Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 20081211 APPROVED 1/22/2009 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS RECONVENED DECEMBER 1, 2008 MEETING December 11, 2008 6:30 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in a reconvened session on Thursday, December 11, 2008 at 6:30 p.m. in the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Vice-Chair Mike Nelson and Commissioners Alice Gordon, Pam Hemminger, Barry Jacobs, Bernadette Pelissier and Steve Yuhasz COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Valerie P. Foushee COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Laura Blackmon, Assistant County Managers Willie Best and Gwen Harvey, and Deputy Clerk to the Board David Hunt (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) NOTE: ALL DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE PERMANENT AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE. Commissioner Nelson called the meeting to order at 6:30 pm. 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda PUBLIC CHARGE The Vice-Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge. 2. Public Comments a. Matters on the Printed Agenda (These matters were considered when the Board addressed that item on the agenda below.) 3. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations a. UNC/Orange County Landfill Gas Recovery Agreement The Board received, reviewed, and commented on a presentation on the proposed agreement for the joint UNC/Orange County Landfill Gas Recovery Project. Assistant County Manager Gwen Harvey said that in January 2008, the County Commissioners authorized a Memorandum of Understanding for the staff to embark upon a process to come to a preliminary agreement for a final contract proposal with UNC. On April 15th, the staff made a presentation and the County Commissioners endorsed having the staff to proceed to this stage. In the middle of October, there was a public meeting. This presentation will be more formal on the process thus far. She introduced the representatives from UNC. THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL and ORANGE COUNTY JOINT LANDFILL GAS RECOVERY PROJECT John Masson with Facilities Planning at UNC presented this portion. What is Landfill Gas? Technical Response— Source: Anaerobic decomposition of garbage Contents: Methane (-50%), Carbon Dioxide (-40%), Nitrogen (-9%), Oxygen (-1%), and other organic compounds (<1%) Current Management Practice: Passive venting WHAT IS LANDFILL GAS? - Natural by-product of decaying municipal solid waste - 50% methane, 49% carbon dioxide, nitrogen & oxygen, and 1% other gases - Energy content approximately %2 of natural gas PROJECT HISTORY - Gas usage has been discussed for years - Gas generation is nearing peak capacity - University electrical demands are requiring improved and expanded service - University loads have increased to where electrical generation capacity can be more fully utilized - The time to act is now LANDFILL GAS (LFG) RECOVERY PROJECT - Project Overview o Collect and use landfill gas to make electricity o Joint University and County partnership, with mutual public and environmental benefits o Subject to final approval by Orange County Board of Commissioners and University - Major Project Components o Collection System o Pipeline o Electrical Generator- 1 Megawatt o Enclosed Flare Multiple slides of pictures.... WHY A PIPELINE? - Currently have electrical load at University's Airport Drive complex - Purchased power cost savings make project more attractive - County wants University to make beneficial use of landfill gas - Potential for using waste heat from generator on Carolina North Campus PROJECT BENEFITS - Cost savings from avoided purchased power - Makes beneficial use of otherwise wasted gas - Helps University with its goals regarding leadership in sustainability and carbon neutrality - Reduction in greenhouse gas emissions o Methane destruction - The emissions reduction attributable to this project are equivalent to: o Removing the emissions of 7,860 automobiles o Planting 9,750 acres of forest PROJECT STATUS - Finalizing contract between Orange County and University - Permitting requirements being defined - System operational 2011 - Expected 20-year operation LANDFILL GAS RECOVERY PROJECT If you have questions regarding this Public Information Meeting please contact: - Gayle Wilson o Orange County Solid Waste Director gwilson @co.orange.nc.us 919-968-2885 - Ray DuBose o UNC-CH Energy Services Director ray.dubose©energy.unc.edu 919-966-4100 David Mezzan of Alston and Bird LLP made a presentation on the specifics of the agreement. Proposed Landfill Gas Agreement Between Orange County and UNC Overview - County will grant UNC rights to the landfill gas (LFG) generated at the Eubanks Road Landfill - UNC will construct a system to collect, transport, and combust the LFG, initially through flaring and then through electricity generation - In exchange for the LFG rights, UNC will make monthly payments to the County for a percentage of the heating energy value of LFG that UNC has flared and used to generate electricity - UNC is responsible for all costs and operating responsibilities associated with the LFG Project Term - Term of Agreement expires on December 31, 2029 - UNC has two 5-year options to extend the Term. If both options are exercised, the Agreement will expire December 31, 2039. Construction Milestones UNC agrees to work expeditiously and in good faith to achieve the following milestones: - Flare operational within 18 months - Conversion system operational within 34 months Provision in Current Agreement: - County may terminate if entire Project is not constructed in 5 years - Flare percentage adjusted upwards if conversion system is not operational in 35 months Rights Granted to UNC - Rights to LFG generated by Landfill during the Agreement's Term - Rights to environmental benefits (e.g., carbon credits) associated with generation, destruction, treatment, sale or use of LFG - License to access the Landfill - Easements across County-owned properties to construct LFG transport pipeline Easements - Closed MSW landfill on the south side of Eubanks Road - 14.71-acre tract immediately north and west of the jointly owned "Greene Tract" and south and east of landfill - 60-acre tract located north of the jointly owned "Greene Tract" - Parcel on Homestead Road that houses the Southern Human Services Center and the Seymour Center Operating Responsibilities - UNC is solely responsible for constructing, operating, maintaining, and repairing the LFG Project - The County is solely responsible for operating and maintaining the Landfill, exclusive of the LFG project - The Landfill's operations take precedence over the LFG Project's operations Commercial Terms: Economic Analysis - The commercial terms reflect an economic analysis that results in an equal sharing of project value between the County and UNC during the Term of the Agreement Commercial Terms: Monthly Payment - UNC will make monthly payments to the County that will be calculated as follows: Monthly Payment to County = Flare Gas: 5.3% of Heating Energy Content of LFG Energy Conversion Gas: 16.6% of Heating Energy Content of LFG X Natural Gas Index Price (capped at $9.00 per MMBtu and inflation-adjusted at 2% per year) Commercial Terms: Payment Adjustments - Flare and energy conversion percentages are subject to adjustment under any of the following circumstances: o Enactment of U. S. federal legislation restricting greenhouse gas emissions and establishing a market for the trading of carbon credits o Changes in methane's global warming potential o UNC's monetization of environmental benefits in a manner other than as carbon credits - Adjustments due to U. S. Federal Cap-and-Trade System o No adjustments before 2015 o Reflects differences between forecasted emission allowance prices and actual prices o Methodology determined by an independent consultant o Only applicable in months in which a Cap-and-Trade System is in effect o Adjustments are determined on a month-by-month basis o The 5.3% flare percentage cannot go lower than 2.09% or higher than 8.51% o The 16.6% energy conversion percentage cannot go lower than 6.52% or higher than 26.68% - Adjustments due to Changes in Methane's GWP o Commercial terms in the Agreement assume methane's GWP to be 21 o Monthly payment to County will be adjusted upwards by 25% if methane's GWP is determined to be greater than 23 o Monthly payment to County will be adjusted downwards by 25% if methane's GWP is determined to be less than 19 - Adjustment for Other Environmental Benefits o UNC shall consult with County, but has sole discretion in determining how to monetize other environmental benefits o Monthly payment to County will be adjusted up if UNC's monetization of environmental benefits in an alternative manner results in net surplus revenue to UNC Commercial Terms: Carbon Credits Option - The Agreements grants the County the right to obtain up to 15% of the carbon credits generated by the LFG Project through a carbon credit-exchange mechanism - County must exchange high-quality credits for credits generated by the LFG Project Commercial Terms: Taxes UNC will pay for any sales and use or other taxes that may arise from the transaction when due County agrees to reimburse UNC for 50% of any sales and use or other taxes that UNC may be required to pay in connection with the transaction Termination - Either party may terminate the Agreement in the event of the other party's uncured, material breach - Agreement