Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 20090317 APPROVED 6/2/2009 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING MARCH 17, 2009 7:00 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, NC. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Valerie P. Foushee, and Commissioners Alice M. Gordon, Barry Jacobs, Pam Hemminger and Steve Yuhasz COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Mike Nelson, Bernadette Pelissier 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. Chair Foushee called the meeting to order at 7:14 PM. 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda Chair Foushee went through the items at the County Commissioners' places. - Orange sheet— refers to item 4-b-4 - Map for item 5-b - Map for item 5-c - Memo from Commissioner Gordon for item 6-a - Tan sheet— refers to item 6-a - Lavender sheet— update on the Federal Stimulus Project - Yellow sheet— Orange County Revaluation - Pink sheet— property subject to potential divestiture Chair Jacobs asked to add a presentation from staff regarding an update on the 2009 Revaluation process and a closed session: "To consult with the Attorney retained by the Board in order to preserve the Attorney- Client privilege between the Attorney and the Board." The presentation by staff will be item 3-a, and the presentation by Durham Technical Community College will be item 3-b. Commissioners Pelissier and Nelson were not in attendance. PUBLIC CHARGE The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge. 2. Public Comments a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda Bill Lyons was from Carolina Sons of Liberty and has been a resident of Orange County for over 11 years. He spoke about property tax increases. He said that last year his home was appraised at $205,000 by a private appraiser. In January 2009, he got his tax bill from Orange County for a $242,000 house. This is a $37,000 difference. He said that even in booming economic times, this is unrealistic. He said that Orange County has one of the highest tax rates in the State. He said that the citizens understand that taxes are a part of life and that the government must have money. However, he does not understand how Orange County has worked its way into spending so much money every year that it plans to raise its property taxes, and the 2009-2010 budget still has an estimated $8 million budget deficit. He said that this is a spending problem. He urged the County Commissioners to rein in spending and not raise property taxes. Earl McKee was from the Caldwell community. He suggested some areas for the County to cut expenses. He said that two weeks ago he suggested a $25,000 savings by shelving a study. He suggested that buying almost 200 acres of very expensive land to site a waste transfer station is a waste of taxpayer money. If the idea is to use part of this property not for the waste transfer station and for parkland, then existing land that is already purchased should be used for parks. He said that thousands of dollars could be saved by buying a smaller tract of land or contracting with a private company. He agrees with divesting of County property to save money. He suggested that the audience stay for the entire meeting and listen to the discussions about the millions of dollars of taxpayer money that will be spent. Richard Hill said that he bought a home in northwest Orange County four years ago and it had been on the market for over a year. He paid $133,000 for it. His tax assessment was $154,000 at that time. It then went up to $166,000 and now it is $195,000. There are four homes in that neighborhood that have not been able to sell and some have been foreclosed. He said that there is nothing moving there. He said that he is disabled and on a limited income and he believes in paying his fair share, but he cannot imagine how the County Commissioners can take this revaluation seriously. Tim Duncan submitted copies of the resolution from the Orange County Republican Convention. He read the resolution. RESOLUTION REGARDING ORANGE COUNTY PROPERTY REVALUATIONS WHEREAS, the recent revaluation of properties in Orange County for taxation purposes has resulted in an average increase of 22 percent in assessed property values WHEREAS, with the economic downturn in the housing market in Orange County the average home price is $50,000 less than January 2007 prices and the 22 percent increase in assessed values represents a large gap between the real value of properties and the assessed values; WHEREAS, the median household income in Orange County has not increased nearly as much as 22 percent; WHEREAS, the Orange County tax rate of 99.8 cents per$100 is the second highest property tax rate in all of North Carolina and the rates in Orange County have resulted in 20 straight years of higher property taxes; WHEREAS, the County Commissioners' policy of discouraging commercial development has caused the percentage of residential tax revenues to total property tax revenues to increase from 64.6 percent in 2002-2003 to 70.1 percent in the current fiscal year; WHEREAS, despite the Commissioners' spokesman's statements that a revenue neutral rate will be sought, past history points to the rate staying the same, which would result in a de facto tax increase for Orange County property owners; WHEREAS, state law does not require Orange County to revalue property until 2013, and other counties have set aside property revaluations; WHEREAS, the Orange County Republican Party believes that after 20 years of tax increases, that the County Commissioners should be able to practice fiscal discipline and find ways to live with the revenue that the current property tax rate and valuations would raise; RESOLVED the Orange County Republic Party calls upon the County Commissioners to set aside the recent tax revaluations and to use current valuations until state law mandates revaluations; RESOLVED that if the Commissioners do not nullify the revaluations, the Orange County Republican Party calls upon the Commissioners to establish a revenue neutral property tax rate and that a program would also be put in place to provide property owners whose tax bills do increase because of a revaluation a rebate; and RESOLVED that the Orange County Republican Party calls upon the Orange County Commissioners to streamline programs and expenditures, and to assess the value of all programs, in order to prevent annual property tax increases on property owners in the County. This resolution passed in Convention, March 7, 2009. Virginia Ferguson said that she was speaking for Bill Knight. She said that she lives in the White Cross area and has been there some 60+ years. She is also a real estate agent and is very much aware of property values and the trends in the last 20 years. She also came as a member of the Orange County GOP with a resolution that was passed on March 71h opposing the use of eminent domain for an Orange County airport. The Clerk had copies of this resolution. She read the resolution. RESOLUTION OPPOSING THE USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN FOR AN ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT WHEREAS, the North Carolina General Assembly, without prior notification of or consent from the Orange County Commissioners passed legislation that provided for an airport to be built in rural Orange County; WHEREAS, this airport legislation was a result of lobbying from certain individuals who wanted an airport near the University for convenience; WHEREAS, this airport is unnecessary considering the proximity of Raleigh/Durham International Airport; WHEREAS, land would be taken from private property owners in order to build the airport; and WHEREAS, private property should be taken by the government in eminent domain proceedings only for public needs, not for the desires of private interests; RESOLVED, the Orange County Republican Party opposes the construction of such an airport; and RESOLVED, the Orange County Republican Party calls upon the County Commissioners and the North Carolina Legislature to end the plans for such an airport. Commissioner Gordon said that the Orange County Commissioners did not propose this airport—the University of North Carolina did. The Orange County Commissioners also do not support it. The University has now withdrawn the proposal. There are plans to work on the airport zoning regulations so that there will be stricter regulations the next time any such thing occurs. P. H. Craig is a lifelong resident of Orange County and an appraiser of commercial and residential properties. He made reference to his handout, which he gave to the Clerk. "This Monday morning several hundred of us listened to a presentation from two mortgage bankers, an area appraiser, and the Executive Director of Homebuilders. Their presentation had nothing whatever to do with tax valuations. They were simply giving us statistics, charts and graphs, analyses and forecasts and comparing the last four years of trends and other factors that affect value of property in the Triangle and Orange County. Here are some of the revealing facts from the Birch Appraisal Group. Every single indicator was down. I don't recall a bright spot that was even discussed in the two hours or so. -Consumer confidence is down, for February and still in freefall, dropping 35 percent in the last six months. -Employed workforce is down in North Carolina —4.85% -Triangle Multiple Listing service closings are down 28% in the last two years -4th quarter houses listed has increased over two years by 100 houses — up 22% -4th quarter houses sold and closed — decreased over two years by 125 houses — down 42% -Orange