Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 11-15-2011 APPROVED 1/24/2012 MINUTES BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING November 15, 2011 7:00 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, NC. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Bernadette Pelissier and Commissioners Valerie Foushee, Alice Gordon, Barry Jacobs, Pam Hemminger, Earl McKee, and Steve Yuhasz COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Frank Cfifton, Assistant County Gwen Harvey, Interim Assistant County Manager Michael Talbert and Clerk to the Board Donna S. Baker (All other staff inembers will be identified appropriately below) 1. Additions or Chanqes to the Aaenda A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to add a closed session for the purpose of: "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," N.C.G.S. §143-318.11(a)(6). VOTE: UNANIMOUS Chair Pelissier went through the information at the County Commissioners' places: - Pink revision for Item 5-i -Approval of Conceptual Installation Plan for Electric Vehiele Charging Stations, Acceptance of Grant Funds and Approval of Budget Amendment#4- A - Blue — information sheet for item 7b - Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Commercial Industrial Transition Activity Nodes and Economic Development District Access Management Plan. - Color copy for item 9-a -Triangle Regional Transit Program —Alternatives Analysis and the Locally Preferred Alternative - White— PowerPoint for item 9-a PUBLIC CHARGE The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge. 2. Public Comments a. Matters not on the Printed Aqenda Douglas Longman resides in the Hunts Reserve subdivision in Chapel Hill. He spoke about the fire insurance item. He said that he was representing others from the subdivision. He said that they live in immediate proximity to Chapel Hill Fire Station #5. He said that there is a mutual aid agreement between Chapel Hill and North Chatham. He said that they all pay South Triangle Fire District Tax and wish to be afforded primary fire district coverage from Chapel Hill Fire Station #5. He said that insurance companies have systematically used GIS technology in a strict legal reading of primary fire district assignment to reclassify all of them in his subdivision and surrounding area. This reclassification has resulted in an increase of.fire district premiums. In his case, the increase is $4,210 each year. Chair Pelissier said that the County-Commissioners have received emails from him and other residents and they are working on resolving this issue. Larry Hodges is President of the Reserve Phase 2 HOA, which is adjacent to the Hunts Reserve. He said that this reclassification puts all of the properties in his subdivision in an ISO 10 rating, which means they do not even meet minimum standards. He said that the ISO is sification before the notif the insurance su osed to notif the residents of an area of a reclas y y pp Y companies, and to the best of his knowledge this did not occur with his subdivision. He said that his policy increased 101% through the new classification. He asked that this subdivision be put in the Orange County district rather than the Chatham County district. Chair Pelissier said that the County Commissioners are aware of these issues and are also concerned. They are working to resolve this. Larry Hodges said that he noticed that the Orange County Commissioners asked for an assessment by a consulting company for the emergency response times, and the report was provided on May 10, 2011. He said that he has not read this yet. b. Matters on the Printed Aaenda (These matters were considered when the Board addressed that item on the agenda below.) 3. Petitions bv Board Members NONE 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations NONE 5. Consent Aaenda A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to approve those items on the consent agenda as stated below: a. Minutes The Board approved the minutes from October 13, 2011 as submitted by the Clerk to the Board. b. Appointments— None c. Motor Vehicle Propertv Tax Release/Refunds The Board accepted the report reflecting the 61 motor vehicle property tax reJease/refunds requested in accordance with the NCGS and approved the refund resolution, which is incorporated by reference. d. Propertv Tax Releases and/or Refunds The Board approved the resolution, which is incorporated by reference, approving the property tax refund requests in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 105-381. e Applications for Propertv Tax Exemption/Exclusion The Board approved a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, related to four(4) untimely applications for exemption/exclusion from ad valorem taxation for the 2011 tax year. f. Interqovernmental