terminates of its own accord if use of LFG as fuel is prohibited or if project operating permits are revoked Termination — County's Rights - The County may terminate the Agreement if either of the following occurs: o UNC failes to make timely payments o UNC abandons the Project o UNC fails to operate the Project for 180 consecutive days o UNC fails to construct the LFG Project within 5 years Termination — UNC's Rights - UNC may terminate the Agreement if either of the following occurs: o LFG generation falls below certain thresholds o UNC cannot obtain the government approvals and third-party easements necessary to construct and operate the LFG Project Effect of Termination - UNC may remove equipment from the Landfill and other County property or offer it for sale to the County at fair market value - Equipment is considered abandoned after 180 days if not removed or offered for sale - However, if the County uses any abandoned equipment, it must pay UNC the fair market value of such equipment Dispute Resolution - All disputes, except those requiring immediate injunctive relief, are submitted to an escalating negotiation and non-binding mediation process - If mediation efforts are unsuccessful, either party may resort to litigation Carolyn Efland stressed how much the University wants to enter into this agreement and that it is ready, able, and willing to sign the agreement. She said that the whole idea of terminating an agreement is foreign to the University. She said that they would work in good faith and were not happy about the thought of a termination agreement. PUBLIC COMMENT Will Raymond said that he would like to endorse what the University has put before the County. He believes that the agreement is essentially good. He said that this was supposed to be revenue neutral, and the original presentation was challenged by him and some others. He would like to see some of the revenue earmarked to address the issues brought forward in the Rogers Road Small Area Task Force, which is a Chapel Hill committee, to address some of the long-term issues along Rogers Road. For example, sidewalks along Rogers Road, which are a County obligation at this time. He thinks that the continuous monitoring issue should be part of the agreement. Noise abatement is also a key part of this. He said that he plans to work very hard to get this through the Chapel Hill Town Council. He believes that it is a very good project. Tracy Kuhlman is a member of the Rogers/Eubanks Neighborhood Association and The Coalition to End Environmental Racism. She requested that the County Commissioners not forget the people in the Rogers Road community who have hosted the landfill for the past 36 years. She said that the income generated for the County from this facility could range from $115,000-140,000 annually, with the potential for an additional $3,500-40,000 annually from the sale of renewable energy credits. In return, UNC will save money by avoiding the need to purchase power, and the University will also be working toward reaching its carbon reduction objectives. County staff has called this agreement a win-win situation for the County and UNC. She asked the County Commissioners to please make it a win-win-win situation by agreeing to use a portion of the revenue to bring public services such as water and sewer to the residents of the Rogers Road community. Reverend Robert Campbell spoke in support of bringing water and sewer to the Rogers-Eubanks community. He asked why a sewer or water line could not be brought through this area. Commissioner Jacobs said that three or four years ago the Board started talking about this and it is good to see it come to fruition. He spoke to Carolyn Efland and said that the County Commissioners do believe that the University acts in good faith, but there was a recent experience with the airport where he does not think the University acted in good faith. He said that the County had to protect itself. He asked who would be responsible for flaring the gas and it was answered that the University would be responsible for all operating of the systems. Commissioner Jacobs asked what happens if at the end of the 34 months that the University thinks that this is not feasible and if there is any compensation to the County for losing three years. David Mezzan said that there would have to be a decision on a lawsuit claiming that UNC was default. Commissioner Jacobs asked staff for more information on the Duke Power site because there is supposed to be a men's shelter there and he does not know how these facilities would coexist. He also wants to make sure that tree clearing is eliminated or minimized through the easements. Commissioner Nelson said that there were some good points about how to use the revenue, and this should be discussed at some point. He suggested that staff bring back information on this. At this point, there was a five-minute break. 4. Consent Agenda A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to approve those items on the consent agenda as stated below: a. Minutes The Board approved the minutes from November 18, 2008 as submitted by the Clerk to the Board. b. Appointments — None c. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Release/Refunds The Board adopted a refund resolution, which is incorporated by reference, related to 40 requests for motor vehicle property tax releases or refunds in accordance with North Carolina General Statutes. d. Property Tax Releases This item was removed and placed at the end of the7:30pm agenda for separate consideration. e. Property Tax Refund The Board adopted a refund resolution, which is incorporated by reference, related to one (1) request fro property tax refund in accordance with N.C. General Statute 105-381. f. Applications for Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion The Board approved three (3) untimely applications for exemption/exclusion from ad valorem taxation for the 2008 tax year. g. Amendment of Audit Contract The Board approved the amendment of the audit contract for FY 20080-09 with McGladrey and Pullen extending the date for completion of the County audit and compensating for additional services to be performed and authorizing the Chair to sign on behalf of the Board. h. Capital Project Funding This item was removed and placed at the end of the 7:30pm agenda for separate consideration. The Board approved the two-year funding plan which includes: 1) Appropriating $3.5 million from the fund balance of the General Fund for transfer to the School Capital Project Fund and County Capital Project Fund; 2) Include the remaining appropriation of $2.4 million from the fund balance of the General Fund needed to complete the correction of the shortfall in the Fiscal Year 2009-10 budget; and 3) Direct staff to take those actions necessary to reallocate available funding to correct the project shortfalls and to bring back to the Board the budget amendments necessary to implement this plan, as well as internal control measures to be used in the future. i. Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (Schools APFO) —Approval of Membership and Capacity Numbers The Board approved the November 14, 2008 membership and capacity numbers for both school districts (Orange County and Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools) which will be used in developing 10-year student membership projections and the 2009 SAPFO Technical Advisory Committee Report. j. Resolution of Approval — Conservation Easement for the Future Northeast District Park (former Kirby Property) The Board adopted the resolution approving the conveyance by Orange County of the conservation easement and authorized the Chair and the Clerk to sign the conservation easement agreement, subject to final review by staff and County Attorney, with a closing and recordation of the document expected to occur on or about December 31, 2008. k. Application for State Public School Building Capital Funds and NC Education Lottery Monies The Board approved applications to the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction to release funds from Orange County's Public School Building Capital Fund and NC Education Lottery account and authorized the Chair to sign. I. Approval of Financing Arrangements for Volunteer Fire Departments to Purchase Fire Trucks The Board approved Cedar Grove, Little River, and Orange Rural Volunteer Fire Companies entering into a financing arrangements to purchase replacement fire trucks; appropriated $20,000 from the Caldwell (Little River) Fire Department's County-held unappropriated fund balance; and authorized the Board of Commissioner Chair to sign the appropriate documents related to the financing arrangement. m. Fiscal Year 2008-09 Budget Amendment #4 The Board approved budget and grant project ordinance amendments for fiscal year 2008-09 for Department on Aging, Orange Public Transportation, Library Services, Department of Social Services, Criminal Justice Partnership Program, Orange Grove Volunteer Fire Department, and Health Department. n. Motorola Service Agreement for 9-1-1 Radio Equipment The Board approved the service agreement and authorized the Chair to sign it pending review by the County Attorney and authorized the Purchasing Director to sign future radio service agreements. o. Performance Agreement with the Town of Chapel Hill and Visitors Bureau The Board approved a performance agreement for FY 2008-2009, between the Town of Chapel Hill and the Visitors Bureau and authorized the Manager to sign. p. Contract Renewal: Courier/Mail