HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 20080311 APPROVED 613/2008
Orange County Board of County Commissioners
WORK SESSION
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
7:30 pm
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Work Tuesday, March 11, 2008
at 7:30 p.m. at the Link Government Services Center in Hillsborough, N.C.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Barry Jacobs and Commissioners Moses
Carey, Jr., Valerie Foushee, Alice M. Gordon, and Mike Nelson
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geof Gledhill
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Laura Blackmon, Assistant County
Managers Willie Best and Gwen Harvey, and Clerk to the Board Donna S. Baker (All other staff
members will be identified appropriately below)
7:36pm
Commissioner Gordon asked that there be a resolution at the March 18th meeting in
remembrance of Eve Carson (UNC student body president that was killed).
1. Discussion Regarding Proposed Distribution Formula for Land Transfer Tax
Proceeds
Laura Blackmon said that this is staff's revision of the resolution (yellow sheet). The
staff would like to put this on the March 18th agenda at the beginning of the meeting so that the
Board can formally approve it at a public, live meeting.
Chair Jacobs asked the Board for comments and there were none on the resolution.
Laura Blackmon said that the Board had approved the Statement of Intent and in the
draft resolution about using the proposed land transfer tax for currently unfunded or under-
funded school and park projects. She said that Budget Director Donna Coffey estimated the
funding generated during the first year as $3.5 million. The chart indicates that 60% would go to
the school and 40% would go to the County. She asked for the Board's direction for this
distribution of funds from the land transfer tax proceeds.
Commissioner Nelson asked about the formula and Laura Blackmon said that this is
based on current policy and could be part of the education campaign, but this is really the
distribution based on current policy for the Board to consider when looking at unfunded projects.
Donna Coffey agreed and said that the formula would have too much information for voters and
this is more of an internal function for staff.
Commissioner Nelson asked about the 60-40 split and said that it is not consistent with
the policy because the 60-40 is between the schools and all other County projects, and this is
talking about 60-40 between the schools and parks.
Donna Coffey said that she considers parks part of the County. Laura Blackmon said
that every year, there is a 60-40 split, and some years the projects lean in different directions.
Laura Blackmon said that there was discussion with the schools about using this to pay
back debt service in order to give the schools more flexibility.
Commissioner Nelson said that the 40% County allocation goes for everything. He said
that 40% in this case is increasing the slice of the pie for parks.
Commissioner Nelson asked several clarifying questions that were answered by Laura
Blackmon and Donna Coffey.
Commissioner Nelson said that he believes that there is not a clear rationale articulated
for a 60-40 split, other than it is a formula similar to what is used in a different set of
circumstances. Laura Blackmon said that this is a new additional revenue source that is being
put into the pot, and the pot is split the same.
Geof Gledhill said that if the Board adopts the resolution, it will say what Commissioner
Nelson is saying —the County would be earmarking 40% for parks.
Commissioner Gordon made reference to the "Now, Therefore, Be it Resolved"
statements and said that she envisioned that when they went to the voters, they would tell the
voters some of the actual under-funded projects. She thinks that these statements would
confuse people because it does not state what will be done in the near future.
Donna Coffey said that this issue is part of the package for the next Board of County
Commissioners' meeting.
Commissioner Gordon said to hold this discussion until tomorrow night. She wants to
tell the voters exactly what this funding is going to be used for.
Commissioner Carey said that it would be a terrible mistake to start changing the capital
funding policy just because there is a new revenue source envisioned. He said that 40% in the
past has not just been parks. He said that the parks may consume most of the 40% funds,
because they are expensive. At some point, the County will have caught up on park
development and then it will free up funds for other projects. Until that time, the Board should
keep its 60-40 policy.
Commissioner Foushee said that the immediate concern is acquiring the additional
revenue stream, and in order to do that, the Board has to ensure that the public understands
that the County will spend any acquired funds on the immediate schools and capital needs. The
trend is that when the funds are not there, the park projects and others are pushed outward in
the capital plan. She said that the public needs to understand how the County will spend the
funds. The 60-40 plan is simply an internal direction to staff to know how to move the monies
when they are acquired. She thinks that it has been communicated clearly that the Board plans
to spend this money, if acquired, on school and park projects. To change the policy now does
not serve the Board well.
