Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 12-05-2011APPROVED 2/7/2012 MINUTES BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING. December 5, 2011 7:00. p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Monday, December 5, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. at the Central Orange Senior Center in Hillsborough, NC. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Bernadette Pelissier and Commissioners Valerie 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 Gwen Harvey, Assistant County Manager Michael Talbert and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) NOTE: ALL DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE PERMANENT AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE. Board Organization a. Election of Chair and Vice-Chair for Calendar Year 2012 Bernadette Pelissier was voted as Chair. Pam Hemminger was voted as Vice-Chair. b. Designation of Voting Delegate for all NCACC and NACo Meetings for Calendar Year 2012 A motion was made by Commissioner Yuhasz, seconded by Commissioner McKee to nominate Commissioner Foushee as the Voting Delegate for all NCACC and NACo Meetings for Calendar Year 2012. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Appointments a. Manager A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to appoint Frank Clifton as County Manager. VOTE: UNANIMOUS b. Clerk to the Board A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to appoint Donna Baker as Clerk to the Board. VOTE: UNANIMOUS c. County Attorney A motion was made by Commissioner Yuhasz, seconded by Commissioner McKee to appoint John Roberts as County Attorney. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda The Chair pointed out the items at the County Commissioners' places: - Yellow sheet -Item 5-a, Minutes -revisions to the October 18, 2011 draft minutes - Blue sheet -Item 5-d, Property Tax Releases and/or Refunds -staff response to Commissioner Cordon's questions - Green sheet -Item 5-d -staff response to Commissioner Yuhasz's questions - White sheet -colored maps related to item 5-I, Formal Transfer of Ownership of Buckhorn-Mebane Water and Sewer Utilities Phase I (also known as Gravelly Hill Middle School System) to the City of Mebane. - White sheet -related to item 8-b, book Drop Options at Main Library -petition from the public. - ..Pink sheet and white sheet -related to item 8-c, Consideration and Approval of the Conceptual Site Plan for Walnut Grove Church Road Solid Waste Convenience Center Improvements, approved and draft minutes of the Solid Waste Advisory Board - Peach sheet -related to item 8-d, Adoption of the Code of General Ordinances The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge. 2. Public Comments a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda Debbie Barnes read a prepared statement. "Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you about a pending matter. As a resident of Randolph Road in Durham, I respectfully ask that you do not support a proposal to close a portion of Pickett Road in Orange County for the Hollow Rock access area or park. It would not be wise to do so, for the safety of local residents, nor is it necessary to fulfill the New Hope Open Space Plans for a Hollow Rock Access Area to a trailhead west of Pickett Road. I believe that Orange County has already purchased a 7-acre parcel at the corner of Erwin and Pickett for the purpose of a parking lot on the west side of Pickett Road, as called for in the Open Space Plan. A traffic analysis maintains that Randolph Road can handle an additional 645 cars per day diverted from Pickett Road. I strongly disagree based upon safety issues for the residents of Randolph Road and some nearby roads. The analysis does not address the queuing problems at intersection of Randolph and Pickett during peak times of day - especially related to Trinity School, plus several other schools in the area. A traffic light is already warranted at the intersection of Randolph/Erwin without (and before) any shifting of additional traffic onto it. Pickett Road needs to remain open for purposes of needed connectivity in the area. Advocates for the road closure cite "safety issues", but these are exaggerated and certainly no more important than the safety issues for residents of Randolph Road. - It is already difficult for some Randolph Road residents to use their own driveways at peak times of day - Walking, jogging, and biking are also difficult due to present traffic - Only one side of Randolph Road has mailboxes; residents must cross the street to get mail - Traffic calming measures are already needed - There is not adequate storage on Randolph to handle any increase in turns - Children already have difficulty walking safely to bus stop on Randolph Meanwhile, there are other ways to make Pickett Road safer besides closing it and diverting its traffic onto Randolph. In fact, at the August TAC meeting, a NCDOT representative said there were measures that could be taken immediately to improve safety at intersection of Pickett and Erwin. With resources not fully available for Hollow Rock development, it would be very premature to close Pickett Road - as planning is often a dynamic, changing process. For example, it may turn out that a pedestrian bridge across Pickett Road would better serve the needs of all concerned. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter." Bill Hall is a resident of Alman Drive in Durham. This road connects to Randolph Road, and this is his only way of getting out of his neighborhood. He spoke about the proposal to close part of Pickett Road. He is opposed to this. He said that the Orange County Commissioners were involved in park planning and would have the final say in closing this road. He appreciates that the Orange County Commissioners asked for input from the Durham residents that would be most affected by this closure. He said that the Durham representatives had no intent to ask for input from those most affected. He said that most input has been from park supporters who think that Pickett being open and the safety of the park users are mutually exclusive. He believes otherwise, and this was supported at the August TAC meeting by representatives from Chapel Hill. He said that supporters think that Randolph can handle the increased traffic that would happen if Pickett Road were closed. Most emphasis is on Pickett and Erwin and Randolph and Erwin. Randolph and Erwin is slated to get a stoplight, which will help. Pickett and Erwin has already been improved. Randolph and Pickett is a huge issue because there is no room for improvement and no room for increased capacity. If Pickett Road is closed, all of that traffic using Trinity School will come past this intersection. He asked the County Commissioners to please listen to all sides and not just those that are in support. He also asked the County to provide more visible signage for the buildings, such as the Senior Center, especially at nighttime. Bob Randall read a prepared statement. "Thank you for allowing me to speak. My name is Bob Randall and I'm a resident of northern Orange County and Chairman of the Orange County Republican Party. I have read news articles about your excitement in adding yet another tax referendum to a future ballot. I'm referring