monthly closings have gone down 50% from June 08 to December 08. -Monthly closings in the Chapel Hill/Carrboro school district down 72% from June 08 to December 08 -Orange County showings 4th quarter down 31% from 2007-2008 -Orange County 4th quarter pending down 42% from 2006-2008 -Orange County price drop on listings from 06-08 increased 100% from 154 to 294 — an increase of 91% in listing prices being dropped -Orange County current supply of houses listed are a 20-month supply, a 46% increase in one year -Orange County average days on market for listings increased 19% from 07-08 The news from the mortgage professionals reflected nearly the same except the outlook for first-time buyers may improve because of tax credits. But as of January 1st, they had not improved. The news from the homebuilding industry reflected some pretty grim factors as revealed by the Multiple Listing data. The mortgage companies are calling in lots of loans on short notice and forcing some builders into bankruptcy. Developing land for new lots is just about at a standstill. Banks and mortgage companies are not going there at the present time. One sad case cited was a homebuilder with three new houses completed. He had been doing business with his same local bank for 15 years, had never been late on a payment. Suddenly his bank is taken over, the bank notifies him that they are "calling the loans" for several hundred thousand dollars in 60 days. That builder just lost everything and he was forced into bankruptcy. The mortgage companies and banks simply have cut off all money to developers and builders in some cases. To our Tax Assessor, I say all of the above market trends, every one of them, are factors when appraising a house. And so are the following: Your son or daughter-in-law just lost their job. The local bank that was never mentioned as being taken over or bailed out suddenly has its stock selling at $2.00 per share. Two of the other biggest banks have been bailed out or taken over. One of three auto dealers in Chapel Hill just closed doors, another had a vacant showroom for weeks. The newspapers are scaling back and laying off. Mr. John Smith, your 401k just went down 30% in a few months and hasn't recovered. More importantly, everyone else has gone down from 20 and 40% also. But you somehow think that all real estate in Orange County should be increased 20 to 40% in value. It is my fond hope that when all of these cases land at the N. C. Tax Commission's lap, they will bind you out of their office. You see, they have had the same market trends. When all of these cases get over there they are going to ask the same thing we are all asking —Are you nuts?" Mr. Craig said that he would be having a seminar on March 30th at the American Legion hut, and anyone is welcome to attend. He also has the complete law in regards to revaluation, and he would be happy to share this with anyone. Ned Riggsbee lives in Carrboro near McDougal School. He said that since 1973, his property has gone up in value 43%. He is expecting a $20,000 tax bill this year. He went through the tax bill increases that he has experienced over the last 36 years. He said that he is tired of hearing about revenue neutral because there is nothing to that. He said that the tax rate would have to drop to 69 cents for his property to be revenue neutral. He said that this is a runaway train. Sybil Skakle has been a resident of Orange County since 1958. She said that her tax bill has risen every year since she moved here. She said that in 2004 she protested her revaluation because it was up to $143,000. She said that she is 83 years old, and her house is not an investment, but it is her home. David Laudicina said that he wanted to speak about why so many concerned citizens are worried about their property taxes. He has done some analysis with different scenarios including rescinding the revaluation, keeping the revaluation combined with revenue neutral rates, and a rate increase of 6.2 cents. He said that revaluations produce huge increases in the property tax and it is a runaway train. He said that these people are worried about the future ability to live in Orange County. He said that everyone is asking that the County Commissioners rescind the revaluation and stay with the current tax rate of .998. Richard Ellington spoke about the continuing preservation and storage of the County's history. He said that the North Carolina Room collection does not have a place in the new Orange County Library. He said that this is an outrage and the North Carolina Room must remain open because the resources there represent the heritage and history of all of Orange County and its people. He said that there has been talk of digitizing, which would take many years and would be very expensive. There has also been talk of boxing up the collection and waiting for a new Heritage Center to be proposed, discussed, and possibly built. He said that the last time the boxing up process was done was during the most recent library renovation. Some resources have disappeared and have not been found since then. He suggested that the new library house this room. Nerissa Williams read a prepared statement: "I'll begin by quoting a fellow researcher, who emailed NC-DOGS (North Carolina- Durham-Orange Genealogical Society): `I live in California, and have been attempting to do genealogy research via computer AND the help of newly-found, distant relatives. I also visit once a year to do research which is the most I am able to financially manage. My next visit will be the first week end in June. I had planned to visit the site in discussion. What can I do....from 35-hundred miles away....to help ensure the collection remains intact? I am researching these Little River/Lebanon Township families: Harris (including Jefferson Harris —founder of the Harris Grove AME church), who were enslaved by Elsey Harris. Mack/McMannen, who were enslaved by Dr. Charles McMannen. And before that, belonged to the family of his wife, Mary Jane Terrentine. Lipscomb, who were enslaved by John and William Lipscomb of the Arrow Head Plantation. It turns out that I am related to most of the black population of the Little River/Lebanon Township, by only a few degrees of separation.' This email also mentions the Forsyth(e)s in Granville and the Cameron-Bennehan Plantation in Person County. It signs off: `Gwen Olson from San Leandro, CA.' Will this June be Gwen Olson's last annual pilgrimage to Hillsborough to research her roots? Or will there still be an accessible, intact Orange County collection for Gwen, and others, to visit in 2010 and beyond? The search for slave ancestors in existing genealogical records is arduous. Often listed by first name only, slaves were not enumerated in Federal Census records, by their full names, until after the Civil War. Trying to identify the tick marks indicating slaves before that, as one's own blood, IS looking for the proverbial `needle in the haystack.' Despite that, our ancestors' souls call out to be known. We must turn to library collections for answers. Which brings us, and our heritage dollars, to places like Hillsborough. Alex Haley's Roots created the first, big wave of African-American genealogists. But there's a much bigger wave on the horizon. Influenced by: The Incredible Internet. Dynamic digital tools. Developments in DNA testing. And, most recently, the soul-stirring sight of Barack Obama. Being sworn in. On steps. Originally built by slaves. Who knows if any of them had roots in Orange County? Genealogy, however, is as much a process of elimination as it is the thrill of finding proof. So, on behalf of Gwen Olson now, and the Gwen Olsons of the future, who will have research to do and heritage dollars to spend here in Orange County, please preserve our North Carolina Room AND protect its collection. Each and every one of its records and artifacts is especially precious to those of us whose ancestors were once officially enumerated as tick marks. Thank you." Carol Boggs read a prepared statement. "Preserving the North Carolina Room collection seemed simple and straightforward at the outset— how could anyone fail to understand its importance? But looking at the development over the last several weeks one could conclude there is still a lack of understanding. If this is not your home county you may not be familiar with the concept of an NC Room. If that is the case, I suggest you accept the invitation of Lynn Richardson, librarian for the NC Room in Durham to see an example of what Orange County could have if it had wanted to. Each surrounding county that was once Orange has a similar room and they have no trouble understanding its purpose nor see any reason to close it down. This is not a new issue. The Library Services Task Force was asked to study and make recommendations regarding a Heritage Center since 2000, and finally on May 20, 2008, the recommendation was accepted. Why has nothing been done? I expect you know better than I. But now is the time to finally do the right thing. The only reason it's become an issue is because there is a new library that is inadequate for its purpose. That's not the fault of the collection, nor is implying that dividing it is a way to preserve it. When Rebecca Wall described the $50,000 bequest in her will in the 1970's, she knew exactly what she intended it to support in the future, and it was not a place on a conference room wall for her painted tray to hang. She was providing for a room that showcased the history of the region as she knew and loved it. Such a separation of her bequest from its intended purpose is either a sad misunderstanding of her bequest, or a way