Aqreements This item was removed and placed at the end of the consent agenda for separate consideration. g: Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Ordinance Amendment Outline and Schedule for Uacominq Master Telecommunications Plan Item The Board approved the attached Amendment Outline and directed staff to proceed accordingly. h. Fiscal Year 2011-12 Budaet Amendment#4 The Board approved budget and capital project ordinance amendments for fiscal year 2011- 12 for Department of Social Services, Department on Aging, Health Department, Sheriff Department, Emergency Services, Solid Waste, and Up fit of Link Government Services Center Capital Project. i. Approval of Conceptual Installation Plan for Electric Vehicle Char�inq Stations, Acceptance of Grant Funds and Approval of Budqet Amendment#4-A The Board approved the conceptual installation plan for approximately eight electric vehicle charging stations at the West Campus Office Building, Seymour Senior Center, Orange County/Chapel Hill Visitors Center, and Durham Technical Community College Park and Ride Lot; accepted the $83,540 in grant funds awarded by the United States Department of Energy and its Carolina Blue Skies and Green Jobs Initiative; approved Budget Amendment #4-A; and authorized the Manager to sign any and all necessary agreements and subsequent amendments related to this agreement L Cost Share Adiustment for Breeze Farm Conservation Easement (Phase 2) and Approval of Budctet Amendment#4-B The Board authorized a reduction of$14,520 from the NC Agriculture and Farmland Preservation Trust Funds for the agricultural conservation easement for the Breeze Farm (Phase 2) and approved Budget Amendment#4-B. k. Chans�es in BOCC Reqular Meetinq Schedule for 2011 and 2012 The Board amended its regular meeting calendars for 2011 and 2012 by: 2011 Meetinq Calendar - Adding a Work Session on Thursday, becember 8, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center, 2501 Homestead Road, Chapel Hill, for the purpose of discussing transit issues. 2012 Meetinq Calendar - Changing the meeting time of the Orange County Legislative Breakfast meeting on April 16, 2012 from 8:00 a.m. to 8:30 a:m. (location TBD) - Changing the location of the Board of County Commissioners' regular meeting (and . organizational meeting) currently scheduled for Monday, December 3, 2012 FROM the DSS Offices, 113 Mayo Street, TO the Central Orange Senior Center(Adjoining Triangle Sportsplex), 103 Meadowlands Drive, Hillsborough, N.C. : VOTE ON CONSENT AGENDA: UNANIMOUS 6. Items Removed From Consent Aqenda f. Interaovernmental Aqreements The Board considered approving various intergovernmental agreements and authorizing the County Manager to sign. Commissioner Jacobs said that he sent an inquiry to staff about the efficiency of the description of what the consultant is going to supply as far as the Information Technology Strategic Plan. He has never received a reply to this. He thinks that there needs to be more , specificity about this. Commissioner Jacobs suggested adding the following language: Beyond internal efficiencies, the study will aid the County in employing technology as a driver of innovation beyond government. The consultant will meet with the Commissioners individually as well as the department heads. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to authorize the County Manager to sign the listed agreements and any amendments or renewals of those Agreements, with the changes as stated above by Commissioner Jacobs. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 7. Public Hearinas T a. Proposed Oranqe Countv Addressinq and Road Namina Ordinance The Board conducted a public hearing on the proposed Orange County Addressing and Road Naming Ordinance in preparation for potential consideration/adoption at the Board's December 13, 2011 regular meeting. GIS Manager Steve Averett made a PowerPoint presentation. Orange County Addressing and Road Naming Ordinance Sco e 33.9% (22,834 out of 67,404) of all addresses are in the County's addressing jurisdiction Specific Addressina and Street Centerline Issues Orange County has more than 2,000 addresses that are: - Out of sequence - Not addressed to the proper road - Addressed to the wrong side of the road - Not displaying the correct house numbers - Not displaying the address in an appropriate manner - Not displaying the address at all � And more than 100 streets that: - Have improper ranges - Have duplicate or phonetically similar street names - Do not have street signs posted - Are private drives that need names and address ranges assigned Issues Caused bv Non-Conforminq Addresses and Streets - Delayed response of emergency services increasing the likelihood of loss of life and/or property - Loss of revenue due to likelihood of