Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 01-20-2011 � APPROVED 2/15/2011 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING January 20, 2011 7:00 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Thursday, January 20, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. at the DSS Offices, Hillsborough Commons in Hillsborough, N.C. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Bernadette Pelissier and Commissioners Valerie P. Foushee, Alice M. Gordon, Barry Jacobs, Pam Hemminger, Earl McKee and Steve Yuhasz COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts COUNTY STAFF PRESENT County Manager Frank Clifton, Assistant County Managers Willie Best and Gwen Harvey, and Clerk to the Board Donna S. Baker (All other staff inembers will be identified appropriately below) 1. Additions or Chanqes to the Aqenda The Chair went through the items at the County Commissioners' places. Yellow— public comment from Community Home Trust Blue — a revised resolution for item 6-a — Public Hearing on the Issuance of Up to $9.9 Million of Qualified School Construction Bonds for the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools and Orange County Schools. Rose — staff responses to questions for item 7-c— County Capital Projects Budget Ordinance Amendments — Budget Amendment#6-A. White — PowerPoint presentation for item 8-a — Progress Report on Telecommunication Issues within Orange County and Review of Request to Place Telecommunication Plan Tower Site Map on February 28, 2011 Quarterly Public Hearing. White —revised attachment for water and sewer boundary for item 7-b- Water and Sewer Management, Planning, and Boundary Agreement Clarification. Chair Pelissier said that Commissioner Foushee would be arriving late, around 8-8:30 p.m. PUBLIC CHARGE The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge. 2. Public Comments a. Matters not on the Printed Aqenda Jeff Wiebe presented a letter and summarized it. The letter is as follows: "Dear Sir/Madam, � On January 4, 2011 I realized that the Duke power had been shut off I a vacant residence which I own at 3320 Southern Drive in Efland. The home in question is a 3 bedroom 2 bath single family house. I initially purchased the home in November of 2009 from a house move named Rich Swain. The house was a 4 bedroom duplex at that time and was moved from University Station in Chapel Hill to a vacant lot which I own in Efland. Following the move, I hired THD Construction to build the foundation, set the home, and complete the renovations. A commercial office development has now been built on the lot the home was removed from in Chapel Hill. When I contacted Duke Power regarding the disconnection, they advised me that the permanent power could not be turned on prior to receiving a certificate of occupancy (CO) from Orange County. When I contacted the Orange County Building Department, they advised me that needed to pay $3,000.00 for"impact fees" before they would issue a CO. The renovation of this building was completed in April of 2010, all final inspections were approved and the power had been turned on. The first I heard of these "impact fees" was yesterday. While I have 2 children currently attending the Orange County School system, I cannot understand why the County now insists that I pay an impact fee for a home that was simply moved within the County. In fact, Section 4 of the ordinance, entitled "Public School Impact Fee Exceptions," contains the following language which applies to my home: `Residential dwelling units for which a building permit was obtained prior to the effective date of this ordinance' (effective date July 1, 1993). A `dwelling unit' is defined under the ordinance as, `A room or group of rooms forming a single independent habitable unit with facilities used or intended to be used for living, sleeping, cooking, and eating by one family.' Clearly, the ordinance accepts homes built prior to July 1, 1993. My home falls within this exception as the original building permits were issued and approved in the 1970's when the duplex was originally constructed. Unfortunately, the building department seems to think that this is of no relevance in assessing this fee. The focus of the building department seems to be that the dirt in Efland was previously undeveloped; therefore, the fee is proper. Unfortunately, the ordinance makes no reference to the lot, and only refers to the "dwelling unit," which in my case, by statutory definition, was permitted and built well before the 1993 ordinance. Furthermore, the ordinance accepts homes which are merely renovated. Once the house was set, the siding was replaced and utilities installed. The house was painted, carpets installed and the wood floors refinished. These types of renovations are clearly accepted from the impact fees by Section 4(3). The ordinance aside, and speaking in common sense only, I have in fact removed a duplex from Chapel Hill which could have housed as many as six school aged children (the parents having separate bedrooms). A commercial development has now replaced this lot and no children will live on that property again in our lifetimes. The house has now been reduced to a 3 bedroom single family residential unit and may house as many as four children. In all fairness, I have in fact REDUCED the impact on the Orange County School System rather than increased it. Should the county continue to exact these fees from small time owners like myself, they will, in effect, be placing an unfortunate burden on the ecosystem. Rather than being moved and renovated, as here, reusable homes will simply be destroyed and sent to the dump based � on cost effectiveness. I remain hopeful that the protection of our ecosystem is still a primary concern of our Orange County officials. Please contact me at your earliest convenience to further discuss this matter. I would appreciate this item being placed on the commission's agenda, should you feel that a clarification or amendment to the current ordinance is in order. In the meantime, my house is without power, tenants of the ability to attract tenants, awaiting your decision on the matter. I thank you in advance for your earliest attention to this matter and look forward to hearing from you." Robert Dowling from Community Home Trust provided a letter, as follows: "Dear Chair Pelissier and the Board of County Commissioners: I am very pleased to report that Community Home Trust had a remarkable year in 2010. In fact, we had a remarkable 18 months going back to July of 2009. I would like to thank the County Commissioners for your support of our work and provide you with a quick update on where we stand with regard to accomplishments and challenges: - In fiscal year 2009-10, we sold 54 homes, 43 of which were new to our inventory of permanently affordable homes. Most of the new homes were condominiums in the East 54 and Greenbridge developments. - In the calendar year 2010, we sold 39 homes, 31 of which were new to the Home Trust. - As of December 31, 2010, there were 191 homes in our inventory, up from 137 homes in July of 2009. That represents a 39% increase in our inventory in 18 months. - The following statistics characterize the owners of our 191 homes: o Average household size is two people o Average income is $36,598 0 48% are employed at UNC, UNC Healthcare or the public schools 0 46% have children 0 34% are self-identified as minorities 0 91.5% earn 80% of inedian income or less - The buyers of our East 54 and Greenbridge condominiums are: o Smaller households (most are single people) o With less income (average is $33,300) o A greater percentage work at UNC - As of December 31, 2010, our housing inventory consisted of: 0 36 detached single-family homes (18% of total) 0 87 townhomes (46% of total) 0 69 condominiums (36% of total) You may recall that in 2007 we revised our model to address long-term affordability and maintenance of our housing stock. At that time we determined it would require about $3 million over 25 years to address these challenges. We have recently updated our progress and remaining challenges in both of these areas: - Since March of 2007, we have used almost $400,000 of subsidy to keep 35 homes affordable when they resold. Most of those funds were HOME or CDBG funds from HUD. � - We are projecting a need for$1.13 million to maintain the affordability of our housing stock between now and 2020. This amount will increase if mortgage rates rise above 6% in the future. - Since March 2007, the Home Trust has contributed over$90,000 of our own funds towards maintenance of our properties. We expect to make additional contributions in the current fiscal year. - We are projecting a need for$1.17 million over the next 25 years to address the maintenance challenge. The Chapel Hill Town Council is aware that affordable homes in inclusionary neighborhoods need to be well maintained and they have asked Town staff to identify sources of funding to meet this need. Although we continue to face challenges, including a difficult housing market, reluctant mortgage lenders and the prospect of higher interest rates, Community Home Trust is a strong organization with a dedicated staff and board. We are viewed as a model by communities throughout North Carolina and beyond. None of this would be possible without the support we receive from the local governments, particularly the Town Council and the Board of County Commissioners. Again, on behalf of the board, staff and 191 homeowners of the Home Trust, I want to thank the County Commissioners for all the support you have provided us over the years. If you have questions or would like additional information about our work, please let me know." b. Matters on the Printed Aqenda (These matters were considered when the Board addressed that item on the agenda below.) 3. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations a. Affordable Housinq PerFormance Report The Board received a presentation on the Annual Affordable Housing Performance Report from the Orange County Affordable Housing Advisory Board. Patsy Barbee, Chair of Affordable Housing Advisory Board, presented the 7th Annual Affordable Housing Performance Report and calendar. b. Proclamation Acknowledqinq February as "Human Relations Month" The Board considered a proclamation to recognize the month of February as "Human Relations Month" in Orange County and authorizing the Chair to sign. Human Relations Commission Chair Bryant Colson read the proclamation. HUMAN RELATIONS MONTH PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, the Orange County Human Relations Commission believes that in order to achieve justice and equal opportunity for all Orange County residents, we must all strive to create an atmosphere where people are valued and accepted rather than merely tolerated, and therefore continue to promote the ideal of social justice for all; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Human Relations Commission has diligently served the County of Orange since 1995 and is committed to promoting equal treatment, opportunity and understanding throughout the community; and � WHEREAS, the County's Civil Rights Ordinance specifically prohibits discrimination based on an individual's race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, veteran status and familial status; and WHEREAS, the County recognizes the dignity and worth of each individual and desires to promote and maintain a climate of good will among individuals, races, ethnic groups and persons of varying social, religious and economic status, ancestry, sexual orientation, marital status or status with regard to public assistance; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Human Relations Commission encourages Orange County residents, as individuals, to take a stand against social injustice and continue to work together to make freedom, justice, and equal opportunity available for all; and WHEREAS, Orange County is committed to preserving the progress made thus far towards equality and leading the challenge for equal opportunity using all the means at our disposal; NOW, THEREFORE, We, the Board of County Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina, do hereby proclaim February 2011 as "HUMAN RELATIONS MONTH" in Orange County and challenge County residents to promote the ideology of social justice for all and to celebrate multiculturalism in our county by encouraging residents to embrace our diversity. This the 20t`' day of January, 2011. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to approve a proclamation to recognize the month of February as "Human Relations Month" in Orange County and authorize the Chair to sign. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Bryant Colson invited the County Commissioners to the Human Relations Month kickoff on January 30th at the Carrboro Century Center from 3-5 p.m. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA: 4. Consent Aqenda A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to approve those items on the consent agenda as stated below: a. Minutes The Board approved the minutes from November 9, 16, 18 and 22 (5:30 and 7:00 p.m.) as submitted by the Clerk to the Board. b. Appointments (1) Commission for the Environment— Reappointments The Board reappointed Lucy Adams to the Air Quality position to a second full term expiring December 31, 2013; Loren HintZ to the Biological Resources position to a full term expiring December 31, 2013; Christopher Adams to an At-Large position to a full term expiring December 31, 2013; Lynnette Batt to an At-Large position to a full term expiring � December 31, 2013; and Renee Price to an At-Large position to a full term expiring December 31, 2013. c. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Release/Refunds The Board adopted a refund resolution, which is incorporated by reference, related to 71 requests fro motor vehicle property tax releases or refunds in accordance with NCGS. d. Property Tax Releases and/or Refunds The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release property values related to twenty-eight (28) requests fro property tax release and/or refund in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 105-381. e. Applications for Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion The Board approved the resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to approve five (5) untimely applications for exemption/exclusion from ad valorem taxation for the 2010 tax year. f. Amendment to the Oranqe County Personnel Ordinance, Article IV, Section 6.0, Sick Leave and Correction of Previous Amendment to Article VI, Sections 5.1 and 5.2 of The Position Classification Plan This item was removed and placed later in the agenda for when Commissioner Foushee could arrive, since a unanimous vote is required. g_ Notice of Public Hearinq on Oranqe County's 2011 Leqislative Aqenda 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 February 1, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. at the Department of Social Services — Hillsborough Commons at 113 Mayo Street in Hillsborough, North Carolina to receive public comments on potential items for inclusion in Orange County's legislative agenda package for the 2011 North Carolina General Assembly Session. h. NC State Firemen's and Rescue Squad Annual Certification Roster The Board approved the certification requirements for the Assistant Fire Marshal and staff to participate in the North Carolina State Firemen's Association for the year 2011 and authorized the Chair to sign. i. Approval to Extend the East Oranqe Fire Insurance District Boundary The Board approved the East Orange Fire Insurance District Map, which is incorporated by reference, which has been expanded to include properties from the Little River Fire District that are currently not in an insurance district. i Renewal of Urban Curbside Recyclinq Services Aqreement The Board approved the agreement with Waste Industries, LLC of Durham, NC for the provision of Urban Curbside Recycling Collection Services effective April 1, 2011 through June 30, 2012 and authorized the Chair to sign. k. Oranqe County Landfill Enqineerinq Services Aqreement The Board approved an addendum to the existing agreement for general engineering and environmental services for the Solid Waste Department with Draper Aden Associates for professional engineering services for three additional years through January 19, 2014 and authorized the Chair to sign. I. Fiscal Year 2010-11 Budqet Amendment #6 The Board approved budget, grant, and capital project ordinance amendments for fiscal year 2010-11 for Department on Aging, Health Department, Department of Social Services, Library Services, Department of Environmental, Agriculture, and Parks and Recreation, School Capital Projects, and Alternative Financed Capital Projects. m. Chanqe in BOCC Reqular Meetinq Schedule for 2011 � The Board changed the date of the Orange County Legislative Breakfast from February 7, 2011 to Monday, February 28, 2011 at 8:00 a.m. at the Link Government Services Center, 200 South Cameron Street, Hillsborough, N. C. VOTE ON CONSENT AGENDA: UNANIMOUS 5. Items Removed From Consent Aqenda f. Amendment to the Oranqe County Personnel Ordinance, Article IV, Section 6.0, Sick Leave and Correction of Previous Amendment to Article VI, Sections 5.1 and 5.2 of The Position Classification Plan The Board considered an amendment to the Orange County Personnel Ordinance, Article IV, Section 6.0, Sick Leave, to align Sick Leave accrual and usage with Annual Leave and to correct the September 2, 2010 amendment to Article VI, Theo Position Classification Plan, Sections 5.1 and 5.2. Frank Clifton asked that this be deferred until Commissioner Foushee is here, because it requires a unanimous vote. DEFERRED 6. Public Hearinqs a. Public Hearinq on the Issuance of Up to $9.9 Million of Qualified School Construction Bonds for the Chapel Hill — Carrboro City Schools and Oranqe County Schools The Board conducted an additional public hearing on the proposed issuance of up to $9.9 million of Qualified School Construction Bonds for the Chapel Hill — Carrboro City Schools and Orange County Schools due to the revised public hearing notice dated Sunday, January 2, 2011; and to approve the Resolution Providing Final Approval of Terms and Documents for QSCB School Improvements Financing. Financial Services Director Clarence Grier introduced this item. The plan is to close next Tuesday on the QSCBs. The recommendation is to approve the resolution, which approves the financing. No public comment. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to close the public hearing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to approve the Resolution Providing Final Approval of Terms and Documents for QSCB School Improvements Financing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Resolution Providinq Final Approval of Terms and Documents for QSCB School Improvements Financinq WHEREAS: Orange County has been asked by the Boards of Education for both Orange County Schools and the Chapel Hill — Carrboro City Schools to cooperate in the construction and financing of various public school improvements, including construction of a new auditorium � wing at Stanford Middle School, various roof replacements and renovations for Orange County Schools, and various roof replacements for the Chapel Hill — Carrboro City Schools. The County has also stated an intent to finance project costs by the use of an installment contract, as authorized under Section 160A-20 of the North Carolina General Statutes, that qualifies as a "qualified school construction bond" (a "QSCB"). The Finance Officer has obtained for the County a proposal from Branch Banking and Trust Company ("BB&T) to provide the QSCB installment financing to the County. The Finance Officer has made available to this Board the draft agreements listed on Exhibit A (the "Agreements"), which relate to the County's carrying out the QSCB financing plan. BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina, as follows: 1. Determination To Proceed with Financing— The County confirms its plans to undertake and finance the Project. The County accepts a proposal from BB&T dated November 29, 2010, to provide Project financing. Under the financing plan, BB&T will make funds available to the County for use on Project costs. The County will repay the amount advanced over time. As part of the financing plan, the Orange County School Board will convey C.W. Stanford Middle School (and its associated real property) to the County, so that the transferred property can provide collateral for the financing. The County will grant to BB&T a mortgage-type interest in the property to secure the County's repayment obligation. 2. Approval of Agreements; Direction To Execute Documents--The Board approves the forms of the Agreements submitted to this meeting. The Board authorizes and directs the Board's Chairman and the County Manager, or either of them, to execute and deliver the Agreements in their final forms. The Agreements in their respective final forms must be in substantially the forms presented, with such changes as the Chairman or the County Manager may approve. The Agreements in final form, however, must be consistent with the financing plan described in this resolution and must provide (a) for the amount financed by the County not to exceed $9,899,439.78, (b) for an annual interest rate to the County not to exceed 5.49%. (in the absence of a default or a change in tax status), and (c) for a financing term not to extend beyond December 31, 2026. In addition, the Board's Chairman and the County Manager, or either of them, are authorized and directed to approve, execute and deliver any further documents and agreements they deem desirable for carrying out the purposes and intents of this resolution. It is the Board's understanding that the financing documents may include (a) a lease agreement, providing for the School Board to continue to use the transferred school property during the term of the financing, and (b) an agreement under which the School Board will carry out the planned school improvements on the County's behalf. The execution and delivery of any document by an authorized officer will be conclusive evidence of his approval of the final form of such document. � 3. Authorization to County Manager and Finance Officer To Complete Closing — The County Manager, the Finance Officer and all other County officers and employees are authorized and directed to take all proper steps to complete the financing in cooperation with BB&T and in accordance with the terms of this resolution. The Board authorizes and directs the Finance Officer to enter into an agreement with BB&T to formalize the County's commitment to complete the financing with BB&T and thereby establish a "sale date" for the transaction for the purpose of determining the tax credit rate to be applicable to the transaction for BB&T. The Board authorizes and directs the Finance Officer to hold executed copies of all financing documents authorized or permitted by this resolution in escrow on the County's behalf until the conditions for their delivery have been completed to such officer's satisfaction, and thereupon to release the executed copies of such documents for delivery to the appropriate persons or organizations. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Board specifically authorizes the Finance Officer to approve changes to any documents, agreements or certifications previously signed by County officers or employees, provided that such changes do not conflict with this resolution or substantially alter the intent from that expressed in the form originally signed. The Finance Officer's authorization of the release of any such document for delivery will constitute conclusive evidence of such officer's approval of any such changes. In addition, the Finance Officer is authorized and directed to take all appropriate steps for the efficient and convenient carrying out of the County's on-going responsibilities with respect to the financing of the Project. This authorization includes, without limitation, contracting with third parties for reports and calculations that may be required under this resolution or otherwise with respect to the Agreements. 4. Resolutions As To Tax Matters--The County will not take or omit to take any action the taking or omission of which will cause its obligations to pay principal and interest (the "Obligations") to be "arbitrage bonds," within the meaning of Section 148 of the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, including the applicable Treasury regulations (the "Code"), or"private activity bonds" within the meaning of Code Section 141. 5. Designation as a QSCB— The County designates the Obligations as a "qualified school construction bond" for the purposes of, and within the meaning of, Code Section 54F and related Code provisions. The County and BB&T intend that the financing will qualify as a QSCB. 6. Miscellaneous Provisions--All County officers and employees are authorized and directed to take all such further action as they may consider necessary or desirable in furtherance of the purposes of this resolution. All such prior actions of County officers and employees are ratified, approved and confirmed. Upon the absence, unavailability or refusal to act of the County Manager, the Board's Chairman or the Finance Officer, any other of such officers may assume any responsibility or carry out any function assigned in this resolution. In addition, the Vice Chairman or any Deputy or Assistant Clerk to the Board may in any event assume any responsibility or carry out any function assigned to the Chairman or the Clerk, � respectively, in this resolution. All other Board proceedings, or parts thereof, in conflict with this resolution are repealed, to the extent of the conflict. This resolution takes effect immediately. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Exhibit A -- Draft Aqreements (a) A draft dated December 20, 2010, of a Financing Agreement and Deed of Trust to be dated on or about January 20, 2011 (the "Financing Contract"), from the County for the benefit of BB&T, providing for the advance of funds to the County for the County's undertaking of the Project, setting out the terms of the County's promise and obligation to repay the amount financed and to care for the collateral, and providing for a security interest in C.W. Stanford Middle School (and its associated real property) to secure the County's obligations. (b) A draft dated December 20, 2010, of a Project Fund Agreement to be dated on or about January 20, 2011, between the County and BB&T, providing for the custody and investment of financing proceeds pending their application to Project costs. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger seconded by Commissioner McKee to approve the Resolution Providing Final Approval of Terms and Documents for QSCB School Improvements Financing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 7. Reqular Aqenda a. Lonq-Term Affordability Policy Exception Request The Board considered a request from the Community Home Trust to allow a change in the period of affordability for a low-income housing tax credit project known as the Landings at Winmore. Housing and Community Development Director Tara Fikes introduced this item. The County had allocated $300,000 in HOME money to this project. In the process of trying to finalize documents related to that $300,000, both the Home Trust and the project developer, Croasland LLC, questioned whether the requirement that the property stay affordable for 99 years was necessary in this case because there is a 30-year period of affordability, for the tax credit program that they might be able to use. Since that time, the staff has continued to work with the documents needed for the HOME program, and they have now decided that the 99 year issue is not a problem for this project, but staff is suggesting to still reevaluate the 99 year requirement that is contained in the County's Long-Term Housing Affordability Policy and come back to the Board in a few months with some suggestions. Frank Clifton said that the issue at stake is that 99 years may create hurdles in financing. Staff wants to look at this and come back with a recommendation. Commissioner Jacobs said that the Affordable Housing Advisory Board should have an opportunity to look at this and make comments. There was also a discussion before the break about what constitutes an adequate item in the agenda as far as background documents, and this was a discussion that the County Commissioners went into. He said that the issue of guaranteed affordability for 99 years came from Magnolia Place, which was an affordable housing development, which did not have guaranteed affordability, and as soon as the houses flipped, they went on the market at market value. He said that 99 years might be an � overreaction, but it