Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 20021009 APPROVED 12/2/2002 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WORK SESSION SOUTHERN HUMAN SERVICES CENTER 5:30 p.m. October 9, 2002 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Work Session on Wednesday, October 9, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Barry Jacobs and Commissioners Margaret W. Brown, Moses Carey, Jr., Alice M. Gordon (arrived at 5:55 pm) and Stephen Halkiotis COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill and S. Sean Borhanian COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr., Assistant County Manager Gwen Harvey 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. Chair Barry Jacobs called the meeting to order at 5:45 p.m. 1 a. Review of the Draft Strategic Plan in Response to the State Mandate for Mental Health Reform John Link said that this time is exciting for him after hearing from the public last night and the creativity that was expressed. He said that we should make sure that important programs continue even if the State does not fund them. He said that we heard last night that services are basically provided based on revenue streams. However, this is not the culture that local government is used to doing mental health. He is optimistic about this mental health reform and that the outcome will be better than it is now, especially in this County. Chair Jacobs reviewed the public forum for Commissioners Brown and Carey, who were not able to attend. Commissioner Carey asked about the bullets in the handouts and if they reflect the points that were made by the people in the work groups. OPC Director Tom Maynard said that every point raised in the groups was written down and everyone voted on the priorities. Tom Maynard said that this County is a leader in mental health and that John Link is one of the premiere County Managers in the State. He disagrees with some of the assessments and some of the aspects of the plan, but fundamentally he thinks they got it right and the plan is one way for them to fix the system. The intent of the client services is to make things more accountable and more effective and efficient. He said that one of the key things that needed to be fixed in this State is the financing scheme. Tom Maynard said that last night there were a lot of comments about child and family services. He thinks that there is a very proactive child service at OPC and he was surprised at the comments. He said that there was something missing in terms of public perception. John Link said that he was in that group but that it was not necessarily critiquing the services themselves, but it was the case management and the coordination piece that needed more in depth work. Tom Maynard said that an issue across the State is how well services work together at the local level and whether or not mental health is connected to Social Services and Health Departments. He sees that the Board of County Commissioners is directly responsible for running the system in the new plan. One of the disagreements that OPC has with the State is the role of case management. OPC feels that if you strip the LME of case management, then you have no ability to do the job. There is not a need for duplicate managed care companies all over the State. He said that OPC's mission statement is to help people live normal lives in the community. He said that the LME has to have strong case management services and make sure that a system is in place to coordinate with other departments. Commissioner Brown said that she does not think that OPC can do all for the other counties but they could serve this County. She listed groups that she would like to see as a working group to keep them informed and see where we can integrate (Community Housing, Sheriff, Judge, Aging, Parks and Recreation, Social Services, Health Department, schools, and UNC Psychiatry). Tom Maynard agreed and said that what is the answer for Orange County may not be the same for Chatham County. Each county must have its own process for making sure that everything works within the counties. Commissioner Brown said that this should be something that Tom Maynard should be the head of. Tom Maynard said that the LME (Local Management Entity) is not the service provider, but the convener of a public process that works for the county that makes sure that the planning and feedback loop is very tight and responsive. He said that throughout the feedback that the major issues were affordable housing, jobs, respite care, and opportunities to be accepted in the community. He has heard that consumers do not want what OPC offers and they want more and different things. The consumers do like Club Nova. Commissioner Brown said that her understanding is that we are going to have people leaving hospitals and going into nursing homes. She said that the Nursing Home and Home Care Advisory Committees should be a part of this. Tom Maynard said that there was some information on nursing home placements. Commissioner Brown asked Tom Maynard how a committee like this could fit into what they have now. Tom Maynard said that it could help shape the plan of how to proceed to develop services. He thinks there should be a structure with ongoing investment and involvement from the consumers and advisory boards and other departments. In answer to a question from Commissioner Carey, Tom Maynard said that they would be purchasing services by a consumer basis and the development of a service plan is actually the commitment of public resources. John Link said that this group (consumers, advisory boards, departments) could examine what coordination issues we have now and see how they integrate cross- agency. He said that his point is that lots of groups are working and there is a theme from last night that one big issue is substance abuse. Chair Jacobs asked if the Consumer and Family Advisory Committee would be represented in this