improper assessment of real and/or peF�sonal property - Loss of revenue due to inefficient assessment of 3R fees - Inefficient Environmental Health and Building Inspections processes - Inefficiencies in identifying proper voting precincts for voters - Inefficiencies in verifying residency for libraries - Inefficient delivery of mail and package deliveries Primarv Items to be Enforced - Address not displayed at all - Address not displayed properly (numbers smaller than three inches, not on a non- contracting background, not in the right location, not posted from both directions) - Address out of range (ex: 200 address located on a 500 block) - Addresses and streets out of sequence - Three or more habitable structures more than 75 feet from the main road that share a common drive must name and place signage on the private drive and address/readdress the three or more habitable structures to the newly named private drive. Penalties and Timeline - If the property owner does not comply within 60 days of receipt of a notice of violation, a $50 penalty will be assessed - Continued non-compliance 14 days after the first penalty will result in another$50 penalty. Additional penalties will follow every 7 days for continued non-compliance. - There will be a grace period of one vear from the adoption of the ordinance with no penalties assessed County staff will work directly and indirectly with property owners on assistance with compliance Commissioner Gordon said that her broad comment is that this is assigned to the �f County Manager and the GIS Director, and usually ordinances have some sort of appeals process. The only appeals process she sees heKe is for the penalties. She thinks that there should be some sort of appeals process in the ordinance to some authority above the authority of the County Manager. She asked how many times someone's address could change and how often. She went through the document and made specific comments. On page 9 under Methodology, she asked how addresses would be assigned south of Calvander. The ordinance still does not specify where the north-south axis is located between Calvander and the Chatham County line. Also, under item E-2, she asked for more specificity regarding a building that is more than 75 feet from any road. On page 11, section VI, B-2 and B-3, regarding the notices, she said that the notices of violation and citations should be consistent with the notice of violation. On page 12, regarding, "the County Attorney may enforce this article by any one or more of the remedies," she suggested that it be listed what these remedies are. Also, in item D, she saad that there should be a place for an appeal in this area. Chair Pelissier asked if Commissioner Gordon meant an appeal for the penalty or also for an addrsss change. Commissioner Gordon said that the appeals process for the penalty is in there to the County Manager, but if something goes wrong or if there is a mistake in the new addressing, there needs to be a way to stop this from going forward. Commissioner Yuhasz made reference to page 8 and the physical standards for road name signs. He asked if there was going to be a requirement that all road signs be the same color. Frank Clifton said that there are many private roads in Orange County. He would suggest any private roads be a specific color other than green. Something can be established in the ordinance. Commissioner Yuhasz said that this is something that he would like to consider to have some consistency. Frank Clifton said that the staff needs some input from the County Commissioners in reference to Commissioner Gordon's comments. He said that human error can occur at the staff level and he is here to listen to those appeals. He said that if the Board of County Commissioners wanted to sit as an appeal board, that can happen, but this process is overdue and they will need direction from the Board of County Commissioners in reference to this issue. Chair Pelissier said that since Commissioner Gordon's suggestion was such a large change to this draft, she would like to ask the County Commissioners if they would like to entertain this because staff needs direction. Frank Clifton said that the recommendation is to extend the public hearing to the next meeting, so there is time to incorporate further input. John Roberts made reference to an appeals process other than what is in the ordinance and said that it is typical to have appeals to the County Manager. Staff will be doing the frontline appeals and then the Manager. After that, the residents can appeal it to the courts. If the Board of County Commissioners wants it appealed to them, then it can become a quasi- judicial body. John Roberts made reference to Section VI, B-2 and 3, and subsection 2, which is referring to the type of mail that