was done as part of a careful deliberation. He suggested that the staff look at the background information on this issue. Frank Clifton said that the staff was going to recommend denying this on the basis of past practices. However, knowing the way the banks are, the concern was that it would be difficult to facilitate these kinds of projects in the future related to financing. Commissioner Gordon reiterated that there are reasons why the Commissioners developed a policy for 99 years. It was because taxpayers subsidize projects on the premise that these projects will be kept affordable for a long time. She said that it makes sense to let AHAB review and also to get past minutes and documentation about why the Board chose 99 years when it developed its affordable housing policy. Commissioner McKee said that he would like to know what effect, if any, there would be if these homes become uninhabitable. Tara Fikes said that she would investigate this. Frank Clifton said that if there are any elements of this request that need in depth research, then staff needs to know now. PUBLIC COMMENT: Robert Dowling — no comments Dean Edwards is Vice President for Affordable Housing of Crosland LLC. He thanked Dr. Fikes for working with them on getting this resolved. He said that the 99 year element came up when they were considering a tax credit rental property and there was an equity investor involved in the tax credits. He said that revisiting it with the AHAB is a great idea. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to send this back for review to the Manager, departments, and the Affordable Housing Advisory Board. VOTE: UNANIMOUS b. Water and Sewer Manaqement, Planninq, and Boundary Aqreement (WASMPBA) Clarification The Board considered approving a resolution related to a clarification within the WASMPBA and a transmittal letter. Planning Director Craig Benedict said that on December 9th OWASA put forth a resolution for a clarification to this agreement that was approved in 2001. The letter regarding this is on pages 7-9 of the agenda abstract. This letter sets forth the justification for the need for a clarification. The clarification is for OWASA to transfer water in non-emergency situations to our partners from Jordan Lake and to make sure these waters can be transferred around through our partners. He said that now the Town of Hillsborough would like an allocation from Jordan Lake, and there is a revised agreement. If the Board approves this, it would be allowing OWASA, Hillsborough, and Orange County to have non-emergency water transfers from Jordan Lake. He said that Commissioner Gordon added some comments and the staff is ok with these. Commissioner Gordon said that she read the agreement and talked to the County Attorney and she thinks that it is important that the Board see this amendment in the context of the entire agreement. She said that the proposed language is very broad. She asked John Roberts to speak to this agreement. John Roberts agreed with Commissioner Gordon in that the language is fairly broad. He said that the only way for OWASA to get water from Jordan Lake is to go through Chatham County. To do that, it has to have the approval of the Chatham County Commissioners if OWASA wants to condemn any property for transmission lines, or even if they want to � purchase any property for transmission lines. Chatham County will probably demand some type of water service for the people that live along those lines. OWASA can make the same demands of Orange County if it tries to remove its 1 million gallon a day allotment. He would like to know the intent of the Board because language can be modified to allow OWASA to enter into an agreement with Chatham County if necessary to get the transmission lines that are needed. Commissioner Gordon said that even her language may still be too broad with respect to whether or not customers outside of Orange County will be served or not. She said that it would be important to understand that Orange County is part of a partnership and the partners are supposed to be cooperating in obtaining their requested alllocations. She thinks the Board needs a review of the issues and how specifically to craft this language. Commissioner Yuhasz made reference to Commissioner Gordon's comment about serving customers outside of Orange County and asked if this was something that the County should not do. Commissioner Gordon said that she does not want to do it without knowing what they are getting into. She does not think that the Board understands what the consequences will be and the County Commissioners need to get more information on the entire agreement before making any decisions. Commissioner Yuhasz said that he does not see a problem given that the County can set the boundaries within the agreement to allow the possibility of transferring water out of the County. Craig Benedict said that this is the only section that was the focus and no boundaries were changed at all. The map from 2001 is the same. He made reference to page 13, Section F, which says that Orange County can only serve its customers. Chair Pelissier said that she had been told that the impetus for this change was related to the Jordan Lake allocation process and that if OWASA did not make the change, then that would put OWASA at greater risk of not getting this allocation with the new process. She saw some materials on the relevant website and she did not understand it to say that there would be greater risk for getting an allocation. She would like some clarification on what role that may play. Executive Director of OWASA Ed Kerwin said that the State has opened an allocation process for Jordan Lake and the Jordan Lake partners are regionally looking at the needs. This will end up in a process to make a formal request of the State for possibly a new allocation. In OWASA's case, it wants to retain its existing allocation, which is equivalent to 5 million gallons a day. OWASA has to demonstrate the need for that. In OWASA's case, in 2010 it completed an update of the 50-year water supply plan. He said that it is extremely important that OWASA justify the need and show that it has the support of local governments and that there are no impediments that would keep them from accessing their allocation when needed. Frank Clifton said that this is a first step and there are some concerns long-term about water allocation for Orange County. As the County begins to expand in Mebane and Durham to extend utilities along I-85 and US 70, it will be important to make sure there is enough capacity to serve these developments. The staff is going to recommend that the County apply for an additional 1 million gallon allocation. Hillsborough is also intending to apply for an allocation. John Roberts said that there are other sections that protect from providing service outside of Orange County, but this proposed language preempts that, and he read, "Nothing herein shall be construed to prevent OWASA from entering into agreements as necessary to provide for water transfer." He said that he brought this to the Board's attention because the original agreement was clear that it did not want service outside of Orange County. � Ed Kerwin said that OWASA was not looking to change the boundaries or serve customers outside of the current area. He said that they want to do the most responsible thing to do for the current and future customers within those defined areas. Commissioner Jacobs asked about the timing of submitting this to the State. Craig Benedict said that it is a lengthy process. Ed Kerwin said that it is subject to change, but the last information from Jordan Lake Partnership was somewhere in the May/June timeframe of submitting an application. Commissioner Jacobs asked if the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro had seen this and Ed Kerwin said that the letter also went to the three mayors — Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Hillsborough. Craig Benedict said that part of tonight's action would be to transmit a letter with revised language to include Orange County and Hillsborough. Commissioner Jacobs made reference to the first page and the full red line about the one million gallon per day allocation. He said that this is something that bothers him. He said that Hillsborough did have an allocation and they decided that they did not want to pay for it and gave it up. Orange County has been paying every year. He said that if this resolution is going to say how much OWASA has paid, this resolution needs to say how much Orange County has paid. He said that it seems that if the State has had the County paying all these years and then there is a new plan with no payment, then he would like to get the money back. He would like to ask for this money back in a separate resolution because it has had no bearing on an allocation of water from Jordan Lake. He suggested that OWASA do the same thing. Ed Kerwin said that during the last round of allocation, OWASA voluntarily asked to reduce the allocation from 10 to 5 million gallons per day and the State did reimburse. Commissioner Jacobs made reference to the point that Commissioner Gordon is making and said that there is a context to this. This agreement was carefully crafted to balance concerns of four governments and OWASA. He said that this is a very truncated version. He urged staff to give more context, so that the Board is grounded with the right kind of information. Commissioner Gordon said that she thinks that there is time to get it right. Chair Pelissier asked when OWASA needed to have this done and when this is scheduled to be considered by the Towns of Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Hillsborough. Frank Clifton said that Hillsborough will review it on January 24th. Craig Benedict said that Chapel Hill and Carrboro both have it scheduled within the next two weeks. Commissioner Jacobs said that he does not think that Orange County needs permission from Chapel Hill and Carrboro to apply for an allocation from Jordan Lake. Ed Kerwin said that it is not necessary to act tonight, but it is important to wrap this up by the spring and absolutely before summer break. Commissioner Yuhasz said that the County Attorney has said that the language as presented here would void all of the boundary restrictions included in the rest of the agreement, and he would like him to review the language to make sure that this is not done. He does not want the flexibility of the language to void the rest of the agreement. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to refer this back to Manager/Attorney/relevant staff and the towns to provide a review of the proposed language changes in the context of the entire agreement, give the pros and cons for the proposed changes, and confer with the staff of the towns so as to craft language that takes into account the input from the staff of the county and towns. The information will also include how much money the County has spent to date on this. Craig Benedict asked if there was intent to include Orange County and the Town of Hillsborough in this agreement and the Board said yes. � VOTE: UNANIMOUS c. County Capital Projects Budqet Ordinance Amendments — Budqet Amendment #6 —A The Board considered approving Budget Amendment#6-A for$13,097, 651 for the County Capital Projects Fund. The proposed correct project budgets for the Lands Legacy (Attachment 1), Conservation Easements (Attachment 2), and Efland Sewer Development (Attachment 3) are shown in the background section of the agenda materials. Michael Talbert presented this item. He referred to the rose-colored handout which pertains to this item. The last two pages the County Commissioners have not seen before. Page 9 gives additional information describing how the proposed corrected budget figure of $6, 010, 452 was derived for the Lands Legacy Project Budget. Page 10 gives a description of the Lands Legacy Project Ordinance Duplicate Projects. The information on pages 9 and 10 is attached and hereby made a part of these minutes. This is a very large budget amendment of $13,097,651. He said that there is no financial impact of this amendment. This is a correction of prior years' double budgeting of three basic projects — Lands Legacy, Conservation Easements, and Efland Sewer extension and development. There is background on each of these three items in the abstract. Information given below contains staff responses to Commissioner Gordon and Commissioner McKee's questions regarding this item. Questions from Commissioner Gordon: All, Here are my initial comments and questions for Item 7-c (County Capital Projects - Budget Amendment#6-A) with special attention to the Lands Legacy section of this item. My intent is to make sure that we all agree on the basic information that is the foundation on which the dollar amounts in this agenda item are based. After that is done, I may or may not need more information. A. General obligation bonds My recollection concerning the 2001 "Parks and Open Space Bond" and the budget for the "Lands Legacy Program" is different from some of the information shown in this agenda item. For example, on page 3 of the agenda abstract it is stated that the 2001 bond referendum included $17,000,000 for Parks and Open Space. I have attached the bond brochure which shows that the amount for Parks, Recreation and Open Space was $20,000,000, not $17,000,000. Of that amount there was $13,000,000 for specific projects and $7,000,000 for"Land Acquisition for Future Parks and Nature Preserves (Lands Legacy Program)." See page 4 of the attachment. My recollection of the 1997 bond referendum is that it included $3 million for land acquisition (Lands Legacy) and $3 million for parks projects. � My first request is that staff verify this information on the two bond referenda. What are the correct amounts for the 1997 bond and the 2001 bond? B. Lands Legacy budget The next thing to do is to determine the correct amount for the 1997 bonds and the 2001 bonds in the Lands Legacy Project Budget, and how those amounts were determined. We should be clear about what is included in the Lands Legacy Program and what is not. For example, on page 4 of the agenda abstract, it is stated that funding the following three projects should have reduced the Lands Legacy project by $1,700,000: Homestead Aquatics, Cedar Grove Park, Fairview Park. According to my understanding, these three projects were to be funded from the $13 million dedicated to specific projects and not from the $7 million for Lands Legacy. That is because the Lands Legacy Program is for land acquisition for future parks and nature preserves. What is the staff understanding of which projects are to be funded from Lands Legacy funds, and which projects are to be funded from funds for parks and other specific projects? Thank you in advance for your response to these questions and comments. Alice Gordon MEMORANDUM To: Clarence Grier, Director of Financial Services From: Michael Talbert, Deputy Director of Financial Services Date: January 19, 2011 Re:Response to Question from Commissioner Alice Gordon Question: Item 7-c A. General Obligation Bonds Yes you are correct in 2001 the voters of Orange County approved the issuance of $75 million dollar of General Obligation Bonds. Included in the $75 million total was $20 million approved for Parks and Open Space. And, in 1997 the voters approved a $56 million dollar Bond Referendum which included $6 million for parks and recreation facilities. There was $3 million, included the $6 million, pledged for the development of park facilities. � November 2001 Parks and Open Space Bonds: Authorized $20,000,000 Issued as of 12/31/08 $14,500,000 Authorized and unissued 12/31/08 $ 5,500,000 On April 24, 2009 the BOCC approved the issuance of $28.2 million of alternative financing bank qualified tax exempt debt, including $2.8 million for parks and open space. The BOCC approved the $2.8 million to replace part of the $5.5 million originally authorized in 2001 but lapsed in 2008. It is the intent of BOCC to issue the remaining $2.7 million for Parks and Open Space when financing is sought for elementary#11. 4/24/09 Alternative Debt Financing $ 2,800,000 6/16/09 Capital Project Ordinance Amendments - Projects Funded Homestead Aquatics $ 500,000 Closed Cedar Grove Park 500,000 Active Fairview Park 700,000 Active Lands Legacy 1,100,000 Active Total $ 2,800.000 Attached are the minutes from the BOCC meeting on 6/16/09 � J� as general abligation bonds, or as alterna�ive financing. 3. Provide to fhe BOCC in the fall, preferably in September 2009, a status report an the 2001 bond projects, including the amount of 2001 bond funds {or substituted alterna#ive financir�g) thafi was spent or� eacn project. 4. Adopt the "'Capital Project Manitoring and Administratiue Pro�edures" in principle and provide the two school systems with an opportunity to camment. TW� ADDITIONAL POlNTS Gommissioner Gordon made twa additional paints abaut the capital praject ordinances. A. The Lands Legacy capital project orc[inance was added to the agenda. Cammissioner Gordon noted that the Lar�ds �egacy capital project ordinance was added ta the agenda for this item, and therefore that ordinance should be inc[uded in the ones that are approved. See the dark pink sheet that had the revised a�enda item alang with the ardinance. B. Gary Humphreys provided ansvvers to questions in the second mema (6-2e). Commissioner Gordon also noted that the Commissioners received an email from Gary Humphreys giving answers ta questions in her secand memo, and she read same of fihe answers infio the recard, Carnmissioner Jacobs said that�t the meeting in May he raised a questian about the Schoal Capi#al Reserve Fund, which Gary Humphreys was not clear about—what it was, where the maney eame fram, and what its original purpose had besn. Gary Hurnphreys said it has been budgeted for construcfion and a lot of ather different purpases in the past. SQme af it was transferred back to the general fund. Commissianer Jacobs asked for staff to ga through and find when the fund was started and history and how it was used and if it is necessary in 2009- 1 U. A motion was rnade by Comrnissioner Gordon, seeanded by Cammissioner Nelson to: 'I. Approve the amended capital praject ardinances, as revised by the Commissioners during their discussion. This means that it is the capital project ordinances themselves that are being approved, and not the text explaining the ardinances in other parks af the agenda materials. 2. Apprave the fol[owing statement with respect to the relationship of the 20U1 bands and alternative financing: � 37 The Board of Gounty Commissioners {BOCC) has autnorized the substitution of alternative financing far cerkain prajects approved by the voters in the 2a01 bond referendum. In the future the remaining $2.7 million debt may be issued as gen�ral obligatian bonds, or as alternative financing. 3. Pravide to the BOGC in the fall, preferably in September 2009, a status report on the�OC�1 bond projects, includin� the amaunt of 2001 bond funds (or substitut�d alternative financing) that was spent on each project. 4. Adopt the "Capita( Project Monitaring and Administrative Procedures'" in principle and provide the twa school systems with an opportunity to c�mment. 