HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 20021202MINUTES
APPROVED 2124/2003 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 2, 2002
7:30 p.m.
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Monday, December 2,
2002 at 7:30 p.m. at the F. Gordon Battle Courtroom in Hillsborough, North Carolina.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Barry Jacobs and Commissioners Margaret W.
Brown, Moses Carey, Jr., Alice M. Gordan, and Stephen H. Halkiotis
COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill, Sean Borhanian
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr., Assistant County Managers Rod
Visser and Gwen Harvey, and Clerk to the Board Donna S. 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 Jacobs called the meeting to order.
Oaths of Office for Board Members
a. Alice M. Gordon- sworn in by Judge Joseph Moody "Joe" Buckner
b. Stephen H. Halkiotis- sworn in by Christon S. Halkiotis
c. Barry Jacobs- sworn in by Judge Joseph Moody "Joe" Buckner
Board Oraanization
a. Election of Chair and Vice Chair
Margaret Brown was elected Chair with a unanimous vote and Alice Gordon was elected Vice-
Chairwith avote of 3-2.
Margaret Brown gave a brief speech and thanked the Chair and Vice-Chair from last year, the
Board and the staff. She pointed out the goals and objectives for next year: supporting and having the
best schools in North Carolina, protecting the environment, increasing affordable housing, and
agricultural infrastructure.
Commissioner Gordon added commendations to the Chair and Uice-Chair from last year.
b. Designation of Voting Delegate for all NCACC and NACo meetings for Calendar Year
December 1, 2002-2003
A motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to appoint Chair
Brown as the voting delegate. Chair Brown accepted the nomination.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Appointments
a. Manager- John Link
A motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to reappoint
John Link as the Orange County Manager for another year.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
b. Clerk to the Board- Donna Baker
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Carey to reappoint
Donna S. Baker as the Orange County Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners for another year.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
c. County Attorney- Geoff Gledhill
A motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to reappoint
Geoffrey Gledhill as the County Attorney for another year.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
1. ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE AGENDA -none
PUBLIC CHARGE
The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge.
2. CITIZEN & AUDIENCE COMMENTS
a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda -none
b. Matters on the Printed Agenda (These matters were considered as the Board addressed
the items on the agenda below}
3. BOARD COMMENTS
Commissioner Gordon thanked all that have supported her and especially her husband, Alan.
Commissioner Gordon reported on the Triangle J Council of Governments. She said that several
governments, including Orange County, did a tabletop exercise to see if the different Emergency
Management teams could work together. The staff reported that it was a very successful exercise.
Regarding the transportation items, she said that the one that has to do with the Long Range
Transportation Plan needs to be done tonight. There is another item that has to do with the
Transportation Improvement Plan.
Commissioner Carey proposed to the Board to adopt a resolution at the December 10t" meeting in
honor of Jake Wicker's contribution to the State of North Carolina over the last 50 years. He lives in
Orange County and has been helpful to the Board on several occasions. He is retired and
Commissioner Carey thinks that the Board should express its appreciation to him. The School of
Government is raising funds to build a roam to be named far Jake Wicker and they are accepting
contributions. He would like to ask Mr. Wicker to come and receive the resolution at the December 10t"
meeting, if his health permits.
Commissioner Jacobs thanked all that supported him and especially his wife, Robin.
Commissioner Jacobs said that he attended two meetings at Triangle J and they were both Mayors'
meetings. They spoke about raising taxes to come up with $1.3 billion to fund almost $8 billion in unmet
transportation needs for the region. He said that if we have a smart, intelligent, and conservative
consensus about what we develop in the Triangle, we would not need $8 billion for traffic improvements.
The other discussion was about solid waste. They are looking at developing a model C&D ordinance
and Orange County is the only county that actually has an ordinance. He was able to answer some of
the questions of the mayors about how the ordinance worked.
Commissioner Jacobs reported that he received an invitation to a meeting Wednesday night at 7:00
p.m. of the Homeowners of the Transition Area and the developers of Winmore. Several other groups
have been invited. They are working toward coming up with some strategies to protect Bolin Creek. It is
at the Winmore Land Management Office.
Commissioner Jacobs reported that he attended a breakfast for the Cooperative Extension
Department. One of questions was how to do a better job of educating the public about Cooperative
Extension. A lot of people still think of it as the agricultural extension. There was a slide show and he
asked that the slide show be presented to the Board of County Commissioners.