Services through OE Enterprises, Inc. The Board renewed a contract with OE Enterprises, Inc. for courier and mail processing services effective December 1, 2008 through November 30, 2011 and authorized the Chair to sign. q. Contract for Architectural Feasibility and Design Services, Department of Social Services, Hillsborough Commons This item was removed and placed at the end of the agenda for separate consideration. r. Hillsborough Commons: Guaranteed Maximum Price Contract Amendment #1 This item was removed and placed at the end of the agenda for separate consideration. s. Approval of Sewer Easement and Utility Dedication — Homestead Community Center The Board approved a Deed of Easement and utility dedication for the sewer line constructed to serve the Homestead Community Center, subject to final review by the County Attorney; and authorized the Chair to sign. t. Contract Amendment for Professional Services, Northern Park Septic Project The Board approved a professional services contract amendment for Coulter Jewell Thames Engineers for the Northern Park Septic Project contingent upon County Attorney Review, in an amount not to exceed $42,700, plus reimbursable expenses; and authorized the Manager to sign. u. Authorization to Execute Change Order for Roof Repairs, Triangle Sportsplex The Board approved a change order not-to-exceed $180,000 for replacement of the roof over the ice rink and needed repairs in the central common area and the area over the pools at the Triangle Sportsplex; and authorized the Manager to execute the change order. v. Animal Services Facility Dedication of Water and Sewer Easements to OWASA The Board approved an easement and water line dedication to the Orange Cater and Sewer Authority (OWASA) for water and sewer utilities constructed to serve the Animal Services Facility and approved an easement for future construction of a water line to serve residents south of the County's facility along Genestu Drive, contingent upon County Attorney review; and authorized the Chair to sign. VOTE ON CONSENT AGENDA: UNANIMOUS Items removed from the consent agenda were moved to the end of the agenda. 5. Public Hearings - none 6. Regular Agenda a. Second Reading: Third Party Presence in the Employee Disciplinary Process The Board considered a second reading of an amendment to the Orange County Personnel Ordinance Article IX, section 4d(1) providing for a third party presence at pre- disciplinary conferences prior to demotion, suspension, or termination of an employee and a staff request that the Board not amend Article IX, Section 4d(1) or at best consider one of the proposed alternatives to the language approved in the first reading. Laura Blackmon said that at the last meeting the Board did not pass unanimously the verbiage during the meeting. There were some concerns addressed in the agenda item regarding having a mediator in a pre-disciplinary conference. Staff drafted two alternatives for the Board's consideration, which delete the presence of a spouse or domestic partner from the meeting, and require that the trained mediator has training in rules and regulations of the County. Staff is recommending Alternative 2. Clarifying questions of the County Commissioners were answered by staff. Commissioner Jacobs asked if statements in the pre-disciplinary hearing are part of the record and Laura Blackmon said that there are no minutes taken, but the accusations are in writing. Geof Gledhill said that if the Board takes no action for 100 days from the last Board action, there will be no amendment to the ordinance. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs to approve alternative one on page three, removing the word "not" from the third sentence, which would read, "The person is considered a support person and is allowed to participate in a conference." The alternative is shown below: An eligible employee may have a third party present at this conference as provided in the Rules and Regulations adopted for this Section. The third party may be a friend, family member(but not a spouse or domestic partner) or another employee, but not an attorney. The person is considered a support person and is allowed to participate in the conference. The Human Resource Director or the Human Resource Director's designee may be present at management's or the employee's request. Commissioner Yuhasz said that he is not clear on this and he does not think that having an advocate will be helpful in accomplishing the goal of ironing out problems between the employee and the supervisor. Laura Blackmon said that, by the point of a meeting of this nature, there would have already been counseling, discussions, and some documentation of the problems. Commissioner Gordon is concerned about equity issues because this would only apply to half of the employees. Michael McGinnis said that he had conversations with the Sheriff's Department, Register of Deeds, Health Department, and Social Services, as well as Drake Maynard from the Office of State Personnel and the rules indicate specifically about an attorney or other such. There is not a representative in the hearings for State personnel and the only other person in the conference is someone from Human Resources. The County departments listed above indicated that they do not wish to change from this policy and would not want to have another person in the conference because it would make it more adversarial and would indicate that something is not being done fairly. He said that all of the departments that are exempt from using the ordinance would wish that the County would not make the change. Commissioner Jacobs made his motion again. Commissioner Yuhasz seconded the motion. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Commissioner Jacobs mentioned an article in the News and Observer that OPC was in danger of losing thousands of dollars in State funding because it had not "satisfactorily" found placements for people who were deinstitutionalized and if they did not act by the end of the year were going to lose the money. Since the County Commissioners do not meet again before the end of the year, he would like some information on this. Laura Blackmon said that there was an email sent out late yesterday from Judy Truitt. She will get this information to the County Commissioners. b. Review of Proposed Chatham/Orange Joint Planning Task Force The Board was to consider reviewing potential processes, including proposed charge and composition, to establish one new Chatham/Orange Joint Planning Task Force and, following any revisions, authorize staff to forward the task force proposal to the other jurisdictions for approval and respective appointments. Commissioner Jacobs would like more information about the Jordan Lake pool. This item will be brought back in January. At this time, the Board moved to the 7:30 agenda. APPROVED 1/22/2009 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING December 11, 2008 7:30 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in a regular session on Thursday, December 11, 2008 at 7:30 p.m. in the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Vice-Chair Mike Nelson and Commissioners Alice Gordon, Pam Hemminger, Barry Jacobs, Bernadette Pelissier, and Steve Yuhasz COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Valerie P. Foushee COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Laura Blackmon, Assistant County Managers Willie Best and Gwen Harvey, and Deputy Clerk to the Board, David Hunt (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) NOTE: ALL DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE PERMANENT AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE. 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda Commissioner Nelson made reference to the request to add item 6-g, Letter to NC Division of Air Quality Re: Air Toxins. He said that he does not feel comfortable adding items at the last minute. He said that he told the person that wanted to add this that it would be added to the very end of the agenda and the likelihood of the Board getting to the end of the agenda was very slim. Commissioner Jacobs said that David Stancil sent an email this afternoon on this item. Commissioner Nelson said that the deadline for comments to the State is December 31St Commissioner Jacobs read the underlined statement in the memo from David Stancil, "Although it would mean letting the December 31 comment deadline pass, they suggest (and I would concur) that we study this issue further before sending a letter to NC DAQ about the exemptions." He suggested not adding this to the agenda. The Board agreed. PUBLIC CHARGE The Vice-Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge. 2. Public Comments a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda Carolyn Cole spoke on the proposed item 6-g, which was not added. She said that there is a current Statewide exemption for toxic air emissions for over 1,400 N. C. industries with combustion sources. This is a loophole that poisons the air for all citizens. In a spirit of deregulation, the North Carolina Division of Air Quality is recommending that this exemption be made permanent. If adopted, the exemption would remove the requirement that industry boilers limit the air poisons and property boundary. She described the boilers. This rule change would adversely impact the public's health and the environment. The toxic pollutants include mercury, arsenic, formaldehyde, hydrogen sulfide, hydrochloric acid, cadmium, dioxins, and others. These air toxins also seriously affect school children. She urged the County Commissioners to contact the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission before the public comment concludes on December 31st and request that they permanently remove the exemption for North Carolina's air toxic program. She submitted a letter to the County Commissioners with contact information. b. Matters on the Printed Agenda (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda below.) 3. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations 4. Consent Agenda See minutes from 6:30 p.m. meeting on approved items. The removed items were considered at the end of the agenda. 5. Public Hearings 6. Regular Agenda a. Efland Sewer Rate Schedule Change The Board considered amending the Efland Sewer System Ordinance with a new rate schedule that generates enough rate payer revenue to sustain the system without General Fund subsidy. Assistant Engineer and operator for the Efland Sewer System, Kevin Lindley introduced this item. This item has been before the Board and has had a public hearing. He gave some background. He made reference to Attachment A in the resolution, which was on page 19, and said that the staff is suggesting that this page be replaced with Attachment A on page 4, or Attachment 2. This is a rate increase phased in over three years. Laura Blackmon said that if the rates are not increased, then the County will have to add money from the General Fund to make up the difference in the budget. Commissioner Gordon expressed concern that the phasing of the increase does not allow time to assist low-income residents. Laura Blackmon said that the low-income families would have the potential for a discount. Commissioner Yuhasz asked about the programs that are in place now that could help low-income families with the bills and Kevin Lindley said that two programs require qualification through DSS. The main qualification is 200% of poverty level income or less. There are also provisions for people in emergency situations and Orange Congregations in Mission also has programs. Commissioner Hemminger said that this is too hard of a jump in one year, so she would rather wait until July. She said that this is not a three-year plan, but really an 18-month plan. Commissioner Jacobs suggested having rate changes in January 2009, January 2010, and January 2011. This would defer some of the impact of the rate increases. Commissioner Pelissier asked about working with people about low water usage and putting in low-flow showerheads and toilets. Laura Blackmon said that the work is supplied through Orange-Alamance and the County would have to work with them to develop some program. PUBLIC COMMENT: Jennifer McAdoo said that a 300% increase in 18 months is a big increase. She asked if it was possible to take a house off of sewer and put in a septic system. She asked that the rate not be increased so quickly. Joann Mitchell said that the customers would feel the pinch of this and the timeline should begin January 2010 and should use a five-year plan. She said that the County should revise the capital improvement plan to absorb the funds needed for the sewer system. She recommended that resident customers receive uncharged sewage one month a year if the use is kept under 3,000 gallons. This would cause customers to conserve. Sam Gharbo is a new resident of Orange County. He said that he missed the first public hearing. He said that his current costs are double that of what he was paying in Durham County. He asked about the rush to equalize this fund in such a short period of time if it has been subsidized for 20 years. Laurie Wolfe said that she recently moved to Efland from Chapel Hill and to more than double the water bill in one month is too short a period of time. Commissioner Nelson asked for a motion. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger to start the increase in July 2009 and spread it out over a true three- or four-year plan. There was no second and the motion failed. A motion was made by Commissioner Pellisier, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to start the increase in July 2009 and spread it over a four-year period, as in Attachment 4. Commissioner Jacobs said that if this starts in July, then there is a hole in this year's budget. If that's the case, then the rates will have to go up to make up the hole that will not be filled for six months. The numbers will have to be recalculated. He would also like to include setting up a plan to assist the low-income families. He offered a friendly amendment that this plan be in place by the time the rate increase goes into effect. Commissioner Pellisier and Commissioner Hemminger agreed with the amendment. VOTE: UNANIMOUS b. Lucas Farm at New Hope - Preliminary Plan The Board considered reviewing and acting upon the Preliminary Plan for Lucas Farm at New Hope application. Commissioner Yuhasz asked to be excused from the vote because the Rules of Ethics of the North Carolina Board of Engineers and Land Surveyors prohibit an elected official from participating in considerations of a project in which he/she has an interest. He has an interest in this project as a land surveyor. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to excuse Commissioner Yuhasz from consideration of this matter. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Planning Supervisor Robert Davis made this presentation. It is located at the northeast intersection of Old NC 86 and New Hope Church Road, which places it in the rural buffer. The rural buffer has minimum lot sizes of two acres. This is also located in the Rural Designated Area in the Growth Management System, which would mean that the process is Planning Board approval of the concept plan, Planning Board approval of the preliminary plan, and then recommendation to the County Commissioners. Because it is in the rural buffer, it is also in the Joint Planning Agreement area. This is in the Carrboro review area and Carrboro has reviewed the plans two separate times and had no comments. This property is in the Jordan Lake Unprotected Watershed. There is flexible development in the rural buffer, which mandates 33% open space. This gives an effective minimum lot size of three acres in this area. The density in this project is five acres per unit. The developer is offering the open space in fee simple to the County. It would be preserved for natural areas, passive trails, but not for any active recreation. He showed some photos and maps of the area. Commissioner Jacobs asked if the trail was specified anywhere. Robert Davis said that it would come to the County, but there has been no designation yet. There is no public access to the area that might have a trail on it because of the problems with parking. There could be a driveway and public access on another portion at a later time. Commissioner Gordon asked if the record should reflect an intention for public access in the future to the County-owned property. Geof Gledhill said that the short answer is he is not sure this needs to be done, but it would not hurt. He will determine where it should be inserted (subsection E, Parkland). A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to approve the Preliminary Plan for Lucas Farm at New Hope in accordance with the Resolution of Approval, with the additional comment about future public access to County- owned property. Geof Gledhill read the language: "Public access is prohibited along the cul-de-sac, but is permitted on the points where this property adjoins the other public road." Commissioner Jacobs said that he appreciates the developer donating this much open space to the public, but he thinks that it is a shame that there is a road that leads the public right to the open space that the public will not have access to. This will encourage more asphalt and people pulling off of a more-traveled road. This is not an optimal situation. VOTE: UNANIMOUS (Commissioner Yuhasz did not vote) c. Approval of FY 2009-19 Orange County, Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools and Orange County Schools Capital Investment Plan (CIP) The Board considered approving the FY 2009-19 recommended County, Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools and Orange County Schools Capital Investment Plan. Budget Director Donna Coffey introduced this item. This was on the agenda for December 1st, but the Board did not get the opportunity to discuss it. Commissioner Nelson said that, based on discussions at the retreat, he does not expect that there will be a vote tonight to approve this. He knows that the County Commissioners had some significant questions. He asked that all questions be put out tonight so that they can be resolved and this can be approved. Laura Blackmon said that if there are any concerns about the recommendations for the changes that were made from the initial work session, she would like to know about this. Commissioner Hemminger spoke in support for the monies allocated for the Super Soccer Fund that are not being used. She asked that the staff work with the other entities that were interested in doing the Astroturf field at Cedar Falls Park. Commissioner Gordon asked the staff to look at the minutes from October 28th November 13th, and November 18th and respond to the concerns raised by the County Commissioners. She said that she has already suggested that the County take the bond money designated for Twin Creeks Park and use it for Twin Creeks Park. There is additional money in the Soccer Super Fund could be used for the field, but the part that