Chair Jacobs said that he made a list of park projects— Twin Creeks, another phase of
the Northern Park, another phase of the Fairview Park, Blackwood Farm, another phase for
West Ten (tennis and playground components), second phase of Julia Blackwood Farm, Kirby
property, McGowan Creek Preserve, and Seven Mile Creek Preserve. He said that it will be
awhile before the County depletes the needs for park development. He said that he agreed with
Commissioner Gordon in that they need to talk about these projects so that everyone
understands that they have a stake in this new revenue source and that there is a benefit to the
public.
Commissioner Nelson said that he is not advocating a change in policy, but he views
what is in the resolution as a change in the policy because of how it plays out in the practical
sense —that parks would be getting 40% and that is not what they are getting now because
there are other projects. He wants to avoid a change in policy and he wants a rationale for the
60-40 that's proposed.
Commissioner Foushee said that she does not see the County using the 40% for only
park projects over a number of years.
Commissioner Gordon said that she does not see any disconnect between what they are
all saying. She said that she just wants to list the projects that would be funded.
Chair Jacobs asked Donna Coffey to flag the most appropriate projects to mention as
needing immediate funding.
Laura Blackmon said that the resolution specifically states parks and she is not sure
what the process would be if it needed to be changed.
Commissioner Foushee said that it should follow the first statement of the resolution that
says, "parks and other County capital needs."
Commissioner Carey said that the second "be it resolved" addresses that issue.
Laura Blackmon introduced the new Financial Services Director, Gary Humphries.
2. Smart Growth 1 Green Building Report, Pervious Pavement, and OWASA's Water
Conservation Initiative
Planning Director Craig Benedict introduced various staff members from his department.
He said the smart growth and green building initiatives goes back to the Board of County
Commissioners appointing a staff committee to pursue specific objectives and one of the
objectives is to look at the smart growth/green building. He summarized the abstract, as shown
below:
A. Smart Growth/Green Building Standards (Attachment#1)
The BOCC adopted two objectives under its Environmental Responsibility Goal on December 5,
2005. The first objective is to develop a countywide environmental leadership policy and
institute a standing Environmental Action Committee. The Environmental Action Committee has
been meeting since May 2006. The second objective is to continue, expand, and formally adopt
the use of green building standards; and to construct new facilities and deconstruct outdated
facilities in a way that is eco-friendly, utilizes energy conserving measures, and minimizes
impacts on the environment. At the January 19, 2007 BOCC Retreat, the Board accented its
interest in these topics.
On April 12, 2007, the BOCC adopted five priorities to enhance the implementation of the green
building standards objective of its Environmental Responsibility Goal. In response to the five
priorities, staff suggested the following objectives:
1. Research and make suggestions for green building standards through the
Comprehensive Plan process and Planning and Inspections Department regulations for
both public and private sector development by the end of 2007.
2. Participate in education and certification of LEED guidelines through training of Building
and Planning employees in order to provide in-house education of the general public and
private sector builders. 2008
3. Adopt `smart growth' principles of land development and site planning including low
impact design' guidelines in appropriate sectors of County policy by the end of 2008.
4. Adopt `smart growth' principles of land development and site planning including low
impact design' guidelines in planning and erosion control regulations by the end of 2008.
5. Implement green building standards through the Planning and Inspections Department,
Building Division regulations for both public and private sectors development beginning
in 2009.
A task force of private homebuilders, local private utilities, designers, members of the County
energy conservation team, and representatives from the Town of Hillsborough, County Planning
and Inspections staff met numerous times in the Fall of 2007 to address green building
concepts the result of this effort was the development of recommendations for this Smart
Growth 1 Green Building Report.
Issue:
There are at least seventy-seven (77) different "green building" programs available nationally.
Two (2) have appeared to have risen to the top in their application in Orange County, the
USGBC LEED standards for Homes and New Development, and the US Home Builders
Association National Green Building Standards. Both programs address the same energy and
ecologically based topics, recycling, non-potable water sources for irrigation, pervious
pavement, site selection and disturbance, but each in their own way. Third-party certification is
common to both. A combination of both will enhance Orange County's Zoning Ordinance and
Subdivision Regulations.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS:
The Task Force concluded that 'Green Building' standards should be a phased implementation
program to include all building construction, demolition and remodeling in Orange County.