to the half-cent transportation tax. Having just been given a sales tax hike, this is the last thing Orange County residents need during this economic downturn. Need I remind you that Orange County presently has among the highest property tax rates in the state? Making matters worse, our state has the highest income tax rates in the Southeast and unless our General Assembly acts soon, the second highest gas .tax in the nation. It is not hard to understand why NC has a 10% unemployment rate, higher than the national average. Your job should be to see how efficiently you can utilize tax dollars instead of finding new ways to spend our money. In your promotion of the recent quarter cent sales tax referendum, you listed the ways all the new tax revenue would be spent; however you failed to mention the downside of higher taxes. I want to repeat, high county property and sales taxes and is a deterrent for businesses to locate, here in Orange County. On the other hand, becoming business-friendly will bring the county more tax revenue and give tax relief to residential property owners. To prove my point about the benefits of low taxes and becoming business- friendly, The Daily Tarheel recently quoted Chapel Hill Town Manager, Roger Stancil, `The town, which ran a deficit last fiscal year, should streamline public services and allocate resources more efficiently. Keeping taxes low and refraining from public employee layoffs and benefit cuts will make Chapel Hill more. desirable to potential businesses and residents. He said Stancil referenced the loss of a new Wal-Mart to Chatham County as a motivation for Chapel Hill to become more business friendly. I can think of no reason why the Town Manager's words would not apply to the county. Thank you." b. Matters on the Printed Agenda (These matters were considered when the Board addressed that item on the agenda below.) 3. Petitions by Board Members Commissioner Jacobs said that a group was at the dedication of the food processing center and the 10% campaign to try and get businesses and governmental entities to subscribe to a program whereby 10% of food is bought local. He would like to ask the group to come and make a presentation to the Board of County Commissioners about this. Commissioner Jacobs asked that the County Commissioners invite the Chair of OWASA. and Orange County's two representatives to come and talk to the Board about the Water and Sewer Boundary Agreement. He said that the intention was to ask Mebane and Durham to join when this was adopted. He would like to have a conversation about this before OWASA acts on leaving the agreement. Chair Pelissier said that at a recent meeting there was mention of interest of individuals to have solar farms in Orange County, not necessarily on farm land. As the UDO is being discussed, she thinks that it would be a good idea to consider such new technology and whether it could fit into the zoning rules. She suggested that staff look into this issue. 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations a. Proclamation -Human Rights Week Human Rights Day. and Bill of Rights The Board considered adopting a proclamation to officially recognize Human rights Week, Human Rights. Day, and Bill of Rights Day in Orange County during the month of December and authorizing the Chair to sign. Assistant County Manager Gwen Harvey presented this item and read the proclamation: ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, an December 10, 1948, the member states of the United Nations signed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and countries of different political, economic and social systems agreed on the fundamental rights that all people share solely on the basis of their common humanity; and WHEREAS, Human Rights Day and Human Rights Week were adopted by the United Nations in connection with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; and WHEREAS, the Bill of Rights Day was first declared in 1941 by President. Franklin Delano Roosevelt to commemorate the 1791 Ratification of the Bill of Rights; and WHEREAS, it was the North Carolina convention, .held in Hillsborough, which was instrumental regarding the inclusion of a Bill of Rights as part of ratifying- the United States Constitution; and WHEREAS, the Bill of Rights guarantees, among other basic liberties, freedom of speech and of the press as well as freedom of religion and association; and WHEREAS, the Bill of Rights states that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law and establishes fundamental rules of fairness in judicial proceedings, including the right to trial by jury; and WHEREAS, the primary responsibility to promote respect for these rights and freedoms lies with each individual in Orange County, and each of us can play a major role in enhancing human rights; and WHEREAS, the residents of Orange County support Human Rights and recognize that the "inherent dignity and the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family are the foundation of freedom, justice and peace;" NOW, THEREFORE, We, The Board of County Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina, do hereby proclaim December 10 - 16, 2011 as Human Rights Week and December 10, 2011 as Human Rights Day and December 15, 2011 as Bill of Rights Day in Orange County and challenge residents to study and promote the ideas contained in these documents to the end that freedom, justice, and equality shall not perish but will flourish and be made available to all. This the 5~' day of December 2011. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Foushee to adopt a proclamation to officially recognize Human rights Week, Human Rights Day and Bill of Rights Day in Orange County during the month of December and authorize the Chair to sign. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 5. Consent Agenda A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Foushee to approve those items on the consent agenda as stated below: a. Minutes The Board approved the minutes from October 4 and 18, 2041 as submitted by the Clerk to the Board. b. Appointments -None c. Motor Vehicle Propertv Tax Release/Refunds The Board adopted arelease/refund resolution, which is incorporated by reference, related to 28 requests for motor vehicle property tax releases or refunds in accordance with NCGS. d. Propertv Tax Releases and/or Refunds The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release property values related to nineteen (19) requests for property tax release and/or refund 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 eleven (11) untimely applications for exemption/exclusion from ad valorem taxation for the 2011 tax year. f. Tax Collector's Annual Settlement for Fiscal Year 2010-11 The Board received the Tax Collector's annual settlement on current and delinquent taxes and approved the resolution, which is incorporated by reference, approved the accounting thereof, and upon acceptance of the reports, issued the Orders to Collect for Fiscal Year 2011-12. g .Appointment of Four (4) Deputy Collectors The Board appointed Linda Jaubert, Bernice Gwynn, Valerie Curry, and Bobbie Underwood as Deputy Tax Collectors for two year terms, effective July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2013. The recommendation was made at the Board's August 17, 2010 meeting (item 4-j) to change the deputy tax collector appointments to align with the Tax collector appointment beginning in Fiscal Year 201.1-2012. h. Amending the County Manager's Employment Agreement The Board amended the County Manager's employment agreement to allow for an elevated vacation accrual i. Examination of Bonds The Board maintained bonding levels for officials pursuant to North Carolina General Statute 58-72-20. L Terradotta com Lease: 501 W. Franklin Street; Suites 105 and 106 The Board approved the lease renewals as presented for Terradotta.com for Suites 105 and 106 at 501 West Franklin Street through December 2, 2012 and authorized the Chair to sign, at the following lease rates: - Suite 105 - $10,416 per year - Suite 106 - $6,240 per year k. Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (Schools APFO) -Approval of Membership and Capacity Numbers The Board approved November 15, 2011 membership and capacity numbers for both school districts (Orange County and Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools), which will be used in developing 10-year student membership projections and the 2012 SAPFO Technical Advisory Committee Report. I. Formal Transfer of Ownership of Buckhorn-Mebane Water and Sewer Utilities Phase I (also known as Gravelly Hill Middle School System) to the City of Mebane This item was removed and placed at the end of the consent agenda for separate consideration. 6. Items Removed From Consent Agenda I. Formal Transfer of Ownership of Buckhorn-Mebane Water and Sewer Utilities Phase I (also known as Gravelly Hill Middle School System) to the City of Mebane The Board considered transferring ownership of water and sewer facilities constructed by Orange County and the property on which the Gravelly Hill Middle School pump station is built to the City of Mebane and authorizing the County Attorney to prepare documents and authorizing the Chair to sign. Commissioner Jacobs asked John Roberts about page 17, Attachment 3 and asked if it had to say "all men" and not "all people." John Roberts said that he could change it to "all persons." Commissioner Jacobs said that part of his motion will be to change this to "all persons." Commissioner Jacobs said that, considering the extent of the County's investment in the Mebane system and the fact that this is such a collaborative relationship, he thinks it would be prudent to at least request that- Mebane consider charging the Orange County Schools the in- town rate for water and sewer service to Gravely Hill Middle School. The County is contributing more than $1.8 million of facilities. Frank Clifton requested that this be part of the motion rather than a requirement so that Mebane can consider it. He said that Mebane has been maintaining these facilities for a number of years and the County has been somewhat delinquent in transferring the property to Mebane. Commissioner Jacobs agreed. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to authorize the Chair to approve the transfer of ownership for water and sewer facilities to the City of Mebane; and authorize the County Attorney to prepare easements and a real property deed transfer for Chair signature as approved by the BOCC; with changes on page 17 from "all men" to "all persons"; and also to request that Mebane consider in-town water and sewer rates for Gravelly Hill Middle School. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 7. Public Hearings a. .Proposed Orange County Addressing and Road Naming Ordinance The Board considered continuing the public hearing from the Board's November 15, 2011 regular meeting 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. Steve Averett, GIS Director, made a PowerPoint presentation. Addressing and Road Naming Ordinance presented by Steve Averett, GIS Manager Orange Co. Information Technologies SCOPE 33.9% (22,834 out of 67,404) of all addresses are in the County's addressing jurisdiction Specific Addressing and Street Centerline Issues Orange County has more than 2000 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 less 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 • 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 personal 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 Primary Items to be Enforced - Address not displayed at all - Address not displayed properly (numbers smaller than three inches, not on a non- contrasting background, not in the right location, not posted from both directions) - Address out of range (ex: 200 address located on a 500 block) - Addresses & 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 & 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 YEAR from the adoption of the ordinance with no penalties assessed • County staff will work directly and indirectly with property owners on assistance with compliance COSTS Existing Orange Co. staff will be required to report violations and follow up on compliance and collection of penalties Estimated $5,000 to develop custom software to track violations and prepare notices Sending notices of violations and confirming compliance will incur some costs for mailings and site visits (est. < $5K per year Commissioner Gordon made reference to page 19, article 6-35, d-1, and she asked what happens to the north-south axis south of Calvander. She thought that the axis should be extended south. Steve Averett said that the axis was to stop in the middle of the County. Commissioner Gordon said that the second question is on page 20, a-1 and 2. She asked for clarification about when a building should have a number. She asked whether it was the intent that, if the building is a sufficient distance away from the street, it should have a number both on the building and at the street; or is the intent for the number to be just at the street. Steve Averett said that if it is more than 75 feet from the street, then the address must be at the street, and Commissioner Gordon asked him to clarify this in the ordinance. Commissioner Gordon asked when people would be able to find out their new number and John Roberts said that they are going to recommend next week for the Board of County Commissioners to adopt this effective December 13th, except for the penalty section, which will be effective January 1, 2013. Commissioner Gordon clarified that people will have a year to comply once they are contacted. Commissioner Yuhasz said that in the abstract it suggested that he said that all .signs should be blue, but he meant green. He thinks that it would be wise to have some specific color requirements in the road sign standards. Steve Averett said that public roads are required to have green signs and private roads can have green or blue: Chair Pelissier said that this is not just about naming of streets, but that signs should be visible day or night. She asked if there was an educational plan about the importance of the visibility of signage. Steve Averett said that they are going to work closely with the local volunteer firefighters and educate them on the ordinance. There will also be advertisements, pamphlet mailings, etc. Commissioner Jacobs said that Mr. Hall raised the point about not being able to see appropriate signage for the COSC and he would hope by the end of the grace period that all Orange County buildings have adequate and visible signage. PUBLIC COMMENT: Mike Murphy asked Steve Averett about the number of addresses out of compliance and it was answered 2,000. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to close the public hearing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to have staff bring this item back to the Board at the December 13th meeting. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 8. Regular Agenda a. Resolution to Lew the Article 46 One-Quarter Cent (1/4~) County Sales and Use Tax Approved by Voters on November 8, 2011 The Board considered approving a resolution levying the Article 46 One-Quarter Cent (1/4 cent) optional sales and use tax approved by voters on November 8, 2011 and confirming Orange County's commitment to fund unfunded or underfunded economic development and public school capital needs for a period of ten years as evidenced by the Resolution approved by the Board on June 21, 2011. Assistant County Manager Michael Talbert introduced this item. The current State sales tax is 4.75%, the County's current rate is 2% for a combined rate of 6.75%. If this resolution is approved, the new rate will be 7% effective April 1, 2012. This tax does not apply to food, gasoline, or prescription drugs. On November 8, 2011, this levy was approved by a vote of 10,749 to 6,965. In June, the Board passed a resolution that indicated along-term commitment to dedicate 50% of this funding to schools and 50% to economic development. He went through the attachments. Economic Development Director Steve Brantley said that the staff is ready to start 2012 with new tools to help diversify Orange County's economic tax base. Commissioner Gordon made reference to Section 3 and the sentence about what the tax shall not apply to and said that it does not mention gasoline or medication, but only food. She asked if it was necessary to add this in. Michael Talbert said that it is not necessary to add it into the resolution, but the Board could add it if it so wishes. Commissioner Foushee said that in Michael Talbert's comments, he indicated that this is the same language that has been used in other jurisdictions. She suggests not changing the language unless there is a compelling reason. Commissioner Jacobs said that he agreed with Commissioner Foushee. He asked if, hypothetically, the County were approached by another municipality about helping to fund a private sewer line for some existing businesses, where would this fall in the matrix and if it would fall under Business Investment Grants. Steve Brantley said that when the core eight categories were drafted it did not at that time include this example. He said that between now and the determination of the budget, this can certainly be considered. Commissioner Jacobs said that there may be a category that addresses existing businesses. Steve Brantley said that funds that are not spent will go into a reserve for those categories. There will be a County website for the general public to monitor how the funds are being utilized. Commissioner Hemminger said that she wanted to make sure that these funds are going to be used for these particular categories because it sounds like it will be thrown into the General Fund. Michael Talbert said that there will be a separate fund that will track these revenues called a Special Revenue Fund. Commissioner McKee said that he understood Commissioner Jacobs' hypothetical scenario, but he wants to be careful not to veer from the original intent. Commissioner Gordon said that they need to be careful to do what they said they would do, Chair Pelissier said that the County Commissioners need to discuss how they would collaborate with businesses in Orange County and they need some criteria. Commissioner Foushee agreed and said that the fact that the taxes will not be levied until April 2012 gives the County Commissioners an opportunity to have these conversations with the towns. ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS-APPROVED A Resolution Levying an Additional One-Quarter Cent (1/4¢) County Sales and Use Tax in Orange County WHEREAS, Article 46 of Chapter 105 of the North Carolina General Statutes (NCGS. Sections 105-535 through 105-538) authorizes the Board to levy a One-Quarter Cent (1/4¢) County Sales and Use Tax in the. County, subject to an subsequent to the affirmative vote of a majority of those voting in an advisory referendum held by the County on the question of whether to levy such local sales and use tax in the County as required by NCGS 105-537; and WHEREAS, in connection therewith, the Board has heretofore directed the Orange County Board of Elections to conduct an advisory referendum on such question, which advisory referendum was held on November 8, 2011; and WHEREAS, the Board of Elections has certified to the Board that, in said advisory referendum, the ballots were cast 10,749 (60.68%) FOR and 6,965 (39.32%) AGAINST the levy of the additional One-Quarter Cent (1/4¢) County Sales and Use Tax in the County; and WHEREAS, NCGS 105-537 permits the Board, after public notice of its intent to do so, to adopt a resolution levying the additional One-Quarter Cent (1/4¢) County Sales and Use Tax in the County; and which notice was published at least 10 days before the date of this meeting; and WHEREAS, the Board has determined that the levy of the additional One-Quarter Cent (1/4¢) County Sales and Use Tax in the County is necessary to fund significant pressing school facility and technology needs, and infrastructure improvements needed for economic development initiatives; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Orange County Board of Commissioners as follows: Section 1. There is hereby levied within the County the additional One-Quarter Cent (1/4¢) County Sales and Use Tax authorized by Article 46 of Chapter 105 of the NCGS (Sections 105- 535 through 105-538). Section 2. Collection of the additional One-Quarter Cent (1/4¢) County Sales and Use Tax by the North Carolina Secretary of Revenue shall begin on April 1, 2012 and continue thereafter. Section 3. The net proceeds of the additional One-Quarter Cent (1/4¢) County Sales and Use Tax levied hereby shall be distributed by the Secretary of Revenue to Orange County in accordance with Article. 39 Chapter 105 of the North Carolina General Statutes. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 39 of Chapter 105, the additional One-Quarter Cent (1/4¢) Sales -and Use Tax shall not apply to the sale of food that is exempt from the tax pursuant to NCGS 105-164.136. The .Secretary shall not divide the amount allocated to Orange County between Orange County and the municipalities within Orange County. Section 4. The publication of the Notice of Intent to Adopt Resolution levying the additional One-Quarter Cent (1/4¢) Sales and Use Tax in Orange County is hereby ratified and approved. Section 5. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. A certified copy of this resolution shall be forwarded to the Secretary of the North Carolina Department of Revenue, P.O. Box 25000, Raleigh, NC 27640, along with a certified copy of the Board of Education results from the advisory referendum. ADOPTED this the 5th day of December, 2011. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to approve a resolution levying the Article 46 One-Quarter Cent (1/4¢) optional sales and use tax approved by voters on November 8, 2011 and confirm Orange County's commitment to fund unfunded or underfunded economic development and public school capital needs for a period of ten years as evidenced by the Resolution approved by the Board on June 21, 2011. VOTE: UNANIMOUS b. Book Drop Options at Main Library The Board considered approving the designation of a parking space at the Orange County Main Library as "Book Drop Only" (Option 3) as discussed by the Board of Commissioners during a work session on October 25, 2011. Library Services Director Lucinda Munger said that this item is a follow up to the October 25th work session. During the session, three options were discussed for afree-standing book drop at the Main Library. The options are: 1) Provide a `drive-by' book drop located at the corner piece of the "right-of-way" into the Eno River Parking Deck. Note: the subject location is not owned by Orange County and would require an easement from the owner of the Eno River Parking Deck (costs range between $18,500-22,500); 2) Provide an alternate walkable book drop at the handicapped ramp located on the east side of the building (cost estimates were greater than $25,000); and 3) Clearly mark and have staff monitor use of a "Book Drop Only" parking spot located along the library parking next to existing Handicapped Parking spaces (cost estimates $150-200). At the work session, the County Commissioners expressed a preference for option 3 and the Manager is recommending that the Board approve option 3. PUBLIC COMMENT: Janet Flowers said that she is from Hillsborough and she is an advocate for seniors. She reads to the seniors for three hours a week. She said that in order to locate the books she needs each week to read to this group, she must ask staff for assistance and the staff are wonderful. She said that, though it is an admiral goal for a book drop, this would require more staff time and the impact on the already limited staff resources would be too much. Jean Brooks said that when she met with the County Manager and librarian months ago they did not know about the property and the ownership. She asked why this was. She said that it seems like it has turned into a struggle to do things and it should not be. There should be some compassion for the older and handicapped. She said that she brought the petitions tonight. Donna Webb said that she wanted to put a face to the email that she sent them this week. She said that she does not understand why a book drop was not placed on the outside of the library when it was originally built. She said that she cannot believe that it is going to cost that much money to put a book drop there. She said that option 3 is not going to work because there will not be anyone there to maintain that five-minute space. Erin Shepherd said that she is a resident of Efland and she has been a patron of the Orange County library for years, especially as a parent. She said that there have been many times when staff time has proven invaluable in enriching the library experience. She spoke about the great resource of the staff. She said that option 3 was the most viable of the three options and she urged the Board to approve this option. Peggie Murray said that she lives in Efland. She said that she is trying to figure out why she is so angry about the new library. She is a teacher and she has received help many times, but she is so angry about the parking and the parking lot. She feels that her library is not accessible to her and she has to figure out where to park. Diane Cates reiterated what Ms. Murray said and said that she thinks it is important to try and figure out a way to help the senior population and to vote for this important need. Lucinda Munger said that, in trying to assist the aging, the staff has been speaking with Janice Tyler, Director of Aging, and she mentioned using the RSVP 55+ volunteers to help drop off/pick up books to help the seniors with library access. Commissioner Jacobs thanked all who spoke. He told Mrs. Murray that the County did invest more money in building another sidewalk so that people could go from the library to Churton Street so that people can actually walk to the library as much as Hillsborough's infrastructure will allow. The parking was also a concern to the Commissioners and it remains a concern because there is an uncooperative parking deck owner. He said that he would be glad to bring the code number to each County Commissioners' meeting and hold it up silently so that anyone who watches can see how they can go to the designated parking spaces and park for free. He would also recommend going to the south side of the parking deck and there are street spaces. Regarding proposal three, he thinks that the County should start here. He said that the Board discussed revisiting this after one year. He has similar concerns that the staff is not going to be able to monitor the five-minute parking space. He said that he is willing to try this option as they work on other options. Commissioner McKee said that he thought it interesting that there were not more complaints and such with the librarians about the lack of a book drop. His main concern over this issue is that people will continue to park in the road to drop off books and it is costly to put in a drive-by book drop. Commissioner Yuhasz said that option three is the most viable option. He said that this is going to be a book drop only parking space and not afive-minute parking space, but a "no parking" space for book drop only. Commissioner McKee said that he would be interested in how the County was going to enforce this "book drop only" parking space. He asked what would change in a year about a book drop. Frank Clifton reiterated that the relationship with the owner of the deck does not generate cooperation. John Roberts said that the County is unlikely to get any easements from the deck owner because it is in litigation with the deck owner. He has yet to receive a response to the complaint, but the relationship is not a good one. Chair Pelissier said that one of the issues is the lack of parking and not just the book drop. She said that option 2 would really affect children's services and the existing staff. She wants to maintain the services for the children. She continues to support option 3. Commissioner McKee said that it is incumbent upon the County Commissioners to provide as many services to their taxpayers as possible. He wants to make an attempt to find out if an easement can be provided. A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner Yuhasz to approve the designation of a parking space at the Orange County Main Library as "Book Drop Only" (Option 3) as discussed by the Board of Commissioners during a work session on October 25, 2011; and to include that the Board will revisit this item in one-year. VOTE: Ayes, 6; Nay, 1 (Commissioner McKee) c. Consideration and Approval of the Conceptual Site- Plan for Walnut Grove Church Road Solid Waste Convenience Center Improvements The Board considered approval of a conceptual site plan for the Walnut Grove Church Road Solid Waste Convenience Center, and authorizing the Manager to proceed to final design and bidding of