group. Tom Maynard said that one group that is mandated by law is the advisory board to the Board of County Commissioners that will be giving testimony. The consumers have wanted a process outside of this. This mega—coordination group (that Commissioner Brown has proposed) could be under or over mental health. It is a good idea to not duplicate the coordination of services. He made reference to the complaints of the UNC Hospital emergency room where people are coming in for medication checks because their prescriptions have run out and they cannot get in to see a psychiatrist and they show up in the emergency room. This could be solved with a contract. Commissioner Gordon asked how Tom Maynard would imagine this would all work. She said that as she understands it, right now the State provides certain services through institutions and then the county provides services. The county both manages and provides the services. The change is that some of the beds at the State level are going to be eliminated and then at the county level, there is going to be a separation between the management and the delivery of services. She asked about the economy of scale. She said that it looks like the providers will remain and that OPC is going to have to divest itself of some of its provision of services. She said that the question that was brought up last night is if you have more of these smaller entities, then OPC will lose its economy of scale. Tom Maynard agreed with Commissioner Gordon. He is worried about economy of scale also. He thinks in most cases we can divest effectively, but they are worried about the possible duplication of infrastructure at a lower level. They have thought about how to make available a service organization function where the LME might extend to non-profits the services that they might need. Commissioner Gordon asked if there was a certain amount of money that the public sector will pay to the non-profits. Another question is where everyone is going to live with reduced beds at the State level. Tom Maynard said that the answer is not to create group homes for everybody coming out of an institution. It is dreadful to put them in rest homes. The only answer is to have them go to independent living situations with the appropriate resources. He said that the kind of support that the mentally ill need typically varies from day to day. When needed, there can be crisis beds available. There must be flexible services, but you have to be able to pay for it. Sometimes there can be roommates, but typically finances come up short. If there is a strong core of support services, then there can be lots of people in relatively light duty living situations without around the clock support. You have to be able to respond to emergencies immediately, and if patients know that, then their confidence increases. Commissioner Gordon asked how much it would cost to put the people in the new situation and if it would cost more than now and if the services would be better, the same, or worse. Tom Maynard said that the base level of funding does not change with the reform. He referred to a handout and how much money we can free up with this new model of care. There are two local things they can control. One is to shift non-priority population savings to priority. If they were to not serve those who had low priority services and only focus on high priority services, they could free up as much as a million dollars. He does not recommend doing this. He thinks that they can free up a million dollars by redirecting some of the priority population money and by recycling the services going to non-priority populations. He said that the non-priority populations are very small and most of the people they are serving are in very serious need. Regarding where they would go for the money to serve those in the institutions, he said that it would not solve the problem by transferring money from the institutions. He said that there should be bridge money for the transition. There may not be enough money from the institutions to cover the need and the only possible solution to the problem is to change the Medicaid plan. The State has said that they would create a new rewrite of the Medicaid plan and now we are talking dollar amounts that can make a difference. A big showstopper for the Medicaid plan is the county match for the new money. He does not think the plan will work unless the State comes up with a way to redo the formula. Chair Jacobs said that he hopes the Board, the LME Board, the Manager, and the OPC Director will keep track of legislative changes that we think will improve this system. Commissioner Brown asked Tom Maynard if he was involved with agencies at the State level and he said yes and that they have been fairly successful. Commissioner Carey said that he agrees with the County Commissioners being involved with changing the Medicaid plan but that the counties are over-burdened right now and could not provide a match. He heard that there is a slight possibility that the federal government may increase the portion of Medicaid it covers and reduce the percentage that the State is required to cover. John Link made reference to the timing of the divestiture of the public side of OPC and said that we should take every single second of the three years and do this slowly and prudently. Because once we know the local cost that could be offset by Medicaid, this is one way to persuade the other County Commissioners. He said that we need to find a way, during the interim of three years, to continue the good programs. Tom Maynard said that there is no need for people in the independent program to feel threatened. There are other programs that are very worried, and he does not see a good answer for them. These programs need to be addressed. Chair Jacobs asked if we could track these programs in writing. Tom Maynard asked about the programs that are working now and if we need to fix