Phase I: Education - Fall 2008
a) Provide funding through the budgetary process and grant proposals for a 'Green
Building' educational outreach program, with staff training and certification in an
established 'Green Building' program such as LEED or Green Globe.
b) Implement an educational outreach program on 'Green Building' techniques and
incentives for designers, architects, engineers, developers, building contractors and
homeowner builders interested in obtaining permits for construction or demolition in
Orange County through partnership between County Inspections Division staff trained in
'Green Building' certification and the local Home Builder's Association.
Phase II: Public funded mandates/Private funded voluntary-July 2009
a) Require mandatory compliance and certification with an established Green Building
program for all publicly funded structures in Orange County.
b) Adopt zoning ordinance regulations to limit site disturbance, limit non-native
landscaping, limit irrigation types, and require pervious parking surfacing and shading for
publicly and privately funded commercial structures and multi-family residential
properties.
c) Utilize subdivision regulations to limit site disturbance, direct structure orientation on lot,
determine native landscaping options, limit irrigation types, require construction debris
recycling and compliance with the Upper Neuse Site Evaluation Tool.
d) Institute incentive based voluntary compliance program with EPA 'Energy Star' and
'Green Building' techniques for all residential construction both one and two family
dwellings, and multi-family (apartments, condominiums).
Phase III:Assessment and Possible Private Sector Mandate - Fall 2010
a) Require mandatory compliance with EPA 'Energy Star' for all residential buildings,
publicly or privately funded.
b) Evaluate both mandatory (EPA Energy Star) and voluntary (LEED, Green Globes,
NCHBA) programs at the end of 2010 and report on progress to date, with
recommendations for increase of voluntary compliance incentives or possible mandatory
requirements for one-and two-family and multi-family residential dwellings.
B. Pervious Pavement
On February 13, 2008, representatives from the Planning Department (2), Erosion Control (2),
Inspections (1), Purchasing (1), and the County Manager's Office (1) met with a private resident
to listen to a teleconference on practical applications of pervious pavement. Attached is a copy
of the PowerPoint presentation from the February 13th session.
While pervious pavement can take many forms, the example presented was a "no-fines"
concrete. The material, when poured in place, resembles a Rice Krispies treat. The material
has 15 to 25% void space with a porosity ranging from 150 to 400 inches per hour. The
pervious pavement can be used in residential situations for driveways, sidewalks, and patios,
and in commercial, industrial, and institutional applications as sidewalks, trails, sports courts in
combination with plastic grids, parking surfaces, drive aisles, and roadways. For parking lot
drive aisles and roadways, pervious pavement requires additional material strength. Increasing
material strength reduces porosity.
With a granular sub-base and a stormwater collection system, pervious concrete paving can
provide innovative approaches to low-impact designs for residential and commercial
development. The application can be cost effective and may result in more ecologically
sensitive development.
Issue:
The North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) does not
recognize typical pervious concrete pavement as a viable method to treat stormwater quantity
and quality in the Piedmont region. The fine particles that make up the majority of Piedmont
soils do not allow the stormwater that passes through pervious pavement to readily infiltrate into
the ground. Additionally, fine particle sediment can clog permeable pavement if not maintained
correctly. Therefore, porous pavement may still be considered impervious by NCDENR because
of the nature of the tight clay soils found throughout Orange County.
However, even with clay soils, pervious pavement can have benefits if engineered with a
collection system below the pavement. Using pervious pavement in this manner may reduce
the size or amount of stormwater management facilities required and can filter out many solid
materials and pollutants suspended in stormwater runoff typically found in the "first flush" of any
stormwater event. Oils and greases, heavy metals, sediments, fertilizers, and air-borne
deposits typically pollute stormwater. With pervious pavement, the rainwater is spread more
evenly over the entire parking lot and stormwater percolates through interconnected voids,
rather than concentrating runoff into a pond. The presenter claims a 90% suspended solid
removal from pervious concrete.