would be used to deliver rather than first class. Subsection 3 is talking about when that delivery is deemed to occur. Commissioner Hemminger said that she does not want to be part of a judicial board and she is in favor of the appeals going to the County Manager. If a citizen wants to complain to the Board of County Commissioners, they can and then the Board has the right to check into it or not. She said that people do not like changes, but this is needed. Commissioner Gordon said that somewhere it needs to be stated what the appeal is and the process. Commissioner Jacobs said that he was not clear on the answer about the notice being sufficient. He asked if he understood correctly that the written notices of violations do not require certified mail. John Roberts said that if the enforcement officer chooses to use mail, it has to be registered or certified. It is deemed delivered upon deposit in the receptacle of U. S. Mail. Other means are posting it on the front door of the structure and hand-delivering it to an occupant of legal age in the structure. Chair Pelissier said that she wants to minimize the number of people that come before the Board on this issue. She thinks that what is here is sufficient and that people can go to the courts as an option. She does not see this as a crucial addition to the ordinance. John Roberts said that he would prefer not putting a direct appeal in here, because then the Manager is turned into a quasi-judicial officer. The way it is set up now, the County Manager is making an administrative decision,on whether or not the enforcement officer followed the proper procedure. Commissioner McKee said that this is not the first round of addressing changes and the first round occurred 20 years ago. He said that, while this will be inconvenient at first, the safety issue is more important. John Roberts changed the Manager's recommendation. He asked that#3 be changed to continue the public hearing to December 13`h. He said that the code of ordinances is going up on the website tomorrow for review purposes. The ordinance numbering will be changed on the addressing ordinance on the 13th and they will also repeal an act on the 13ih of the older addressing ordinance. Frank Clifton said that there witl be two public hear.ings —one on each end of the County —and the recommendation on the 5`h will be to continue the public hearing on the 13tn A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to continue the Public Hearing to the Board's December 5, 2011 regular meeting and direct staff to bring the Ordinance back to the December 13, 2011 regular meeting for consideration/adoption. VOTE: UNANIMOUS b. Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Commercial Industrial Transition Activitv Nodes and Economic Development District Access Manaaement Plan The Board received the Planning Board's and Orange Unified Transportation Board's recommendations, considered closing the public hearing, and making a decision on the Efland- Buckhorn-Mebane Commercial Industrial Transition Activity Nodes (CITAN) and Economic Development District (EDD) Access Management Plan. Tom Altieri introduced this item. He made reference to the notes from the public meeting (light blue). The Planning Director recommends adoption of this Access Management Plan (Attachments 1 a, 1 b, 1 c, 2, and 3). Adoption of the plan will lead to more orderly growth which promotes the public health, safety, and general welfare, and achieves the purposes on the adopted Comprehensive Plan. The Manager recommends adoption of the Access Management Plan also (Attachments 1 a, 1 b, 1 c, 2, and 3). There were no public comments. 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 Manager's recommendation to receive the Planning Board's and OUT Board's recommendations of approval and adopt the Access Management Plan (Attachments 1 a, 1 b, 1 c, 2, and 3). VOTE: UNANIMOUS 8. Reqular Aqenda a. Authorization to Proceed with Next Steps for Chapel Hill —Carrboro Citv Schools Elementarv School #11 The Board reviewed and discussed the proposed Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Elementary School #11 and considered authorizing staff to proceed with necessary funding actions and next steps. Financial Services Director Clarence Grier said that this school has been delayed over the past few fiscal years because of budgetary restraints. The elementary school numbers have now exceeded the SAPFO limit. The interest rates are low right now and it is a good time to proceed with this. The CHCCS Board of Education approved the construction and funding of Elementary #11 at its November 3, 2011 Meeting. The Town of Chapel Hill has approved the required Special use Permit (SUP). Applications are now being reviewed for the Zor�ing Compliance Permit (ZCP)which