Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Mou topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rutherford County DSS raises concerns about state MOU’s retroactive date and two-year term
Summary
At its May 29 meeting, the Rutherford County Department of Social Services board discussed a state memorandum of understanding from the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services that directors said contains a retroactive effective date and a two-year term; the director said she will not sign until the state addresses those concerns and the board will review the document again before the June 30 deadline.
The Rutherford County Department of Social Services board on May 29 reviewed a state memorandum of understanding (MOU) from the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services that county directors say requires counties to attest to specified performance measures.
Director Hunt told the board the MOU is effectively mandatory and that many directors’ associations are pushing back because the document contains a retroactive effective date and asks counties to sign for two years. "It is a mandate that we need to sign," Hunt said, adding directors have raised concerns about a retroactive date and the length of the commitment.
The board’s discussion focused on two central concerns: the MOU’s retroactive language and the two-year term. Hunt said one county director discovered a retroactive date at a prior meeting and that the statewide directors’ association is asking the state to change that date and allow a one-year term instead of two. "So that's why we're not signing it right now," Hunt said.
Board members also questioned whether signing the MOU would expose counties to new legal risks or potential funding consequences. Hunt told the board that the document addresses performance measures, not funding, and that much of the county's funding is federally mandated. "It says nothing about withholding funding," Hunt said. She added she will research and provide clearer information on state immunity and any legal differences among counties for the board’s next meeting.
Hunt said she had shared the MOU with county leadership and the county attorney and requested another board discussion before the June 30 due date so the group could finalize its position. The board did not take a formal vote; Hunt said she plans to sign only after leadership and legal questions are resolved, or unless the county instructs otherwise.
The next procedural step the board identified was a follow-up meeting before June 30 to review revisions or clarifications from DHHS and to consider the county attorney’s guidance.
