Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 20030616APPROVED 9/2/2003 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BUDGET WORK SESSION June 16, 2003 7:30 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Work Session on Monday June 16, 2003 at 7:30 p.m. in the Southern Human Services Center, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Margaret W. Brown, Moses Carey, Jr., Alice M. Gordon, Stephen Halkiotis and Barry Jacobs COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: 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. 1. Chair Review of Schedule and Topics The Chair opened the meeting. 2. Continuation of School and County CIP Discussions a. Possible BOCC decision point -CHCCS proposed High School #3 Chair Brawn said that she has found this to be a thrilling process. The County Commissioners saw a need for expanded capacity in the CHCCS system and they have worked with the school board on locating sites. She was pleased to find out that even though this is a new high school and it was not something proposed on the countywide bond two years ago, that the Manager came up with the money to build this school. She commended the Manager, the Budget office, and the Finance office. Commissioner Jacobs asked John Link to review the schedule of Board of County Commissioners' work sessions. Whatever is not covered tonight can be covered on June 19`h. If the Board wants to invite any outside agencies, then they could come to the meeting an June 19t". The Resolution of Intent may also be started on the 19t". The plan for June 23rd is to adapt the budget. Commissioner Jacobs submitted a statement (pink) regarding Funding the Fifth High School in Orange County. This statement is included below: FUNDING A FIFTH HIGH SCHOOL IN ORANGE COUNTY Schools are perhaps the most important capital investment a community can make. They represent a commitment to the purposes of education and citizenship, and are intended to serve across decades. They cast in the tens of millions of dollars. Therefore their planning and execution requires the greatest possible care. We applaud the efforts of the Board of Education of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS) as it sought to balance sometimes-competing demands and imperatives in siting its third, and Orange County's fifth, high school. Those efforts have been formidable, and in keeping with the Board of Education's role as an advocate for the best interests of its students. The role of the Board of County Commissioners is to fund schools and the educational programs that take place within them. Yet that is only one aspect of our multifaceted responsibilities. It is within that larger context that we view the matter of school siting, funding and function, and our allocation of $27.8 million far a new high school. The landscape of our county continues to change before our eyes -- physically and socially --and we must remain attuned to those changes. Construction of this newest high school in the CHCCS district, and a funded middle school slated for the Orange County system, will enable our community to realize a longtime goal: VIle will be almost caught up in providing facilities to accommodate what has been explosive student growth. Approximately 6,500 students were added to the county's public school rolls since the 1988-89 school year, according to figures provided by the N.C. Department of Public Instruction (DPI). That total surpasses the entire 2002- 03 enrollment in the Orange County system. Orange County has built 10 new schools {including Rashkis Elementary in the CHCCS system} since 1988, an average of one every 18 months. The total cost was $170 million. Additional capital spending for schools aver that period amounted to $84 million, yielding a combined capital investment of more than a quarter of a billion dollars for schools. That aggressive capital spending, coupled with high annual per-pupil allocations, placed Orange County at the forefront of "actual effort" in school spending in North Carolina every year since 1997 and in the top five annually since 1990, according to the N.C. Public School Forum. Our 10-year capital investment plan (CIP} sets out the likely casts of major capital projects proposed by both school districts and the county. The CIP anticipates several more, as yet unsited, new schools in the CHCCS system. The Orange County system is expected to confront far fewer capacity needs in the coming decade. Key to assuring the predictability of our fiscal projections are a county policy that limits indebtedness to 15 percent of total spending, a defensible and agreed-upon method for projecting student populations, and the advent of the Schools Adequate Facilities Ordinance (SAPFO). The adequate facilities ordinance allows local government to pace growth to our ability to provide services, assuring the timely provision of sufficient school space to meet the needs for quality education of growing student populations. SAPFO allows us to adjust spending across the decade through fiscal year 2013-14 with a level of certitude currently lacking in North Carolina educational planning. Given the fact that we've nearly caught up in providing schools, and can project spending with some accuracy, it is imperative we take an historical view of future spending. Since 1988, spending on schools -- including bonds, alternative financing, sales tax revenues and other funds -- has accounted for 77 percent of county capital projects. County government under numerous commissioners has put schools first. Now we are in a position to address long-neglected county projects that are essential to meeting the diverse needs of our evolving county. However, in order to have sufficient resources to meet those needs, we must spend in a measured manner. That includes a firm limit on funding for the new high school. Seven months ago the