Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 20080129 APPROVED 3/6/2008 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Work Session January 29, 2008 5:30 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Transfer Station Siting Work Session on Tuesday, January 29, 2008 at 5:30 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, N.C. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Barry Jacobs and Commissioners Moses Carey, Jr., Valerie P. Foushee, Alice Gordon, and Mike Nelson COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Laura Blackmon, Assistant County Manager Gwen Harvey, and Clerk to the Board Donna S. Baker (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below). PURPOSE: The purpose of the meeting will be to continue discussion of the transfer station siting process presented at the January 16th Special Meeting of the BOCC. The proposed project schedule will be presented for the purpose of discussing BOCC meeting dates and public information format including web site. The size requirement for the site will also be discussed. AGENDA: 1) Receive Comments and Questions Regarding the Proposed Transfer Station Siting Process 2) Present Revised Project Schedule and Process Flow Chart 3) Review Tentative Meeting Schedule and Key Milestone Decisions Chair Jacobs said that the agenda is going to be inverted to have comment at each of these work sessions for 15 minutes at the end of these meetings. There will be no decision made tonight, but maybe at the next meeting. The Board will discuss the schedule for future work sessions tonight. This meeting is for information gathering, and whatever the Board receives, the public will also receive. The Board will try not to act on anything until it has heard from the public. He pointed out the materials —schedule for the siting process, calendars, etc. Bob Sallach apologized for the lateness of materials and said that the information is for discussion only tonight. Ed Shuffler pointed out the process sheet. He said that they have tried to merge the meetings with the Board of County Commissioners' meetings and where approvals would fit in. He said that the flow chart has the various steps and key points, but does not identify yet all of the meetings that will be needed. He went through the flow chart, which is incorporated by reference. The process includes finalizing exclusionary criteria, identifying potential sites, narrowing it down to less than 10 sites, and technical evaluation of potential sites. There will be a number of public meetings also. Commissioner Nelson made reference to the community-specific criteria, and asked if greenhouse gas emissions would be an example of that and Ed Shuffler said yes, whatever the community wants that is important to them could be brought forward to consider. He said that the technical criteria is more for the consultants and is straightforward. Commissioner Nelson asked about the exclusionary criteria and asked if there would be opportunity for input from the Board of County Commissioners and the public. Ed Shuffler said that exclusionary criteria is fairly simple and is usually not taken to the public. Chair Jacobs asked for examples of exclusionary criteria. Ed Shuffler said that this includes site size, land use and zoning, watershed areas, major highways, etc. The County Commissioners asked clarifying questions about the meeting schedule, which were answered by Ed Shuffler and Bob Sallach. Chair Jacobs said that the idea is to have most of the meetings in the southern part of the County, where 2/3 of the waste is generated, but there might need to be a bigger room. Bob Sallach said that Board of County Commissioners' input is needed on the detailed schedule. Laura Blackmon said that most meetings on the schedule are before a regularly scheduled meeting, which only gives an hour to an hour and a half. February 11th is listed as a special meeting with 2-3 hours. A lot of it will depend on how long it will take for the discussion items and public input. There may need to be additional meetings. Commissioner Gordon said that December 11th comes after the new Board is elected. Laura Blackmon said that this schedule is showing that there is a lot of work that needs to be done. If this is to be done before the new Board is elected, then some meetings will have to be lengthened and moved up. Commissioner Foushee would like to make a site selection before a new Board is seated and Commissioner Nelson and Commissioner Carey agreed. Chair Jacobs said that most special meetings indicated are prior to regular County Commissioners' meetings. Today the meeting started at 5:45 p.m. and he does not want to move back into the afternoon times, so additional meetings may need to be added. Commissioner Carey said that these meetings need to be held no matter what, even if all five County Commissioners cannot meet. Chair Jacobs suggested televising the sessions and the Board agreed. It does not have to necessarily be live, but just available on television. Discussion ensued on the possible schedule of meetings. Ed Shuffler said that comments would be taken back to staff and a revised schedule would be brought back to the County Commissioners. 