is necessary for a building permit to be issued. The ZCP is expected in February 2012. The County Manager proposed and the Board of County Commissioners approved the FY 2011-12 General Fund Operating Budget and in the 2011-2016 Capital Investment Plan (CIP) a combined amount of$1,163,196 of funding for Elementary School #11. This funding was comprised of$500,000 of funds from the CIP to fund abatement and deconstruction costs of the existing building on the property. An additional $663,195 of the County's General Fund Balance was reserved to fund any excess deconstruction costs of the existing building on the property. The County CIP also includes full funding of Elementary School #11 in FY 2012-13 schedule plans for the school to open in August 2013. The total estimated cost of the project would be $21.4 million. CHCCS will utilize a maximum of$2.1 million of its fund balance to fund the construction . costs incurred prior to the County receiving the financing for the project. The County will reimburse CHCCS for the amount spent and the Boards of botN� CHCCS and the County will consider reimbursement provisions to reimburse any construction costs incurred before receiving the funding for the project. The County would cover any interim cost in excess of the CHCCS fund balance reserved for the project if financing for Elementary School #11 is delayed. The construction and funding timeline for Elementary School #11 is as follows: - Deconstruction — October 2011 through March 2012 - Financing of the project—April and may 2012 - Construction —April 2012 through July 2013 - Opening —August 2013 Todd Lofreise, Assistant Superintendent of CHCCS, said that the CHCCS school board unanimously approved an acceleration plan for Elementary School #11, which authorized the school district to use $2.1 million of fund balance for this project until the County can arrange financing next spring. The County will reimburse these funds by July and will fully f�nd the schools. He described the actions that were taken to try to remedy the over-crowding situation before bringing this project forward. He introduced Steve Trigiano, an architect from Moseley Architects, who made a PowerPoint presentation. Elementary School #11 Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Orange County New Elementary School #11 - Process and Community Involvement - Sustainable Features o Policy 9040/LEED Certification - Footprint o Site layout and building program 0 3 Story, 585 Students - Appearance Project Vision Statement "The new Elementary School #11 shall be a child-centered, welcoming, and environmentally sensitive facility that respects and supports the Northside community." Process - Advisory Council - Design Charette - Neighborhood Presentations - Town of Chapel Hill Elements of Sustainability - Divert 75% of waste from landfill - Orientation of building for Daylight - Rainwater cistern � - Photovoltaics - Vegetated Roof Systems - Sola-tube daylighting - School as Teaching Tool - Compact Footprint Aesthetic Concepts The History of the Rosewald School - Windows - Masonry The Nature of the Northside neighborhood - Porches - Shed roofs - Columns - Materials Rosenwald School - Window detailing - Masonry details - Materials - Porches and canopy Commissioner Foushee asked what moving ahead means. She asked for clarification on the next steps. Frank Clifton said that this is not recommending any additional levy in the school district tax, but just the technical steps of moving forward. Clarence Grier said that as soon as the Board approves this, staff will contact the LGC to obtain financing. Commissioner Jacobs thanked and congratulated the school board for following through on the principles such as deconstruction and returning schools to communities inside the municipalities rather th�an on the edges. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Foushee to authorize staff to proceed with next steps. A capital project ordina.nce for the project will be provided to the Board as a future budget amendment item. Commissioner Gordon asked when the capital project ordinance was coming back and Clarence Grier said either at the December 5th or 13`h meeting. Commissioner Gordon suggested that the motion should also include coming back with a list of all of the steps with the capital project ordinance to accomplish all of the construction by August 2013. Clarence Grier said that if the Board authorizes this to go out to bid, then th�t will accomplish what is needed. Commissioner Hemminger took adding "authorizing the staff to put this out to bid," as a friendly amendment and Commissioner Foushee seconded. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 9. Reports a. Trianqle Reqional Transit Proaram —Alternatives Anatvsis and the Locallv Preferred Alternative The Board received a presentation on the Triangle Regional Transit Program — Alternatives Analysis and the Locally Preferred Alternative. David King, Executive Director of Triangle Transit, and Patrick McDonough made a PowerPoint presentation. Trianqle Reqional Transit Proaram Presentation Overview - Today's Focus: Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) for Durham-Orange Transit Corridor - Background on Process - Decisions Before MPO - Review of Recommended Alternatives - Current Timeline for LPA Decision - Questions and Discussion Today's Focus: LPA - Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) o A fechnical definition of a transit project required to apply for federal funds o Describes a detailed goal; does not specify timing o Must be approved by Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) of DCHC-MPO o Part of a process required by FEDERAL law - Transit Plan for Bus and Rail in Orange County o Specifies revenues, costs, borrowing, financial assumptions (inflation, sales tax growth)and timing of new/expended bus and rail services to 2035 o Must be approved by Orange County Board of County Commissioners, DCHC- MPO TAC, and Triangle Transit Board of Trustees o Part of a process required by STATE law Background - Special Transit Advisory Commission (STAC) recommendations (2008) - DCHGCAMPO Joint 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan Adopted (2009) - NC House Bill 148: Congestion Relief and Intermodal 21St Century Transportation Fund (2009) o Option of'/2 sales tax (referendum required)for public transportation pu'rpases in Triangle and Triad o Option of vehicle registration fee increase (up to $7) for public transportation � purposes in all NC Counties o Option of Triangle Transit increasing existing vehicle registration fee by$3 for public transportation purposes Agency and Public Involvement - Multiple station planning, site specific and corridor meetings , - 3 sets of Public Workshops totaling 19 meetings o June and September 2010; March 2011 o Multiple locations in Raleigh, Cary, Durham, and Chapel Hill o In Morrisville, Apex, Carrboro, Garner, Knightdale, RTP and Wake Forest - Over 1,100 participants - 58,000+ unique website visitors Decisions Before the MPO - Choosing a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) for Corridors: Required Elements o Technology o Termini (Endpoints) • o Alignment - Not Required, But Fewer Unknowns = Better o Exact Station Locations o Maintenance facility location (all proposed sites in Durham County or Durham City) Recommendations: Durham-Orange Corridor Light Rail from UNC Hospital to Alston Avenue (Technology and Endpoints Recommendation) - Recommended Alignment Alternatives o A3(d): UNC Hospital Station at Mason Farm Road o C1: Alignment using elevated station at Friday Center, Meadowmont path to Leigh Village; but C2 advanced to DEIS stage as backup alignment o D3: South Square East—Shannon Road near Target - Move forward to develop Light Rail Transit service: 17 stations along 17 miles o Average daily boardings: 11,700 (in year 2035) o End to end travel time: 35 minutes o Estimated capital cost: $1.37B (2011 dollars) o Estimated annual O&M Cost: $15M (2011 dollars) Reasons for Durham-Orange Recommendations - Light rail more likely to foster compact growth and support economic development than BRT; faster travel times, LRT likely to have long-term lower operating costs than BRT - Endpoints cover three travel markets: two major employment centers at UNC, Duke/Downtown Durham; and lower-income worker to 15-501 jobs/shopping market, shorter segments present challenges serving at least one of three markets - A3 Station at UNC Hospital: preferred location of Town of Chapel Hill, UNC-Chapel Hill - C1 alignment via Meadowmont: existing TOD on the ground with good urban deisgn and pedestrian-supportive street network; C2 development is potential TdD but may be limited in extent by existing development and roadway networks; C1= fewer private property acquisitions - D3 site more TOD opportunities; D1 limited by roads similar to C2 Timeline - Upcoming Key Dates o Orange BOCC— 11/15/2011 Regular Meeting o Orange BOCC— 12/08/2011 Work Session o Durham BOCC— 12/05/2011 Work Session o Durham City Council — 12/08/2011 Work Session o MPO Public Comment Period Closes —01/04/2012 o MPO TAC Holds Public Hearing —01/11/2012 o TCC Recommends LPA— 01/25/2012 o TAC reviews/takes action on LPA-02/08/2012 - Submit New Starts Application to FTA—August 2012 Chair Pelissier reminded the Board of County Commissioners that they wilF meet to discuss this in more detail on December gtn Commissioner Foushee asked David King to share some of the information that came from the Wake County and Durham County meeting. David King said that a week ago the citizens of