The pervious concrete surface has good skid resistance and is easy to maintain. The surface
is lighter in color and reflects sunlight better than a typical asphalt surface. This factor
addresses the "heat island" effect of large asphalt parking lots. Pervious concrete paving can
meet the US Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
standards because it can reduce stormwater runoff, it is composed of recycled materials, it can
use regional materials, and it addresses urban heat island effects.
Pervious concrete is five to ten percent more expensive per cubic feet than conventional paving;
however, installation costs less because smaller crews are needed and the equipment is less
costly. Further, site costs can be less because stormwater treatment facilities can be smaller.
Tight Orange County clay soils do not allow credit for pervious paving. The watershed
impervious cover standards do not need to change. However, pervious paving could be a key
feature of green building standards suggested in an earlier staff report "Orange Turning Green."
Stormwater flowing from residential driveways and sidewalks could be collected and used for
lawn and landscaping irrigation and precluding the need to use potable water sources for
irrigation. Further, pervious paving can be an essential element in low-impact design, which is a
more specific application of LEED New Development and Home Builders' Green Building
Standards development standards.
Pat Davis from OWASA went through the following section. He said that some of
the recommendations would involve OWASA taking a fairly significant proactive role in
promoting conservation in development. The first recommendation that came out of these
discussions and subsequent consideration by the OWASA Board with input from its General
Counsel, was that OWASA as a utility should require state-of-the-art water use efficiency
measures and conservation planning for all new development or redevelopment as a condition
of receiving water and sewer service from OWASA. OWASA believes that it should be
mandating whatever is possible in terms of water use efficiency. OWASA's attorney has
advised that it has the inherent right as a utility to establish more stringent water use efficiency
requirements for new development. There might even be an inherent right to require existing
development to retrofit as a change of service occurs.
Other recommendations include local governments serving as models for behavior such
as incorporating water use efficiency in all new development and retrofitting existing public
facilities. He said that Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and the schools have been
leaders in this. Another long-term recommendation would be to look at landscape ordinance
provisions and see if there are some things to do to promote more sustainable landscaping.
Regarding long-term issues, OWASA is developing a reclaimed water system in
partnership with UNC-CH and this is under construction. It will be online in March of 2009.
OWASA would like the local governments to consider having reclaimed water ordinances in
place that would require connections to the reclaimed water system so that new development
can benefit from the system as a way of meeting non-drinking water demands.
The Board of Directors at its meeting on February 14th concurred with the overall
recommendations, and this letter will be coming forward to the BOCC. OWASA is asking for the
BOCC's concurrence that it is on the right track and that it is fully in agreement that the County
staff continues to be at the table helping OWASA developing conditions of service possibilities,
implementation plans, roles and responsibilities, and the funding requirements.
C. Water Conservation (Attachments#2 and 3)
County staff, along with representatives from the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill, has been
working with OWASA staff to make suggestions for water conservation priorities and initiatives.
The draft of that report is attached to this abstract. The final adopted revision may not be
available for this BOCC work session. However, the difference in the two documents is some
clarifying detail in the recommendations, and not the recommendations themselves.
Obviously, most of the emphasis of the report focuses on public water supplies and not wells.
Orange County is only affected as a water customer. However, the need to develop incentives
and/or requirements for water saving fixtures and devices, retro-fitting governmental and school
district facilities, sustainable landscaping, retro-fitting private residences at the point of sale, and
prohibiting homeowners associations from not allowing innovative water conservation measures
for private residences are all worth discussing at the County level.
Phase I of the Green Building Standards will accomplish the first Near-Term OWASA
recommendation. The second and third recommendations essentially reflect current BOCC
policy.
The first Longer-Term recommendation has no direct application to Orange County. The last
two recommendations could be made part of Phase III, because the local government may not
have sufficient legal authority to enforce them and state enabling legislation may be required.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: LEED certification and other green building training would be
approximately $2,000 per staff member. Staff recommends two Inspections staff members and
one Planning staff member be trained in LEED certification. Initiation of the Smart Growth 1
Green Building Report will result in savings to County daily operations and to private residents
from energy savings, both in actual dollars and in reduced environmental costs.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board receive the reports and
direct staff regarding proposals for regulatory and educational opportunities related to Smart
Growth and Green Building guidelines, pervious pavement, and the OWASA water conservation
priorities and initiatives.