of diverting money from someone who can no longer defend her wishes. She meant to keep it intact, and that is our wish as well. Saying that the collection will be `safe' and `accessible' is as non-specific as to mean anything at all, but what it does not say is that the collection will be intact. How sad that her specifying the collection be in a library, or called a library, should be twisted so that what she sought to support and protect could be broken up and culled for desirable items, the lesser ones going to other sites. Digitization is invaluable for both preservation and access, but not a substitute for a focused reference collection such as the typical NC Room. All libraries and historical societies try to digitize delicate or fragile materials, but first and foremost is the integrity of the collection itself. The imperative is that the bequest be used for protecting and growing the collection to become even more significant than today. The last time it was moved from one library to another, several items were never seen again. That can't happen this time. Orange County is proud of its history, and enjoys the benefits of Heritage Tourism to spread an understanding of the history of the region and the families who lived in or passed through here, while enhancing its economy. Why jeopardize the very thing that people visit from across the U. S., when it could be enhanced? You have the opportunity to make a wise, forward-looking decision regarding the collection, repairing years of neglect. I ask that you take it." Paul Hollinghurst, President of the Durham-Orange Genealogical Society of North Carolina, read a prepared statement. "The Durham-Orange Genealogical Society of North Carolina (D-OGS) is a nonprofit organization established in 1989 and dedicated to the research and preservation of family history of Durham and Orange Counties, North Carolina. We are committed to the preservation of the Orange County Public Library's North Carolina Room Collection in a supportive role, and hold the following beliefs: The NC Room is uniquely important because: -It is irreplaceable -It preserves the heritage and history of the region -It documents the origins of the County and its people from Colonial times -Family and history researchers and organizations at the national level depend upon the sources of this facility for their work Because of these factors we maintain this reference collection is a growing entity and must: -Remain intact, not broken up in any way -Be accessible to the public for ready reference -Be allowed to grow as new materials and donations become available -Remain in the Hyconeechee Library System Catalog To ensure this outcome we hold that it either: -Be housed in the new library building, intact and accessible to the public or -Be located in a Heritage Center in an appropriate location, intact and accessible to the public Our original intention was to champion that the Orange County Library NC Room Collection would remain intact and accessible to the public. We seem to have failed in our attempt. It appears that the NC Room Collection will close with the opening of the new library this fall. The Orange County Commissioners accepted a report from the Archival Task Force in May 2008, but failed to plan any further. The further plan should have included the specifications of a Heritage Center to house the NC Room Collection and other collections and the funding for the new entity. Now it appears that the Orange County Board of Commissioners has run out of time and has put the Library Director, Lucinda Munger, in an untenable position. It seems that Ms. Munger must move the library contents to the new library. In an attempt to gain needed space in the new library, Ms. Munger has stated that she is planning to disassemble the collection. She would move as many volumes as possible to the regular reference collection, sending books that are old to the State Archives or the Wilson Library in Chapel Hill, sending NC books that pertain to other counties to those counties, removing books that she feels are not necessary to the collection and hope that an appropriate location can be found for the remainder of the collection in the future. It is our position that this will be a tragedy for the collection for it will gut the present collection of many irreplaceable items. This is not acceptable; we should not let this happen. D-OGS over the years has given several thousands of dollars to the Orange County Library and, with the guidance of volunteer Nat Clark, has used these funds in purchasing books and materials for the NC Room Collection. Nat and others also donated numerous books of their own. If the Collection is to be broken up, Ms. Munger needs to maintain an active inventory, including items removed from the Collection. When the Heritage Center is operational, the Collection will need to be restored, and the library and County will need to make the Collection whole again. D-OGS promises to continue to help when and where we can." Ben Lloyd is a property owner in the Efland area. He said that in his 30+ years of public involvement, he has never seen so many people upset in his entire life. He said that we are in a financial catastrophe. Regarding the revaluation, excluding Chapel Hill, in his opinion, there is not a piece of property in rural Orange County that is worth as much than was stated in the 2005 revaluation. Tonight is the third meeting of upset people demanding that this revaluation be rescinded. He said that Geof Gledhill advised the Board that it could not rescind the revaluation after January 1st. In his opinion, this is wrong. He has learned that interpretation of the law is similar to interpretation of the Bible because people can interpret them in the way they want them to read. He said that he has discussed this issue with five or six different attorneys, some of whom have done in-depth studies of the revaluation situation, and they also disagree with the January 1st deadline. The law says that it must be done every eight years period. He said that Rockingham, Caldwell, and Stanley Counties have rescinded their revaluations. This all happened after January 1st. He asked the County Commissioners to provide the public with a State statute that says that a revaluation cannot be rescinded after January 1st. The following was transcribed verbatim, per Commissioner Jacobs, for the benefit of the Durham-Orange Genealogical Society, who had left by this time: Commissioner Jacobs: I'm sure the other Board members, after we have a discussion on the revaluation, which is the item we added and is the next item on the agenda, may have something to say, but I just wanted to address the Heritage Center and the people from D-OGS who were here. As a member of the Board of Commissioners who was on all four Library Task Forces, I hope that the members of D-OGS are barking up the wrong tree. I believe that the Board of Commissioners, with the exception of one Commissioner, has never expressed opposition to having a freestanding Heritage Center. The problem that we're running into, as you will hear, and as Mr. McKee spoke earlier heard when he came to a work session, is that we're trying to cut costs. And in cutting costs, we're looking at alternatives for how we can deal with a Heritage Center. We haven't made any decisions yet. I personally, and I'm sure the Board as a group, appreciate people expressing their concerns, but we haven't reached any conclusions. No decisions have been made about what's going to happen to the collection. We have a great respect for the heritage of Orange County, and I think that we'll work toward what we set out to do when we designed the library, which was to have as adequate a library as we possibly could and to have a Heritage Center somewhere else that could meet the needs of the existing collection and be a place where the collection can grow. b. 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. Revaluation Analysis Tax Assessor John Smith made a PowerPoint presentation. 2009 Orange County, NC Revaluation March 17, 2009 Revaluation Analysis Orange County revalued real property in 2009. Following the 1989 revaluation of real property Orange County has revalued real property every four years. NC statutes require counties to publish a revenue neutral tax rate. Revenue neutral is a tax rate that when applied to the new property values will generate the same tax dollars as received in the previous year. The goal of a revaluation is to align appraised property values with market values and the assessment ratio should be 100%. For the most part, assessed valuations remain unchanged between revaluations. This typically means the gap between the County's assessment and market values increases each year until the next revaluation. According to the Department of Revenue, at the end of 2007, Orange County's assessment ratio was 79.33%. By the end of 2008, without revaluation, the assessment ratio would be around 75%. Real property is only one component of the tax base. The other components include: • Registered motor vehicles such as cars, trucks, and motorcycles • Mobile homes • Personal property such as boats, motors, and airplanes • Business personal property such as computers, leasehold improvements, and machinery • Utility companies (public service companies) such as electric companies, phone companies, gas companies... • Exemptions that reduce the tax base Taxable real property includes residential, commercial (including farmland and farm buildings) and industrial. For 2009, there are 51,225 total taxable properties in Orange County. In order to calculate the percentage increase in real