5. Direct staff to make a reporfi on the Schoo! Capita3 Reserve Fund, 'sncluding a defini#ion of v�rhat ifi is and the history of its use. VCJTE: UNANIMC}US B. Lands Legacy Budget David Stancil provides the Board an annual update called the "Lands Legacy Funds Status Report" each year. He is scheduled to present this update to the BOCC at the February 15, 2011 Board Meeting. Attached is information on Lands Legacy expenditures furnished to the Board as of July 1, 2009. With the approval of items 7.c & 7.d on 1/20/11 we will close out much of the Lands Legacy 10 year history. Financial Services and the Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks and Recreation are in agreement as to the remaining funds available for future Lands Legacy projects as of July 1, 2010. I will be glad to sit down with every Commissioner and go over all projects funded over the past 11 years and the funding sources for each project if that will help you understand the history of Lands Legacy. MEMORANDUM To: Clarence Grier, Director of Financial Services From: Michael Talbert, Deputy Director of Financial Services Date: January 14, 2011 � Re:Response to Question from Commissioner Earl McKee Question: What was the amount of alternative debt financing sold to replace Parks and Open Space Bonds authorized in 2001, since the authorization lapsed in 2008? Specifically what was the amount of alternative debt financing sold for Lands Legacy projects, and which projects were financed with the proceeds from the sale? Background: In 2001 the voters of Orange County approved the issuance of $75 million dollar of General Obligation Bonds. Included in the $75 million total was $20 million approved for Parks and Open Space. There is a 7 year window to issue General Obligation Bonds after the voters authorized the bonds in November 2001. As of the end of 2008 only $14.5 million of the authorized Parks and Open Space bonds had been issued and the authorization to issue the additional $5.5 million lapsed. On April 24, 2009 the BOCC approved the issuance of $28.2 million of alternative financing bank qualified tax exempt debt, including $2.8 million for parks and open space. The BOCC approved the $2.8 million to replace part of the $5.5 million originally authorized in 2001 but lapsed in 2008. It is the intent of BOCC to issue the remaining $2.7 million for Parks and Open Space when financing is sought for elementary#11. 4/24/09 Alternative Debt Financing $ 2,800,000 Projects Funded Status Homestead Aquatics $ 500,000 Closed Cedar Grove Park 500,000 Active Fairview Park 700,000 Active Lands Legacy 1,100,000 Active Total $ 2,800.000 Lands Legacy � 4/24/09 Alternative Debt Financing $ 1,100,000 Available Balance as of June 30, 2010 After 1/20/11 BOCC Action Closing of Prior Years Activities $ 860,809 Fiscal 2009/2010 Activity Purchase of Historic Moorefield property As an addition to Seven Mile Creek Preserve $ 151,000 Fiscal 2007/2008 Activity Purchase of Eno River Confluence Property $ 88,191 Total $ 1,100,000 Commissioner Gordon thanked Michael Talbert for sitting down and meeting with her about this issue and for the information he gave to her and gave in answer to Commissioner McKee's email questions. She said that the background materials from Michael Talbert need to be in the minutes. Chair Pelissier thanked Michael Talbert and the Finance staff for helping to find these errors and correcting them. Commissioner McKee said that he also spent time with Michael Talbert reviewing this information and it does not bother him so much that the County has to fix this error, but that it occurred in the first place. He hopes that this is never repeated. He said that the worst scenario did not occur, which would have been for the County to have approved the $10 million Lands Legacy purchase and then find out six months later that there was no money. He asked Michael Talbert about the actual cash on hand in the Lands Legacy Program. Michael Talbert said that it is $1.86 million. Commissioner Hemminger feels confident that the staff is being very proactive with this. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to approve Budget Amendment#6-A for$13,097,651 for the County Capital Projects Fund. � Commissioner Jacobs made reference to the rose sheet and asked about the statement, "it is our intent to issue the remaining $2.7 million for parks and open space when financing is sought for Elementary School #11." Michael Talbert said that this was part of the motion when the County Commissioners approved the $2.8 million, which was sold in April 2009, knowing that they had authorized $20 million in 2001 bonds. Up until that point, in December 2008, the County had sold $14.5 million that was dedicated to parks and open space. When the County decided to issue $33 million in new debt there were some technicalities in the size of the bond issue to keep it qualified and get a preferred interest rate. Therefore, the County Commissioners decided to only issue slightly less than $30 million instead of $33 million. When this was done, there was a downsizing from $5.5 million to $2.8 million. The $2.7 million will be additional proceeds over and above the $1.86 million. Frank Clifton said that there are a lot of accounting and budgeting transactions that were going on simultaneously with two different departments. Now these two departments are combined — Finance and Budget— and this should never happen again. Commissioner Foushee arrived at 8:27 PM. Commissioner McKee said that he is concerned that the original bond funds were put before the voters and approved and in 2008 the unissued bond money lapsed. With that lapse it was no longer possible to issue the remaining amount of the bonds for any of these programs. Rather than going back to the voters, the money was obtained through alternative financing. He does not think that there is anything wrong with doing that, but it is circumventing the original intent. He said that he knows that the reallocation of monies from one fund to another to make up for shortfalls is a standard practice, but he thinks that the funds should be returned to the original designated use as quickly as possible to account for that return. Clarence Grier said that one of the things that staff recognized was that a lot of the communication in the past that should have been provided to the Board of County Commissioners was not provided. He assured the County Commissioners that he would always communicate with them. VOTE: UNANIMOUS d. Closinq of County Capital Projects The Board considered closing seven completed County Capital Projects and closing prior years' activities in six active County Capital Projects. The details for closing these projects are shown in the schedules on page 3 of the agenda materials. Michael Talbert summarized this item. BACKGROUND: The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for June 30, 2010 has 86 capital projects with activity in the County Capital Projects Fund. Over the past eight years, few if any capital projects were closed even though many have been completed for several years. On October 26, 2010, the Board was presented the second draft of a revised Five Year Capital Investment Plan. The format was discussed and changes were requested to improve that format and provide the Board with information that is necessary to make Capital Funding decisions. One component of the Capital Investment Plan is to review active Capital Projects and close projects as completed. As of June 30, 2010, there are seven completed County Capital Projects that can be closed. Attached is a detail schedule of the completed projects with the total project budgets � of $9,688,609 to be closed, if approved by the Board. Revenues exceed expenditures by $6,300 and these funds will be closed to County Capital Projects Fund Balance. The County also funds County Capital Projects that have a scope of ten or more years and have had significant activity over the past ten years. The funding sources for these projects involve multiple funding sources, including Bond Issues and Pay-as-you-go funding. These projects will be part of future Capital Investment Plans and the projects will remain active. Closing prior years' activities will improve accountability, transparency, and understanding of available balances. Attached is a schedule of six projects with the total project budgets of $16,490,118 to be closed, if approved by the Board. Michael Talbert said that it is not the accounting system's function to keep up with the project history from inception until 15-20 years later. It is only to keep up with the current budgets and the ability to go forward with that. The staff will track and keep up with historical information. Commissioner Gordon asked for changes in some of the titles of the schedules to make them more understandable and Michael Talbert said he would do that. A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to approve the closing of seven completed County Capital Projects and close prior years' activities in six active County Capital Projects. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Consideration of Item 4-f: f. Amendment to the Oranqe County Personnel Ordinance, Article IV, Section 6.0, Sick Leave and Correction of Previous Amendment to Article VI, Sections 5.1 and 5.2 of The Position Classification Plan The Board considered an amendment to the Orange County Personnel Ordinance, Article IV, Section 6.0, Sick Leave, to align Sick Leave accrual and usage with Annual Leave and to correct the September 2, 2010 amendment to Article VI, Theo Position Classification Plan, Sections 5.1 and 5.2. Since Commissioner Foushee had arrived, Chair Pelissier asked that the Board consider this item in order to get a unanimous vote. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner McKee to approve the amendment to the Orange County Personnel Ordinance, Article IV, Section 6.0, Sick Leave and corrected the September 2, 2010 amendment to Article VI, Sections 5.1 and 5.2 of the Position Classification Plan. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 8. Reports a. Proqress Report on Telecommunication Issues within Oranqe County and Review of Request to Place Telecommunication Plan Tower Site Map on February 28, 2011 Quarterly Public Hearinq The Board received an update on staff activities concerning the County's communication(s) needs and reviewed a request to place the Telecommunications Plan Tower Site Map on the February 28, 2011 Quarterly Public Hearing agenda. � Progress Report on Telecommunication Issues and Review of request to Place Telecommunication Plan Tower Site Map on the February 2011 Quarterly Public Hearing Agenda. January 20, 2011 Item 8-a PURPOSE 1. Update BOCC on Multi-Department Activities regarding Broadband service into the County and Improving public safety; and 2. Request BOCC to place the attached Telecommunication Plan Tower Site Map on February 2011 QPH agenda. County Staff Work Group •Planning and Inspections, •Sheriff, •Emergency Management, •Information Technology, and •County Manager's Office. BACKGROUND •Progress Report Two active tower companies Motorola meeting to determine County needs MOU with American Tower Company Telecommunication Plan Tower Site Map •Section 6.18.5, Master Telecommunication Plan and •Article 8.8.17a, Telecommunication Towers allow towers to be sited on •Public sites, •Quasi-publicly owned properties, and •Private property enrolled in the plan. PROPOSAL for BOCC Identify suitable public sites, •Add these sites to the MTP for telecommunication development, •Seek technical partnerships, and •Later BOCC approval of RFPs for tower sites and tower leases. FUTURE PARTNERSHIP •We have the land, •We determine the size, shape, height, and location, and •We receive a revenue stream. � FUTURE PARTNERSHIP (continued) •Tower providers have: —Construction and installation responsibilities, —Tower maintenance responsibilities, —Tower marketing responsibilities, —Contract management for each collocator, —Tower bonding and insurance responsibilities, —Long-term tower management responsibilities, and —RF engineering expertise RECOMMENDATIONS •Receive this report on multi-departmental activities and •Request BOCC to place the attached Telecommunication Plan Tower Site Map on February 2011 QPH agenda. Commissioner Jacobs said that he is generally supportive of this. He asked if all of the criteria would be listed when this is presented to the public at the public hearing. Craig Benedict said yes, the criteria will be presented. Commissioner Jacobs said that in the previous discussions, the Board of County Commissioners also directed staff to not locate towers in environmentally sensitive portions of these properties. He wants to make sure that these areas are undisturbed. Commissioner Jacobs asked if "preapproved sites" meant that if February 28th would be the last opportunity for neighbors to comment on a 150-foot tower going up near their neighborhood. Craig Benedict said yes. Commissioner Jacobs said that he has a real problem with that. He said that this is one of the most contentious issues in neighborhoods. He said that he thought the County Commissioners directed staff to apply the same standards to County properties in terms of public notification. He asked if this would be done. Craig Benedict said that they would go through the same process as in a special use permit for notifying residents, putting up balloons, and holding a public hearing, etc. Commissioner Jacobs wants to be clear that there is no separate standard for Orange County government. He wants to make sure that this is captured in the document that is taken to the public hearing. Frank Clifton said that, as the County goes through this notification process, the initial action by the Board could be for a specific time period. The sites could be approved for a three-year period and then come back for approval. The goal is to foster competition and get services throughout the County. There are some areas in the County where there is absolutely no coverage at all. Commissioner Jacobs said that there needs to be a distinction for Little River Park because it is a no-impact area. He does not think that a tower is consistent with that use. He would like to discuss with the Caldwell Fire Department about its site. It is about a mile and a half from Little River Park. Commissioner Yuhasz said that he thinks this is a good idea because every time there is a tower proposal, it is an individual proposal. He thinks that this is a broader concept. He asked if the proposed number of sites was enough to insure emergency communication. � Frank Clifton said that he cannot answer this specifically. Most of the gap is in the north. The more populated areas have enough coverage. Commissioner Gordon said that she would like to confirm her understanding that staff will use the same process as a Class B Special Use Permit, which has to go through a public hearing and fulfill the other requirements in the zoning ordinance. The only difference would be whether the site was approved administratively or by issuing a special use permit. When it comes time for the site to be located, then the balloon test would be done and the other zoning requirements would be met. Discussion ensued between Commissioner Gordon and Frank Clifton about the potential location of towers. Commissioner Gordon stated that if a map is brought to the Quarterly Public Hearing, that the public should know the ramifications of the map. Commissioner Yuhasz said that he thought that what was being proposed here was to go through the steps to approve a map, which would be preapproved Telecommunication Tower sites, using the process the County has in place. A motion was made by Commissioner Yuhasz, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to accept the update and authorize staff to begin the process of developing a request to place the Telecommunication Plan Tower Site Map on the February 28, 2011 Quarterly Public Hearing agenda. (Legal advertisement wording will be approved at the February 1, 2011 regular BOCC meeting). VOTE: Ayes, 5; Nays, 2 (Commissioner Gordon and Commissioner Jacobs) Commissioner Jacobs said that nothing was added to this motion, only the preapproved sites. He wants to follow the County's ordinance about balloons and public notice before the public hearing. Craig Benedict said that these notices will go out by February 2gtn Chair Pelissier asked for a clarification of what will happen. Craig Benedict said that on February 1St there is a request for a legal advertisement to create the map. As part of that legal process, the staff will follow all aspects of the zoning ordinance, which includes the specific location of the site, the parameters for approval, balloon tests, letter of notification to surrounding residents, public hearing, etc. Craig Benedict asked if there was agreement that he should look specifically at the Caldwell Fire Department and the Board agreed. A motion was made by Commissioner Yuhasz, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to include the Caldwell Fire Department in these discussions about the potential towers. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 9. County Manaqer's Report Frank Clifton said that he wanted to confirm that the $1.4 million of Federal grant money that was allocated in 2003 and 2005 is on hold and available for the County to move forward with the expansion of the Efland sewer project. This is a $4 million project, so the remainder of that will be pursued with loan funds through the Clean Water Trust Fund or additional financing. Frank Clifton acknowledged the Carol Woods community in Chapel Hill, which made a contribution of $170,000 to Orange County. This is a tax exempt agency, but it has done this in the past. The County has a good relationship with this community. � Regarding the addressing project, the legal staff is working on a project ordinance. He said that he would provide the history under separate cover. Regarding the impact fee, he will address this at the staff level. 10. County Attorney's Report John Roberts said that it was pointed out to him by Commissioner Gordon that there was not a clear process for getting information about closed session items. If the County Commissioners want to know more about closed session items before a meeting, then they should call him. He said that there is concern about the impact fee ordinance. He is also concerned about the way it is applied and the way it is worded, and whether or not it actually applies to certain situations. The current interpretation has been to apply this impact fee when dwelling units are located anywhere within the County. The focus has been on the word "located." It does not say "new construction" or"lot". The interpretation has been if you locate, relocate, or build on a lot that has not previously had a house on it, then it should get an impact fee. He will be working with the Planning Department on a recommendation. 11. Appointments a. Advisory Board on Aqinq — Two New Appointments The Board considered making two new appointments to the Advisory Board on Aging. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to appoint Ed Flowers, III and Alexander Castro, Jr. to At-Large positions with expired terms ending June 30, 2013. VOTE: UNANIMOUS b. Historic Preservation Commission — New Appointment The Board considered making a new appointment to the Historic Preservation Commission. A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to appoint Rob Golan to an At-Large position with a full term expiring March 31, 2013. VOTE: UNANIMOUS c. Human Relations Commission — New Appointment The Board considered making one new appointment to the Human Relations Commission. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to appoint Shannon Jackson to an At-Large position with a full term expiring June 30, 2013. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Commissioner Jacobs said that there are so many vacant at-large positions and five people that applied. He nominated Linsey Hazen for Position #1, Matthew Hughes for Position #9, Dr. Christine Kelly-Kleese for Position #12, Melissa Twomey for Position #17, And Annette Uhlenberg for Position #19. Commissioner Gordon said that she had thought about the proposed process for the combining of the Commission for Women and the Human Relations Commission. She asked about the status of that effort and whether there was a revised proposal or a new name for this board. � Clerk to the Board Donna Baker said that nothing has come forward yet. She said that Tara Fikes is working with the Commission for Women trying to get some of those individuals to apply. Commissioner Gordon said that she thought that the decision on the new process would be made before the appointments. Commissioner Foushee said that this board needs adequate membership in order to continue its work. Commissioner Jacobs said that there will still be three at-large positions that will not be filled and there are also positions from each of the Towns that will not have been filled. There is plenty of opportunity for people that might have had a different interest subset. Commissioner Gordon said that she does not understand why the Commission only asked for one position if that is the case. Donna Baker said that she would find this out. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to get a status report at the February 1St meeting on the combination of the Human Relations Commission and the Commission for Women. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 12. Board Comments Commissioner Hemminger said that the Upper Neuse River Basin Authority (UNRBA) has met six times in the last five weeks. This is 14 jurisdictions meeting to deal with the rules that went into effect January 11th for Stage 1 for the Falls Lake Watershed. The name will be changed to Falls Lake Watershed. The Attorney has been at the meetings. The plan is to change the bylaws that have been in effect since 1996. The new bylaws will better reflect the new legislation that went into effect this summer about what the legislators want to have this group do, to bring the bylaws up to be more consistent with non-profit guidelines with the State, and to make it more descriptive with the IRS descriptions for 501(c)3. The rules for the Falls Lake area are more restrictive than for the Jordan Lake. The estimate to put all of this into effect is over$3 billion. Orange County will have to provide some of this. The EMC looked over it and changed the agricultural portion to be a little more favorable towards Orange County. The storm water rules are more intense, which also affect Orange County. The good news is that the school systems got the storm water grant for the storm water at Stanback Middle School and Orange High School. Commissioner Hemminger said that she needs permission from the Board to vote next time because the group would like to create an additional corporation that would be a 501(c)4 so that they could do some lobbying in the future if needed. Chair Pelissier asked for a copy of the proposed bylaws. Commissioner McKee said that on January 8th he and Commissioner Gordon attended a press conference announcing the purchase of the Stillhouse Bottom property. Orange County partnered with other entities to purchase this property. This is a very nice undisturbed natural area. Commissioner Gordon said that the key is that this was a partnership to purchase the property with the Town of Chapel Hill, the County, and private donors all contributing. Commissioner Gordon said that she is happy that staff is going to address the addressing project. Commissioner Yuhasz - none Commissioner Jacobs wished everyone a Happy New Year. He said that they had the first meeting of the governing board of the Agricultural Processing Center. This board will � meet monthly for the first six months. Staff has already done interviews of five candidates. The tentative date for opening the center is April 15tn Commissioner Jacobs made reference to the calendar from the AHAB and said that Eno Haven is one of the projects listed for August. He would like to get a report on this project because the County gave $1 million for this. Commissioner Jacobs said that it seems unfair to impose an impact fee on someone that is moving a house to a lot that is not being used. He said that this is a huge disincentive to deconstruction if someone deconstructed a house and moved it to an empty lot. Commissioner Jacobs made reference to the pending items sheet and asked if everything was finished that happened before December 14th. He asked for an update. Greg Wilder said that staff could put together a list of outstanding items. Commissioner Foushee said that Chair Pelissier, Commissioner McKee, and she attended the NCACC Legislative Goals Conference, and the Governor announced that she would not recommend the privatization of liquor sales in North Carolina. She was happy to hear this. They voted on the priority goals from the NCACC and nothing has changed. There was some discussion about clarification on one of the policy statements regarding the legislature determining whether counties had the ability to consolidate school systems. All of the goals are related to maintaining or retaining the control that counties have. Commissioner Foushee said that another item discussed was involuntary annexation where municipalities are not providing services within the five-year period after annexation. The language that will be brought forward will ask that this be reduced to three years rather than five. Chair Pelissier said that she attended the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools legislative breakfast last week. Representative Hackney noted that the item in the budget where there is the most flexibility in the State level is education. David Price also came and highlighted how there is some talk about eliminating the Department of Education. Chair Pelissier said that earlier this week there was the school collaboration meeting and the County has received a letter from the CHCCS Board asking the County Commissioners to reconsider the funding formula for capital projects. Right now the formula is 60% for schools and 40% for the County. CHCCS was asking for it to change to 80% for the schools and 20% for the County. It was agreed that at the next meeting, County staff will come up with some alternative scenarios for addressing the issue of funding formulas for schools —the 48.1% as well as the capital funding distribution. Chair Pelissier said that she has organized, along with Mayor Kleinschmidt, a meeting related to transit. This will be a small group to make presentations to the Towns and the University about where we are so far and ask for feedback about proceeding with a %2-cent sales tax referendum. If there is not buy-in with all of the Towns and the University on the Orange County Transit Plan, then there will be no Orange County Transit Plan. She has asked Commissioner Foushee to be on this group and she will report back as to how this proceeds. 13. Information Items • December 14, 2010 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List 14. Closed Session A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to go into closed session at 9:48 PM for the following: � Pursuant to NCGS 143-318.11(a)(3) To consult with an attorney employed or retained by the public body in order to preserve the attorney-client privilege between the attorney and the public body, which privilege is hereby acknowledged; and Pursuant to NCGS 143-318.11 (a) (5) To establish, or to instruct the public body's staff or negotiating agents concerning the position to be taken by or on behalf of the public body in negotiating (i) the price and other material terms of a contract or proposed contract for the acquisition of real property by purchase, option, exchange, or lease; and "To discuss matters related to the location or expansion of industries or other businesses in the area served by the public body, including agreement on a tentative list of economic development incentives that may be offered by the public body in negotiations," NCGS § 143- 318.11(a)(4). "To consider the qualifications, competence, performance, character, fitness, conditions of appointment, or conditions of initial employment of an individual public officer or employee or prospective public officer or employee;" NCGS § 143-318.11(a)(6). "To consider and approve the unsealing of closed session minutes." VOTE: UNANIMOUS RECONVENE INTO REGULAR SESSION: A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Foushee to reconvene into regular session at 11:05 p.m. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 15. Adjournment A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Foushee to adjourn the meeting at 11:05 p.m. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Bernadette Pelissier, Chair Donna S. Baker, CMC Clerk to the Board