is designated for Twin Creeks Park should be used for creating a linear park. She said that the staff was supposed to do some preliminary work on this. She wants to start developing Twins Creeks with a linear park as a first phase. Commissioner Nelson would like to see from staff whether what Commissioner Gordon is asking is feasible. Commissioner Jacobs agreed with Commissioner Gordon in having staff look at the minutes. He asked that David Stancil and Lori Taft come back with information in writing about Commissioner Gordon's suggestion. Regarding the Soccer Super Fund money, he met with the Vice-Chair, the County Manager, the Mayor of Chapel Hill, and the Manager of Chapel Hill about another issue, and this possibility was brought up. The Mayor and the Manager seemed amenable to this idea if there was a presentation to the Town Board. There would have to be an agreement with the Town on ownership, etc. Commissioner Yuhasz said that if money is going to be shifted around, he'd like to see the operating fund implications of each of these things. He wants to know all of the implications of taking on capital projects. Commissioner Nelson made reference to the funds for library improvements amounting to $3 million, which the Manager put in the CIP originally when the County was committed to the southwest library. Since that time, the Library Task Force has recommended some other items. He is interested in the CIP reflecting the funding that it would take to implement the Library Task Force recommendations. Commissioner Nelson said that he toured some of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro schools today, and it was eye-opening. He said that there are a number of roof leaks at Phillips Middle School. There are also some other significant problems at other schools that need repair. Commissioner Gordon said that she had suggested previously taking two items for land acquisition and putting first the words "Lands Legacy" and then a `slash' before the other wording to describe them as Lands Legacy items. For example, Lands Legacy/Reserve for Future Land Purchases and Lands Legacy/Mountains to Sea Trail. She also suggested taking all of the projects that have increased over the last year and evaluate them to see if the additional funding could be reallocated. There are also some projects that she is not sure about the urgency such as Government Services Annex of $200,000, and perhaps these funds could also be reallocated. She asked about the recommendation to fund, with an additional penny, the County facilities, which the Manager is recommending not be done. She asked if this affects any other item besides the County Facilities and it was answered no. She said that last year the CIP had unfunded capital needs, including County facilities and land opportunities, and parks development. She said that the land opportunities that are unfunded should also be listed as unfunded this year. Commissioner Nelson asked that the Manager and Donna Coffey make sure that all of Commissioner Gordon's questions were captured by checking with Commissioner Gordon. Commissioner Jacobs asked about the $1.2 million for Emergency Service needs and Laura Blackmon said that this would be brought back to the Board. Commissioner Jacobs said that he would like to follow the study. Laura Blackmon said that the RFP would be coming in January. Commissioner Nelson agreed. Commissioner Nelson asked about the stabilization of buildings at New Hope Park and asked if there were concerns about the Manager's recommendation. Twin Creeks bond money will not be used for this project. Commissioner Yuhasz asked for the Manager to search for other opportunities to find a place other than the Link Center renovations to capture that money for building stabilization. Commissioner Gordon said that this is much better than taking bond money designated for Twin Creeks Park and giving it to other projects. She would like to have more information about what is going in the Link Center renovations and why it increased from $1.1 million to $1.3 million. Commissioner Jacobs said that the reason it increased might be because it was delayed for one year. If it is continually delayed, the costs will continue to rise. He would like some choices, if there are any. Laura Blackmon said that the increase was related to construction cost increase. Commissioner Nelson asked if the Board was comfortable with the Manager's recommendation that she bring back a renovation timeline, project scope and costs for the Link Center. The Board agreed. Major points for staff direction: 1. Designate the land acquisition items as Lands Legacy items by putting the words "Lands Legacy"and then "slash"before the other wording. 2. Look at minutes from October 28th, November 13th, and November 18th and respond to questions about CIP raised by the Commissioners and also follow up with Commissioner Gordon about issues she raised tonight 3. Work on utilizing the bond monies for Twin Creeks Park and investigate using them to create a linear park 4. Investigate using the remaining Soccer Super Fund for an Astroturf field at Cedar Falls Park and make a presentation to the Town of Chapel Hill 5. Bring back a revised CIP to include an amount that accurately reflects implementation of the Library Task Force report. 6. Evaluate projects that are not urgent as well as projects where funding has increased over the last year, and see whether the funds can be reallocated 7. Have Manager look for other ways to fund stabilization of building at New Hope Park other than the Link Center renovations. 8. Bring back a renovation timeline and project scope and costs for the Link Center 9. In the unfunded section of the CIP, list the unfunded land opportunities 10. Bond monies for Twin Creeks Park should only be used for Twin Creeks d. Educational Facilities Impact Fee Ordinance The Board considered making a decision regarding an amendment to the Educational Facilities Impact Fee Ordinance to adopt updated impact fee levels effective January 1, 2009 and providing for incremental increases until 2013; accepting the student generation rate calculated in the TischlerBise, Inc. reports; and directing staff to begin the process outlined in the Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (SAPFO) to update the student generation rates used in SAPFO. Perdita Holtz from Planning introduced this item. She made reference to the updated agenda packet (hot pink). She reviewed the actions for the Board and the attachments. 1. Authorize the addition of Attachment 7 as Appendix C to the 2007 TischlerBise School Impact Fee reports; 2. Accept the student generation rates calculated in the 2007 TischlerBise School Impact Fee reports; 3. Adopt the impact fee levels and effective dates as detailed and contained in the attached Ordinance; and 4. Direct staff to begin the process of updating and incorporating student generation rates into the Schools APFO. She summarized the information in the abstract. The recommendation is for the impact fee levels to increase to 40% of the maximum effective July 1, 2009 and then 50% of the maximum effective January 1, 2011. An additional increase to 60% of the maximum would be effective January 1, 2013. In fiscal year 2013-14, the County should expect to update the technical study using current data at that time. Commissioner Jacobs asked why the two school systems had to move in tandem if the construction costs were so different. Geof Gledhill said that the impact fees are in the nature of regulatory exactions and are measured by the courts on a different standard than legislative matters. Commissioner Hemminger asked about the breakeven point. Donna Coffey said that she has not done a breakeven analysis. Laura Blackmon said that staff did an analysis on what it would take to pay the debt service. Commissioner Yuhasz asked if a schedule of increases could be set and before implementing increases there would be a report on the effect of the last increase and a determination on whether another increase is necessary or could be delayed. Geof Gledhill said that, if the Board did this, he would recommend only implementing the current year's impact and have staff review the data for the upcoming year as opposed to implementing the impact fee and adjusting it. Commissioner Yuhasz asked clarifying questions about the student generation rates, which were answered by staff. He asked for reports on how the data are collected. PUBLIC COMMENT: James Carnahan was from The Village Project. He made reference to an email letter sent to the County Commissioners last week about the fees. The Village Project would like the County to provide some kind of relief for housing called accessory dwellings, which are size- limited dwellings. The original request that there be some relief was based on a case of a friend of his who built a 750-square foot dwelling for a parent. The structure costs $80,000 and the builder was subject to the $4,400 impact fee, which was 5.5% of the cost of the structure. The accessory dwellings fulfill an important need for affordable housing for senior citizens. It is unlikely that there would be a school impact from these dwellings. He suggested adding "accessory dwellings 600 square feet or less" to the multi-family designation. Omar Zinn is a builder and a local developer. He said that the drastic increase directly affects him. He said that it is a buyer's market and house sales are down. He asked the County Commissioners to delay any increase in impact fees. He understands that it has been seven years since the last increase, but now is not the time. He would like to see everyone giving towards affordable housing. Letter from Robert Dowling: To members of the County Commission, I'm sorry I won't be attending your meeting this evening, but I wanted to ask a couple of questions about the proposed increases in impact fees. As most of you know, I manage Orange Community Housing and Land Trust. We provide homeownership opportunities to low-income households — primarily in Chapel Hill and Carrboro where the elected boards ask us to implement their inclusionary housing policies. In addition to our inclusionary housing work, we develop our own housing. For example we are planning to build two affordable homes in Carrboro early in the new year. They will sell for about $125,000. We are currently required to pay an impact fee of approximately $4,400 on each home. We include this cost in our development budget, but we typically are reimbursed for the fee after the home is sold. I have two questions about the proposed fee increase: 1. If the fee is increased, will the County be increasing the amount of funds available for reimbursement to nonprofit organizations? 