4) Discuss Expanded Site Use and Size Requirements Chair Jacobs explained to Commissioner Nelson that the Board asked staff to come back with land use maps and potential options to include or exclude on the site. Solid Waste Director Gayle Wilson said that what really matters on the site size is how much of the site is usable. He reviewed the following table, which gives proposed sizes of sites. Facility Estimated Acreage Cumulative Required Estimated Acreage Required Transfer Station Only 10-15 10-15 Add 5-10 15 —25 Materials Recovery Facility NOTE: A stand alone Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) is estimated to require approximately 15 acres,the same as a Transfer Station. In combination with a Transfer Station, the estimated additional requirement is 5-10. Add 60 (minimum) 75 — 85 (minimum) Permanent Facility for 80-100 (ideal) 95 — 125 (ideal) Managing Storm Debris, Various Organic Materials, and Land Clearing/Debris Recycling Operations Add 3-5 78—90 (minimum) Relocation/Modernization of 98— 130 (ideal) Crew Facilities and Parking Other Options Estimated Total Acreage Required New/Emerging Technologies; Waste 40-60 Conversion i.e. vaporization; Incineration, Refuse Derived Fuel, etc. Gayle Wilson said that 100-130 acres would be needed, ideally, to handle most of the things that the Board might want to consider in the future. He said that co-locating of facilities makes it easier to share staffing and equipment. He made reference to buffers and said that if there were a 100-acre square piece of property, and there was a 100-foot buffer, then 18 acres of the site would be taken up with buffer. The rough estimate for a buffer is 20% of the property. Commissioner Gordon asked about "other options" and asked if this was an additional 40-60 acres and Gayle Wilson said yes. He said that the "other options"were speculative and pretty far into the future. Chair Jacobs said that the Board has not had a conversation about whether or not to even consider regional solutions. If this is a possibility, then it should be decided as early in the process as possible. Laura Blackmon said that regional considerations would complicate the location. She said to keep in mind that the immediate issue is that the County needs a transfer station. She would rather narrow the discussion rather than expand it. Commissioner Gordon said that the most important thing is that the transfer station be close to the center of the County's trash generation. She said that regional may be possible long-term, but not for the immediate needs. Commissioner Nelson suggested limiting the size of the site to 25 acres, because the bigger the site, the more it encumbers the site search. Chair Jacobs said that usage of the site should be limited and the size should be narrowed, because it will make the neighborhoods feel a lot less threatened. Commissioner Gordon asked how it would work if one of the towns wanted to partner with the County and how that would fit into the plan. Ed Shuffler asked for direction from the Board on how to pursue sites. He said that the general consensus is to focus on a MRF and transfer station, which would be about a 25-acre piece of property. This would be the minimum size to pursue. There will be no decision by the Board at this meeting. The consultants will come back with a recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to vote on. Commissioner Gordon wants to ensure that there be public input before decisions are made at any meeting. Ed Shuffler asked how the Board wanted to approach the availability of property. Commissioner Foushee said that she would like to pursue sites that are for sale only and Commissioner Gordon agreed that it would be preferable. Chair Jacobs asked if that could be one of the weighting criteria and Ed Shuffler said yes. He said that he has done siting where heavy weight was put on those sites that are for sale, but other parcels can be included in the process. Chair Jacobs said that the Board's practice has been not to use condemnation, and he would want to put a heavy weight on voluntary sites. He wants to send a message to property owners that the County will weigh heavily against condemnation, but it would like to engage in conversation about whether to sell the property. Chair Jacobs asked Planning Director Craig Benedict about watershed maps and the part of Jordan Lake that is unprotected. He asked if the Neuse River Basin was subject to the study by the State of the entire basin. He wants to know how this will affect the watersheds. Craig Benedict said that the Jordan Lake unprotected would have some criteria subject to the new Jordan Lake rules, but they are still being developed. The expectation is that the Jordan Lake rules are the first phase of what might be done basin-wide. The unprotected part of the Neuse River Basin still has some rules pertaining to the basin, but they are not as heightened as if they were in the Lower Eno protected, Upper Eno critical, or Little River. Commissioner Gordon asked about the timeline for this and Craig Benedict