Commissioner Halkiotis thanked all for supporting him since 1986 in 5 elections. He has had
several significant others, including his mother; his wife, Susan; and his daughter, Christon. He said to
the Board that they are all very special people. He said that this Board truly cares about people.
4. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
Recognition of Children's Services Staff
There are 50 members of the staff, but they could not all be in attendance. John Link recognized
Social Services Director Nancy Coston and Chair of the Social Services Board Dee Gamble. This
department has received very high accolades from the State Division of Social Services for their quality
work.
Nancy Coston thanked her staff.
Dee Gamble introduced the Directors and Supervisors that were in attendance.
5. RESOLUTIONSIPROCLAMATIONS
a. Refunding of General Obligation Bonds
The Board considered authorizing the refunding of bonds issued in March 1993 and bonds
previously refunded in June 1993.
Finance Director Ken Chavious said that this item was to take the necessary actions to allow
the County to refund up to $28 million in bonds that were issued in 1993. The current estimate is that by
refunding these 1993 bonds, the County could save approximately $1.4 million over the remaining term,
which is about 11 years. This would be about $125,000 annually. He has requested permission from
the LGC to pursue this undertaking. The plan is to do this in March and it could be piggybacked with the
regular bond sale to save some money in the issuance costs. In order to do the refunding on schedule,
the Board has to take some actions. The first action is to introduce the bond order for the refunding
bonds. The Board does not have to vote on the bond order introductions. The second action is for the
Board to adopt a resolution that establishes January 21 S` as a public hearing on the refunding bond
order. The resolution also authorizes the Finance Director to file the sworn statement of debt and
authorizes the Clerk to publicize the notice of the public hearing. All appropriate documents have been
prepared.
Chair Brown read the bond order title as follows: The Bond Order Authorizing the Issuance of
General Obligation Refunding Bonds in the Maximum Amount of $28 Million.
A motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to adopt
the resolution setting a date for a public hearing, authorizing the Finance Director to file a Debt
Statement, and authorizing the Clerk to publish a Notice of Public Hearing as stated below:
RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING
AND AUTHORIZING FILING OF DEBT STATEMENT
WHEREAS, there has been introduced at this meeting a bond order entitled as follows:
BOND ORDER AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION
REFUNDING BONDS IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $28,000,000
AND WHEREAS, Section 159-57 of the General Statutes requires that a public hearing be held on such
bond order prior to its adoption, Section 159-56 of the General Statutes requires publication of a notice of
such hearing, and Section 159-55 of the General Statutes requires the filing of a statement of the
County's debt with the Clerk to the Board prior to the public hearing;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North Carolina, that
a public hearing on each such bond order will be held at 7:30 p.m. (or as soon thereafter as the matter
may be heard) on January 21, 2003, at the F. Gordon Battle Courtroom in Hillsborough, North Carolina,
and that the Clerk to this Board is authorized and directed to publish a notice of such public hearing, in
the form provided for in Section 159-56 of the General Statutes, one time, not less than six days prior to
such hearing date, in a newspaper having general circulation in the County;
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County's Finance Officer is authorized and directed to
prepare and file, prior to the publication of the notice of public hearing, a sworn statement of the County's
net debt in the form prescribed by statute.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
b. Resolution Regarding DCHC 2025 Long-range Transportation Plan
The Board considered a resolution providing comments to the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro
{DCHC} Transportation Advisory Committee {TAC) regarding the Draft DCHC 2025 Long-Range
Transportation Plan.
Chair Brown asked Commissioner Gordon to tell the Board about this resolution.
Commissioner Gordon said that she would like the Board to identify any parts from which we need
response from the jurisdictions or other agencies.
Commissioner Halkiotis asked if Planning Director Craig Benedict could give a brief review of
the alternatives. Karen Lincoln handed out information from two October 2001 meetings.
One of the primary issues of the package is the Elizabeth Brady Road extension.
Karen Lincoln said that there are three areas of concern that Orange County may want to
address. The first is the Northern Durham Parkway. The consensus of the group was that Orange
County wants some assurance from Durham City and Durham County that this roadway will not extend
west of Roxboro Road in Orange County. The second is Elizabeth Brady Road. Commissioners Gering
and Chavious of Hillsborough, Karen Lincoln, and Commissioner Gordan met to try and come up with a
common stance on the Elizabeth Brady Road project. Most of the group agreed that they would like to
include language that an alignment that has or considers the least impact on the Eno River should be
encouraged. Craig Benedict showed the possible alignments on a map. The third deals with the major
concern of non-traditional revenue sources proposed in the plan. The plan has a $947 million shortfall
between the proposed projects and projected revenues using traditional sources. The plan is proposing
a 5°~ tax on the retail price of gasoline, an increase in personal property tax and vehicles, and a $20
yearly increase in vehicle registration fees. Orange County's view is that these revenue sources should
be further analyzed and discussed before anything is adapted.