2. Does the County have a policy on reimbursing these fees? It has never been clear to me if we are guaranteed reimbursement of impact fees or if reimbursement is based on availability of funds. I am under the impression that the policy is the latter. If reimbursement is based on availability of funds, then it makes it difficult for nonprofit housing developers to budget for these fees. If reimbursement is uncertain, then we have to include the fees in our costs and increase our subsidy requirements to offset the fees (should they not be reimbursed). This is not an insignificant concern with the fee at $4,400. Obviously it becomes a bigger concern as the fee increases. Any clarity that the Board can offer is much appreciated. I hope my concerns are clear and again, I'm sorry that I will not be at this evening's meeting. Thank you for your consideration of this perspective. Robert Dowling Executive Director Orange Community Housing and Land Trust 104 Jones Ferry Road Suite C Carrboro, NC 27510 919-967-1545 ext. 307 Commissioner Nelson asked about the answer to the first question, if the fee is increased, then would the reimbursement to nonprofits also increase. Laura Blackmon said yes, unless the Board says otherwise. Commissioner Nelson asked about the second question and it was answered that reimbursement is based on availability of funds. Laura Blackmon said that there could be a budget adjustment if more funds came in. Commissioner Jacobs asked staff to provide the Board with the reimbursement policy and also to provide it to the nonprofit entities that provide affordable housing and to the Towns. Regarding setting the fee annually, he does not think that this is feasible because of the nature of the data. He would agree with the staff working on a threshold structure size. Commissioner Jacobs said that the County should do revaluations every two years rather than every four years. Also, there have been cases of deconstruction and rebuilding of houses, and he thinks that these houses should be exempt from impact fees. Commissioner Gordon said that she is concerned about the affect of this on the building industry and she would like to think about this and come back to it a little later. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to approve items 2 and 4: Accept the student generation rates calculated in the 2007 TischlerBise School Impact Fee reports; and Direct staff to begin the process of updating and incorporating student generation rates into the Schools APFO. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Commissioner Hemminger spoke in support of exempting the accessory dwellings. Craig Benedict made reference to page 21, attachment 7, and the additions to the multi-family category. There is a reduced rate for these dwellings, but there is not a minimum threshold in there yet. Commissioner Hemminger said that two jumps in the impact fee in one year would be impossible and all agreed. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to authorize the addition of Attachment 7 as Appendix C; approve the increases to take effect on January 1st of subsequent years (2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013); and direct staff to do further investigation on the minimum threshold for accessory units. VOTE: UNANIMOUS e. Site Selection Approval — Orange County Transfer Station The Board considered a technical report, including options, and recommendations to enable the BOCC to approve a site for a Solid Waste Transfer Station in Orange County. Gwen Harvey said that there has been a long period of time with work sessions, public meetings, and reports. The Board has received two documents — a technical report by Olver, Inc. addressing concerns raised and a staff memorandum from the Solid Waste Director, Gayle Wilson, with recommendations regarding a particular site to be selected. Bob Sallach from Olver, Inc. made a PowerPoint presentation. Olver, Inc. recommends that the Board proceed with the site selection process and the implementation of a transfer station. This is predicated on the fact and the issue that the landfill capacity will expire in May 2011, so there is a need to move forward with a disposal plan. Olver, Inc. recommends that the County pursue the acquisition of site #056, which is the Howell property. As part of this process, an environmental assessment will be prepared for the site, and a neighborhood representative would be on the Solid Waste Advisory Board that would represent the neighborhood. The Howell property is 142 acres with minimal flood plain. The site is wooded and undeveloped. It is 11 miles from the waste generation centroid and has direct access to NC 54 through the acquisition of an easement. The site has no water or sewer utilities available. The owner is willing to negotiate the sale of the property. The zoning is currently Agricultural- Residential. Public Comment: Commissioner Nelson asked people to keep comments down to two minutes because the Board needs the opportunity to discuss this further. Susan Walser said that on Monday and Tuesday the Board of County Commissioners was hand-delivered a report compiled by three community groups — Orange County Voice, The Rogers-Eubanks Neighborhood Association, and Orange County Community Awareness. She handed the report to Deputy Clerk to the Board David Hunt as part of the record. She said that the community groups are in agreement that all ten sites selected by Olver, Inc. are bad sites, and they came up with four alternative sites that all three groups agree are good sites. She asked the County Commissioners to look at the report. Tom Schopler made reference to a letter submitted to the County Commissioners talking about some of the discrepancies between the information on the purchase of the Howell property. He has heard that the property was valued at $700,000, whereas the owner has stated that he expects to paid somewhere in the orders of $3 million. There is also a stipulation that the owner must be allowed to some special zoning requirements of eight acres in the front for something to be built. He is not sure that some of this information has been publicized and that people are aware of it. He thinks that the transfer site should remain on the Eubanks Road site because all of the infrastructure is there and it would save money. Forrest Covington lives on Orange Grove Road and has for 40 years. His property does not abut the proposed property, but he is within %2 mile of the Howell property. He said that the wind is such that he will be able to smell the trash. He lives on a piece of property that is surrounded by property that is already used by OWASA to spray treated waste material. Also, one of the prospective airport sites cuts his property in half. He feels a bit put upon with this process. He spoke about the negative effects of this facility on wildlife. He recommended a more industrial site. Edward Mann is a lifelong resident of Orange County. He shared comments sent via mail. He asked the Board to extend the selection process and consider a site in a more industrial area with better access to major interstates. He said that there is no water and sewer and no municipal fire protection services available. There is also lack of access to rail services. He said that this area has been forced to provide water for a large portion of the County, yet it receives no water services. He said that he could find no objective data to support the score associated with these sites. He asked the Board to extend the site selection process to further identify and consider alternate sites. Wallace Williams lives near the proposed site and is concerned about his well, which is about four miles from the facility. He said that pollution and water use is a problem. He thinks that putting a transfer station in this area will definitely cause a problem. He pointed out that NC 54 is a two-lane road and there will be traffic backups. He does not want his water to go bad. Paul Brey said that this can be a win-win situation, if the County Commissioners are willing to provide the leadership. He said that there is a sense of urgency because the landfill is filling up. He suggested asking the citizens to cut back on garbage generation and support efforts to do so. Matt Peretin said that there has not been enough deliberation and time has not run out. He asked the County