them. The UNC contract is a big problem because there is inappropriate use. He asked the Board what they thought he should focus on most urgently. John Link said that two critical issues are to thoroughly understand the potentials of case management and coordination of services, and to stretch the definition of what case management services for complex services only means. He thinks that 90% of the cases are complex. Tom Maynard said that there are a fair amount of clients who may have serious disorders but can be successfully treated by a single provider. A complex case is one that requires multiple services. Coordination is the issue. Commissioner Brown asked about the potential for managed care companies coming in and how we can defend ourselves. Tom Maynard said that the State says that you have to accept all willing and able providers. There can be certain services that can be defined as needing different elements. Commissioner Brown said that this has been done in other states with terrible consequences and we should learn from this. Tom Maynard said that we could go with open competition but this is a critical issue. Commissioner Brown asked about what the State requires and who is going to judge if you use a non-profit or a for-profit. Tom Maynard said that it is a very critical issue as to who is going to decide whether this is done right. This has not been resolved. Commissioner Brown said that it seemed to her that county governments provide these services all the time without a conflict of interest. Commissioner Gordon does not know the State ground rules or how we would like to change them. She said that we have decided we wanted to manage services and the question is could the county also provide services. She asked if it was possible to break apart management and services. Tom Maynard said that he did not know if it was possible, but, as part of the State plan, we need to decide what the Board is ok with and what it wants to fight about. He said that this plan has been very muddled and unclear about how the finances would work. Commissioner Gordon thinks the thing to do is to have Tom Maynard and his staff make out the best plan that they can recommend and how that fits into the State plan and get it back to the Board soon enough to get it in by January 1 t. It sounds to her that the plan is not so cast in concrete as she thought it might be. John Link said that he thinks that the State plan ought to be a plan that we received when all the County Commissioners met in Raleigh last year. This plan gives more flexibility. He said that the counties are the experts when it comes to service provision and not the State. Commissioner Halkiotis said that he hopes that this plan is much better thought out than what the State did with the DWI seized vehicle plan five years ago. He said that there are still 38 vehicles rotting in a field in Hillsborough that the administrative office of the courts has lost in their computers. He wants Tom Maynard to bring to the Board what he wants them to fight. Tom Maynard said that OPC will take more control and not less on every issue possible. He said that they work for the Board of County Commissioners and not the State. They will propose a set of relationships that are clear in their governance choices and the division of labor. Chair Jacobs said that the Board would fight for what is best for the County. The County Commissioners hope that they can insulate Tom Maynard so that he can do what he thinks is best. Tom Maynard said that the next meeting is October 30`h With no further items to consider, the meeting was adjourned at 7:15 p.m. The Board of County Commissioners will meet for their next regularly scheduled meeting on Tuesday, October 15, 2002 at the Southern Human Services Center on Homestead Road in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Barry Jacobs, Chair Donna S. Baker Clerk APPROVED 12/2/2002 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CARRBORO BOARD OF ALDERMEN CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL OCTOBER 9, 2002 7:30 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in joint session with the Carrboro Board of Aldermen and the Chapel Hill Town Council on Wednesday, October 9, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, North Carolina for the purpose of holding a Joint Planning Area Public Hearing. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Barry Jacobs and Commissioners Margaret W. Brown, Moses Carey, Jr., Alice M. Gordon and Stephen Halkiotis COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill and Sean Borhanian COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr., and Clerk to the Board Donna S. Baker (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Council Members Flicka Bateman, Pat Evans, Ed Harrison, Mark Kleinschmidt, Bill Strom, Dorothy Verkerk, Jim Ward, and Edith M. Wiggins TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Mayor Kevin Foy CARRBORO BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Michael R. Nelson and Aldermen John Herrera, Diana McDuffee, Alex Zaffron, and Joal Hall Broun CARRBORO BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEMBERS ABSENT: Aldermen Jacquelyn Gist and Mark Dorosin NOTE: ALL DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE PERMANENT AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE. A. OPENING REMARKS FROM THE CHAIR/MAYORS Chair Barry Jacobs said that the room is past capacity and as new people come they are going to be asked to stay out in the hallway. Chair Jacobs said that the agenda is structured —Winmore is an informational item only and no public hearing and they cannot devote the whole time to the Winmore item since it is only at the concept stage and the Board of County Commissioners will be meeting on it several more times. This item is on the agenda to provide the public with the courtesy to make comments at this preliminary time about the concept