Commissioner Gordon distributed the language concerning the Elizabeth Brady Road
extension, and noted the sections on which the group agreed and those for which they could not reach
consensus. There was no consensus on the lane configuration. The plan now is a four-lane divided
highway. Orange County prefers two lanes and Hillsborough prefers four lanes. She said that the plan
needs to identify a corridor, a cross section {two or four lanes}, a dollar amount, and a statement about
whether it is regionally significant. She asked the Board to discuss what they want for this project.
Commissioner Halkiotis asked Craig Benedict about Hillsborough's preferred route. Craig
Benedict said that any of those first three choices were fine with Hillsborough, but they do not want to
underrate the road. They did say that collector roads in and around Hillsborough should be similar to
Carrboro's and not be more than three lanes. He was not at the meeting last week in Hillsborough.
Chair Brown asked about the two alternative routes and how many houses were in the way of
this project. Karen Lincoln said that these were just lines at this time and they do not know how many
houses it would affect. She said that the estimate is that there would be 22,000 trips per day on this
road, so DOT decided that four lanes with bicycle and pedestrian amenities would be appropriate.
Commissioner Gordon asked about the modeling and Karen Lincoln said that the model map
indicated that the level of service would not be different on a two-lane versus a four-lane road.
Commissioner Jacobs said that Orange County's preference has been pretty clear through
the statements. He said that the Board favors an alignment that has the least impact on the Eno River,
the natural environment, and cultural sites. This is what the EDD work group was saying. He said that
we could say, "has the least impact" and take out "an the river." It also indicates that the County prefers
having a smaller facility if possible. This is also consistent with the EDD work group's recommendation.
Commissioner Gordon said it would be fine to take out "on the river", but that is what the EDD
work group said.
Commissioner Carey would like to remove "an the river" because the real impact is going to
be in the environmentally sensitive area. He thinks that this Board needs to send a message and the
Hillsborough board needs to send its own message.
Commissioner Jacobs said that a large part of the genesis of the EDD Transportation Work
Group in its effort to look at the Elizabeth Brady Road Extension was an attempt to bring in all of the
stakeholders and to try and reach some consensus statement about this facility. He said that the
members of the work group felt like they achieved that. He feels comfortable standing by what the group
said.
Commissioner Gordon made reference to `b' and said that it is not clear whether the
alignment needs to be modeled or not. She thinks that if it does the Board should ask for it by December
Stn Karen Lincoln said that the alignment does not have to be modeled.
Commissioner Halkiotis asked about the stretch of US 70 dawn east that becomes four lanes
and then goes back to two lanes. He asked if this was the thinking for this road and if it was expected
that US 70 would be four lanes in the next 10-15 years. Craig Benedict said that DOT is trying to match
the roadway for the 2025 plan. He thinks that reserving the right-of-way for four lanes should be done.
There may be sections of US 70 that could be four lanes.
Chair Brown summarized what the Board wanted. For `a', the Board wants option1, for `b',
the Board wants 1 a, and for c, the Board wants 1. There are some changes in the language on b1 a,
"that has the least impact on environmental and cultural resources."
Commissioner Gordon clarified what "four lanes if necessary" meant. The Board wants two
lanes, but money will be put aside for four lanes.
Commissioner Jacobs said that he thinks we are saying that we want to see the modeling
before we make a commitment to four lanes ar two lanes.
Chair Brown suggested taking out the reference to four lanes.
Commissioner Carey said that it should be left in.
The Board will vote on the dollar amount that is currently in the plan, with the four lanes.
Commissioner Halkiotis said that he hopes that the Board is kept posted an the non-
traditional revenue sources. He is concerned about doubling the tag fees and increasing taxes for
vehicles especially when DOT has a huge Highway Trust Fund.
Commissioner Gordon made reference to the Revised Northern Durham Parkway and said
that this is what was called option 7 by the TCC. It is now called the Revised Northern Durham Parkway.
There is supposed to be language that is circulated among the TAC representatives. She asked Karen
Lincoln about the language.
Karen Lincoln said that it was for future reference that dealt with any future major roadway
that would be proposed far any county, that it would not extend into any neighboring county, unless that
county was in agreement. It was not specific to this road.