said that the State is having discussions about mandates, etc. The timeframe has been fluid, but this summer there may be deadlines and standards. Laura Blackmon said that no matter where they are looking for sites, there would be some environmental considerations for construction at that site. Chair Jacobs pointed out that some considerations would mean that the buffers would need to be more. 5) Set Next Meeting Date and Tentative Agenda Ed Shuffler said that on the February 11th meeting they would bring back exclusionary criteria for the Board. Laura Blackmon said that this meeting needs to be longer than 1 % hours and Ed Shuffler agreed. PUBLIC COMMENT: Neloa Jones said that she really appreciates the effort that the Board is putting forth. She read from her prepared statement, as follows: "My name is Neloa Barbee Jones, and I am speaking on behalf of the Rogers- Eubanks Community and as Co-Chair of the Coalition to End Environmental Racism. My comments relate specifically to the site search criteria established thus far. In mid-November, when we presented before this board, we pointed to TWO points of special importance: 1) Establishing an advisory panel (or site search committee) As recommended by BOTH the National Environmental Justice Advisory Committee (NEJAC) and the EPA in their Waste Transfer Stations: A Manual for Decision-Making, establishing this panel is absolutely essential to ensuring meaningful participation from the residents of Orange County and residents of the Rogers-Eubanks Community. Furthermore, this panel should be comprised of local and state elected officials. It should be comprised of representatives from environmental justice organizations; from civic, neighborhood, and community groups; from businesses and solid waste industries; and from academic institutions AS WELL AS technical consultants such as Olver. According to BOTH NEJAC and the EPA, this diverse panel is FIRST educated on site search issues and it is THIS panel that develops the initial set of site search criteria. Already evidenced by the materials thus far developed, having Olver alone, a technical consultant who lacks expertise to serve in diverse capacities, the present site search criteria thus presented is clearly and already flawed. 2) The second point of major importance includes the meaningful participation of the public and the application of community-specific criteria. For some inexplicable reason, the process outlined in your flow chart does not include public input OR apply community-specific criteria until very late in the site search process. Public input should begin immediately after the advisory panel develops the initial set of criteria. Community-specific should be applied much earlier in the process. The flowchart shows that community criteria are not applied until four (4) sites have been finalized. Developing site search criteria for a transfer station site in this manner violates EPA recommendations. For these reasons, we view this current process as already and clearly flawed. The site search steps listed in Figure 1, Exhibit 1 (attached) merely represent a COMPRESSED version of the process and were intended merely as an outline. We assumed that this board along with an advisory panel would do the work that each step demanded. We are disappointed that this has not been done because what this means is that the process once again will at best yield flawed results. So at this point, we implore this board to establish an advisory panel to begin developing appropriate criteria as soon as possible." The Board adjourned the meeting at 7:16 p.m. Barry Jacobs, Chair Donna S. Baker, CMC Clerk to the Board APPROVED 3/6/2008 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Work Session January 29, 2008 7:30 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Work Session on Tuesday, January 29, 2008 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, N.C. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Barry Jacobs and Commissioners Moses Carey, Jr., Valerie P. Foushee, Alice Gordon, and Mike Nelson COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: Goof Gledhill COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Laura Blackmon, Assistant County Managers Willie Best, Gwen Harvey, and Clerk to the Board Donna S. Baker (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below). Change in BOCC Regular Meeting Schedule for 2008 The pink sheet was an addition to the agenda for a Change in BOCC Regular Meeting Schedule for 2008. A motion was made by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Carey to change the Board of County Commissioners' meeting calendar for 2008 by adding a BOCC Retreat on Friday, February 8th -from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. (breakfast at 8:30 a.m.) at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill; and a meeting on Monday, February 11, 2008 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill to discuss the transfer station siting process. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 1. Appointments - Local Revenue Options Education Advisory Committee The Board considered making appointments to the Local Revenue Options Education Advisory Committee. A motion was made by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Foushee to appoint Pam Seamans, Dr. Carolyn Schwarz, and Krysia Lynes to the appropriate positions. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 2. Discussion of Recommended Orange County FY 2008-18 Capital Investment Plan (CIP) 2008-18 Capital Investment Plan and Local Revenue Options Work Session Tonight's Objectives • Complete County space needs dialogue - Pick up from January 16, 2008 work session - Finalize plans for Department of Social Services and Health Department Laura Blackmon said that staff is preparing for the 2008-2018 CIP public hearing on February 5th. The main objective tonight is to go through the CIP and discuss the issues with the revenue options. Commissioner Nelson asked for a 60-second synopsis of the space needs for DSS and Health. Pam Jones said that there are two options for the human services space — one is to build 50,000 square feet at the Southern Human Services Center or to lease the old Wal-Mart store in Hillsborough. There are not a lot of differences between the cost estimates. She presented the following information. Human Services Space • Options: — Lease/Purchase property on Mayo Street — Construct new facility on Southern Human Services site Lease/Purchase Option • Assumptions: — Primary/satellite location service delivery model adopted for DSS — County leases property effective April 1, 2008 through January 2012 per terms presented by Landlord — County exercises purchase option no later than February 2012 — Health Department would vacate Whitted and relocate to the Mayo Street site Bottom Line Cost Estimates—Lease/Purchase Existing Building Lease through February 2012 and upfit DSS w/reimbursement $2,505,986 Upfit/equipment costs for Health when they are relocated to Mayo St. $9,500,000 Purchase price/including reimbursement $11,121,750 TOTAL $23,127,736 Bottom Line Cost Estimates—New Construction Estimated construction and furnishing 50,000 sf for DS w/reimbursement $9,250,000 Upfit & equipment SHSC for Health when DSS moves to new location $3,500,000 Upfit Whitted for Health Dept (DSS retains 5,000 sf for satellite office) $11,800,000 TOTAL $24,550,000 Advantages of Lease/Purchase • Quickest option to provide adequate space for Social Services. • Adaptive reuse of existing facility consistent with High Performance Building standards • Opportunity to significantly improve entranceway to Hillsborough and reflect a more environmentally sustainable facility • County's presence will help sustain the local businesses currently located at the site. • Could potentially continue some leases after purchase to help offset debt service (similar to 501/503 W. Franklin project) • County acquires 10 acres with estimated value of$1.5--$2 million. • Facility would remain on tax rolls during lease period • Single level would offer good access to handicapped citizens (no future elevator problems) Disadvantages to Lease/Purchase • Building design could be less flexible than totally new construction. • Would get less reimbursement from State for upfit costs since we will not own the facility at the time of renovation. Advantages to New Construction • More flexibility over design outcome since you are starting with a clean site • New space • Located at an established site so clients would be familiar with the service location. Disadvantages to New Construction • Development timeline longer • The Whitted Building renovation after DSS is relocated would be more expensive and less predictable than renovating the same amount of space at the Mayo Street site. Next Steps: Human Services • State option preference, citing additional information that may be needed before staff presents item for formal BOCC approval; OR • Outline additional options to be vetted by staff and presented to BOCC at future date Commissioner Nelson asked how a renovated Wal-Mart would feel like for a working space. He is trying to understand how it would work for employees and citizens. Pam Jones said that it is a shell of a building with 56,000 square feet of wide- open space. There could be a central atrium with street-scaping on the inside. There are a lot of options for the inside. She said that the feel of the building could be easily changed. Commissioner Gordon distributed some information with questions, which is attached and hereby made a part of these minutes. Commissioner Nelson asked about how this location would work as far as people getting to the site, as opposed to the Southern Human Services Center. Social Services Director Nancy Coston said that location is a concern in making sure that both locations have good access. She made reference to a letter from the Social Services Board that it is essential that there be a minimum of 5,000 square feet at the Southern Human Services Center. The other site would have to be totally accessible. Commissioner Nelson said that when the Southern Human Services Center site was first built, he had concerns about accessibility, but moving the services to Hillsborough concerns