johnson said he understood the nominations would be subject to each
nominee's willingness to serve.
Commissioner Williams said this was correct.
Chairman Johnson said the board was concerned about the farming community.
He advised the audience members that each commissioner was willing to talk to them
if there were any concerns in the future.
VOTING: Ayes — 5; Nays — 0.
Commissioner Madison asked if the personnel ordinance included any
procedures to follow when a citizen was poorly treated by a county employee. He
asked if there were procedures to file a complaint.
Mashburn said anyone could file a complaint either with the supervisor of the
department or in the county manager's office. He said there were policies that
employees were expected to follow and there was a procedure for the supervisors to
follow in addressing situations when the policies were not followed. Mashburn said
that in Mr. Hall's case, there was a tax supervisor who had been employed less than six
months. He said the tax supervisor was administering a program that was put in place
and employees put in place prior to his arrival, along with having to implement statutes
that were recently changed. Mr. Mashburn said that in fairness, all of these factors
needed to be taken into consideration by the task force. He said there had always been
an effort to treat everyone fairly, and the best way to be fair was to treat everyone
equitably and in accordance with the statutes.
Commissioner Madison said he felt the citizens needed a place to go if they felt
they had been treated poorly. Mr. Madison said he didn't want the citizens mistreated.
PRESENTATION FROM VAUGHN BOWLES, AN EMPLOYEE OF THE
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, IN REFERENCE TO THE COUNTY'S SICK
LEAVE POLICY: Mr. Bowles said he began employment (full time) with the
sheriffs department on September 15, 1985 and remained until September 20, 1994
leaving behind 739.10 sick leave hours. He said that on May 9, 1996, he was rehired,
again at the sheriffs department, and the 739.10 sick leave hours were credited to him.
Bowles said later, on August 6, 2003, a memo from the county's human resources
office was sent to him explaining that the sick leave hours had erroneously been
credited to him, and they would be deducted from his sick leave balance. Mr. Bowles
said the human resources office had justified this action by saying the personnel
ordinance stated "employees that retire or resign and are not reinstated with the county
within a one-year period shall lose all sick leave credits." Bowles requested that the
hours be reinstated. He said he had already made the request to Sheriff Redmond and
the county manager. Bowles said he recognized sick leave was a privilege and not a
right, but that the county had elected to grant it to the employees. He said the hours
would equal 61 days or about 5 months on his retirement, and he had earned them. Mr.
Bowles said other employees (John Cloer, Ron Wyatt, and Ron Lambert) at the sheriffs
department had experienced similar sick leave time losses, and he requested that their