Commissioner Nelson said that the Governor came out with a proposal about water
conservation measures and one proposal is for homeowners to use reclaimed water for
irrigation purposes. He made reference to OWASA possibly going over the state building code
and Geof Gledhill said that what Pat Davis is talking about is not a state building code but it is
OWASA's service requirements in order to use its water. Pat Davis said that it would be a
condition of service to get access to OWASA's service.
Pat Davis clarified that reclaimed water is treated wastewater that is further treated and
sent through pipelines and gray water is like dish water that could be used for toilet flushing,
irrigation, etc.
Clarifying questions were asked about grey and reclaimed water, which Pat Davis
answered.
Chair Jacobs asked about Carolina North and Pat Davis said that UNC is saying that the
buildings for Carolina North will need to be dual plumbed for reclaimed water. He said that
there is consensus that there would be installation of a water reuse facility that would be located
on Carolina North and would be designed to be expandable to provide reclaimed water to the
high school/middle school/elementary school complex.
Commissioner Carey asked about Attachment 3 and Craig Benedict said that the top of
the list is what is in the state building code, and the more enhanced water conservation
measures are some of the considerations.
Code Required Water Conservation Measures For New Construction
• Lavatories (private) —2.2 gpm
• Lavatories (public) - .5 gpm
• Lavatories (public, metered) - .25gallon per metering cycle
Metered fixtures required for assembly occupancies, school occupancies in student use
restrooms, in all occupancies with 6 or more lavatories
• Shower head — 2.5 gpm
• Sink faucet—2.2 gpm
• Urinal — 1.0 gal. per flushing cycle
• Water closet— 1.6 gallons per flush
Optional Water Conservation Measures
• Install on-demand tankless water heaters
• Provide circulation pump for hot water piping from conventional water heater to keep
warm water in piping system
• Insulate hot water piping to reduce heat loss
• Install conventional water heaters as close as possible to bathrooms and kitchen
• Use "Energy Star" water conserving appliances, e.g., dishwasher, washing machine
• Use shut-off valve, motion sensor, or pedal activated faucet to enable intermittent on/off
operation
• Use ultra low flow water closets (< 1.6 gals. per flush),
e.g., power assisted and dual flush
• Use low volume, non spray irrigation systems such as drip, bubblers, drip emitters,
soaker hose, and stream rotator spray heads
• Zone irrigations systems separately for turf and bedding areas
• Use weather based irrigation controllers or rain sensors
• Provide rainwater harvesting systems for irrigation
• Provide grey water recycling systems as permitted by code for flushing fixtures
• Use waterless urinals as permitted by code.
• Design landscaping using drought resistant shrubs and plants to minimize the need for
irrigation.
Commissioner Gordon made reference to unincorporated Orange County and asked
how this will work. There is a question about use requirements for wells. Some people are
drilling wells just for irrigation. Craig Benedict said that there will probably be an urban and a
rural model. They would have to examine rural areas and how they can monitor for
groundwater recharge.
Commissioner Gordon pointed out that 30-40% of Orange County residents are on
wells.
Chair Jacobs said that part of the Governor's proposal is some kind of tax incentive so
that people could retrofit.
Laura Blackmon said that staff is looking at County buildings and funds would need to
be budgeted for retrofitting.
Chair Jacobs said that he does not think the County did well with the Seymour Center
and the water fixtures. He wants to lead by example.
Chair Jacobs made reference to page 14 and the parking lots and asked if the upfit for
the old Wal-Mart could have pervious pavement and Craig Benedict said that it could be used
on sidewalks. Chair Jacobs said that there is no walkway there right now and Craig Benedict
said that this could be considered in the mix.
Commissioner Nelson said that he likes to do pervious surface projects in the eastern
part of the state, but they are very difficult and expensive here. He said that there are other
things to do for run-off. He said that there are also maintenance issues associated with
pervious surfaces.
Craig Benedict continued with the presentation and said that the Home Builder's
Association has a green building program and staff is looking at the Energy Star Program.
Energy Star is embedded within some of the LEED standards. The main thing with any green
building program is whether it is working and if someone is verifying it.