plan of Winmore. B. PUBLIC CHARGE Chair Jacobs dispensed with the reading of the public charge. C. JOINT PUBLIC HEARING T- Re-Zoning Carrboro Planning Director Roy Williford gave a status report on the Winmore project. He also gave a short history of the project. The project began around December 2000. The first submittal was March 2002 and this information was forwarded to the Orange County and Carrboro staff. The set of plans included an application for rezoning as well as the conditional use permit. The first comments were rendered in June 2002. Following the comments, there were revisions made by the applicant and submitted in September. Six of the 16 reviewers have completed their review of the second set. He expects additional revisions. Orange County Planning Director Craig Benedict said that Orange County has been notified about this process. If the property were annexed, it would be a courtesy review for Orange County. In this process, they look at the Carrboro Northern Study Area Plan and ensure that the project is consistent with the overall intent of the joint planning area agreement. The Northern Study Area Plan had some general design concepts and land use concepts that were part of the planning regulations. The regulations anticipated village mixed-use projects coming forward. The comments from both Carrboro's staff and Orange County's staff have been extensive. He wants to keep the County Commissioners involved in this application process. PUBLIC COMMENT: Phillip Szostak said that he is a long-term resident of this area and he gave a history of this project (he is the developer). Winmore was born because of what he has heard that it is too expensive to live in town. There are a lot of complaints about development in this area. He did not want to do another five hundred thousand dollar residential development. He said that this development is for all people because it has affordable units, 50,000+ co-op housing, and 25% of the units are less than $175,000. It has live/work units in the village center where somebody could live upstairs and work downstairs. The village is very walkable. The project is sustainable because all of the builders will be required to meet the green building guidelines. It is designed for superior water quality and will be a benchmark for developments in this area. He said that they have designed Winmore to maximize the Northern Transition Area buffer. He showed an image of the project. He said that there is 1600 feet of green area before you get to the first house. The first phase has 50% open space. The second phase has 60% open space and they are working on getting a portion of it in a conservation district so that it cannot be built on in the future. James Carnahan lives in Carrboro and said that 20 years ago policy changes were made to keep sustainable growth. The three changes were: 1) an establishment of an urban growth boundary; 2) watershed protection and critical conservation area protection; and 3) density. Density is important because it enables us to further constrain the land we use and make more efficient use of resources. He said that the present international situation that we are in now and our dependence on the automobile and the foreign sources of oil that is required to power the activity places us in great jeopardy. Chuck Willingham is a resident of Lake Hogan Farms and was representing a group that was formed last week called BEST (Build Elementary School Ten Now). His concern is school use and that the area in the northwest is crowded. He said that this group would help facilitate planning for the schools. This group would like to be involved in long and short-term planning with the school district. His purpose for speaking tonight is to make sure that, during the planning for Winmore and other developments in the northwest section, that the concern for overcrowding in the school system is considered. He distributed a written statement to the Clerk. Dave Otto was representing the Friends of Bolin Creek, which is a group dedicated to preserving the natural habitat along the Bolin Creek corridor. The Friends of Bolin Creek are concerned about the proposed rezoning and the development of Winmore. Bolin Creek flows through the lands proposed for rezoning. He said that development in this area must be planned very carefully because it could impact the entire downstream corridor. The Friends of Bolin Creek have initiated a campaign to save this special corridor. The Bolin Creek corridor includes one of the last stretches of significant native forest habitat left in southern Orange County. They have determined that initiating a Bolin Creek Corridor Master Plan is the next appropriate step in preserving Bolin Creek. This plan must involve Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Orange County, UNC-CH, and the community. They will be coming to all of the boards later this fall to ask for help in developing this master plan. He distributed a copy of the full statement. Nancy Salmon, a resident of the Northern Transition area, asked for some extra time because she is leaving town for six weeks and is worried she will not be able to speak again. Kathy Kaufman yielded her time. Nancy Salmon said that the small area plan for the northern study area states clearly that the most environmentally sensitive areas are found along Bolin Creek. The Upper Bolin Creek Basin is classified by the State as a protected water supply watershed. The small area plan also encourages clustered or village type developments. One advantage of this is that there can be clusters of dense development so that the environmentally sensitive areas can be preserved. She described some areas on a map. She pointed out prime and secondary conservation areas to be protected. She asked where else in the Northern Transition area could you have property that is more environmentally sensitive than this. She said that this is precisely