this project. Solid Waste Director Gayle Wilson went through this item. The County purchased this 18-acre property several years ago with the intention of eventually relocating a convenience center to the property and to eliminate the leasing of the property adjacent to it. There is a tremendous amount of use of this site. There are some new recycling services contemplated in the new concept plan. The proposal is to add the recycling of textiles and shoes, cooking oil, and food waste. They also want to expand the salvage shed to be able to accommodate additional materials. The goal is to complete the site and try to have it open in July 2012. Gayle Wilson introduced Ed Shuffler, consultant from HDR Engineering, who presented the concept plan. Ed Shuffler presented the concept plan and the maps. Key Design Features: - Compactors o Municipal solid waste (2) o Single stream recyclables o Cardboard o Bulky waste (2) - Additional Services o Loading dock o Plastic film o Household hazardous waste o Food waste o Vegetable oil o Textiles o Expanded salvage shed Existing Services- o Motor oil and filters o Antifreeze o Batteries o Electronics PUB LIC COMMENT: Bonnie Hauser spoke on behalf of Orange County Voice. She said that she also wanted to speak to item 9-a. She said that Orange County Voice wishes to ask the County Commissioners to consider slowing down the County's Solid Waste project. They do not oppose the project, but only the timing given the risks and uncertainties that lie ahead. She said that much has changed since these projects were approved. Chapel Hill appears to be seriously looking at new ways to handle the waste collection and disposal. She said that it is conceivable that Chapel Hill may not participate in the County's program for much longer. This greatly impacts the County's plans and it appears that the SWAB and the County staff have not been in the loop. She asked that the County consider keeping the program as adual-stream before moving forward with the proposals. She said that the 3R fee is not even legal. She asked if it were possible to outsource the program rather than spending money on new trucks and new bins. Norma White said that she is questioning some of the traffic flow issues within the site. She asked for an explanation of how to use this site if you have multiple things to drop off. Chris Weaver said that he also has a question about the flow. He is worried that there will be a backup of traffic with people waiting in line to get in to drop off their trash. Chair Pelissier made reference to Bonnie Hauser's statement about the 3R fee being illegal and said that this is a serious allegation. She asked the Attorney to address this. John Roberts said that he sent an email to the Board of County Commissioners on this issue. He said that the County cannot impose fees that it is not statutorily authorized to impose. In one case, Durham County attempted to impose impact fees. Orange County has statutory authority to impose impact fees but Durham County got caught doing something that it did not have the authority to do. Unlike the impact fee situation, all counties in North Carolina are statutorily authorized to impose three types of fees: collection fees, user fees, and availability fees. He does not believe that there is a legality issue with the solid waste fees. Chair Pelissier asked that the memo sent to the County Commissioners regarding this issue be sent to Orange County Voice. Chair Pelissier said that there were other questions asked about the flow of traffic. Ed Shuffler made reference to the concern about the traffic moving about the green boxes and showed on the map how the flow would work. Commissioner Jacobs made reference to the citizens that came to the meeting. in October and said that he does not see any of them tonight. He asked if staff had contacted any.. of them. Gayle Wilson said that all nine people were sent a communication from him via first class mail. Commissioner Jacobs asked about some of the Q&A in their packets and why does the Board not want to make a statement in the contrary that they want to put a transfer station or landfill in some of these northern parcels that Orange County has. He suggested that as a part of the narrative going forward that it should say that the County has no intention of making this site a transfer station or landfill and the same for Mincy Road/Schley Road. Commissioner Jacobs asked clarifying questions about the traffic flow, which were answered by Gayle Wilson. Commissioner Gordon said that what Chapel Hill and Carrboro do may not affect the County directly, but there needs to be a total financial picture in mind. Michael Talbert said that these are convenience centers for rural residents of the County. The County will have to ultimately dispose. of the solid waste and recyclables that come from the rural part of Orange County whether Chapel Hill is a part of it or not. This is an upgrade to the system to make it more efficient. Commissioner Yuhasz said that the Board has looked at this many times and previously it had looked at costs for upgrades to all of these centers. Gayle Wilson said that over time, once the landfill closes, there is no question that these improvements over a 15-20 year time period will easily save the costs of the improvements. This is also an opportunity to enhance the recycling program. Chair Pelissier asked about truck traffic and it was answered that total truck traffic will be cut approximately in half. A motion was made by Commissioner Yuhasz, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to approve a conceptual site plan for the Walnut Grove Church Road Solid Waste Convenience Center, and authorize the Manager to proceed to final design a bidding of this project. VOTE: Ayes, 6; Nay, 1 (Commissioner Gordon) A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Foushee that the staff include information in affirmative statements on what the County is NOT going to do -nothing will be done on the property between Mincy and Schley Roads, etc. VOTE: UNANIMOUS d. Adoption of the Code of General Ordinances The Board considered codifying and adopting Orange County's general ordinances into a Code of Ordinances. John Roberts said that this would include all ordinances except the UDO. There is not a public hearing required for this process and this just renumbers the ordinances and puts them in a different format. He consulted with the School of Government on this process. Commissioner Foushee said that the Board needs to commend the Attorney and his staff for getting this accomplished in a timely manner. She also commended the Manager for his astute observation and she commended the Manager's staff. Commissioner Gordon said that she also wanted to commend the Attorney and his staff. There was a revised memo at the County Commissioners' places. MEMORANDUM TO: John Roberts, County Attorney FROM: Sahana Ayer, Staff Attorney DATE: November 1, 2011 RE: Orange County Ordinances -Republication This memorandum is written to identify the specific technical revisions to Orange County ordinances for purposes of incorporation into and republication of the General Code of Ordinances. The manner of arrangement, classification and indexing of the Orange County ordinances is currently incomplete