Chair Jacobs made reference to page 13, under Construction Recycling, and suggested
making the first sentence comprehensible. Also, regarding septic tank maintenance, he
suggested looking at homeowners' association agreements for rules that are not
environmentally sensitive (i.e., no air-drying of clothes, requirements for certain types of grass,
etc.).
Commissioner Gordon said that she agreed with doing the Phase 1 education and
seeing how it goes. Regarding Phases 2 and 3, she is not sure what is involved. She said that
the Board of County Commissioners needs to look at what smart growth principles mean.
Laura Blackmon said that staff could come back with a one-year plan for the educational
program and the costs and budgetary implications.
Commissioner Nelson said that, in terms of implementation of the LEEDS or the Green
Globe programs, he would like to hear more about how to clarify this in the County's land use
plan. Craig Benedict said that he would work to give the Board attributes of these programs.
3. County Commissioners: Boards and Commissions Assignments
Clerk to the Board Donna Baker explained the handout, including the master list, task
forces, Ex-Officio, officers, representation, and then individual Board member appointments.
Commissioner Nelson said that last year the Board talked about doing this a different
way. He suggested looking at the way that Carrboro had done it. Donna Baker said that she
looked at Carrboro, and it only has about 10-12 boards. Her impression was, as she looked at
the minutes, was that she did not think that the Board wanted to pursue the way that Carrboro
did it. She can bring it back up again.
Commissioner Nelson said that he thought there was interest in doing it the way that
Carrboro does, which is via email.
Commissioner Gordon said that three new Commissioners may have new ideas.
Chair Jacobs suggested doing it this way for this year, and then figuring out a better way
to do it next year before there is a new Board.
Commissioner Nelson said that he remembers that people were concerned that there
was a history of some confrontation in terms of people wanting the same thing. He agreed with
adopting a different policy before the new Board comes online.
Chair Jacobs suggested that staff provide a report on how Carrboro appoints its boards
and commissions and then decide if it should go on an agenda for adoption.
The following Board assignments were made.
2008 BOCC Assignments-FINAL 3 11 2008
Board Commissioner Terms Served
Advisory Board on Aging (L) Commissioner Gordon 3
Commissioner Carey 1
Affordable Housing Advisory Board (L) Commissioner Foushee 4
Agricultural Preservation Board (L) Commissioner Jacobs 9
Alcoholic Beverage Control Board (L) Commissioner Foushee 2
(non-voting)
Animal Services Advisory Board (M) Commissioner Carey 3
Board of Health (M) Commissioner Carey 6
Chapel Hill/Orange County Visitor's Bureau (M) Commissioner Jacobs 1
Chatham-Orange Work Group (M) Commissioner Gordon 4
Commissioner Jacobs 1
Commission for the Environment (L) Commissioner Gordon 10
Commissioner Nelson 2
Commission for Women (L) Commissioner Nelson 2
Communities in Schools (M) Commissioner Foushee 4
Durham Technical Community College (M) OPEN
Durham-Chapel Hill-Orange Work Group (M) Commissioner Gordon 3
Commissioner Jacobs 9
Economic Development Commission (L) Commissioner Jacobs 7
Commissioner Nelson 1
Fire Chiefs' Association of Orange County (M) Commissioner Jacobs 2
Commissioner Nelson 1
(alt.)