the property that village mixed use zoning is designed to protect, by putting high-density development someplace else. She said that the importance of the stream buffers is enormous. She said that the developers will tell you that their storm water engineering systems will take care of all problems. She referred to recent history and said that we should be skeptical. She reminded the Board that the developers and the Town of Carrboro would not be responsible for the engineered solutions after they are built. The engineered solutions are not self-sustaining and the maintenance is the responsibility of the homeowner's association. She would hate to trust Bolin Creek to such a group. She asked the Board to please consider wisely where village mixed use zoning should go. If you mess up Bolin Creek with Winmore, it cannot be un-built. Rick Faith distributed a handout. He lives near Homestead and Rogers Roads in the Northern Transition Area. He asked if Winmore was really the village that Carrboro wants. He also asked if Winmore would be the village that Carrboro could be proud of in the years to come. He believes the answer to both of these questions is no based on density, walkability, and commercial viability. He said that downtown Carrboro is significantly less dense than what is planned for Winmore. He pointed out some places on a map. He said that the lot sizes were smaller than the requirement for Habitat for Humanity homes. He said that one rule of thumb for walkability is that people are willing to walk % mile. He said that there are not many people living within a % mile walking distance of Winmore's business area, and there are not many businesses within that % mile. He said that the people will have to drive a lot. He showed the flood plain of Bolin Creek. He strongly feels that Winmore will not fulfill the dreams of our community for a new village. It will not have the feel or the walkability of Carrboro or of Southern Village, and it possesses a difficult tradeoff between commercial viability and environmental responsibility. He urged the boards to reject Winmore at this time and wait for a proposal for a village that will meet expectations. Mark Gill is a resident of the Northern Transition area. He spoke about the storm water runoff of the proposed Winmore project. He gave a PowerPoint presentation. He spoke about heavy metal pollutants and said that there would be a heavy metal depository right next to Bolin Creek with lead, copper, zinc, and cadmium. Rich Kaufman lives in the Northern Transition area. He said that he sat beside someone on a plane who is the wife of someone who is on the board of directors of a large university. He spoke to her about this situation and she said that he was wasting his time and that the public meetings were only for show and that the agreements have already been made behind closed doors between the developer, the city, and the university. He hopes she is wrong. He went over a few facts. He said that the Northern Transition zone is in a water crisis. The schools in the Northern Transition zone are over capacity. He cannot understand why we are putting high density next to Bolin Creek. The university is five miles from the proposed high-density area of Winmore 1 and 2. He said that no one would be walking this far to the university. He said that the politicians in Carrboro were willing participants in the joint planning agreement. He said that these same politicians broke the agreement of joint planning and this is a breach of public trust. He said that by annexation, you have undermined the longstanding joint planning agreement and have rendered the Board of County Commissioners irrelevant in this process. He said that this is bad planning, bad politics, and a bad example for the community. He said that in order to protect the environment and the children (over capacity schools) we must maintain low-density zoning. Stephanie London is a resident of Northern Transition area. She said that zoning decisions are among those that most directly affect the quality of local residents' lives. It affects property taxes, road and school crowding, environmental issues, water supply, the value of property, etc. She said that the residents in Highlands and Camden are outside of both Carrboro and Chapel Hill. They do not get to vote for elected officials of either town. They do get to vote for the Board of County Commissioners. She urged the towns to keep the Board of County Commissioners in the loop for planning decisions for Winmore, including the right to vote on zoning. She said that Alderman Mike Dorosin recently disputed the notion that people we can vote for may be more interested in our concerns than the Board of Aldermen of Carrboro. She agrees with Mr. Dorosin that we have the same goals— sustainable and environmentally sound development. However, they may have different interpretations of those goals and different ideas about how to achieve them. She would like the Board of County Commissioners to be kept in a decision-making role in this process. Mayor Nelson made reference to Ms. London's comment about not having representation and said that this has come up several times in their public meetings. He encouraged her to request annexation if this is an issue. Linda Hock is a Carrboro resident and lives at the end of Bolin Creek. She said that she gets to vote for both the Aldermen and the Board of County Commissioners. She said that the boards are representatives of the citizens. Secondly, she made reference to the comment from Chair Jacobs that this is a preliminary stage. She said that the track record is that this is not true. She said that eight months of County and Town time has been spent on this already. She said that this is already a train in motion. Thirdly, in terms of what the developer said about affordability, she has watched repeatedly the cry of affordability as the reason to pass these kinds of