county identified funding in the amount of $27.8 million for construction of a new high school. That fits within debt constraints and spending limits that are acceptable to the funding body, the Orange County Board of Commissioners. We will not support the assumption of further debt to build the school. Even if CHCCS pays off the debt, unacceptable limitations will be placed an future county borrowing. We are persuaded another high school is needed. We recognize a strong preference for locating that facility in the southern sector of the district. We understand that large-acreage sites are limited in a growing urban area. But cost is a major concern. The current CHCCS proposal exceeds adopted standards by more than six million dollars, requiring $34,527 per student seat, far higher than for any school ever built in Orange County. The cost per seat will be significantly higher than at recently constructed high schools in fast-growing counties such as Lincoln, Cabarrus, Forsyth, and New Hanover. Even at $27.8 million, the spending per student seat for the new high school ($27,800) would virtually equal that of Cedar Ridge High School in the Orange County system ($27,900). Yet the cost of the new school is greater. Cedar Ridge, built to be expandable to 1,500 students, includes large core facilities in its initial construction budget, and the per-seat cost will decrease accordingly as it expands. The proposed CHCCS high school is designed to serve 1,000 students, based on the most recent presentations of board and staff. The Board of County Commissioners twice has been assured that the projected costs of construction do not include expandable core facilities. That is welcome specificity in light of persistent shifts in what has been requested. We must choose a fixed target upon which to base funding. Guided by the county's various constraints and policies, the commissioners allotted $27.8 million to a new high school with all attendant facilities. Given the 1,000- student model, we respectfully suggest that CHCCS consider: 1} A 700-800-student high school, expandable at a later date. This approach, producing a facility of a size endorsed by CHCCS in spring 2002, would spread funding over a longer period and allow for possible development of the Lincoln Center as another high school space. Current projections shave CHCCS high school enrollment will not exceed the 110 percent capacity level through 2014. There is no need to build both a 1,000-student facility and to rehabilitate Lincoln Center as a high school space (as per the proposed CIP far CHCCS) within the next decade. A choice that includes the Lincoln Center would support important community values, stagger the costs, and provide students with the alternative academic environment that polling indicates some prefer. Other possibilities are to work with the Orange County system to add planned seats at Cedar Ridge High, and then to utilize space there, or to expand the two existing high schools, as CHCCS recommended in spring 2001. 2} A 1,000-student high school that reduces the overall footprint from the current request of 182,710 square feet, the largest possible facility under adopted school construction guidelines. The square foot range fora 1,000-student high school, a standard adopted by both school boards and the county commissioners, begins at 151,049 feet. 3) Revisit discarded sites at Obey's Creek and C71d Lystra Road. Significant criteria in rejecting both sites were their inability to fit a 1,500-student building and full complement of athletic fields and ancillary facilities. Subsequent to rejecting those properties, CHCCS decided to reduce the size of the building and to place some functions off-site, mooting significant reasons for abandoning the Obey's Creek and Old Lystra properties. These sites might be acquired without need to pursue condemnation, a last-resort course for acquiring land that is apt to be more expensive. 4} Construct a high school on land the county acquired for park and school purposes near the corner of Eubanks Road and Old Highway 86. Infrastructure costs to the district initially related to erecting the high school will be reduced over time as other schools and a park share the property. 5) Accept the $27.8 million without condition, and fit construction to that amount in whatever way best suits CHCCS. The commissioners also encourage a school design that makes smarter use of land and public transportation, agoal inadequately met to date. Ta spur that process, and in recognition of the tightness of the financial constraints listed above, the commissioners would approve spending an additional $2.2 million in capital funds, bringing total school casts to $30,000,000, in order to promote creative thinking and a sounder example for young people of reduced parking, land disturbance, and other deleterious aspects of current plans. The time is overdue to promote asmart-growth school model. If this is accomplished to our satisfaction, we will approve $2.2 million in additional debt on the part of the school system to devote to this project. June 2003 Commissioner Jacobs said that the idea is that this is in the form of a motion Commissioner Halkiotis seconded the motion. Commissioner Gordon asked if there were County Commissioners that would acceptor support the school board proposal, which is a $33.9 million high school with stadium suggestions. She supports this model since with interest rates being so low it is a favorable time to build and it is possible that the 700-student capacity could be reached fairly soon. She said that the land is $1 million over and the site is about $2.6 million aver the standards. She said that the school board is not proposing that the construction of the school building be over the standards, but they are asking for more money to purchase and develop the site. She said that the proposal