him more. There are transportation issues to consider. Pam Jones said that there were no transit services at the Southern Human Services Center when the County moved in, but there are now. She said that the hope is that the transit system will improve between Chapel Hill and Hillsborough. Health Director Rosemary Summers said that she is not proposing a smaller satellite site. There must be access at both ends of the County because 50% of the service population comes to each site. Commissioner Gordon said that she did not think that the Board made decisions at work sessions and questioned whether we were going to finalize plans for DSS and the Health Department. Laura Blackmon said that the staff is looking for direction to bring back the CIP on February 5th Commissioner Gordon said that what she passed out was additional information she would like to have added on to the charts presented on January16th. She went through her handout with questions for the staff. She pointed out that the Health Department stated a need for 30,000 square feet at the northern location, and if 59,000 square feet is renovated, then this is more than is needed. If only 30,000 square feet is renovated, then it would only cost $6 million as opposed to $11.8 million. Pam Jones said that it is not known what will go into the Whitted Building, but the rest of the building would be used. Commissioner Gordon asked if the upfit for Wal-Mart would be $35.50 per square feet. She said that this plan is attempting to meet 2020 needs by 2012, and this is not necessary. She asked about possible staging so that costs could be phased over a period of time. Commissioner Gordon asked about the appraised value at the tax office of the shopping center. Her main question is whether these are the right numbers for the costs. She said that if all of the space at Whitted did not need to be renovated right away, then $6 million would be saved. Laura Blackmon said that Pam Jones would have to look at numbers and there may be some reimbursements not included in Commissioner Gordon's figures. Chair Jacobs asked Laura Blackmon if she was looking for a response from the Board about what to include in the CIP and Laura Blackmon said yes. Commissioner Carey said that both the Social Services Board and the Board of Health came to the conclusion that the lease purchase option better served them. He said that this should be included in the direction to the staff about the CIP. Commissioner Foushee agreed. Commissioner Nelson said that he wants to hear from the public. Chair Jacobs said that he respected both boards' decisions. He also thinks that there is something to be said for doing some of the adaptation of a building that is not green, rather than disrupting a site that already has issues, such as the Southern Human Services Center. He said that Carolina North will also increase transit between Hillsborough and Chapel Hill by 2020. Commissioner Gordon noted the materials presented to the two boards, and the time constraints for making their decisions. Both boards wanted assurance that they would get additional space and also they heard that the building option would take five years. She also made reference to her question at the last work session about the option for an addition of 25, 000 square feet to the Southern Human Services Center, which would be available soon, and then 50,000 square foot of new space at a later time. She has not received a response to this question. • Overview of currently dedicated Capital Investment Revenues - Reference slides 3 through 5 of this handout Donna Coffey discussed the dedicated Capital Investment Plan Revenues and said that she used fiscal year 2009-2010, because 2008-2009 would not give a full year for these revenues. At this time, there is $41 million dedicated to County and school capital. Of that, $27.3 million is being paid out on debt service each year. The remaining $13.6 million is used for pay-as-you-go capital projects. She said that the current capital funding policy says that the dedicated property tax for recurring capital is 4 cents - 3 cents for school recurring capital, and 1 cent for County recurring. Right now 2 cents is budgeted for the schools. She has not assumed an increase for 2009-2010. Projected County Capital Revenues for Fiscal Year 2009-10 Per County Capital Funding Policy(1) (graph) The summary of the graph is as follows: $23.2 million for property tax dedicated to repay school and County debt service; $3 million for property tax dedicated to school and County recurring capital; $9.6 million for Articles 40 and 42 sales taxes dedicated to repay school and County debt and fund projects; $1 million for public school building funds dedicated to repay school debt service; $2.1 million for school construction impact fees dedicated to repay school debt service; and $2 million for proceeds from NC Education Lottery dedicated to school projects. Commissioner Foushee asked about the lottery projections and Donna Coffey said that she has not assumed any growth in the lottery for the next ten years. Chair Jacobs asked about the public building school funds and