developments. She said that there is no tracking by our government officials as to whether there is truly affordability when these things are built out. Lastly, she said that this is the most biologically sensitive area that we have. She challenged the Chapel Hill Town Council to understand the safety and flooding issues that they are putting their town at risk for. She showed some pictures of the flooding that could happen with this dense development. Sue Holshen lives on one of the tributaries by a flood plain in Camden Place. She said that it is ironic that we have all these meetings and plans and proposals and a bulldozer takes out very old trees behind her house. She said that the area was completely cleared. She called the Town of Carrboro and the planning people came out immediately and asked him to stop clearing. Unfortunately, it was too late and this vegetation cannot be replaced. She said that no one is accountable because there is a plan in place that says that he could not do this, but he did it. She has no confidence in how the Winmore plan is going to unfold if this is what is happening right next door to her. Susan Drake lives at 1009 Camden Lane. She said that one month ago Brian Voyce stood in front of the Board of County Commissioners and asked how the citizens of the Northern Transition zone could transfer their town designation from one town to the other. She congratulated Chapel Hill. She said that Mr. Voyce was assured that he would get an answer to this question, and no answer has come to date. She said that she has seen no action from her designated town to make her feel welcome, so she must assume that she is not welcome into this family of citizens and they are ready to move forward and to pursue a change in town designation within what is left of the Northern Transition zone. Brenden Meyer (a young boy) said that he is worried about Bolin Creek because he has seen the clear cutting right up to the creek on Camden Lane. He asked what would happen when 200 houses were built. He asked why we should add to the population in the schools and lower the water supply when the schools are over crowded and the water supply is low. He said that he and his friends play in the woods that are about to be cut down. He suggested making it a nature preserve instead. Brian Voyce said that, according to the Winmore developers, the only reason this audience is upset is fear of the unknown. He said that they have studied the Winmore plans and they know exactly what is coming and that is what they fear. He said that Winmore would destroy the environment, would not help the schools, would not reduce traffic, or would not create a better lifestyle. He said that the people in Winmore would be going to the dreaded RTP because the houses would be built before the jobs. He thanked the elected officials for giving him the opportunity to speak, and particularly the Board of County Commissioners that have listened to them at meetings and have read mail. He asked those in the audience to stand if they felt that they had not been served by the existing planning process. He said that without citizen involvement, a village would already be rising over a clear-cut forest. Chair Jacobs thanked Mr. Voyce and said that they have devoted an hour to Winmore so that the Aldermen and Town Council members could hear the concerns. He said that the Board of County Commissioners believes that the elected officials are trying hard to represent the best interests of the citizens of their jurisdiction and of the overall citizens of Orange County. He made reference to the next item, which has to do with extending for 20 years some of the most important parts of the joint planning agreement. He said that there would be more public hearings both in Carrboro and in Orange County. 2. Joint Planning Agreement Timeline Orange County Planning Director Craig Benedict said that this item came about because there were provisions in the overall joint planning agreement that was approved in 1987 that had some expiration dates. The expiration dates only had to do with the annexation provisions of the agreement. Based on the JPA meeting in the spring, it was decided to bring this item to this meeting. He introduced Chris Berndt of the Chapel Hill Planning Department, who has made some revisions to the annexation portion of the agreement. Chris Berndt said that this is a public hearing on a proposal to extend provisions in the joint planning agreement that relate to annexation. The current provision has an expiration date of 20 years. The annexation provisions expire in the year 2006. She said that the entire joint planning agreement is not up for reconsideration and remains in effect. There are two key provisions of the 20-year term. One is that the cities agree that there is no annexation into the rural buffer. The second provision is that the cities also agree that there is no annexation into each other's transition areas. The purpose of this item is to get public comment on the idea of extending the annexation provisions for 20 years. PUBLIC COMMENT Barry Katz, a resident of the rural buffer, a member of the Orange County Planning Board, a member of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Committee, and a member of the executive committee of the democratic party, said that his views in no way represent the views of the party. He said that the people in the rural buffer support the extension of the anti-annexation provisions of the joint planning agreement. He presented a petition of rural buffer residents who support this extension. They have re- started the Alliance for the Rural Buffer and have extended it to many neighborhoods within the rural buffer, so that they can comment and inform the County regarding future buffer issues. He said that the rural buffer has retained its rural character. He said that if rezoning were considered in the rural buffer, then other areas would be put at