Chair Brown asked what we are doing with this. Commissioner Gordan said that the question
is whether to input this resolution as it is, or wait to see what happens with other jurisdictions.
The Board decided to wait on this resolution.
There was consensus that Commissioner Gordon has authorization to convey the sentiments
of the Board on Elizabeth Brady Road, and also officially ask that on December 4tH, that Durham City
Council and Durham County Commissioners ensure by resolution that there will be no westward
extension of the corridor.
The Board will vote on the resolution on December 10tH
6. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
a. Tuscany Ridge Subdivision
The Board received information on five issues raised at its Nov. 6, 2002 meeting concerning
the Tuscany Ridge subdivision.
Planning Director Craig Benedict gave an update on the Tuscany Ridge subdivision. This
subdivision was approved by the Board of County Commissioners on June 27, 2002. He said that since
the approval of this there have been several issues that have been brought up -water resources,
environmental issues, etc. There have been reports provided to the Board and to the public addressing
the majority of the technical issues. In November, there were five more issues brought up by this Board
that warranted some additional research. These items are on page three of the agenda packet.
1. A letter was sent to DOT about the paving of Arthur Minnis Road and no direct comments have
come back from DOT about their position.
2. County Attorney looked at legislative changes on how roads are paved in the County based an
previous and new regulations. Geoff Gledhill has provided a letter describing the new
regulations.
Geoff Gledhill said that DOT is required to condemn for secondary road improvements when
one or more property owners refuses to dedicate the necessary right-of-way when at least 75°~
of the owners of the majority of the road frontage adjacent, petition to pave the road and
provide DOT with the money necessary to do the condemnation.
Chair Brown asked how this relates to this subdivision. Geoff Gledhill said that DOT said that
this situation meets this particular standard. There are people who have voluntarily dedicated
right-of-way and in terms of numbers and frontage, this meets the requirement.
3. Contact DOT about issues of water drainage. DOT has gone into the field to look at culverts. If
there are any improvements to the road, then DOT will look at it and make sure the culvert
sizes meet the drainage standards. DOT has talked with the developer and the developer
wants to proceed with the paving of this road and DOT must enter into an encroachment
agreement.
4. Contact Sheriff's office regarding any accidents. The Sheriff's office is working with the State
on accident reports in this area. Transitions from paved to gravel areas are a concern.
5. Contact developer about reducing density and planning open space development. There have
been discussions with the developer by Planning staff and ERCD to look at the possibilities of
conservation quality on this site.
6. Paving of Arthur Minnis Road. Far the last few months, the County Commissioners have asked
DOT not to proceed with paving the road that was on the secondary road improvement
program. Staff is looking for direction from the Board as to whether DOT should proceed with
allowing the developer to pave the road. The developer has come forward and offered to fully
fund the paving of this 800-foot section of road. If the Board wants to ask DOT to do something
atypical and leave the road where it is, then the Board would have to go back to the Resolution
of Approval and remove the condition about paving the road.
Commissioner Jacobs made reference to an email from DOT from November 21 ~. He
verified that DOT has granted an encroachment to the developer to pave the road. Craig Benedict said
that DOT might honor a request from this Board to withhold the encroachment agreement.
Commissioner Jacobs said that he got calls from two legislators. One legislator was saying
that he was involved solely at the request of a citizen who was interested in getting the road paved that
traveled this section but did not actually live in this section. The other legislator said that, as far as they
were concerned, if the people along this section of road did not want it paved, that was good enough for
them and it should not be paved.
Commissioner Halkiotis asked about the email from DOT. He said that this is secondhand
information that these issues have been resolved. He does not believe that all issues have been
resolved. He has not received the information he requested about accident rates on unpaved surfaces in
Orange County. He still has the same concerns that he had a couple of months ago.
John Link said that he did talk with DOT District Engineer Mike Mills shortly after the last
meeting that this was discussed. His understanding from Mike Mills is, based on the present
requirements of the approved Tuscany Ridge, the road is to be paved. The developer says that he will
pay for it all. If the Board takes no action, the developer will pave the road. However, if the Board
rescinds its action that the road be paved, then the road will not be paved. Either way, the development
will proceed, assuming the developer meets all the other criteria in the resolution of approval.
Commissioner Carey said that he does not think it would be in the best interest to rescind the
decision to pave the road. Citizens have been lobbying for years to get unpaved roads paved. He
cannot see the Board going contrary to its previous policies and taking an action that would promote that
this section of the road not be paved. If the Board does nothing, the road will get paved and at the cost
of the developer. He said that paving 800 feet is better than not paving any.