and inadequate to meet the needs of the County and the general public. Pursuant to the authority granted by N.C. Gen. Statute §153A-49, the Board of County Commissioners ("Board") instructed .the County Attorney to codify and compile. the existing ordinances and incorporate the said ordinances into a General Code of Ordinances. Since July 2009, the Orange County Attorney's Office has been editing, proofreading and preparing all Orange County Ordinances (excluding the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance) for republication by the MuniCode Corporation. During this process, the ordinances have been reformatted and renumbered in accordance with the MuniCode numbering and formatting guidelines. Each ordinance (excluding the Unified Development Ordinance) has been reviewed to ensure typographical and grammatical correctness, rectify conflicts and inconsistences between the ordinances and state statues and ensure accuracy of state law references, internal cross-references and historical notes. Additionally, the names of the following federal, state and Orange County Departments, ordinance and personnel designations have been changed as indicated below: Former Name Revision Chairperson Chair County of Orange Orange County Department of Emergency Management Services Department of Emergency Services Department of Inspections Department of Planning and Inspections Department of Parks and Recreation Department of Environment Agriculture Parks and Recreation (DEAPR) Emergency Services Medical Advisory Committee Emergency Service Peer Review Committee Environment and Resource Conservation Department Department of Environment Agriculture Parks and Recreation (DEAPR) North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources (DEHNR) North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) North Carolina Department of Human Resources North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services North Carolina Department of Natural Resources North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) Personnel Department Human Resources Department Personnel Director Human Resources Director Recreation and Parks Department Parks and Recreation Department Zoning Ordinance Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) The focus of the republication project has been to prepare the ordinances that have been enacted by the Board of County Commissioners for adoption and incorporation into the General Code of Ordinances, in their current form. Substantive amendments to the ordinances have been deferred until such time as the General Code of Ordinances is adopted by the Board. ADOPTING ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING AND ENACTING A NEW CODE OF ORDINANCES FOR .ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF CERTAIN ORDINANCES NOT INCLUDED THEREIN; PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR THE VIOLATION THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR THE MANNER OF AMENDING SUCH CODE; AND PROVIDING WHEN SUCH CODE AND THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA: Section 1. The Code entitled "Code of Ordinances, Orange County, North Carolina," published by Municipal Code Corporation, consisting of chapters 1 through 50, each inclusive, is adopted. Such Code updates references to certain state and county agencies and departments as specified in the Memorandum of Agency and Department Names dated November 1, 2011, which memorandum is incorporated in this Ordinance by reference. Section 2. All ordinances of a general and permanent nature enacted on or before December 5, .2011, and not included in the Code or recognized- and continued in force by reference therein, are repealed; provided, however that the Code does not contain, and is not intended to affect: (a) The Unified Development Ordinance of Orange County, North Carolina, as adopted on April 5, 2011 shall continue in full force and effect. (b) The Facilities Use Policy adopted on May 17, 2011, as amended, shall continue in full force and effect. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of the Facilities Use Ordinance (chapter 18 of such Code) and the Facilities Use Policy, the provisions of the Facilities Use Policy shall prevail. The Facilities Use Policy is available for review at the Orange County Clerk's Office. (c) Budget Ordinances and the annually adopted Schedule of Fees. (d) Bond Orders and Ordinances. (e) Any franchise ordinances not specifically incorporated in the .Code. Section 3. The repeal provided for in section 2 hereof shall not be construed to revive any ordinance or part thereof that has been repealed by a subsequent ordinance that is repealed by this ordinance. Section 4. Unless another penalty is expressly provided, every person convicted of a violation of any provision of the Code or any ordinance, rule or regulation adopted or issued in pursuance thereof shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $500.00, or shall be imprisoned for not more than 30 days, for each offense. Each act of violation and each day upon which any such violation shall continue or occur shall constitute a separate offense. The penalty provided by this section, unless another penalty is expressly provided, shall apply to the amendment of any Code section, whether or not such penalty is reenacted in the amendatory ordinance. In addition to the penalty prescribed above, the county may pursue other remedies such as abatement of nuisances, injunctive relief and revocation of licenses or permits. Section 5. Additions or amendments to the Code when passed in such form as to indicate an intention to make the same a part of the Code shall be deemed to be incorporated in the Code, so that reference to the Code includes the additions and amendments. Section 6. Ordinances adopted after December 5, 2011, that amend or refer to ordinances that have been codified in the Code shall be construed as if they amend or refer to like provisions of the Code. Section 7. Any typographical, reference, spelling or name errors may be corrected during final production of the Code. Section 8. If any portion of this Code or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect .other provisions or applications of this Code which can be given effect. without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Code are declared to be severable. Section 9. A copy of this Code shall be kept on file in the office of the Clerk to the Board. It shall be the express duty of the Clerk, or the Clerk's designee, in consultation with the County Attorney, to insert in their designated places all duly adopted amendments to this Code, and to extract from this Code all provisions which may from time to time be duly repealed. A copy of this Code shall be available for all persons desiring to examine it during reasonable times, under the supervision of the Clerk or the Clerk's designee. Section 10. No action or proceeding of any nature, whether civil or criminal, judicial or administrative, or otherwise, pending on the effective date of this Ordinance by or against Orange County or any of its departments or agencies shall be abated or otherwise affected by the adoption of this Code. Section 11. This Ordinance shall become effective upon adoption. Adopted by the Orange County Board of Commissioners this 5th day of December, 2011. A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to codify and adopt the Orange County's General Ordinances into a Code of Ordinances. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 9. Reports a. Conversion of Recvcling Programs to Single Stream (Comingled) Collection The Board received from County staff information regarding planning for implementation of single stream recycling and was asked to provide guidance to staff with regard to proceeding to implementation. Recycling Manager Cody Marshall made this presentation. He said that he is here to let the County Commissioners know how they are going to move to single-stream recycling in the next seven months. He said that single-stream is when paper, bottles, cans, and cardboard can be put into one container. This will be done for convenience to citizens. There will be a reduction in costs for the Urban Curbside program. The cost should be reduced to about $3.00 to $3.75 per household per month. It could save the County as much as $100,000 per year. Staff is recommending going with the 95-gallon cart for households for the collection service. There is a possible grant from the State of $75,000 to go towards the purchase of these carts. The carts will have chips in them that will allow the County to collect data about participation. Chair Pelissier asked staff about what happens if the municipalities did not participate with solid waste and' how this would impact this program. Gayle Wilson said that the carts would belong to Orange County and if the municipalities opted out, they would collect the carts. He has been asked by a Chapel Hill Town Council Member to make a presentation to the board for the plans for implementation regarding single-stream Clarifying questions. of the County Commissioners were answered by staff. Commissioner Jacobs said that he was concerned about how to provide security of information regarding the chips in the carts and where the information goes. Frank Clifton said- that the information will be kept at Solid Waste. Commissioner Jacobs wants to talk with IT about security. Commissioner McKee said that he appreciates the effort to move toward single-stream. He said that the Board will be meeting with the municipalities in January and he would like to ask to move the timeline back until the Board of County Commissioners has had a chance to talk with them about solid waste. Cody Marshall said that the current contract is up June 30, 2012. Commissioner Yuhasz said that he would prefer that staff keep moving ahead on the current timeline. Commissioner Jacobs said that the municipalities have been asking for single-stream and pay-as-you-throw, so this will make a partnership more attractive to the municipalities. Commissioner Gordon said that she supported Commissioner McKee's comments about not moving ahead until they have had this conversation with the towns, because the meeting is in January. The Board agreed to direct staff to continue gathering information but not to make any major decisions until after the conversation. with the towns. Commissioner Jacobs clarified that some people will continue to use the smaller bins and Cody Marshall said yes. Commissioner Gordon said that she supports what Commissioner Jacobs said about privacy and security of information obtained from the chips in the carts. Chair Pelissier asked where the single-stream would go. Cody Marshall said that there are three major markets in the area -two in Raleigh and one in Greensboro. Chair Pelissier just wants to make sure that no efficiencies are lost in the transport. 10. Countv Manager's Report Frank Clifton said that this year the County employees combined pledges for the United Way Campaign of over $30,000. Also, the Social Services Department gets together to .collect a community toy chest program. The employees gave over 6,700 toys last year. Also, the employees have talked him into the Jeans for Joy program, which is when employees can wear jeans and contribute $1 for every day they wear jeans during the month of December. Lastly, the Employee Relations Committee put together a food drive this year. 11. Countv Attorney's Report John Roberts said that once Municode gets the link up on the County website, they will not automatically be able to include amendments in the document. He is going to work with IT so that there will be links to documents with amendments that are done, pending Municode adding the amendments into the actual code of ordinances. 12. Appointments -NONE 13. Board Comments Commissioner McKee -none Commissioner Foushee said that for those members of the public who would like to contribute to the annual giving to DSS, they can mail a check to P. O. Box 8181, Hillsborough, NC 27278. The website is Hillsborough-nc.toysfortots.org and gives a list of places for drop- off. Commissioner Foushee said that she attended NACo's Healthy Counties Forum in D.C. last week. Her expenses were paid in full by NACo and the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners. The goal is to improve individual and community health and to assist counties to implement federal health reform. Commissioner Gordon said that she went to the joint meeting of the Durham-Chapel Hill - Carrboro MPO and the Capital Area MPO and they had a presentation on the Wake, Durham, and Orange County transit plans. Wake County's plan includes a core program that they can finance using funds that are currently available, and an enhanced program that would make use of federal and state funds that are not available currently. She said that Orange County should seriously consider using this approach. Commissioner Hemminger made reference to the memo about the surface water quality monitoring. She recommended that the area wait to see what tools are being developed. The consultant is supposed to help with tools and guidance. Commissioner Yuhasz said that the County Health Department has finished the data collection for the Community Health Assessment and the Board of Health will be determining the priorities for the next year in January. Commissioner Jacobs congratulated everyone that worked at the polls. He pointed out that the day after tomorrow is the 70th anniversary of Pearl Harbor and everyone should remember all who sacrificed for our country. Chair Pelissier said that she attended the Cooperative Extension Community. Association Achievement Day. She said that she was impressed with this and the services that are provided. Chair Pelissier said that there is a work session on Thursday on transit and there will be discussion on how to develop a plan that does not depend on federal or state funds. 14. Information Items • November 15, 2011 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List • Memo: Efland Cheeks Day Camp 2011 Summary • Memo on Surface Water Quality Monitoring • Memo Regarding Orange County Board of Health Review of the Responsibilities, Inspection Requirements, and Fees Associated with State-Permitted Septic Systems 15. Closed Session-NONE 16. Adjournment A motion was made by Commissioner Hemminger, seconded by Commissioner McKee to adjourn the meeting at 10:13 PM. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Bernadette Pelissier, Chair Donna S. Baker, CMC Clerk to the Board