property due to revaluation, staff compared 2008 values (before revaluation) with 2009 values (after revaluation). The comparison excluded some properties to make the comparison one of "apples with apples." Excluded properties include those that did not exist in 2008; properties with new construction for 2009, properties with construction not previously taxed; newly created property parcels; and, parcels that had use value status changes. • Of the total 51,225 total taxable properties in Orange County in 2009, 4.8%, or 2,454 properties, fell into one of these comparison exclusions. • Staff analyzed statistics related to the remaining 48,771 properties. That analysis follows. The overall cumulative increase in real property value due to Revaluation is 24%. Twenty-five thousand five hundred fifty-seven (25,557) parcels, or 52.4% of the analyzed properties, had value increases of less than or equal to 24%. Example of Tax Bill Comparison After Revaluation (Value Increase of Prior to Revaluation 24%) Value of Property $241,000 $298,840 * Tax Rate 0.998 0.86 Equals Tax Bill $2,405 $2,570 Note: 2008 tax rate =99.8 cents per$100 valuation. Projected revenue neutral rate between .84 and .87 cents per$100 valuation. For purposes of illustration only a tax rate of.86 has been selected. This may or may not be the neutral tax rate. *$298,840 is the average value of all residential property in Orange County after the 2009 revaluation schedule of values is applied. How A Neutral Revenue Rate Impacts Tax Bills • Properties with value increases at or below 16% would have no tax increase at the .86 cents rate. (approximately 9,134 properties) • Properties with value increases between 16% and 24% will have tax increases between 0 and 6.85% at the .86 cents rate. (approximately 16,423 properties) • The tax increase in the example above is $165, a 6.85% increase • When the revenue neutral tax rate is applied, property tax bills for personal property such as cars, motorcycles and mobile homes will decrease. o County bills for approximately 98,000 registered motor vehicles will decrease. When the tax rate reduces to the revenue neutral rate, those taxpayers will see lower tax bills for their motor vehicles. Mobile home owners (mobile homes not on permanent foundations) will also see lower tax bills for their mobile homes). It is also important to note staff anticipates vehicle, personal and public utilities property valuations to continue to decline. As to vehicle and personal property, this is because fewer new motor vehicles are being purchased and because purchases of other personal property, boats, business computers, etc. are being deferred. In addition, the NC General Assembly has created new tax exemptions that will erode the local property tax base. How Do Revaluation Values Compare to Sales Prices Last Quarter 2008: Multiple Listing Service (MLS) sales data of closed sales have been compiled and compared to the 2009 revaluation data for October, November, and December. (Out of 172 sales only foreclosures (13), short sales (1), and multiple property sales (2) have been excluded.) The comparisons reflect the accuracy of the revaluation. The ratio is 100%. January and February 2009: The Tax Assessor staff has monitored sales thus far in 2009. Multiple Listing Service sales data of closed sales have been compiled and compared to the 2009 revaluation data for the first two and one half months of 2009. (Out of 78 sales only relocations (3), and foreclosures (8) have been excluded.) The comparisons reflect the accuracy of the revaluation. The ratio is 100%. What to Do If You Do Not Agree With Your 2009 Value Prior to April 1, 2009, contact the Orange County Tax Assessor's Office • Telephone: (919) 245-2100 • Physical Location: 2nd floor, Gateway Center, 228 South Churton Street, Hillsborough • Mail: Orange County Tax Assessor's Office, PO Box 8181, Hillsborough, NC 27278 After April 1, appeals must be made in writing to the Board of Equalization and Review, PO Box 8181, Hillsborough, NC 27278. Appeals filed after the adjournment of the Board of Equalization and Review, will be heard during the following tax year. Tax Relief for Elderly and Permanently Disabled Elderly and permanently disabled taxpayers may apply for assistance with paying their tax bills. Timely applications will be filed no later than June 1; taxpayers must apply, in writing, for tax relief. Explanation of Taxation of Public Service Companies The North Carolina Department of Revenue determines the value of all public service company property based on the sales assessment ratio in the year the county conducts a revaluation followed by the fourth and seventh years thereafter. The billed value of public service companies for 2008 was about $226,300,000. If the County did not revalue effective January 1, 2009 (the fourth year after revaluation) public service companies would be billed based on the County's 2008 assessment to sales ratio level of 75%. Therefore, instead of public utility values being valued at 100% of value or $226,300,000, they would be valued at 75 % or$170,000,000. Comparison of Taxes Paid By Utility Companies Assessment Tax Year Billed Value Ratio Tax Rate Taxes Due Difference 2008 $226,300,000 100% 0.998 $2,258,474 2009 with revaluation (1) $203,670,000 100% 0.86 $1,751,562 ($506,912) 2009 without revaluation (1) $203,670,000 75% 0.998 $1,524,470 ($734,004) (1) NC Department of Revenue projects a decrease in valuation for public utility companies in 2009. For the purpose of this illustration, a 10% decrease is assumed. Orange County can expect to receive less property taxes from utilities in 2009. Without the January 1, 2009 real property revaluation the reduced amount could be $734,000. With revaluation it could be $507,000. In other words, the revaluation will produce approximately $227,000 more utility tax revenue. Commissioner Gordon made reference to public utilities and asked for further information about how, if the County does not revalue, it will lose money from public utilities. John Smith said that utilities are taxed at 100% of value every year. The North Carolina Department of Revenue develops evaluation for utility companies. The NCDR sends evaluations of each utility to the counties, and then the counties apply the appropriate tax rate. In 2008 in Orange County, the ratio was 75% of value for most properties. As long as the ratio is above 90%, utilities will be taxed at 100%. If the ratio falls below the 90% mark, then utilities will be taxed at that ratio. This would equate to a reduction of $564,000. Commissioner Jacobs asked for an explanation of the Homestead Exemption, and John Smith provided this. This program is regulated by the North Carolina General Assembly. The County Commissioners cannot provide these exemptions. Commissioner Yuhasz asked how many people that request an adjustment to the revaluation actually get one and it was answered 15-20%. John Smith said that he expects that this will double this year. b. Presentation from Durham Technical Community College The Board received a presentation from Durham Technical Community College President Bill Ingram on the College's strategic plan. Bill Ingram said that on January 27th the Board of Trustees brought to the Board a strategic plan for the next 8-10 years. He said that he appointed a task force made up of faculty, staff, students, and a representative of the Board of Trustees to develop a plan over the course of nine months. The new mission statement is as follows: Durham Technical Community College's mission is to enrich students'lives and the broader community through teaching, learning, and service. He said that the most important initiative is learning and student success. The other initiatives are applying technology, emphasizing globalization, sustaining the learning environment, and fostering and strengthening partnerships. Bill Ingram said that this is a time where communities are turning to community colleges and he is seeing record enrollments at Durham Tech. He thinks that this plan will help Durham Tech move forward during this critical time. Commissioner Gordon asked about the fostering and strengthening partnerships initiative, specifically the last bullet, "forging strong partnerships that foster economic growth and support workforce development." She asked for examples. Bill Ingram said that he has worked closely with the economic and workforce development entities in the service area — Greater Durham Chamber of Commerce and Orange County Economic Development Director to help recruit businesses and industries that want to move into the area. Training opportunities have been provided through grant funds available through the North Carolina Community College system. Durham Tech is also working closely with businesses and industries that are now retrenching. Commissioner Jacobs asked if Bill Ingram had any experience in working with prison populations to try and help them learn skills in order to integrate back into the community. Bill Ingram said that Durham Tech has a number of programs within the prison system. There are GED programs for the inmates. The programs are governed by the length of stay for the inmates. Chair Foushee asked Bill Ingram to address the two-year credit program with respect to students who graduate from the program and are admitted to UNC system schools. Bill Ingram said that this is an agreement with UNC institutions. This agreement assures admission to a UNC institution for any community college graduate with an associate arts or sciences degree with a 2.5 GPA. In addition, this past year about 60 students transferred to UNC-Chapel Hill. 4. Consent Agenda A motion was made by Commissioner Yuhasz, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to approve those items on the consent agenda as stated below: a. Minutes The Board approved the minutes from November 14 and December 4, 2008 and also January 10, February 3, 10 (5:30 p.m. and 7:30 p.m.), 2009 as submitted by the Clerk to the Board. b. Appointments (1) Historic Preservation Commission— Reappointments The Board reappointed Tom Allison to a second full term expiring March 31, 2012 and Todd Dickinson to a first full term ending March 31, 2012 to the Historic Preservation Commission. (2) Human Services Advisory Commission — Reappointments The Board reappointed Jerry Passmore, James Harris, Suzanne Deobald, and Janine Zanin to first full terms ending March 31, 2012 to the Human Services Advisory Commission. (3) Nursing Home Community Advisory Committee — Reappointments The Board reappointed Ed Flowers, and Pat Revels to first full terms ending June 30, 2012 and Art St. John to a second full term ending January 30, 2012 to the Nursing Home Community Advisory Committee. (4) Orange County Planning Board — Reappointments The Board reappointed Mary Bobbitt-Cooke and Judith Wegner to first full terms ending March 31, 2012 to the Orange County Planning Board. c. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Release/Refunds The Board adopted a refund resolution, which is incorporated by reference, related to 53 requests for motor vehicle property tax releases or refunds in accordance with North Carolina General Statutes. d. Sexual Assault Awareness Month Proclamation The Board approved a proclamation, which is incorporated by reference, recognizing April as Sexual Assault Awareness Month in Orange County and authorized the Chair to sign. e. Proclamation Recognizing Kick Butts Day This item was removed and placed at the end of the consent agenda for separate consideration. f. Renewal of Consolidated Agreement Between Health Department and NC Department of Health and Human Services The Board approved the annual consolidated agreement between the NC Department of Health and Human Services and the Orange County Health Department, which provides State and Federal funds to the Health Department to partially support mandated services and authorized the Chair to sign pending final review by the County Attorney. Renewal of Urban Curbside Recycling Services Contract The Board approved the contract addendum with Waste Industries to continue the provision of Urban Curbside Recyclable Materials Collection Services and authorized the Chair to sign the agreement, subject to final review by staff and the County Attorney. h. Orange County Animal Services Center Custodial Contract The Board approved a contract with OE Enterprises from May 1, 2009 through June 30, 2009 for custodial services at the Orange County Animal Services Center and authorized the Manager to sign. i. NC State Firemen's and Rescue Squad Annual Certification Roster The Board approved the certification requirements for the fire marshal and staff to participate in the North Carolina State Firemen's Association for the year 2008 and authorized the Chair to sign. L Notice of Public Hearing on Orange County's 2009 Legislative Agenda The Board directed the Clerk to the Board and the County Manager to publish a notice of the Board's intent to hold a public hearing during its regular meeting on April 7, 2009 at 7:00 p.m. at the Central Orange Senior Center at 103 Meadowlands Drive in Hillsborough, North Carolina to receive public comments on potential items for inclusion in Orange County's legislative agenda package for the 2009 North Carolina General Assembly Session. k. Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (SAPFO) — Receipt and Transmittal of 2009 Annual Technical Advisory Committee Report The Board received the 2009 SAPFOTAC Annual Report and authorized the Chair to sign the transmittal letter to SAPFO partners contained in Attachment 1. I. Fiscal Year 2008-09 Budget Amendment #6 The Board approved budget, capital project ordinance and County fee schedule amendments for FY 2008-09 for Board of Elections, Health Department, Central/Northern Orange Senior Center Capital Project Ordinance, Visitors Bureau, Solid Waste Department, and County and School Capital Project funds. m. Adoption of Resolution Approving Alternative Financing for Capital Projects and Equipment The Board authorized staff to proceed with the recommended financing proposals by adopting the resolution directing staff to execute documents and complete the closings of the financings. n. Partnership to End Homelessness — Interim Coordinator Agreement The Board approved the Agreement to Provide an Interim Homelessness Program Coordinator for the Partnership to End Homelessness with the Town of Chapel Hill and authorized the Chair to sign the document on behalf of the Board subject to final review and approval by the County Attorney. VOTE ON CONSENT AGENDA: UNANIMOUS ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA e. Proclamation Recognizing Kick Butts Day The Board considered a proclamation recognizing March 25, 2009 as Orange County Kick Butts Day and authorizing the Chair to sign. Health Director Rosemary Summers recognized a group of high school seniors. She said that the Tobacco Reality Unfiltered project is 100% grant funded through the Health and Wellness Trust Fund. This is the sixth year of this project and they have received word that there is funding for an additional three years. Elena Black is a member of the Orange County Tobacco Reality Unfiltered Club. She spoke about the consequences of using tobacco. She thanked the Board and the Health Department for their support of this project. She also thanked the Board for designated tobacco-free schools and County buildings. This year Orange County TRU will be hosting the Kick Butts Day carnival at the Wal-Mart Supercenter on Saturday, March 21St Shannon Jacobs read the proclamation. PROCLAMATION TO RECOGNIZE MARCH 25, 2009 AS ORANGE COUNTY KICK BUTTS DAY WHEREAS, Kick Butts Day is an annual national initiative sponsored by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids that makes students leaders in the fight against tobacco use and exposure to secondhand smoke; and WHERES, the 2007 North Carolina Youth Tobacco Survey revealed that 27% of NC high school students and 9% of NC middle school students currently use some form of tobacco; and WHEREAS, the Tobacco Reality Unfiltered (TRU) Program of Orange County, funded by the NC Health and Wellness Trust Fund, has been working with youth since 2003 to prevent tobacco use and develop positive decision-making skills among middle school and high school students in Orange County; and WHEREAS, the Healthy Carolinians of Orange County Partnership's 2007Community Health Assessment revealed lower percentages of smoking among Orange County youth since 2003 indicating positive contributions from the Orange County Tobacco Reality Unfiltered program; and WHEREAS, The Orange County Schools Smart Track Survey Report revealed that an average of 15% of 10th graders smoked in the past 30 days and the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Youth Risk Behavior Survey revealed that 5.7% of middle school students and 12.2% of high school students smoked in the past 30 days, showing that the need remains to educate students about being tobacco-free; and WHEREAS, the Orange County TRU program will continue to use social marketing, peer education, and merchant education to educate youth and their parents or caregivers, and the community about the dangers of tobacco use; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Health Department recommends that proclaiming March 25 as Kick Butts Day will increase community awareness of the need for preventing tobacco use and for continuing public health education programs for youth; NOW, THEREFORE, be it recognized that the Orange County Board of Commissioners do hereby proclaim March 25, 2009 as Orange County Kick Butts Day. This, the 17th day of March 2009. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Chair Foushee to approve the proclamation as stated above. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 5. Public Hearings a. North Carolina Community Transportation Program (CTP) Administrative and Capital Grant Application FY 2009/2010 The Board conducted a public hearing on the North Carolina Community Transportation Program grant application by Orange Public Transportation for FY 2009-2010 and considered approving the grant application, adopting the resolution authorizing the County to enter into an agreement with North Carolina Department of Transportation, and authorizing the County Attorney to complete the necessary certifications and assurances and authorizing the Chair to sign. Department on Aging Director Jerry Passmore said that NCDOT Public Transportation Division for several years has provided funds to Orange County for the Community Transportation Program, which is Orange Public Transportation. As part of the process of applying, the County has to have a public hearing. He gave some statistics about the program. This year, he is requesting $369,420. Approximately half of that is for administrative services funding and the other half is for two new replacement vehicles that will be diesel-fueled. The match is 10% for the capital and 15% for the administration. The Board is being asked to close the public hearing and approve the resolution submitting the application. No public comment. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to close the public hearing and approve the Community Transportation Program Grant application for FY 2009-2010 in the total amount of $369,420 with a local match of $46,173; and authorize the Chair to sign the Community Transportation Program Resolutions, which are incorporated by reference, and annual certified statements of participation. VOTE: UNANIMOUS b. Zoning Atlas Amendment (Rezoning) —4115 Old NC 10 (Jones) The Board received the Planning Board recommendation on and considered approval of a petition submitted to rezone a 2.8 acre parcel of property located at 4115 Old NC 10 (TMBL5.26.40 / PIN 9893-00-8606) from Existing Commercial Five (EC-5) to Rural Residential One (R-1). Planner Michael Harvey said that this is a continuation of a public hearing for this property. This item was presented at the November 24, 2008 Quarterly Public Hearing, where staff testified that there was an existing auto body garage on the property. In 1981, when the Comprehensive Plan was adopted, the zoning of this property was changed to EC-5 in an effort to bring it into compliance with the standards and requirements of the Comprehensive Plan. Since that time, the existing auto body shop has ceased. The current property owners were unaware that it was zoned commercial and do not want it zoned commercial. The Planning Board has reviewed this and recommended unanimously that the property be rezoned. He read the Administration recommendation. No public comment. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to close the public hearing and approve the zoning atlas petition by: approving the Statement of Consistency (Attachment 2); and approving the Resolution of Rezoning Approval (Attachment 3). VOTE: UNANIMOUS c. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment: Hillsborough Area Economic Development District (EDD) Buffer Regulations The Board received the Planning Board recommendation on and considered approval of a staff-initiated Zoning Ordinance text amendment to modify existing landscape buffer regulations contained within Section 6.29.3a of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. Michael Harvey said that the staff put forward a staff-initiated text amendment to the Orange County Zoning Ordinance, specifically Section 6.29.3a, which is the Economic Development District Design Manual, to amend existing buffer regulations within the Hillsborough EDD. This was heard during the November Quarterly Public Hearing, and the impetus for initiating this amendment was to address concerns staff had over the potential for development within the Hillsborough corridor, specifically along NC 86. There has been interest in converting one of the existing residential structures into a professional office. Current buffer regulations would require a 50-foot landscaped area separating non-residential from residential development. Staff proposes buffer amendments that would allow for an individual to adaptively reuse existing single-family residential structures to obtain a reduction in the required buffer in order to increase the usable area. During the public hearing, there were numerous concerns. One concern was that if an individual deconstructed then they might be able to make use of this buffer allowance. The answer to that is no. The only way to make use of the buffer allowance is to use the existing residential structure for a non-residential purpose. Another concern is what would constitute a suitable screen when there were joint or shared driveways. Staff proposed language that would allow the Planning Director, at his discretion, to weigh certain landscape requirements. The Planning Board reviewed this item after a long deliberation and has recommended that the Board approve the amendment as presented by staff. He read the Administration recommendation. Commissioner Yuhasz made reference to 3.2.3g and said that it does not make sense to talk about granting a waiver of the location of a perimeter buffer. He said that the waiver should be for some of the planting requirements along the common lot line where there may be a shared use easement in place. Michael Harvey said that he understands this, but the rationale for writing it this way was to require and force dialog. Chair Foushee asked if there was compromised language here. Commissioner Jacobs suggested using the word "parameters" instead of "locations." Michael Harvey agreed with this. It was agreed to use the word "parameters." Commissioner Jacobs said that there were a number of questions at the public hearing that were left out of the minutes on page 11. The way that he reads the staff comment is that this amendment, while it addresses buffer issues, it is not the venue for addressing the other issues that were raised that relate to the buffer. He asked, if the buffer regulations are approved and then the Board wants to make adjustments to other aspects of these parcels that might affect the buffers, whether this would be possible or if it would be precluded because the buffer regulations have been approved. He does not want to approve something that will then preclude him from addressing limiting road access. Geof Gledhill said that the Board could come back and change the text. However, property owners who have vested rights in the present use of their property or some permitted use of the property that arise after these changes are adopted but before the text changes get adopted are going to continue to have the vested rights to do that. Commissioner Jacobs asked for the Clerk's office to go back and transcribe the clarifying questions and answers from the public hearing in November and bring back to the Board some identification of issues as well as the South Churton Street Access Management Plan to see what it says. He wants to make sure that what the County is doing is consistent with this. Commissioner Yuhasz verified with staff that this ordinance would only affect these few houses. He said that it would be difficult to try and provide any common access to these houses and provide parking in front, etc. He said that to put additional requirements would preclude adaptive reuse of these structures. Commissioner Jacobs said that there could be language that encourages parking to the rear or to the sides. There is limited flexibility. He said that Old NC 86 is already a mess and he is concerned about moving forward. He said that it might be more important to have an access road than a buffer behind the buildings. He said that he does not want to approve something that he will later regret. Commissioner Gordon about the Planning Board's deliberations. Michael Harvey said that the Planning Board deliberated for a long time on this matter and there were several friendly amendments to the motion that were not approved. Those friendly amendments would have asked the County Commissioners to direct staff to begin the process of amending the ordinance to address these concerns. There was unanimous approval. He said that clarifying points were that there was a similar problem when the Efland- Cheeks Overlay District was adopted. There may be existing language within the EDD Design Manual that would encourage and require shared driveway access. He thinks that there are some existing regulatory standards that eliminate four independent commercial access points for these properties. Commissioner Jacobs suggested that the topic come back at the next meeting so that the Board can discuss directing staff to do an analysis on the access points so that the problems are not exacerbated on Old NC 86. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to close the public hearing, approve the proposed zoning ordinance amendment allowing for a reduction of required landscaping and buffer yards within the Hillsborough Economic Development District in instances where an applicant proposes the adaptive reuse of an existing single-family residential structure as a professional office space; and also direct staff to begin comprehensive analysis on impervious surface issues as well as required locations for parking lots, and direct staff to study existing access management regulations and consider amendments requiring shared drives and access roads in these situations within the Hillsborough EDD. This motion includes changing the noun from "location(s)" to "parameters" as stated above for page 6, item `g'. VOTE: UNANIMOUS d. Zoning Atlas Amendment (Rezoning): Hillsborough Area Economic Development District (West Side of Old NC 86) The Board considered 1) receiving the Planning Board recommendation; 2) closing the public hearing and 3) approving a County-initiated general use zoning atlas amendment petition in the Hillsborough Area EDD. Planner Robert Davis said that this is the actual atlas amendment that rezones the property on Old NC 86 from ED-LO-1 to ED-LNR. The main difference between the two is generally the lot sizes. The uses are virtually similar. The tract is on the south side of the Credit Union property. Tract 1 consists of seven lots and tract 2 consists of four lots. There are five single-family houses on tract 1, four of which front out on Old NC 86. There is one single-family house on tract 2. He showed the property on a map. The recommendation is to rezone both tracts. He said that the Planning Board did discuss an issue with flooding and that some lots within Cornwallis Hills were approved in the flood plain. This does not affect these two tracts, however. Commissioner Gordon pointed out that the Planning Board took separate votes on each tract. She asked why this was and said that it looks like it was concern for the neighbors impacted and the fact that they would not have the ability to participate in the special use permitting process at all. Robert Davis said that the vote was 6-2 for the south tract and unanimous for the north tract. A portion of it was a misunderstanding that the buffer was going down to 25 feet. Once it was explained that the buffer was 50 feet, there was less concern. The main thing is that there were two residents within Cornwallis Hills that were asking that the ED-LO-1 stay in place because it requires a special use permit within a certain distance. If the ED-LO-1 stays in place, then potentially a seven-story building could come online and would have to be approved because it meets the requirements. Craig Benedict said that these lands are still within the EDD and the Design Manual still applies. The design manual has guidelines such as interconnectivity. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to close the public hearing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to approve tract#1, 1) receiving the Planning Board recommendation; 2) to close the public hearing and 3) to consider approval of a County-initiated general use zoning atlas amendment petition in the Hillsborough Area EDD. VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to approve tract#2 1) receiving the Planning Board recommendation; 2) to close the public hearing and 3) to consider approval of a County-initiated general use zoning atlas amendment petition in the Hillsborough Area EDD. VOTE: Ayes, 4; No, 1 (Commissioner Gordon — because of arguments from the Planning Board about impact on neighbors and giving up the special use permit process) 6. Regular Agenda a. Approval of FY 2009-19 Recommended County Capital Investment Plan (CIP) The Board considered approval of the FY 2009-19 Recommended County Capital Investment Plan (CIP). Laura Blackmon made reference to the memo from Commissioner Gordon that was included in the packet. Commissioner Gordon went through her memo. MEMORANDUM To: BOCC and Manager From: Alice Gordon Re: Comments on the Capital Investment Plan (CIP) Date: 16 March 2009 The purpose of this memorandum is to provide comments concerning the CIP before the BOCC discusses it at our March 17th meeting under Agenda Item 6a, "Approval of FY 2009-19 Recommended County Capital Investment Plan (CIP)". My substantive comments are given below. A procedural comment is that the proposed changes to the Manager's Recommended October 2008 CIP are not listed in the March 17th meeting agenda abstract. Instead, we are referred to adjustments identified at the BOCC meetings of December 1, 2008 and March 5, 2009. The minutes for December 1st show that the BOCC did not discuss the item, which was deferred (to December 11). On March 5, we only had a very brief discussion concerning the CIP. There are other meetings at which we did discuss the CIP. Therefore it is hard for me to know specifically which items we will be including as changes to the Manager's recommended CIP. I am assuming that approval is only being requested for County projects and not for school projects. A. Recommended Changes to Specific CIP Items The BOCC has already agreed to the following changes to the CIP, I believe, and I recommend that the changes be made. 1. County Facilities Capital Repairs and Replacements Postpone a 1-cent tax rate increase (that was to have been effective July 1, 2009) to fund County facilities capital maintenance items, and thus delete $1,462,040 from this line item in 2009-2010. 2. Lands Legacy Items Two CIP line items, "Reserve for Future Land Purchases" and "Mountains to Sea Trail" will be adjusted to read as follows: "Lands Legacy/Reserve for Future Land Purchases" and "Lands Legacy/Mountains to Sea Trail," respectively; and the project descriptions will reflect the change designating them as Lands Legacy Program projects. 3. Twin Creeks Park AND the CIP Items for Farmstead Stabilization Projects at Blackwood Farm at New Hope Park and Millhouse Road Park Bond monies for Twin Creeks Park will only be used for Twin Creeks. Therefore, a source other than the 2001 bond will be used to fund the $275,000 required in these two farmstead stabilization projects. The $275,000 expenditure will be deleted from the Twin Creeks Park project and the money will be added back into the project funding for the park. B. Overall Comments and Recommendations 1. It is critical that when the CIP is adopted, there is an indication of how the increased debt service and the other costs of new projects, and accompanying tax rate implications, will be addressed. For the projects funded by currently proposed debt issuance, the associated tax rate impacts are given in the CIP, and we have recently been given the revised dollar amounts for that debt service. Not indicated is how the new debt service will be paid. We need to know what revenue is to be used to offset the payments. One thing the County should do is indicate which buildings will be divested (sold) to provide additional revenue to offset some of the costs. That would help us implement our goal of not raising taxes. I have stated before that, as new buildings are completed and County staff members move into them, the buildings vacated should be sold to raise revenue to offset new building costs as well as return the buildings to the tax rolls. Therefore, the plans for divesting need to be included as part of the CIP process. 2. I believe that the total cost of the CIP may have to be revised downward to meet new budget realities. The 10-year CIP has a total of over$200 million for County projects. New debt issuances for FY 2011-12 through 2018-19 would be over$60 million. If we decide to adopt the CIP in something close to its current form, we should emphasize that we may have to cut some projects due to budgetary constraints, and particularly those financed by new debt. We should also consider not including new debt-financed projects in this CIP. C. Possible Changes in Other Specific CIP Items 1. Court and Detention Future Needs The BOCC should consider whether this item, funded at $200,000 in 2010-11, could be postponed and the money used for other projects. These funds have been noted as a possible source of funding for the Link Center renovations. 2. Government Services Annex Renovations The BOCC should consider whether this item, funded at $200,000 in 2010-11, could be postponed and the money used for other projects. 3. Link GSC Renovations We need to resolve this issue. We could use $275,000 from this project in 2009-10 for the farmstead stabilization projects. It is possible that we may have to delay the Link GSC renovations due to budgetary constraints. 4. Emergency Services Reserve Some or all of the $1,200,000 listed for 2009-10 could potentially be deferred, pending outcome of the fire and rescue study, but the BOCC has not resolved this issue. 5. Information Technology (IT) The IT expenditure for 2009-10 is given as $3 million but the BOCC has not made a decision about the IT strategic plan. 6. County Telephone System Replacement This $1 million project is listed as being entirely debt-financed in 2009-10, yet we have not recently discussed that alternative financing. The project description refers to implementation over several years so the BOCC should consider whether project funding might be delayed. D. Issues Needing Resolution in the Near Future There are other capital project issues needing resolution in the near future, including: 1. How will the revised debt issuance schedules be reflected in the CIP and/or capital project ordinances? In particular, how will the voter-approved 2001 bond issuances be handled? 2. Issues concerning Twin Creeks (Phase I linear park), Soccer Super Fund, Astroturf Field 3. Issues concerning the Heritage Center/North Carolina Room. Commissioner Gordon moved approval of her item A. Laura Blackmon said that staff concurs with this. Commissioner Jacobs asked about the stabilization and whether this amount of money is necessary in this fiscal year. He thought that staff had a new way of looking at that. He would not want to approve $275,000 before he heard about these options. Laura Blackmon said that Environment and Resource Conservation Director David Stancil was working on a phased approach to the stabilization. Commissioner Yuhasz seconded the motion. Dave Stancil said that the number could be ratcheted down to $150,000 in the next fiscal year by doing it in phases. The motion was for items 1, 2, and 3 under item A. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Commissioner Gordon said that she would like for the County to make some attempt to give staff direction to sell property. On November 131h, this was on the County Commissioners' agenda. She distributed a handout giving the agenda abstract of the November 13, 2008 agenda, entitled "Properties Subject to Potential Divestiture." Chair Foushee said that this is not part of the CIP process. She agrees that it should be discussed, but not for the purposes of passing the CIP. This talks about proposed revenues and not expenditures for CIP. Laura Blackmon said that it would be delineated as a revenue source and it would not be a revenue source for next year, but for the year after. It could be done in conjunction with the CIP, identifying it as a revenue source. Chair Foushee said that this should be flagged with the understanding that the information will be coming back as soon as possible. For the purposes of passing the CIP tonight or in the very near future, that would hold up the process. Commissioner Gordon would like the staff to come back in April with a schedule for divesting as a way to get more revenue. Commissioner Yuhasz said that it is a bad idea to borrow against fund balance to pay things with the promise that it will be paid back with bonds or with borrowing that has not been committed yet. He said that this does not make sense and it is a bad practice. He will vote against any reimbursement resolutions that come forward in the future. Laura Blackmon said that having a CIP gives a better picture of whether or not there is the capability to do these types of reimbursements. Also, if bonds are going to be issued, they have to be spent when they are issued. Commissioner Gordon said that on August 19, 2008 the Commissioners had passed a Reimbursement Resolution for Parks, Recreation, and Open Space and one for Affordable Housing. She distributed a handout that included an excerpt from the minutes of August 19, 2008 showing the Board deliberations and decision on the reimbursement resolutions, along with a copy of the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Reimbursement Resolution. This handout is incorporated into these minutes by reference. Geof Gledhill said that reimbursement resolutions allow timing the placement of debt to avoid paying interest on debt prior to the time when the money is needed. He said that there are times when reimbursement resolutions make sense. Commissioner Yuhasz said that, based on that explanation, he will withdraw his "never." Commissioner Jacobs asked about the $3 million for Information Technology when there is no strategic plan. Donna Coffey said that the $3 million included $2.5 million for the Property Information System. Only $500,000 is pay-as-you-go money. Commissioner Jacobs asked about the $60,000 for the Millhouse Road Park. He asked how this relates to stabilization costs. Donna Coffey said that this is part of the $275,000 for stabilization. Commissioner Jacobs asked about Lake Orange Capital Maintenance. Commissioner Yuhasz said that, in conversations with the County Engineer, he suggested that $75,000 of the requested amount could be shifted to a later year. Commissioner Jacobs said that he flagged this because the Board needs to discuss proceeding with the Link Center renovation. Commissioner Jacobs said that the County Commissioners have received a number of emails from the Arts Commission and he would love to give 1% for art, but this year it does not seem feasible. He would still like to see the $5,000 carried forward so that there is some money for public art. Commissioner Jacobs pointed out that there is no money reserved for future land purchases for Lands Legacy. Commissioner Gordon made reference to the 2001 bond referendum. The Lands Legacy bonds were supposed to be spent by November 2008. The land acquisition, which is covered by the Lands Legacy Action Plan, has some goals to accomplish. The goals are dependent upon the money from 2001 that has not been issued. She said that it is a good time to buy, and the voters approved it. Chair Foushee asked to go back and talk about the Emergency Services Reserve. Commissioner Gordon said that she remembers that it was flagged and on March 51h, staff made a recommendation that it be approved and the funds be released, but the Board never got to it. Laura Blackmon said that part of the presentation tonight was to discuss some of the needs and where some of the funds would be spent. This will be refined. Commissioner Jacobs said that he is willing to approve this if the flagged items could be listed — Emergency Services Reserve, Lake Orange Capital Maintenance, Millhouse Road barn, Public Arts Reserve, and stabilization funds. He said that if these things could be refined, then he would be willing to approve the CIP. Commissioner Gordon said that she would like a further evaluation on the courts facilities item and at least put some money in reserve. Donna Coffey said that the project could be considered a reserve. However, the County Commissioners would be approving a plan and it is a 10-year plan. The County would only be authorized to expend what is brought back in the capital budget which would be in the form of capital project ordinances for 2009-10. The money for the courts and for government services are not even on the radar to expend in the upcoming fiscal year, but in the next year. Commissioner Jacobs said that the Board should assume that the only thing that really counts is this year, with the five stipulated flags. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to approve the FY 2009-19 Recommended County Capital Investment Plan, with the understanding that staff will come back to the Board with the refinement of the Arts Reserve, Stabilization funds for the two park facilities, Millhouse Road money, Emergency Services Reserve, and the Lake Orange Capital Expenditures. Commissioner Gordon said that there is a line item of debt-financing for 2009-10 County telephone replacement project. Laura Blackmon said that this would have to be pushed out to next year's CIP. The County Commissioners agreed to flag this. Commissioner Gordon also pointed out that only $1.5 million is being approved for Information Technology and there is $2.5 million for 2009-10 that is debt-financed. Laura Blackmon said that the $1.5 million is debt-financed and $500,000 is pay-as-you-go. The Board agreed to flag this. Commissioner Jacobs accepted the two items from Commissioner Gordon, in order to include the remaining items under section C of her memorandum that he had not already mentioned. Commissioner Hemminger seconded. VOTE: UNANIMOUS b. Consideration of Official Name for Northern Park (working title) The Board considered a report from the County Manager on a recommendation for approving a name for the Northern Park project, currently under construction on NC 86 northwest of Hillsborough. Dave Stancil asked if signs could be ordered for the grand opening. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to approve a recommendation for approving a name for the Northern Park project, currently under construction on NC 86 northwest of Hillsborough. The name will be Cedar Grove Park. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Commissioner Jacobs asked if the Board would consider inviting Harold Webb to come and speak. He is the Chair of the Wake County Commissioners and was the principal of the elementary school at this site. This was one of the first integrated kindergartens in the State. Laura Blackmon said that he has been contacted to be at the opening. 7. Reports a. Potential Discussion Points for Jordan Lake Nutrient Management Rules Position Statement The Board considered possible discussion points for a position statement and/or resolution regarding the B. Everett Jordan Reservoir (Jordan Lake) Nutrient Management Rules, in response to a draft resolution submitted by the Haw River Assembly, a position statement from the NC Association of County commissioners and potential legislation introduced in this session of the NC General Assembly. Dave Stancil made reference to the chronology of the Jordan Lake Rules issue. He said that the Board can take a position statement and the staff can bring back a resolution. Public Comment: Marilee McTigue thanked the Board for attention to the protection of the watershed. She encouraged the County Commissioners to support the Jordan Lake rules. She said that there is a significant portion of the Haw River watershed that is currently unprotected in Orange County. She asked for the Board's help and support in reassessing the watershed and protecting it. Chair Foushee said that the Board would defer discussion on this item and the remaining items on the agenda. b. Emergency Services —A Performance Report and Recommendations for Improvement The Board was to consider information on changes made within the Emergency Services Department to improve performance and enhance safety throughout Orange County along with projected costs to support and sustain continuous improvement. DEFERRED 8. Board Comments 9. County Manager's Report 10. Appointments ALL DEFERRED a. Affordable Housing Advisory Board — New Appointment The Board was to consider making a new appointment to the Affordable Housing Advisory Board. b. Agricultural Preservation Board — New Appointments The Board was to consider making new appointments to the Agricultural Preservation Board. c. Commission for Women — New Appointment The Board was to consider making one new appointment to the Commission for Women. d. Equalization and Review Board — New Appointments The Board was to consider appointments to the Board of Equalization and Review. e. Orange County Planning Board — New Appointments The Board was to consider making new appointments to the Orange County Planning Board. 11. Information Items • Memo from Animal Services Director and Emergency Services Director Regarding Pet Co- Located Sheltering During Disasters • Orange County Health Department Celebrates National Nutrition Month® March 2009: Eat Right • Status Report—Transfer Station Siting Process and Parallel Investigations 12. Closed Session A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to go into closed session at 10:51 p.m. to: Pursuant to G. S. 143-318.11a3 "To consult with the Attorney retained by the Board in order to preserve the Attorney-Client privilege between the Attorney and the Board." County Attorney Geof Gledhill discussed legal implications of various revaluation options, including responding to "what if" questions from the Board. RECONVENE INTO REGULAR SESSION A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs and seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to reconvene into regular session at 11:57 p.m. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 13. Adjournment A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to adjourn the meeting at 11:57pm. VOTE: UNANIMOUS