Commissioner Jacobs asked if DOT at some point may want to pave all of Arthur Minnis
Road. He asked if it is possible to leave the requirement that the developer pay far the paving of the
road and hold the money in escrow until the rest of the road can be paved.
Geoff Gledhill said that he sees it taking a long time to work out. If the County wants to
change the condition of approval to not require the paving of the road, but to secure the paving of the
road for same future time when DOT gets everything worked out for the paving of the entirety of the road,
he thinks it could be done. He is hesitant because he does not know how long in the future it would be
before the entire road could be paved.
Commissioner Halkiotis said that he is supportive of what Commissioner Jacobs said
regarding paving the entire road.
Commissioner Carey asked Geoff Gledhill what would happen if the County requires the
developer to pay for this and the cost escalates beyond what is in escrow. Geoff Gledhill said that DOT
would pay for 100% of the road. No cost would be borne by the County.
Commissioner Jacobs said that he is sympathetic to the residents that donot want this road
paved. He thinks that the trend is to get the road paved because it is a connector road in the County.
He does not want to jeopardize the relationship that the County has with DOT.
Geoff Gledhill said that he recommends that he bring back a revised resolution of approval
that is similar to what Commissioner Jacobs is suggesting.
Commissioner Gordon said that if we take this approach, she would like to see something that
takes everyone's concerns into consideration.
Commissioner Jacobs asked to defer the motion until the County Attorney comes back with a
revised resolution.
This item will be brought back in January.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Jahn Ingersoll re-emphasized the safety issue on where the pavement will end. He said that
paving the 800 feet would make the pavement end at a corner. The speed limit is 55 mph and this would
not be safe for this corner. He asked that the revised resolutions be made available to the public for
review.
b. Business System Software Award of Praposal(Contract
The Board received information concerning the replacement of the County's business system
software in anticipation of considering a bid at its December 10, 2002 meeting.
Jahn Link said that for 30 years the County has had the same operating system and now it is
time to change the system in order to pull information together for the Board of County Commissioners.
Finance Director Ken Chavious presented information on the proposed replacement of
business system software. The system has been modified over and over for the past 20 years. The
replacement of this system is a part of the replacement of all Legacy systems in the IT Strategic Plan.
The Legacy systems have already been replaced in the Register of Deeds, Sheriff's Department,
Planning and Inspections, and Board of Elections. The process for this replacement began in 1998. The
needs assessment was completed in late 2001 and an RFP was done in early 2002. The County
received eight responses to the RFP. The pool was narrowed to three firms. The selection team is
recommending the MUMS system. MUNIS has 52 successful North Carolina installations. MUNIS also
had the overall lowest cost. He spoke about the advantages of the MUNIS system. The implementation
of the system would take approximately six months. If this is begun in mid-December, it will not interfere
with the budget and CIP processes. Regarding project management, the team proposes a project
manager similar to what the County had far Y2K. This is needed with the constraints on the current staff.
The project manager is included in the MUMS contract and the cost is $57,200. The total cost of the
contract will not exceed $480,000. The proposal is that the system be financed through an existing loan
that the Board has already approved for some landfill equipment that has a 3.75°lo interest rate. The
casts of this contract are currently in the IT plan.
Commissioner Carey verified that the $480,000 includes all of the training necessary for all of
the County staff.
Commissioner Halkiotis said that we pay a significant price for technology and that it is a
shame that counties cannot come together and get a package deal an a consistent project. He supports
this, but it is so expensive.
Commissioner Jacobs asked about the money to pay for this. Ken Chavious said that it was
budgeted for the current year and in future years, funds from the IT plan would be used to cover it.
Commissioner Carey asked if $480,000 includes hardware and Ken Chavious said no, but it
will be included in the Information Technology plan.
Commissioner Gordan asked about the Information Technology Committee and why this is a
good thing to do. The Chair of the Information Technology Committee, Joel Dunn, spoke and said that
they have worked very closely with this team. The committee feels comfortable recommending this
proposal. The committee wrote a letter of recommendation to go with the information.
Commissioner Gordon asked if the cost was reasonable. The Chair of the IT Committee said
that this package would be comprised of hundreds of thousands of programs. It takes many years of
effort to write these programs. The program will provide the County with a significant amount of
additional efficiency, which will help the staff do the additional things that need to be done.