risk because of poor drainage in the area. He said that he was surprised to hear at the recent Comprehensive Plan Land Use Committee that Orange County's Planning Director stated that the 35,000 acres of the rural buffer are on their way to becoming 17,500 two-acre home sites. Coincidentally, this is very close to the actual number of the total residences in all of Chapel Hill. He said that this is an exaggeration of the buffer sprawl and he is concerned about this. He is concerned about the term smart growth. He does not object to the principles, but he is concerned because unless you understand exactly what development tools are being proposed for a specific project, then it can leave you hesitant to appear as if you are an advocate for stupid or dumb growth when you question the value of pursuing those tools. He also worries about the acronym that the Planning Department has been using called the GOOD Plan. He said that this can quickly evolve into a doctrine where alternative approaches can be characterized as bad in the course of a meeting. He urged the elected officials to study this issue. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Brown to refer this proposal to amend the Joint Planning Agreement to extend 20 years, with the annexation time limits specified therein to the Planning Board and return a recommendation back to the Board of County Commissioners no later than February 18, 2003. VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Alex Zaffron, seconded by Joal Hall Broun to refer this proposal to amend the Joint Planning Agreement to extend 20 years, with the annexation time limits specified therein to the Carrboro Planning Board and the Planning Board will return a recommendation back to the Board of Aldermen no later than January 21, 2003. VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Jim Ward, seconded by Bill Strom to confirm their commitment to the extension of the annexation components of the joint planning agreement and the staff recommendation for the Planning Board and Town Council decision for November 19, 2002 and December 9, 2002. VOTE: UNANIMOUS The public hearing was closed. D. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 1. Report on Joint Planning Chair Barry Jacobs said that is a presentation of a report on the intent, provisions, and process of joint planning as contained in the joint planning agreement. He said that this was the first agreement of its kind in North Carolina. Chapel Hill Planning Director Roger Walden gave a PowerPoint presentation and spoke about the background of the joint planning agreement. He described the concept of extraterritorial jurisdiction, which is that municipalities have development standards and those are often different from the county development standards in which the municipalities exist. The concept is that there needs to be management at the municipal edge. There needs to be orderly development such that development that is occurring right outside the boundaries of the municipality matches the standards of the municipality. In the extraterritorial jurisdiction, Carrboro and Chapel Hill will exercise zoning jurisdiction. In the 1970's, the Town Council asked the County Commissioners to extend the extraterritorial jurisdiction out one mile, and the County Commissioners said no. The County Commissioners did agree at that time to jointly plan this area. This was the origin of the joint planning agreement. Commissioner Gordon asked for an explanation of what happened in 1995 between Chapel Hill and Carrboro about the transition area. Roger Walden deferred to Carrboro Planning Director Roy Williford. Carrboro Alderman Joan Hall Broun asked about problems with water and sewer that had to be redone. Roger Walden said that the main areas where there have been problems are along the Weaver Dairy Road corridor. They have been trying to extend sewer out there gradually. Carrboro Planning Director Roy Williford gave a PowerPoint presentation on the history of the joint planning agreement and the ETJ. He read from the PowerPoint presentation, which is incorporated herein by reference. Commissioner Gordon asked again about the agreement in 1995 between the two towns. Roy Williford said that the 1995 agreement was to establish annexation boundary agreements between Smith Level Road and through the existing town limits of the towns, continuing up to the railroad tracks around Seawell School and Rogers Road. The towns worked on this agreement for four or five years. Commissioner Gordon wants to know what happened with this and Roy Williford described the line. Roger Walden said that the joint planning agreement established who would annex what, but there was not anything like that within the ETJ. Bill Strom asked about a local bill in 1987. Mike Brough (Attorney for Carrboro) said that the bill was written specifically to enable this agreement just for Orange County, Chapel Hill, and Carrboro. Jim Ward asked why there was legislation needed. Orange County Attorney Geoff Gledhill said that it was because the joint planning concept involved Chapel Hill and Carrboro exercising police power in Orange County's planning jurisdiction. Commissioner Gordon asked for a more detailed map so that she could see where the ETJ line was. Chair Barry Jacobs pointed out that the joint planning agreement, OWASA, the water and sewer boundary agreement and the upcoming Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance are unique reflections of our ability to cooperate in this county. E. NON-JOINT PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 1. Establish Commercial and Residential Plans Review Fees DEFERRED ADJOURNMENT With no further items to address, the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. The next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, October 15, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Barry Jacobs, Chair Donna Baker Clerk to the Board