Durham County,voted on a Durham County plan, which matches this plan. He said that Durham County approved the '/2-cent transit tax last week, so there is public support. In Wake County yesterday, there is a possibility of a referendum in November 2012. The County Commissioners received a briefing of the plan. PUBLIC COMMENT: Ed Harrison, Chapel Hill Town Councilmember, said that Ruby Seinrich was here but had to leave and he can summarize what she wanted to say. He said that he spent three months as part of the Grassroots Steering Committee in Durham County. The same committee will probably turn up in Orange County. He thinks that Orange County is well-positioned to come to a sound decision. Eric Teagardner said that he is a resident of Chapel Hill and he would like to help the County Commissioners make this plan Orange County's plan and not Triangle TransiYs plan. He has been involved in this process for a while. He made reference to C1 and C2 and said that in the executive summary of the report that C1 is $30-60 million more expensive. This is on Table 3-18. It goes on to say that C1 ridership is lower than C2. Also, C1 is four times more damaging in the amount of wetland that it invades. He said that the LRT vision was not built into tMe design of the Meadowmont community. He said that there is no parking allocated and the track would be going between the parking lot and the health center. There is a tremendous amount of traffic between the streets there. Jeff Green is a resident of the Meadowmont community. He clarified that there are some significant advantages of running light rail through Meadowmont. He thinks that there are some huge environmental issues related to the light rail, but if C1 and C2 move forward, then there can be a full evaluation of environmental issues. Commissioner Jacobs said that issues were raised previously about the parking deck at Leigh Village. He would like to address this on December 8`h. Similarly, there have been concerns raised about impacts on New Hope Creek and he would like to address these on December gtn Commissioner McKee thanked the Triangle Transit staff for providing questions and information. He said that he supported bus transit and he feels that this plan should be split into two parts. David King said that Wake County chose to split it around what they can control with local money and what they cannot controL Commissioner Gordon asked that for December 8th that staff bring back #he minutes where this has been discussed before. She said th�t they need to address the number of technical reports that have been submitted. She said that it is important to up front explain the ridership and the goalsrfor each alternative. She encouraged the County Commissioners to read the executive summary for the alternative analysis. Chair Pelissier said that the County Commissioners need a little more detail on this issue besides the full report, because it is very lengthy. She suggested getting an abbreviated version of the report prior to the work session: Commissioner Yuhasz said that the split in Wake County of the things that it can control versus the things that it cannot control is reflective of his concern back in the spring of what will happen if the State does not get the federal money. He asked if the Board would see some of the components of the interlocal agreements at the December 8'h meeting. David King said that they will be in a position to try and get federal funds for the light rail portion of the Orange County plan in the latter half of the decade. The system in Charlotte is now being funded through federal money, but this cannot be guaranteed. He said that the County Commissioners could discuss adopting the Wake County approach of making a distinction. , Chair Pelissier suggested that the group from last spring reconvene and discuss what ', would happen if there were no federal funds. She also wants to engage the County's partners. ' David King said that the bus portion of the plan also involves state and federal money. It is formulized, so the risk associated with the bus funding is less than the risk associated with the light raiL Commissioner McKee said that he wants to focus on what is sustainable and doable. Commissioner Gordon said that for the December 8th meeting it is important to review the alternatives analysis. She said that by March or April, the County will need to know if it is going to go forward in November with a referendum. Commissioner Foushee suggested that the County Commissioners get a sample of what an interlocal agreement would look like. The Board agreed. : Frank Clifton said that there are some assumptions in the financial analysis as to the cost splitting of the sections located in Durham County. He suggested discussing this at the December 8th work session because it has a huge impact on the cost analysis. Chair Pelissier agreed that the plan does make assumptions about the cost-sharing. 