Commissioner Carey asked about the support needed for this software through the company.
Ken Chavious said that the people the County would be working with are located in Raleigh. The major
headquarters is in Maine, but they have a Raleigh office.
Commissioner Carey asked if the $480,000 include future amendments to the program to
upgrade and improve it. Ken Chavious said that he understands that any upgrades to the software will
be automatically sent to the County.
Purchasing and Central Services Director Pam Jones said that there is an annual
maintenance fee.
The bid far this will come back at the meeting on December 10, 2002.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS -NONE
8. ITEMS FOR DECISION -CONSENT AGENDA
a. Minutes-with pink correction sheet
The Board approved minutes of the following meetings: Oct. 9, 2002 work session; Oct 9,
2002 regular meeting and JPA public hearing; and, Oct. 15, 2002 regular meeting.
b. Appointments
The Board made the following appointments:
1) Commission far the Environment -Two Reappointments
The Board reappointed Annette Jurgelski and Richard Pratt to second terms expiring on
December 31, 2005.
2j Cable TV Advisory Committee -One Reappointment
The Board reappointed Rodney Recor to a second term expiring on December 31, 2004.
3) Board of Health -One Appointment
The Board appointed Dr. Jessica Y. Lee for a partial term expiring on June 30, 2004.
c. Property Tax Refunds
The Board approved the resolution, which is incorporated herein by reference, approving
three property tax refund requests in accordance with N. C. General Statute 105-381.
d. Property Value Changes
The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated herein by reference, approving value
changes made in property values after the 2002 Board of Equalization and Review adjourned.
e. Applications for Property Homestead Exemption
The Board approved untimely requests for granting homestead exemptions for the 2002 tax
year.
f. Late Applications for Property Homestead Exemption
The Board approved applications for 2002 homestead exemption for seven applicants.
g_ Examination of Bonds
The Board approved maintaining the bonds at their present levels for the Sheriff, Register of
Deeds, Finance Director and Tax Collector, and other County employees as required by NCGS 109-5.
h. Lands Leaacy Annual Action Plan - FY 2002-2003
This item was removed and placed at the end of the consent agenda far separate
consideration.
i. Appraisal Contractual Agreement
The Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign a contract with Johnson and Knight
Appraisal Services in the amount of $9,500 for the appraisal of the General Electric property in Mebane.
L Lease Approval - 501 W. Franklin St, Suite #105; and Authorization of County Manager
to Execute a Potential Agreement During Winter Break
The Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign a lease far Terradotta.cam for the term
December 3, 2002 through December 2, 2003 for a monthly rental fee of $650; and authorized the
County Manager to execute a lease as may be necessary during the Boar's winter break.
k. Work First Block Grant Local Plan
The Board approved the two-year Work First Plan.
I. Indirect Cost Allocation Plan Contract
The Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign a contract with MAXIMUS, Inc.,
formerly David E. Griffith and Associates, in the amount of $9,200 for preparation of the County's 2002
indirect cost allocation plan.
m. NCDOT Community Transportation iCTP) Administrative and Capital Grant Application
The Board approved the Community Transportation Program Grant application for FY
2003/04 and authorized the Chair to sign the Community Transportation Program Resolution and Annua
Certified Statements of participation.
n. EMS Transportation Contract Renewal with Orange EMS and Rescue Squad, Inc.
The Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign a contract with Orange EMS and
Rescue Squad, Inc., through June 30, 2003, subject to final review by staff and the County Attorney.
o. Proposed Environmental Summit and Conservation Award
This item was removed and placed at the end of the consent agenda for separate
consideration.
~ Section $ Project-based Voucher Program Policy
This item was removed and placed at the end of the consent agenda for separate
consideration.
q_ Housing Bond Project Review and Selection Committee Appointments
The Board approved the membership of the Housing Bond Project Review and Selection
Committee as follows:
AHAB Representatives: Stephen Jenks, Tracey Dudley, and Frances Douglas
Orange County Employees: Gwen Harvey, Craig Benedict, Ken Chaviaus, and Tara Fikes
Town of Chapel Hill: Loryn Barnes
Town of Carrboro: James Harris
Town of Hillsborough: Margaret Hauth
r. Chance in BOCC Reaular Meetina Schedule
The Board amended its regular meeting calendar for 2003 by adding a joint meeting with
OWASA, the Carrboro Board of Alderman, and the Chapel Hill Town Council on Thursday, January 16,
2003, at a location to be determined.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA
h. Lands Legacy Annual Action Plan - FY 2002-2003
The Board considered a draft Lands Legacy action plan for fiscal year 2002-2003.