Commissioners to investigate transparently these items before even talking about deciding. He spoke about the negative traffic impact of this site. He said that 100 acres is ridiculous, but 15 acres is acceptable. He asked that the process be transparent. Robert Campbell spoke in support of a letter that the Board will receive shortly. He said that there is a problem with the waste, but he wants to look at the environmental impact on the communities. He said that this community has already been impacted by the OWASA sludge. He asked the County Commissioners to please not come back to the Rogers Road community. He asked the County Commissioners to keep the human element in this process. Jim Conner is an attorney in Durham and said that he has been retained by a diverse group of citizens who live all over the County. He said that the citizens wish to have a dialog with the County Commissioners about this. The citizens have also asked him that if a site is approved here tonight to move forward in superior court to obtain a restraining order and a lawsuit to have the approval overturned. He said that it is worth it to take the time to resist the impulse to get it over with. He asked the County Commissioners to engage in discussion with the citizens and to find the best site. Lynn Ramirez is a cyclist and lives near Maple View Farms. She chose this area because it is gorgeous and it is popular for cyclists. She is concerned that there are no bike lanes, but cars respect the bicyclists. She said that with no bike lanes and with two-lane roads, she can picture a big trash truck bearing down on the cyclists. This area is not meant for trash trucks going down this path. Alexa Ramirez said that she cycles in the area and the big trucks scare her. Buz Gayer said that he is also a cyclist. He said that the decision to put a transfer station in this area is not responsible. He said that to have all of the traffic going down Orange Grove Road is just a travesty. Lester Ray is the closest farmer to the proposed site and is the fifth generation farming the same land. He spoke about his experience on a committee with Bob Strayhorn in the 90's that was working to preserve rural character. He said that it was determined that the farmers do not need help to keep farming in Orange County, but they just need to be left alone. He asked the County Commissioners to reconsider this. Virginia Leslie said that she has emailed the Board about her concerns. She wanted to reaffirm that one of the things that the citizens keep hearing is about pressure and time. She believes that Gayle Wilson received a phone call today from a representative from Waste Management, Inc. From her understanding, Waste Management, Inc. has agreed to help Orange County in the short-term, medium-term, and the long-term with this issue, including waste transfer and waste to energy. She said that the time pressure is not as valid as it has seemed. Michael Hughes lives on Orange Grove Road. He said that the citizens have not been properly informed and the reports have not been promptly put on the website. He said that there has been some information that has not been available to the public. Board Discussion: Commissioner Nelson thanked the public for being good through the process. Commissioner Pelissier said that there are competing goals and there is no ideal site. She thinks that the narrowing down to the three sites is a compromise. She said that reconsidering the sites would mean that the County Commissioners would have to start the process all over again because of the criteria. She said that the thing with picking an industrial site is that Orange County is not an industrial county. Commissioner Yuhasz said that he, Commissioner Pelissier, and Commissioner Hemminger have come into this process late and decisions were made early in this process and Olver, Inc. was given certain criteria and the sites chosen were based on the criteria. He said that none of the sites are ideal and he is not excited about putting a transfer station on site #056, but there is not another site that he has seen that he would be more excited about. He would like to continue to look for alternatives because the transfer station is not the ultimate solution to the waste responsibilities of the County. He encouraged the staff and the Solid Waste Advisory Board to continue to search for alternatives. He thinks that the time pressure is real. Commissioner Gordon said that if the County Commissioners started the process all over again, it would take another six months to a year. This is a very difficult decision. Commissioner Jacobs said that he has lived in rural Orange County for many years and he has often thought that there is an element of urban imperialism where if the municipalities do not want something, they dump it in rural Orange County. This goes for all over the country. He said that Cedar Grove and Littler River Townships have just as much burden from reservoirs where they do not get water and sewer, and Mebane is moving in without the County's control in Cedar Grove and Durham is moving into Littler River. Orange County does ask people to reduce and there are mailings on a regular basis to encourage this practice, but some of it is beyond the County Commissioners' control. He also thinks that it is an exaggeration to compare the transfer station to the airport as far as impact. A transfer station is not even remotely as large or as much of an impact than an airport. He said that he has some disappointment because he has never gotten an answer to the question of where the trash is going to go when the landfill is full. He does not totally believe that May 2011 is a hard deadline and he does not totally believe that all alternatives have been explored in the private sector. Commissioner Hemminger said that she has followed this process and has tried to take the emotion out of this. The more she has looked at this, the more she cannot agree that this is a good site because it is so far out on a rural road. She does not think this is a good long- term solution and she would like to take another six months. She would like better road access for the large trucks. She also thinks that this parcel is too large. Commissioner Nelson said that he shares the sentiment shared by his colleagues and this is a very difficult decision. He does not believe that there are any good options in this matter. If you only look at the technical criteria, the Eubanks Road site is the best site, but the County Commissioners decided that there were other issues that needed to be addressed with regard to that. He spoke about how the process was reopened and how there was much public input and it was very collaborative. He said that the worst possible option would be to reopen this process. He does not think that a suitable site would be found through reopening the process. Commissioner Pelissier said that she is not sure that if the County Commissioners started all over again that they would come up with a better site. She thinks that the long-term issue is looking at the waste to energy possibility. She wants to study this issue of waste to energy. She spoke about the biosolids application issue and said that there are concerns. There are 3,000 acres of biosolids application around the County and the County has no control because it is permitted by the State. Much of the applications come from Alamance and Durham Counties. She would like to deal with this issue. She said that this could not be coupled with the waste transfer station because it is a larger issue. Commissioner Jacobs made reference to page 6 of the Olver report under "Sustainability Considerations", which says that, "the transfer station may be considered a transition element in the County's Long-Term Solid Waste Management Strategy," and he thinks that the Board should look at this in that way. Even if a decision is made tonight, the Board can still operate on a parallel track to investigate other alternatives. He brought up the OWASA property, site #759, which has the biosolids applied on it. He said that one of the reasons why the County Commissioners moved from looking at the only viable sites on the interstate was because Hillsborough said that it would annex them if the County tried to build on them. Hillsborough has done this before. He thinks that if a transfer station is put in Bingham Township, then there should be a park that goes with it. He would like to talk about whether it is feasible to look at the two sites and also step up the effort to work with people that are interested in looking at alternatives. Commissioner Pelissier said that she did not think it was efficient as a recommendation to appoint one person from the neighborhood to be on the SWAB. From all of the comments expressed, she would like to have an advisory board of a group in the neighborhood to work with the staff and with the consultants so that specific concerns are heard. She wants to mitigate as much as possible. Commissioner Yuhasz agreed with having a broader community representation to monitor this facility. Commissioner Jacobs suggested discussing the specifics of the recommendations from staff. Commissioner Nelson made reference to Commissioner Jacobs' comment about the site with the sludge and said that staff made a compelling argument that it would not be best to put the County in a position of being liable for any environmental damage done by the sludge if there was a transfer station there. A motion was made by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to