HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions - 1992.06.25 - 20480REPORT (Misc. 92149) June 25, 1992
BY: Personnel Committee, Marilynn Gosling, Chairperson
IN RE: PROBATE COURT: POSITION REQUEST-ONE (1) CHILD WELFARE
WORKER POSITION-STANDARD PROBATION
TO THE OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Mr. Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen:
The Personnel Committee, having reviewed the above referenced
resolution on June 17, 1992, reports with the recommendation that
the resolution be adopted with the following amendment:
Delete the tenth paragraph and replace it with: NOW THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED that one additional full time Child Welfare
Worker I position be approved for the Casework Unit of the
Field Services Division of the Probate Court, with sufficient
position resources found within the existing operation of
Probate Court to fund the position.
Mr. Chairperson, on behalf of the Personnel Committee, I move
acceptance of the foregoing report.
ERSO L COMMITTEE
MISCELLANEOUS RESOLUTION #92149 June 25, 1992
PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE, JOHN P. McCULLOCH, CHAIRPERSON
IN RE: PROBATE COURT - POSITION REQUEST-ONE CHILD WELFARE WORKER
POSITION AND FUNDING - STANDARD PROBATION
TO: THE OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MR. CHAIRPERSON, LADIES & GENTLEMEN:
WHEREAS, The standard probation staff in the Casework Unit,
Field Services Division workload has increased by 397 cases, or 33%,
in the three years from December 31, 1988, through December 31, 1991;
and
WHEREAS, The workloads for this staff have reached the point
where effectiveness is impacted, resulting in increased hearing and
out-of-home costs; and
WHEREAS, The court has explored alternative means to reduce
caseloads that now average 65 cases per staff; and
WHEREAS, An acceptable maximum caseload per staff should be no
more than 50 cases per staff; and
WHEREAS, American Bar Association standards suggest 35 cases per
staff; and
WHEREAS, The Probate Court has not received a new position for
standard probation since 1976; and
WHEREAS, The Probate Court has generated considerable new
revenue for the county through its probation service fee; and
WHEREAS, The imposition of the probation service fee denotes a
level of service which cannot be met with current workload; and
WHEREAS, The Probate Court has continually worked to reduce
costs and generate additional fees, the result of which far exceeds
the cost of this position;
I HEREBY APPROVE THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION
Datiel T Murph9, Obunri)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That one additional full-time
Child Welfare Worker position be approved and funded for the Casework
Unit of the Field Services Division of the Probate Court.
Mr. Chairperson, on behalf of the Public Services Committee, I move the
adoption of the foregoing resolution.
PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE
) 2
) 3
June 25, 1992
FISCAL NOTE (Misc. 92149)
BY: FINANCE COMMITTEE, DR. G. WILLIAM CADDELL, CHAIRPERSON
IN RE: PROBATE COURT - POSITION REQUEST - ONE CHILD WELFARE
WORKER POSITION AND FUNDING - STANDARD PROBATION
TO THE OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Mr. Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen:
Pursuant to Rule XI-G of this Board, the Finance Committee
has reviewed Miscellaneous Resolution # 92xxx and finds:
1) The Probate Court requests an additional Child Welfare
Worker position at an annual cost of $40,737 (salary
$28,329, fringe $12,408). The cost for the balance of
1992 equals $20,101 (salary $14,056, fringe $6,045).
The annual salary figure reflects 1992 salary levels.
Should the Board grant a salary increase for 1993, there
would be an additional cost.
Probate Court find the resources within their operation
to fund the requested position.
FINANCE COMMITTEE
June 25, 1992 Resolution # 92149
Moved by McCulloch supported by Gosling the resolution be adopted.
Moved by McCulloch supported by Gosling the Fiscal Note and the
Personnel Committee Report be accepted.
A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the Fiscal Note and
the Personnel Committee Report were accepted.
Moved by Gosling supported by Huntoon the resolution be amended as
recommended in the Personnel Committee Report.
A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the motion carried.
Vote on resolution as amended:
AYES: Obrecht, Olsen, Palmer, Pappageorge, Pernick, Price, Schmid, Serra,
Skarritt, Wolf, Aaron, Bishop, Caddell, Crake, Ferrens, Gosling, Huntoon, Johnson,
Krause, Law, McConnell, McCulloch, McPherson, Moffitt, Oaks. 125)
NAYS: None. (0)
A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the resolution, as amended,
was adopted.
STATE OF MICHIGAN)
COUNTY OF OAKLAND
I, Lynn D. Allen, Clerk of the County of Oakland, do hereby certify that the foregoing
resolution is a true and accurate copy of a resolution adopted by the Oakland County
Board of Commissioners on June 25, 1992
with the original record thereof now remaining in my office.
In Testimony Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the County
of Oakland at Pontiac, Michigan this 25th day ?0 June 1992
Lynri,/b. Allen, County C erT"