of the staff {$27.8 million) is under the maximum far the high school standards, which is $29.9 million. Commissioner Carey said that he has been clear to all that he could support the school system's proposal but he has always had concerns with the costs and the need to use the condemnation process. He said that he would not withhold support because of the land acquisition. He did not feel that the issue of borrowing $6 million was a problem either. He said that the most important thing is to make a decision so the school board can move forward with the building of the school. He supports the school being built but he has concerns about the total cost. He said that he would support the motion so the school district can move forward with building this high school. Commissioner Halkiotis said that Commissioner Jacobs makes same interesting points. He made reference to the point that since 1988, there has been a capital investment of over a quarter of a billion dollars for schools. He said that when it comes to taking care of the school systems, no one has any basis to say that the County does not care. He thinks the needs of the County are going to continue to grow. He said that if you tell the architects how much money you have and what you can afford, they will bring forth a design that will work. He thanked Commissioner Jacobs for this proposal. Commissioner Gordon said that, if the Commissioners will not support the school board's $33.9 million proposal, then she would like to put forward the figure of $32.3 million for the high school. She compared this amount to the cost of building the school at the Eubanks Road site, if the land cost is included. She thinks this amount is what it would take to build this school at the Eubanks Road site. She suggested in Commissioner Jacobs' proposal, #5, that the lowest amount be $30 million without conditions and the higher amount be $32.3 million with conditions. She thinks the County Commissioners should give the school board the money and tell them to go out and build the school. Chair Brown said that she wants the high school to be built as soon as possible, but it has varied over time. She was never in favor of the eminent domain issue. This could put the County in a difficult financial situation. She sees this facility as an important piece of construction for the CHCCS board. But she has to listen to John Link and when the final proposal came, the Manager did not recommend the amount of money the school system wanted. She said that this proposal by the school board could damage the County's fiscal situation in the next few years. It is clear that adopting this full proposal would also put the school system in a position of not being able to do the renovations and maintenance necessary to maintain the existing schools. She agrees with Commissioner Halkiotis in that we can give money to the architect and they will deliver a wonderful high school. She said that all could work together to build a school that will live up to the expectations. She gave her support to the motion on the floor. Commissioner Gordon asked if anyone else supported her suggestion of changing section #5 of Commissioner Jacobs' proposal from $27.8 million without conditions to $30 million without conditions. She argued strongly that the standards are essentially $30 million and the County should allot this amount. Commissioner Halkiotis said that the way he reads it is that the Manager, Superintendent Neil Pedersen, the Chair of the school board, and the Chair of the Board of County Commissioners need to meet to discuss the finer points of #5. He likes this smart growth school model. He is also worried that the owner of the land has no intentions of taking only $1.5 million far this land. Commissioner Carey asked to hear from school board members, if they like. Superintendent Neil Pedersen said that they need a decision as soon as possible, but he struggles with this as a motion. He sees five different suggestions as to ways to go about it. He asked for clarification that the motion would basically be for $30 million for the third high school with the plans subject to approval by the County Commissioners and the County Manager. Within the $30 million, they may need to re-look at capacity and core to meet projected growth needs. Commissioner Jacobs said that there are five alternatives but #5 essentially says that the school board should figure it out and let the Board of County Commissioners know what they are doing. Neil Pedersen said that they still require Board of County Commissioners' approval for the school site. He asked for clarification on this. Commissioner Jacobs said that he would like far the school board to reconsider the site, but in this motion, the Board is not approving the site but the amount. Chair Brown made reference to Commissioner Halkiatis' suggestion of the additional $2.2 million for specific smart growth models and said that she would be glad to work with the school board to see how it could be worked into the project. Commissioner Gordon said that she thought that the commissioners could look at reduced parking and land disturbance, etc. but it was not her view that the Board would approve the plans. She does think that there would be County Commissioners chosen to work with the school board on the design and construction. Commissioner Jacobs said that if we do settle on the Rock Haven Road site, then he thinks we should ask the County Attorney about an MOU about eminent domain and to limit the County's exposure and to make it clear that the County is not legally liable for additional costs. Superintendent Pedersen verified that $30 million would come from the County and the School Board would not have to adjust the CIP with additional funds. John Link said yes. The initial $28 million included some impact fees and this is still expected to be budgeted