Chair Brown asked Environment and Resource Conservation Director Dave Stancil if this
could wait until the Board retreat and Dave Stancil said yes.
The Board agreed to address this at the retreat in January.
o. Proposed Environmental Summit and Conservation Award
The Board considered a proposal by the Commission for the Environment to hold an
environmental summit in March of alternating years to bring together members of environmental
organizations and present the State of the Environment report and a proposed new Orange County
Conservation award.
Chair Brown asked to leave out the award this year until there is more specific information
and put forward the achievements that Orange County has made in the efforts of environmental
protection.
Commissioner Jacobs said that there is a Paulie Murray Award for an individual and an
organization. He questions whether there should be mare than one award (individual, organization,
business, etc.} so that it is less of a single shot.
Commissioner Gordon asked if this could be passed without the awards and it was answered
yes.
The Board approved the Commission for the Environment's proposal and authorized the
Commission for the Environment and ERCD to plan and organize an Orange County Environmental
Summit for March 29, 2003.
,~ Section 8 Project-based Voucher Program Policy
The Board considered approving a Section 8 project-based voucher program policy under the
County's Section 8 housing voucher program.
Chair Brown said that this came forward and she pulled it off so that the public (affordable
hauling community and recipients of Section 8 vouchers} knows why we are doing this.
Housing and Community Development Director Tara Fikes said that they have already had
discussions with the Affordable Housing Advisory Board and affordable housing advocates. Regarding
the Section 8 population at large, they probably need to think more about education and getting the
information out there.
Commissioner Jacobs said that it is his understanding that one of the problems is that the
average rental prices in Orange County are often higher than what HUD had been allowing. He made
reference to the sentence, "A family is ineligible for the program if more than 40°~ of its income has to be
used to pay rent in the first year." He asked if a lot of people who are forced to pay high amounts for rent
because of the market here are being rendered ineligible under the standards of the program. Tara
Fikes said that what it says is that a person should not pay any more than 40% of their income for rent.
The purpose of the program is to prevent people from paying more than 40% of their income for rent.
The Board approved the Section 8 Project Based Voucher Program Policy under the County's
Section 8 Housing Voucher Program.
A motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Commissioner Carey to
approve those items on the consent agenda as stated above.
VOTE ON CONSENT AGENDA: UNANIMOUS
9. ITEMS FOR DECISION -REGULAR AGENDA
Item 9-d will be referred to Commissioner Gordon and Commissioner Jacobs.
Commissioner Gordon asked which of the items need to be addressed tonight. John Link said that
there were people here for the Telecommunications Tower Ordinance Amendments and Eno Ridge
subdivision.
a. Telecommunications Tower Ordinance Amendments
The Board considered closing the public hearing and considered amendments to the County's
telecommunications tower ordinance.
Craig Benedict said that there have been many discussions with staff, consultants, and the
industry about how to update this ordinance. This is an overhaul to the existing ordinance. Some of the
height requirements have been changed. The Board of County Commissioners will see applications for
towers that are under 200 feet if the industry is not providing at least four users on the tower. Each year,
there will be an annual telecommunication projection meeting to find out where the industry wants to put
towers throughout the year. They are promoting co-location on existing electrical transmission lines.
The technical standards for review are higher. The ordinance is requiring periodic inspections and
engineering certification of new towers that are put in the County. There is a placeholder in the
ordinance for a Master Telecommunication Plan. It is not part of the ordinance tonight. There is also a
visual impact analysis. The fee schedule has been greatly revised. There is an escrow agreement
where fees will go in escrow for a consultant hired by the County in reviewing the applications. There
were some things added by the Planning Board (minimal light diffusion, fall zone, inspections}. The
Planning Board approved the amendments with a 5-4 vote. The Planning Board was concerned about
how the Master Telecommunication Plan would play into this.
The administration recommendation is to approve the amendments with one change. On
page five, recommendation number eight, the Planning Board asked that the industry just has to provide
the standards in place at the time the tower was originally installed for something that is less than six
years old. Administration's recommendation is that we stay with having the industry provide what the
current regulations are as far as the structural integrity of the tower. The administration recommends
approval of the amendments and of the fee schedule, which will be effective upon approval.
Commissioner Gordon said that she has a lot of questions. She would like to hear the public
speak and then put this on a consent agenda at a later time. She can get answers from the staff before
the next meeting.