10. Countv Manaqer's Report Frank Clifton thanked the Board of County Commissioners for the '/4-cent sales tax support. He said that staff would be bringing back to the Board the EDC reconstituted recommendations. 11. Countv Attornev's Report John Roberts said that the code ordinance is ready for review on the County's website. 12. Appointments a. Affordable Housinq Advisorv Board —Appointments The Board considered making appointments to the Affordable Housing Advisory Board. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to appoint Katherine Doom to a first full term expiring September 30, 2014; Brona Kay Wilbourne to a first partial term expiring June 30, 2012; and Arthur Sprinczeles to a first full term expiring June 30, 2014 to the Affordable Housing Advisory Board. VOTE: UNANIMOUS b. Oranqe Countv Parks and Recreation Council —Apnointments The Board considered making appointments to the Orange County Parks and ' Recreation CounciL A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to appoint Eric Roeder to a first partial term for Carrboro City Limits ending March 31, 2012; Joel Bulkley to a first full term for Chapel Hill City Limits ending March 31, 2014; and Neal Bench to a first full term for Chapel Hill Township ending March 31, 2014 to the Orange County Parks and Recreation Council. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 13. Board Comments Commissioner McKee said that he wants to track the revenues of%-cent sales tax as stated by the Manager. He thanked everyone for supporting this sales tax. Commissioner McKee said that last Sunday he attended the 30th anniversary of Orange Congregations in Mission. Commissioner McKee said that this weekend the Caldwell Hunting Club will again sponsor the Wounded Warrior benefit for wounded veterans. Commissioner Hemminger extended a thank you to the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber for their support of the sales tax. Commissioner Hemminger said that the Community Home Trust amended its by-laws to be able to expand their services to individuals who meet 115% of the poverty level. Commissioner Gordon thanked all of those who worked on the sales tax referendum and the voters who voted for it. Commissioner Yuhasz thanked all who voted for the '/4-cent sales tax. Commissioner Foushee echoed the comments made about the sales tax. Commissioner Jacobs said that the groundbreaking of the Efland Buckhorn Sanitary System was on 11/10/11. Funding came from the federal government from Congressman David Price through a grant process. Commissioner Jacobs said that he appreciated the memo (blue paper) regarding the capacity use agreem�nt. He said that it would probably be wise to have more than one entity involved. He suggested asking the four other entities involved — Piedmont Minerals, Orange- Alamance Water, Town of Hillsborough, and Eno River Association — if they have any suggestions for how to improve the capacity use agreement. Commissioner Jacobs made reference to the item he pulled off the consent agenda and said that the Board talked at the retreat about how well the consent agenda works uuhen things are pulled off as long as things are put in by noon to get a response. This did not happen this time. He would like the Manager to figure out what went awry so that it does not happen again. He was surprised that there was nothing at their places when he arrived. Chair Pelissier thanked everyone for voting for the '/4-cent sales tax. She said that citizens are still asking how they are supposed to know that the County Commissioners will honor their commitment. She said that the County Commissioners will have to earn the trust of the public. 14. Information Items • November 1, 2011 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List • Process for Instigating a Review of the Eno River Voluntary Capacity Use Agreement • Administrative Rules Governing the Filling of Permanent Full Time Vacancies with Incumbent Temporary and/or Qualified Employees Pursuant to the Personnel Ordinance 15. Closed Session A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to go into closed session at 9:54 PM for the purpose of: "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," N.C.G.S. §143-318.11(a)(6). VOTE: UNANIMOUS RECONVENE INTO REGULAR SESSION A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to reconvene into regular session at 10:08 p.m. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 16. ADJOURNMENT A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to adjourn the meeting at 10:08 p.m. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Bernadette Pelissier, Chair Donna S. Baker, CMC Clerk to the Board