toward the project. Commissioner Gordon asked how the school board would get site approval and John Link said that he would recommend the school board coming back after the County consults with the County Attorney. Commissioner Gordan asked if the school board could craft something and then come up with an interlocal agreement and let them work over the summer to see if they need the extra $2.2 million. Jahn Link said that the first step is for the school system to make that decision. Commissioner Gordon said that the motion sounds like everything happens at once Superintendent Pedersen said that they could go forward and meet each other's expectations. They have $3Q million and they need to work within this for the site and the completion of the school. Chair Brown asked about the MOU and if the decision is made for eminent domain, then the cost should be within the $27.8 million. Commissioner Jacobs said yes, and the school will find money other places than the County for any lawsuit. Superintendent Pedersen said that they have gone through a process for fair market value for the property and he will use that figure for the site, and if they wind up in court and the figure increases then the money will come from the CIP budget (pay as you go}. VOTE: Ayes, 4; Nay, 1-Commissioner Gordon Commissioner Gordon is in favor of building the school, but she feels that the commissioners should have given the school system the money they needed. She also thinks that it should be clear to the school system about how to get permission to acquire the school site before the Board goes into break. She said that the commissioners have not allocated enough money far the high school. She would also like the school board to have permission tonight to go and get the site. b. Possible BOCC decision point - Resalution(s} of Intent to Adapt County & School CIP's Commissioner Jacobs said that the Board has not spent any time on the County CIP. John Link recommended that the Board address the two school systems' CIP's and then move onto the County CIP. Commissioner Jacobs said that if the Board just accepts these two CIP's, then it is essentially committing 2I3 of its funding for the next decade to schools again. He thinks the Board should do a better job of achieving some equity in the funding. He is open to suggestions on how to address it, but he is not open to approving it before County projects are discussed. Commissioner Halkiotis said that these CIP's are highly fluid because new things are constantly coming up. He thinks "acknowledge" is a better word to use than "approve." John Link said that the Board needs to adopt the capital project ordinances that will require work and expenditures during next year by June 30tH Commissioner Halkiotis said that the County's projects have taken a back seat and the Board has not discussed in detail an animal shelter, emergency communications and infrastructure, equipment and record storage, etc., and this worries him. He said that he does not approve of all of this, but he acknowledges it. Commissioner Jacobs suggested identifying which projects have to be included in the CIP this fiscal year and agreeing to have a work session after the break to devote to the CIP and trying and adopt it in the fall. John Link said that the school has projects to work on next year and to work with OCS and CHCCS and list those projects that are only needed for next year at Thursday night's meeting (June 19th}. Commissioner Halkiotis agreed with this. Commissioner Carey made reference to the blue sheet and the projects that require funding beyond the pay as you go service and he once had a spreadsheet that showed how each project was to be funded, and he found this more helpful. He would like more information based on the spreadsheet. Commissioner Jacobs asked about the agricultural center and also that Chapel Hill has raised the issue about the old post office and the homeless shelter. The Board may need to project out some of these projects and set aside some undifferentiated funds so that there is flexibility to address the needs. Commissioner Halkiotis said he does not feel that he has the total picture of priorities. He would like the two superintendents to give the Manager their priorities and he would also like to see priorities for the County. Chair Brown said that she would like to fund the development costs for the Northern Human Services Center. She would like to see some creative ways -such as soccer superfund monies - to fund it this year. Jahn Link said that they would come back at the next work session with this recommendation. Chair Brown asked that the pie charts be done for five years instead of ten Commissioner Carey made reference to the agricultural center and said that the County received some federal money for this. He asked if there were constraints on this and if the County would lose the money after a certain period of time. John Link said yes and that there are constraints on the Farmer's Market. Commissioner Gordon said if the Board wants the Manager to come back on Thursday and then wait till fall for rest of the CIP, then she suggests that the Manager prioritize the projects for the County. It would be up to the County Commissioners to decide what the pie chart would be. One thing that the Board agreed to change {not by motion) is that the Lands Legacy Fund would have $500,000 a year for the opportunity fund. It was reduced to $200,000. She would like this to be restored without waiting until after the break. John Link said they need a motion by the Board to do this. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Chair Brown that the opportunity fund for the Lands Legacy program be restored to $500,000 a year. The Board discussed what was cut from the Lands Legacy budget last year. Commissioner Gordon said that they cut some things in the budget to make it $200,000. Commissioner Jacobs said that last year they made cuts in the CIP because of what the State had done. Now the Board has not kept up with where all of this is now. He asked that the staff track what gat cut last year and what is being restored this year. He thinks the Board needs to devote the same time and attention to this as it has for schools. John Link said that the staff would come back on Thursday with the projects that need to be funded next year, such as the Northern Human Services Center, etc. The staff will show the Board how to reinstate Lands Legacy at $500,000 and how that affects other projects. He recommended that the staff come back in the fall with the prioritization of projects for future years and looking at the pie chart adjustments. Chair Brown asked John Link to come up with a short process to determine how things are added. There was no vote on the motion. 3. County Operating Budget Matters a. Outside Agency funding - BOCC discussion {if representatives are needed to respond to Board questions, they would be asked to attend the beginning of the June 19 work session) Chair Brown made reference to the Piedmont Wildlife Center not recommended to be funded. She asked about the comment, "not considered to be within the Human Services purview." John Link said that he did not recommend funding the Piedmont Wildlife Center and he would be delighted to discuss it. Commissioner Jacobs asked if the wildlife center does not fit under Human Services and if there was any other place in the budget to address this other than the APS budget. John Link said that if the Board were to initiate funding for this, then he sees it coming out of the Human Services Safety Net. His perspective is a little different than staff on thl5. Commissioner Jacobs said that, in the short term, it would be fine to look at this stand alone this year. If we are going to be going through so much effort with the Humane Society, it would be a logical time to contemplate whether or not to pursue the wildlife center and group all of the animal welfare activities under one umbrella. He supports giving them half of what they requested to help them get started. Commissioner Halkiotis said that he would like an update, because the last time there was a public discussion on this, the Board was told that the APS was going to do something. He said that he is proud of the County and what it has done to regulate and protect exotic animals and citizens. He said that doing something for the wildlife center would be appropriate. Commissioner Jacobs said that Dr. Schopler called him and he invited Dr. Schopler to come to the meeting on Thursday to answer questions of the Board. Commissioner Carey said that he places value in the advice of the Human Services Advisory Committee. He said that he cares a lot about the animals, but he cares mare for human life than animal life. There are a lot of needs (human) over the wildlife center and if they want half this year then they will be back next year and fallowing years for continuation funds. He cannot do this in good conscience. But if there is a discussion about the wildlife center, it should be in the context of the recommendations of HSUS. Commissioner Gordon said that Commissioner Carey has made a lot of good points and the Manager did not recommend funding on this. It is tough to start a new project, especially in a tight financial year. She agreed with Commissioner Carey. Chair Brown supports giving money to the wildlife center as set aside money in a fund that would be looked at after the HSUS report. She does not like the Human Services Advisory Committee looking at this because it is outside of their purview. She thinks we should tie it in with a public health issue and children's public health education. Commissioner Jacobs said that he thinks wildlife rehabilitation is a cost of growth in the County because we are destroying habitat. He thinks that part of his responsibility is to address the harm caused by the development. Commissioner Halkiotis wants the Manager to come back with a proposal to tie in the public health issue and education. Jahn Link verified that he would include this in the mark-up items as a reserve until information comes back from the HSUS. Commissioner Gordon said she wants to see the final list of what other people are putting in besides the County. Commissioner Jacobs said that he had asked about the Duke Community Hospice and whether Duke owned it and why we are funding a Duke enterprise. John Link said that he does not have an answer at this time. Gwen Harvey said that there is a change in the name to Triangle Community Hospice, but it was still owned by Duke. Commissioner Jacobs said that if it is just a Duke profit- making center, then the County does not need to participate. Jahn Link said that it is based on it being a continuation item and it is located in Orange County. Commissioner Jacobs said that he would like to see this money go to someplace that really needs it. For example, someone came to a public hearing and requested funding for an organization that provides transportation to mentally handicapped people that cannot drive to get to their jobs. Chair Brown thinks this might be ARC, which is already funded by the County. The staff will provide this information Commissioner Jacobs also mentioned the proposal from Orange Community Housing and Land Trust to fund them more than was recommended. He would like to know if we have the money in the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. The staff will provide this information before Thursday. b. Fire District funding - BOCC discussion (if representatives are needed to respond to Board questions, they would be asked to attend the beginning of the June 19 work session) Rod Visser said that the suggested appropriations are what is generated by the fire district tax that was recommended