Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19910306 , . ►, Approved April 1, 1991 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL MARCH 6, 1991 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in Joint Session with the Chapel Hill Town Council at 5 : 30 p.m. in the Council Meeting Room, Municipal Building, Chapel Hill , North Carolina to discuss legislative matters. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Moses Carey, Jr. , and Commissioners Alice Gordon, Verla Insko and Don Wilihoit. COMMISSIONER ABSENT: Commissioner Stephen Halkiotis COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jonathan Howes, and Council Members Nancy Preston, Joseph Herzenberg , Joyce Brown, and Julie Andresen . COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Council Members Alan Rimer, James Wallace, Arthur Werner, and Roosevelt Wilkerson. ORANGE COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: John Link, County Manger, Ted Abernathy, EDC Director and Kathy Baker, Deputy Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners. ORANGE COUNTY ATTORNEY: Geoff Gledhill CHAPEL HILL STAFF PRESENT: Cal Horton, Town Manager, Pete Richardson, Clerk to the Town Council and Greg Feller, Assistant to the Manager. CHAPEL HILL ATTORNEY: Ralph Karpinos 1 . INTRODUCTIONS Mayor Howes called the meeting to order and stated that the meeting focus would be discussion of the proposed Orange County Visitor Development Authority, as well as the Orange County Impact Tax. Mr. Horton indicated that the information provided by the proposed Visitor's Center Task Force had been evaluated. Staff has researched the idea, and citizen comments have been solicited and received. From an economic standpoint it has been decided that a break-even analysis would be the most effective one to be used. In essence, in carrying out the proposal enough funds would be generated to cover operating costs. The review of potential contributions indicates that this venture could very well be self- supporting. Discussion on the particular services and arrangements for creation would be beneficial . He suggested that "service bureau" or "commissioner" would be a more descriptive title. He also indicated that the details do not need to be worked out before presenting the request for authority to establish this Bureau to the General Assembly. In response to a question from Council Member Preston, Chairman Carey indicated the EDC' s suggestion was that the we request authority for a maximum of a 3% tax . The details of how much would actually be put into effect initially is not necessary for the enabling legislation. Council Member Brown asked if it was possible to request an increase in the tax without indicating the intended use. Chairman Carey indicated that the request could be handled that way. Council Member Andresen indicated that she was interested in discussing what vision the county had for this bureau. She also expressed concern about the bureau's accountability in terms of performance agreements. Chairman Carey indicated that this bureau would capitalize on the "clean industry" which already exists in the county and municipalities with emphasis on getting people who are already coming here to stay longer, as well as to attract small conferences to this area. The details will be worked out after the authority has been granted by the General Assembly. Attracting large conventions to Chapel Hill is not a part of the vision. In response to a question about what this Bureau could do that the Downtown Commission and/or the Chamber of Commerce could not do, Mr. Abernathy indicated y that the Bureau would have an expert on visitor services. Also, their entire focus would be enhancing the visitors experience and encouraging more visitor to stay longer. Mayor Howes indicated that the expertise of the staff at the visitor's bureau was the critical issue, not layering on another level of bureaucarcy. This bureau would not have its own facility and would have a staff of probably two people and certainly no more than three people. Commissioner Willhoit indicated that the request for a 3% tax is not an unreasonable amount compared with what other communities have requested. Seeking the authorization for 3% gives flexibility for the future although 1% may be designated initially. Council Member Brown stated that she felt having the money earmarked for visitors might not be in the Town's best interest. It may be that people w i l l not travel as much in the future and the money could be better spent for purposes other than trying to promote travel to Chapel Hill . Mayor Howes stated that this proposed Bureau would be accountable to the Board of Commissioners and the Town Council . This item will be discussed and voted upon at upcoming meetings of the Chapel Hill Town Council and the Orange County Board of Commissioners. If passed, the General Assembly will be asked to pass enabling legislation. ORANGE COUNTY IMPACT TAX Mr. Gledhill mentioned that the Impact Tax would be much more manageable than trying to administer an Impact Fee. The Impact Fee would require a nexus be established between the development which is occurring and the infrastructure which that development would require. It is a complicated process to keep that nexus in place. That would not be required with an Impact Tax. The tax money would be used for the same purposes. It would be held in capital trusts and would be reserved to be used for the infrastructure that the development creates, however, the calculations would not need to be done. He indicated that this would be a tax on current construction and would not be retroactive. Council Member Preston stated that there is a great deal already required of developers in Chapel Hill . They must pave the roads, landscape, dedicate recreation land, and protect trees. This Impact Tax could place an undue burden on them. Commissioner Willhoit agreed that they are required to do those things, however, they are not required to do anything for the schools. The two systems are requesting upwards of $90,000,000 in capital improvements which could be a property tax impact unless other action is taken. He pointed out that if it were a fee it would be relatively simple to define the impact on water and sewer for residential development. Establishing the impact on the schools would require changing the wording so that it was clearly applicable within all of Orange County. Mr. Gledhill indicated that the Impact Fee authority that the Town has covers their planning jurisdiction. The County's Impact Fee authority covers its planning jurisdiction. There is no overlap. The Impact Tax would be imposed on all development in the County, not just in on section. Commissioner Willhoit remarked that the real impact is in providing the additional classrooms. The largest percentage of the increase in property taxes over the years has been for the schools. The Impact Tax could help offset that increase in the future. Council Member Andresen indicated that she believes further study of the issue isneeded to determine the consequences this tax will have on local developers. Mr. Gledhill indicated that the Impact Tax proposal had two features. It has a district in which the revenue is divided between the town and county, with the town getting the tax collected on development within the Town's jplanning jurisdiction. The rate will be decided jointly by the town and the county. The other feature of the proposal is a county-wide impact tax for school capital which would be retained 100% by the County. The only modification which has been made to the proposal , which was approved by Carrboro/Chapel Hill and Orange County, is a feature which allows the County to have impact fees. This would override the section which states that if we have impact tax authority the impact fee authority is repealed. The only change that has been made would allow the impact fee authority to remain for the county for water and sewer purposes. That is to address the eventuality that the county will have to get into some kind of a governmental monitoring program for alternative water and sewer. If that happens, then the county is going to want to have fees so that there will be a source of money to handle the costs involved. Mr. Link indicated that the intergovernmental work group sent a memorandum to the local jurisdictions, dated February 7 , 1989 ,which addresses many of the questions which have been raised. That memorandum would be a departure point for discussion on this issue. That memorandum is attached. Discussion on this issue was ended. Mayor Howes indicated that the Town of Chapel Hill is pursuing a stable revenue source to support the Triangle Transit Authority. Some of the possible sources they are considering are taxes on rental cars and/or parking. He requested that the county support this request. They are also supporting state wide legislation encouraging beverage container recycling. There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned. Moses Carey, Jr. , Chairman Kathy Baker, Deputy Clerk