HOME Program Review Committee (M) Commissioner Foushee 4
Housing Bond Program — Project Review and Commissioner Foushee 4
Selection Committee (M)
Human Relations Commission (L) Commissioner Nelson 2
Human Services Advisory Commission (L) Commissioner Foushee 4
Information Technology Advisory Committee (L) Commissioner Nelson 2
Intergovernmental Parks Work Group (M) Commissioner Gordon 6
Commissioner Jacobs 2
International Council for Local Environmental Commissioner Nelson 2
Initiatives (M)
Joint Orange Chatham Community Action Agency Commissioner Carey 17
(M)
NCDOT Quarterly Meetings (M) Commissioner Foushee 2
Commissioner Jacobs 6
OPC Area Board (M) Commissioner Carey 8
Orange Community Housing and Land Trust Board Commissioner Nelson 1
of Directors (M)
Orange County Partnership for Young Children (M) Commissioner Carey 1
Orange Unified Transportation Board (L) Commissioner Gordon 3
Orange/Chatham Justice Partnership Board (M) Commissioner Carey 8
Project Planning Committee (Chapel Hill/Orange Commissioner Gordon 3
County PPC (M)
Recreation and Parks Advisory Council (M) Commissioner Gordon 3
Social Services Board (M) Commissioner Foushee 4
Solid Waste Advisory Board (L) Commissioner Nelson 2
Sportsplex Community Advisory Committee (L) Commissioner Jacobs 3
Transportation Services Board (M) Commissioner Gordon 3
Short Term Taskforces
Air Quality Advisory Committee (M) Commissioner Gordon 2
Animal Shelter Design Committee (M) Commissioner Carey 2
Commissioner Jacobs 2
Animal Tethering Committee Commissioner Nelson 2
Efland-Mebane SAP Implementation Focus Group Commissioner Jacobs 2
(M)
Eno EDD Small Area Plan Taskforce (M) Commissioner Foushee 2
Hillsborough Joint Planning Strategic Growth Commissioner Jacobs 2
Committee (M)-
Hollow Rock Park Planning Taskforce (M) Commissioner Jacobs 2
Commissioner Gordon (alt) 2
IFC Comprehensive Service Center Commissioner Foushee 2
Work Group (M)
IFC Men's Residential Facility Work Group (M) Commissioner Gordon 2
Land Trust Affordable Housing Maintenance Task Commissioner Foushee 2
Force (M)
Library Services Taskforce (M) Commissioner Jacobs 2
Commissioner Nelson 2
New Hope Park at Blackwood Farm Master Commissioner Gordon 2
Planning Taskforce (M) Commissioner Jacobs 2
Rogers Road Small Area Plan Task Force (M) Commissioner Carey 2
Commissioner Foushee 2
School-based Health Center Planning Group Commissioner Carey 1
Solid Waste Management Work Group (M) Commissioner Jacobs 3
Triangle Transit Authority—Special tax Board (M) OPEN —2 members serve
Ten (10) Year Plan to End Homelessness Executive Commissioner Carey 2
Team
Transfer of Development Rights Taskforce (M) Commissioner Jacobs 2
Twin Creeks Workgroup (M) Commissioner Carey 2
Commissioner Gordon 5
Legislative Issue Work Group Commissioner Gordon 1
Commissioner Nelson 1
Ex-Officio (off limits)
Community Leadership Council (M) Chair Serves
Hillsborough/Orange County Chamber of Commerce (L) Chair Serves
NACo Voting Delegate (M) Delegate is chosen by BOCC
NCACC County Legislative Liaison (M) Mike Nelson
Upper Neuse River Basin Association (M) Chair serves
Boards where BOCC members are officers-(off limits)
Durham-Chapel Hill Carrboro Transportation Commissioner Gordon
Advisory Committee (M) Commissioner Carey (alternate)
Triangle J Council of Governments (M) Commissioner Jacobs
Commissioner Gordon (alternate)
TTA Board of Trustees (M) Commissioner Gordon
PlanninglLegislative Committee
Boards without BOCC representation
Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee (L)
Equalization and Review Board (April-June)(M)
Healthy Carolinians (M)
Research Triangle Regional Partnership (M)
Small Business Work Group (M)
Rural Planning Organization —Transportation Advisory Committee (M)
Workforce Development Board — Regional Partnership (M)
Boards without a BOCC seat
Arts Commission
Historic Preservation Commission
Hyconeechee Regional Library
Nursing Home Community Advisory Committee
Orange County Board of Adjustment
Orange County Planning Board
Personnel Hearing Board
Boards to be Sunset
Cable TV Advisory Committee
Carolina North Leadership Advisory Committee
Central Orange Senior Center Design Committee
CHCSS Elementary School #10 Work Group
NC Hwy 57 Speedway Small Area Plan Taskforce
Justice Facilities Exterior Planning Committee
Justice Facilities Interior Planning Committee
Smith Level Road Task Force
The meeting was adjourned at 9:25:25 PM.
Barry Jacobs, Chair
Donna S. Baker, CMC
Clerk to the Board