by each fire district. The largest increase is the Eno district, which is due to the increased cost of land and that they want to build a second station in the area. Also, they want to improve their ISO rating. Commissioner Halkiotis asked about the ISO rating and Rod Visser said there is a growing concern in the Insurance Services Office in North Carolina to paying attention to whether or not an insured property is within five road miles of a fire station. If it is not, the insurer could make a determination that the property is not in a protected district and the whole district could be rated as a 10. Commissioner Halkiotis asked if Efland was the only one with an ISO rate of 7. EMS Director Nick Waters said that all that cannot meet the initial standards can lase ISO rating and the insurers can ga to a 10, which is the highest possible premium. There are areas in the County now that are not in the five-mile radius and must build more stations. Commissioner Jacobs would like to see a map with fire district coverage and ISO ratings. He said that they need to be proactive with the future of the fire districts and there needs to be conversations regarding volunteers, ISO ratings, full-time personnel requirements, etc. Commissioner Halkiotis thanked the staff for the red sheet and suggested this be used for educational purposes. Chair Brown asked Nick Waters to come back with some information about the future of fire districts. Rod Visser recapped the tax increases on page 8-16. Commissioner Jacobs asked about the new building for Ena and if the rate increase includes the community room. Nick Waters said that Ena is interested in partnering with the County, and when they start the building plans, there is a place far the County to became active with them. Chair Brown asked about the two-cent increase in Eno and asked if there was a point at which the capital would be paid off and if the tax rate would go back down. Budget Director Donna Dean said that it is unclear if this will give them enough to use pay as you go funds to construct the building. Commissioner Halkiotis suggested looking at a GIS map and the five-mile circles. A lot of people may be outside of these circles. John Link said that there is a radical idea that the Board of County Commissioners could become the Fire District Commission for the entire County and there is a statutory process in place for this to happen and it is an idea that needs to be discussed. Commissioner Jacobs said that if the County were a fire fighting entity it could become eligible for homeland security funds that it is currently not eligible for. c. Discussion of potential State budget impacts Social Services Director Nancy Castan made reference to a list from the different departments. The problem is that they are still at the unknown level now because there is not final State approval of anything. The Senate budget would hold them harmless. The impact for Social Services is not as bad this year as it was two years ago. Commissioner Jacobs asked to have this highlighted for Thursday night. d. Decision point - EMSIRescue Squad Transition John Link said that he recommends that the Board go forward with the proposal in the budget regarding the transition. Rod Visser made reference to the issue of use of the buildings and said that they would propose to bring to the Board on the consent agenda for June 26`", an updated contract with the squad for next year. There will be a monthly stipend paid by the County of $4,70Q. Commissioner Halkiotis asked who owns the buildings and Rod Visser said the rescue squad. Commissioner Halkiotis asked who ultimately owns the rescue squad buildings. Nick Waters said that, according to the charter, if the squad dissolves, their assets go to alike agency within the County. There is no like agency within the County except the County. Commissioner Halkiotis asked about the long-range plan and said that he needs a clear picture of what the County is getting involved in. Jahn Link said that in the short term the County needs to use their buildings. In the long term, it is a negotiation process between the County and rescue squads. Commissioner Halkiotis said that in the long term, the County should acquire these buildings rather than renting them. Commissioner Carey agreed with Commissioner Halkiotis and said that this is a public purpose and he suggested to only do an agreement for a year and then sort it out for the long term. This is the first he has heard of the $4,70Q a month. Commissioner Gordan said that she is looking at the May 13`" proposal and asked what the County is getting here. She would like a summary of all of the costs. She asked the staff to speak to the capital issues with the Board and the rescue squad. John Link said that the fire departments and rescue squads are going through a transition that is painful. He said that they would come back with recommendations about the total capital plan -bath chart and long term. Nick Waters said that they have a new contract far the coming year that hammers the figures down on utility costs, a fair square-foot lease, and for the right for County staff to share the buildings. They have also discussed the location of the buildings and whether there should be a more centralized building. He said that the decision needs to be made sa they can make this happen by June 30`" A motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Halkiotis to approve the proposed transition, including the one-year contract. VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to adjourn the meeting at 10:10 p.m. VOTE: UNANIMOUS e. Decision point -Employee Pay and Benefits (Phases 2 and 3) f. Review Menu of Possible Modifications to the FY 2003-04 Manager's Recommended Budget These items were delayed until the next meeting on Thursday, June 19tH Margaret Brown, Chair Donna S. Baker Clerk to the Board