approve the Manager's recommendation to approve the recommendation from Olver, Inc. and Solid Waste Management to select Site 056 for the Orange County Solid Waste Transfer Station; authorize the Manager to negotiate the acquisition of the approved site for the development and construction of the Solid Waste Transfer Station; including: performance of surveys, appraisals, and associated tasks necessary to support acquisition; and initiation of site plan development and permitting for the new facility, with Commissioner Pelissier's comments on forming a citizen advisory committee to monitor the development of the facility and the operation of it. Commissioner Jacobs said that one of the other reasons that he mentioned the OWASA site was because it was a very disturbed site already. Commissioner Nelson said that his first instinct was the OWASA site, but the staff memo about the potential liability changed his perspective. Commissioner Gordon said that the large trucks can be kept off of routes like Orange Grove Road by specifying that in a contract with the haulers. Commissioner Hemminger asked what happens if there is a lawsuit and if there would be a delay. Geof Gledhill said that he did not know how to answer that. She suggested changing the criteria to be near a major thoroughfare. Commissioner Yuhasz said that moving forward would not preclude the Board from considering the possibility of other sites. He thinks that it is unlikely that a more suitable site will be found. He is not opposed to asking the consultant to look at the sites suggested to possibly continue a search. Commissioner Jacobs said that he does not think that keeping the site search open would work. There are only three highways in the County that are four lanes — 15/501 and the two interstates. The sites that are reasonably close to the waste generation are in the jurisdictions of municipalities except that one is in the middle of the rural buffer. He said that a parallel track of developing this site along with considering other alternatives would be beneficial. He would rather look at two sites because it gives more bargaining power and it gives the option of deciding which site has less impact. VOTE: Ayes, 2 (Commissioner Gordon and Commissioner Nelson); Nays, 4 (Commissioner Jacobs, Commissioner Hemminger, Commissioner Pellisier, and Commissioner Yuhasz) MOTION FAILED A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to investigate sites #759 and #056. VOTE: Ayes, 5; No, 1 (Commissioner Hemminger) A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to authorize the Manager to negotiate the acquisition of the sites to be investigated (759 and 056) in the development and construction of the solid waste transfer station, including the performance of surveys, appraisals, and associated tasks necessary to support acquisition. VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to 1) Advertise to establish a citizen advisory group from Bingham Township to advise the staff and County Commissioners on the operation of the transfer station; 2) Establish a group to work with the County on alternatives to waste transfer; 3) Ask the staff where they are planning to send the waste; and 4) Find out what the plan is for the solid waste if the landfill is full and the transfer station is not complete. This information should be brought back by January 21, 2009. Commissioner Pellisier suggested deferring item 2 (Establish a group to work with the County on alternatives to waste transfer); and voting on items #1(Advertise to establish a citizen advisory group from Bingham Township to advise the staff and County Commissioners on the operation of the transfer station), #3 (Ask the staff where they are planning to send the waste);, and #4 (Find out what the plan is for the solid waste if the landfill is full and the transfer station is not complete). Commissioner Jacobs and Commissioner Yuhasz agreed. VOTE: UNANIMOUS The Clerk's office will start advertising for this citizen group and the Board will decide on the group size and charge in January. f. West Ten Fund-Raising Contract The Board considered approval of a contractual arrangement with a professional fundraiser to market the West Ten Soccer Center to potential financial partners and authorizing the Manager to sign pending review by the County Attorney. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Pellisier to approve the contract with Diane Reynolds for fundraising services and authorize the Manager to sign pending review by the County Attorney. VOTE: UNANIMOUS The following are items that were pulled from the Consent Agenda from the Board of Commissioners'Meeting at 6:30pm, for further discussion/vote: d. Property Tax Releases The Board considered adoption of a resolution, , to release property values related to three (3) requests for property tax release, in accordance with N.C. General Statute 105-381. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to excuse Commissioner Yuhasz from the vote. VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to approve the adoption of a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release property values related to three (3) requests for property tax release, in accordance with N.C. General Statute 105-381. VOTE: UNANIMOUS h. Capital Project Funding The Board approved the two-year funding plan which includes: 1) Appropriating $3.5 million from the fund balance of the General Fund for transfer to the School Capital Project Fund and County Capital Project Fund; 2) Include the remaining appropriation of $2.4 million from the fund balance of the General Fund needed to complete the correction of the shortfall in the Fiscal Year 2009-10 budget; and 3) Direct staff to take those actions necessary to reallocate available funding to correct the project shortfalls and to bring back to the Board the budget amendments necessary to implement this plan. DEFERRED DUE TO TIME Contract for Architectural Feasibility and Design Services, Department of Social Services, Hillsborough Commons The Board considered approving an agreement with Corley Redfoot Zack architects for the upfit of space leased by the County at the Hillsborough Commons Shopping Center for use as office space by the Department of Social Services and authorizing the Chair to sign, contingent upon Attorney review. Commissioner Gordon suggested approving this, but deleting the $35,000 master planning item and authorizing an expense of $252,500. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to approve an agreement, contingent upon Attorney review, with Corley Redfoot Zack for the upfit of space leased by the County at the Hillsborough Commons Shopping Center for use as office space by the Department of Social Services in an amount not to exceed $252,500 (deleting master planning), plus reimbursable expenses; and authorize the Chair to sign on behalf of the Board. VOTE: UNANIMOUS r. Hillsborough Commons: Guaranteed Maximum Price Contract Amendment #1 The Board considered approval of Amendment #1 to a contract with Resolute Building Company for Phase I upfit of the space leased for the Department of Social Services at Hillsborough Commons, subject to final review and approval of the County Attorney; and authorizing the Chair to sign. Commissioner Gordon asked if the $3.719 million in the CIP includes this design work and it was answered yes. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to approve Amendment#1 to a contract with Resolute Building Company (RBC) for Phase I upfit of the space leased for the Department of Social Services (DSS) at Hillsborough Commons in the amount of $358,710, subject to final review and approval of the County Attorney; and authorize the Chair to sign on behalf of the Board. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 7. Reports a. Information Technology Strategic Plan The Board was to receive an update on the work of the Information Technologies Advisory Committee with the latest approved version of the Information Technologies Strategic Plan and consider providing feedback on the evolution of the document. DEFERRED b. Public Relations and Evaluation Plans for Tethering Ordinance The Board was to receive the public relations plan and evaluation process for the recently adopted amendment that will restrict the tethering of dogs in Orange County. DEFERRED 8. Board Comments 9. County Manager's Report 10. Appointments DEFERRED ALL a. Affordable Housing Advisory Board — New Appointment The Board was to consider making a new appointment to the Affordable Housing Advisory Board. b. Chapel Hill/Orange County Visitors Bureau — New Appointment The Board was to consider making a new appointment to the Chapel Hill/Orange County Visitors Bureau. c. Commission for the Environment— New Appointments & Reassignments The Board was to consider making new appointments to the Commission for the Environment. d. Historic Preservation Commission — New Appointment The Board was to consider making a new appointment to the Historic Preservation Commission. e. Hillsborough Area Rail Station Task Force Appointment The Board was to consider making an appointment to the Rail Station Task Force. f. Orange County Planning Board — New Appointments The Board was to consider making new appointments to the Orange County Planning Board. 11. Information Items 12. Closed Session 13. Adjournment A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to adjourn the meeting at 11:27 pm. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Mike Nelson, Vice Chair David Hunt Deputy Clerk to the Board