Donna Coffey said that the State has only taken $500,000 so far, but she thinks it may all be taken by the State. Laura Blackmon said that at the TJCOG Manager's meeting today they heard about some actions of the State and the potential for counties to have the option of financing construction and maintenance of local roads. This will have a serious impact on the budget. Clarifying questions of the County Commissioners were answered by the staff. Allocation of Pay-As-You-Go Capital Revenue Per Current Practice (1) Fiscal Year 2009-10 Revenue Projections Used for Illustrative Purposes (graph) Schools Per Current Practice - $10.1 million County Per Current Practice - $3.4 million • Review funded County projects - Reference pages 1-7(bottom part) through 1-10 of 2008-18 C/P Laura Blackmon said that staff needs direction on these County capital projects regarding which projects are too far out; or which ones the Board wants to bring in closer. Commissioner Gordon made reference to #18-Animal Services Facility Construction, and said that the price has gone up from $7.7 million to $8.8 million and asked for an explanation. Pam Jones said that the project includes all of the owner's responsibilities and the CMR at risk is only for the cost of the building, which is $8 million. The number has gone up significantly. She said that they have cut everything in the animal services project that was not deemed core services. She said that it is not just a kennel, but operating rooms, etc. She said that the committee that was appointed to plan the facility pursued best practices all the way through. The previous number of$7.7 million was just the construction, and the $8.87 million includes the design costs, land, permit fees, drilling a well, some furnishings, etc. Commissioner Carey said that he was a member of the planning committee, and the members were knowledgeable and wanted to make sure the animals as well as the public were being served. Chair Jacobs was also on the planning committee and he said that the Board told the committee that it should give its best recommendation. The consultant specialized in animal shelters and the goal for Animal Services is to have a 50% adoption rate of adoptable animals. It is also designed so that the staff feels like it is a pleasant space, with a meeting room. Pam Jones said that the increase is also due to some site work because the County has to get out of the present facility by the end of 2008. Commissioner Foushee made reference to #31 on page 1-8, Efland Sewer Extension Construction, and #54 on page 1-9, Fairview Park. She asked if the available funding indicates that these projects would be able to be completed by the end of the fiscal year, since none of the funds are carried forward to future years. Pam Jones said that Fairview Park would be under construction and so would the Efland sewer. Commissioner Foushee said that for Fairview, the funds have been available for many years and it is hard to explain to the public why they are not being completed. She said that it would be helpful to get status reports on the Efland sewer and Fairview Park periodically. Chair Jacobs said that he has been asking for updates on the Efland sewer for a long time and it infuriates him. He said that he went out there with the County Engineer and told people that it would be done in 2007, and construction has not even begun. Commissioner Carey said that the costs go up more the longer they wait. Commissioner Nelson made reference to #37 and asked if technology for the Register of Deeds was included in this Information Technology item. Donna Coffey said that this has been included in debt service, but not in this IT item. She said that the debt service has already been calculated in the alternative financing, and Laura Blackmon said that it should be in the IT item. Commissioner Nelson made reference to #64, Twin Creeks Park, and said that there is an expectation in the community that this park will be built. Laura Blackmon said that this list is what is currently funded with pay-as-you-go funds. The next thing to look at would be unfunded projects. Commissioner Nelson made reference to #74, Reserve for Library Task Force Implementation, and said that he wants to fully fund this project. Chair Jacobs made reference to #34, Government Services Center Annex Renovations, and asked about the completion date of 2007 on page 2-33. Donna Coffey said that this should be 2009. Commissioner Gordon made reference to the Government Services Center annex and said that, as the County is constructing or buying additional buildings, the County is emptying out buildings without any clear indication as to what will happen to these facilities. She asked about the overall plan for the vacant buildings and if the County would be getting any money out of the buildings. Pam Jones said that she wants to give the Board of County Commissioners a list of those facilities that the County no longer needs and think about divesting of them. She said that the court street annex and the Government Services Center annex are critical to providing the court space that is desperately needed. Chair