Public Comment
Gary Pennington from Verizon Wireless spoke and encouraged the Board to pass the
amendments. He said that this ordinance has been debated at length. His only objection is the fee
structure.
The decision on this item was deferred to December 10, 2002.
b. Eno Ridge Subdivision (Formerly James Woods) Preliminary Plan
The Board considered a preliminary plan for the proposed Eno Ridge subdivision.
This project is located in Cheeks Township on the west side of Frazier Road between West
Lebanon Road and US 70. There are 32 lots with an average lot size of .975 acres.
Craig Benedict said that this project was originally known as the James Woods subdivision.
The applicant has worked with staff to amend the plan from its conventional design to add more open
space (31 %). The original plan only had 10°~ open space. The open space will be maintained by the
homeowners association. There is only one access point from Frazier Road at this time. The developer
has agreed to put in a center left turn lane into the project. The project will be serviced by individual well
and septic systems. Administration recommends approval of the subdivision as amended.
Commissioner Gordon verified that all of the neighbors were notified.
Commissioner Jacobs asked about number six on page four and the possibility of extending
public water services from Orange/Alamance. He asked if there has been any change. Craig Benedict
said that Orange/Alamance services some customers in this general area, but not a compact network of
users. Orange/Alamance has not developed a master plan to determine the ultimate boundaries. This is
outside of Orange County's transition area. There is a trend towards a lot of units in this area. If this
pattern continues, then urban services may be necessary in this area.
Geoff Gledhill said that the Orange/Alamance connection was part of the conventional plan
and is not part of this resolution of approval.
Commissioner Jacobs said that he was just asking about it because it had been discussed
before.
A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to
approve the preliminary plan for Eno Ridge Subdivision in accordance with the resolution of approval,
which is incorporated by reference.
Commissioner Jacobs said that he appreciates that this developer has gone beyond the
minimum requirement. He said that the choice of this versus a flexible open space reveals some of the
flaws in our current process. He said that this is suburban/urban development in an area that still has
rural water and sewer. If it is going to be this dense, then it should be developed in more of an urban
model.
VOTE: Ayes, 4; No, 1 (Chair Brawn -agrees with Commissioner Jacobs' points above)
c. Adams Tract -Potential Participation
The Board considered potential participation with the Town of Carrboro in acquiring the 29-
acre Adams tract in Carrboro.
Jahn Link said that the Board generally supports coming up with some process with Carrboro
by which the Adams Tract could be preserved. Dave Stancil crafted a paragraph that he recommends
the Board support. He read the statement as follows: "Orange County supports the Town of Carrboro's
Clean Water Management Trust Fund application and is willing to participate with the Town of Carrboro
in providing a local government match for the tentative grant award, the detail of which will be defined by
January 31, 2003." This language would be conveyed to the State officials to assure that the grant
would be approved in its tentative status.
Dave Stancil said that the Trust Fund Board would be meeting an December 10t" during the
day. This statement would allow the statement of support to be considered by the Trust Fund Board.
A motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to adopt
the general statement of support as stated above, and to forward it on to the Town of Carrboro and the
State.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
d. Resolution Submitting Comments to NCDOT and DCHC TAC Regarding Draft 2004-
2010State Transportation Improvement Plan
Commissioner Gordon and Commissioner Jacobs will address these items.
e. Chapel Hill Horace Williams Tract Citizens Committee
The Board was to consider an appointment to the Chapel Hill Horace Williams Tract Citizens
Committee.
POSTPONED UNTIL 12/10/2002
f. Arts Commission -One Appointment
The Board was to consider one appointment to the Arts Commission.
POSTPONED UNTIL 12/10/2002
q: Commission for the Environment -Three Appointments
The Board was to consider three appointments to the Commission for the Environment.
POSTPONED UNTIL 12/10/2002
10. REPORTS
11. APPOINTMENTS
12. MINUTES
13. CLOSED SESSION
A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Carey to go into closed
session:
"To consult with the County Attorney in order to preserve the attorney-client privilege between the
County Attorney and the Board," NCGS § 143-318.11(a}(3}. one of which is Childers vs. Orange County
{amended)
"To discuss the County's position and to instruct the County Manager and County Attorney on the
negotiating position regarding terms of a contract to purchase real property" NCGS § 143-318.11 {a){5}.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Carey to reconvene into
regular session.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
14. ADJOURNMENT
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordan, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to adjourn the
meeting at 11:25 p.m.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Margaret Brown, Chair
Donna S. Baker
Clerk to the Board