Jacobs said that the Board needs a list of all properties that Orange County owns with an analysis of compliance, age, usage, structural issues, etc. He said that he would move money from annex renovations into the Purchasing and Central Services space for the Heritage Center. He is talking about moving the $205,000 from #34 to 2008-09 for#35 for the purposes of discussion. Commissioner Gordon said that she would have to think about this, but she could flag it for purposes of future discussion. Discussion ensued on this option. Laura Blackmon flagged it for discussion. Laura Blackmon said that another question to think about is whether the Board wants to continue to retain this building, which currently houses Purchasing, or should the County divest of it. Commissioner Gordon made reference to #24, County Campus Purchase, and asked about the $700,000 added for this year. Pam Jones said that this was added for the moving of the department and inventory. Commissioner Gordon asked if the $25.7 million would be enough for this project and Pam Jones said that the developer has agreed to hold the price as of now. There was an addition to the contract to this effect. Commissioner Gordon made reference to #37, Information Technology, and said that she did not completely understand how much was or was not included in this, but whatever it is, there should be a plan for Information Technology. Laura Blackmon said that there should be a master plan for Information Technology. She said that the replacement of the revenue software is not listed in these figures. Commissioner Gordon made reference to #39, Justice Facility (including New Courthouse Renovations), and asked if the $700,000 for 2009-2010 was enough. Pam Jones said that this was additional work such as moving staff from one location to another and furniture. Commissioner Gordon said that she wanted to reiterate her concern about completing the parks development that has been planned. Chair Jacobs said that he would like to find money in the CIP for conservation easements, #48, because the money runs out in 2007-08 and there is no funding in sight. Donna Coffey made reference to page 5-9 and said that there is a reserve set up for future land purchases, which could include conservation easements. Chair Jacobs said that the last time this was discussed, both he and Commissioner Gordon said that they wanted to move this money from the reserve to conservation easements. Commissioner Gordon clarified that she wanted to move money to the Lands Legacy item. Laura Blackmon made reference to #71 and said that there is some money in the Reserve for Future Land Purchases. Commissioner Gordon said that she is concerned about the Lands Legacy program, and she wants to flag this for additional funding. Chair Jacobs made reference to #69, Reserve for Art in County Facilities, and said that it is such a petty amount that it seems silly to list it. He said that the Board discussed having some sort of understanding to incorporate public art into the County buildings without setting an amount. Laura Blackmon said that if the desire is to do outdoor art, then it is a small amount, but if the Board wants to do an art collection in facilities, then it might be enough. She thinks that there should be a program developed for this. Chair Jacobs said that, at this point, it is probably more reasonable to have some kind of understanding that County facilities will incorporate public art in all new facilities, and he thought this was the conversation. Commissioner Gordon made reference to #43, Planning and Ag Building Renovations, and flagged this to make sure these are the right amounts and times. She also flagged #62, Smith Middle School and #76, Reserve for Northside Human Services. She wants to know what will be done in these projects. Commissioner Gordon said that if the Board is going to try and make the case that more money is needed from the local revenue options, and the County is now building up space that it is not using, then the public will not support additional funds for capital. Laura Blackmon said that on the gold sheet there are items that are unfunded projects for schools and the County. She made reference to the PowerPoint, as shown below: • Preliminary discussion of funding options for unfunded County and School projects - Reference goldenrod colored handouts Summary of Unfunded County and Schools' Capital needs- FY-2008-2018 Summary Unfunded County Capital Needs - FY 2008-2018 - Unfunded Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Capital Needs - FY 2008- 2018 Unfunded Orange County Schools Capital Needs • Choices for possible uses of Local Revenue Options - Reference pages 6 through 13 of this handout o Anticipated Revenue From Local Revenue Options o Possible Uses of Local Revenue Options o Capital Revenue Fully Funding Capital Funding Policy o Impact of New Revenue Options for Funding Identified Unfunded Needs o Additional Debt Service County Can Issue Between 2009-10 and 2013-14 o Cost Comparison of$3 Million Project Debt Funded Compared to Pay-As- You-Go Funds Anticipated Revenue from Local Revenue Options • %4 Cent Sales Tax — $3 million • .4% Land Transfer Tax — $4.1 million Possible Uses of Local Revenue Options-Presented by the Manager • Option 1 - Fully fund County Capital Funding Policy • Policy allows for Board to allocate 4 cents to School (3 cents) and County (1 cent) recurring capital projects • Due to financial constraints in past, Board has only been able to allocate 2 cents to School projects and no monies to County projects — Dedicate new monies from Local Revenue Options above equivalent of 2 cents on tax rate to new debt service • Would offset anticipated increases in future tax rate and annual operating budget to cover new debt costs — County would rely on excess over 2 cents to pay for growth Possible Uses of Local Revenue Options • Option 2 — Fully fund County Capital Funding Policy • Policy allows for Board to allocate 4 cents to School (3 cents) and County (1 cent) recurring capital projects • Due to financial constraints in past, Board has only been able to allocate 2 cents to School projects and no monies to County projects — Dedicate new monies from Local Revenue Options above equivalent of 2 cents on tax rate to offset annual operating costs associated with opening new School and County projects — County would rely on excess over 2 cents to pay annual recurring expenses Possible Uses of Local Revenue Options • Option 3 — Dedicate new monies from Local Revenue Options to offset repayment of annual debt service associated School and County projects • Debt service currently paid from dedicated property and sales tax — Redirect freed up monies to annual operating budget to offset future increases — County would use freed up monies to mitigate future tax rate increases Capital Revenue Fully Funding Capital Funding Policy Fiscal Year 2009-10 Revenue Projections Used for Illustrative Purposes (graph) Impact of New Revenue Options for Funding Identified Unfunded Needs Reference: Goldenrod Colored Handout • Orange County • Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools • Orange County Schools Additional Debt Service County Can Issue Between 2009-10 and 2013-14 • Based on County's Debt Management Policy — 15% of Total General Fund — Assumes annual General Fund growth at 7% • Reference Appendix B-2 in 2008-18 CIP • Additional face value debt of$190-195 Million • With anticipated new annual debt service of$16.5 Million by fiscal year 2013-14 if all debt capacity used • Cumulative impact on tax rate between 10 and 12 cents on tax rate for debt service only • Does not include additional cost for operations of new capital facilities Cost Comparison of$3 Million Project Debt Funded Compared to Pay-As-You-Go (graph) Laura Blackmon asked the Board to think about this before the February 7th budget work session. Commissioner Nelson thanked the staff for laying these options out. He said that he looks at these politically and how to get people to support them. He said that the realtors are going to be coming out against the options. He wants to couch this to the voters as money for the schools from the local revenue option because it is a clearer argument. He said that if it passes, then the money will go to the schools and free up money for the County. He said that this needs to be crystallized for the public. He wants to keep the conversation very straightforward. Donna Coffey said that tonight the staff wanted to make sure the Board of County Commissioners understood the options as they go out to educate the public. Commissioner Gordon made reference to Appendix A (unfunded capital needs) and the senior center expansions on page 1. She wants to flag these items (#2, 5, 6, 7) for future funding because the senior population is expanding rapidly, and we need to plan ahead for future senior facilities, just as we do for schools. She would also like to flag for funding #31 Twin Creeks Park. #39 Carrboro High School additions, #42 Culbreth Middle School science labs and #43 Elementary School #11. Laura Blackmon said that even though there are some unfunded projects, there will be discussion about bonding. Commissioner Gordon asked clarifying questions about debt capacity, which were answered by Donna Coffey. Commissioner Gordon made reference to the strategy for local revenue options and said that you almost need to treat it like a bond referendum in the sense that you explain what you are going to do with the money. The projects need to be identified for the public. Laura Blackmon said that this would mean that the County would have to continually identify projects for the money, unless it is identified that the money will only be used for school operating, school capital, or others. Chair Jacobs said that the Board will have the opportunity to discuss this at least one or two more times. Commissioner Carey said that he would like to get some public comment on the options before they are adopted. It was answered that there would be a public hearing on February Stn A motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to adjourn the meeting at 10:01 pm. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Barry Jacobs, Chair Donna S. Baker, CMC Clerk to the Board