Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03-21-2013 APPROVED 5/7/2013 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL JOINT MEETING March 21, 2013 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met with the Town of Chapel Hill for a Joint Meeting on Thursday, March 21, 2013 at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill. N.C. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Barry Jacobs and Commissioners Mark Dorosin, Alice M. Gordon, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Earl McKee COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: Annette Moore COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Frank Clifton, Assistants to the Manager Michael Talbert, Clarence Grier and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Mark Kleinschmidt, Ed Harrison, Jim Ward, Lee Storrow, Matt Czajkowski, Donna Bell, Sally Greene CHAPEL HILLTOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Gene Pease and Lauren Easthom CHAPEL HILL STAFF PRESENT: Town Manager Roger Stancil Welcome and Opening Remarks (Mayor Mark Kleinschmidt and Chair Barry Jacobs) Mayor Kleinschmidt welcomed everyone. Chair Jacobs said Commissioner McKee will be unable to attend this evening. Mayor Kleinschmidt said Council Member Easthom would be unable to attend. 1. Review of Rogers Road, including Town's Small Area Plan Assistant County ManagerMichael Talbert said this is a discussion on Rogers Road and noted that the re-assembled Roger's Road Task Force held its first meeting last night. He referenced Attachment 1 and noted that it contains the charge for the Task Force for the next 6 months. He noted that the first item is the installation of water and sewer lines, and he reviewed the charges as follows: • To have the Task Force consider the final costs, provision and installation of water and sewer utility extensions preferably at no cost for members of the Historic Rogers Road Community; • Consider options to address gentrification; • Consider Chapel Hill's most recent Small Area Plan; and • Consider funding options, including the Greene Tract. He said utility districts were the main topic at last night's meeting. Mayor Kleinschmidt noted that this item also relates to item on #5 on the agenda, regarding annexation changes and joint use. He suggested that they may need to bleed the conversations together. He said when the Town of Chapel did the Small Area Planning (SAP) process, it was assumed that there would be an agreement with Orange County and this area would become a part of Chapel Hill. He said it is now known that town initiated annexation is unlikely for any unincorporated parcel in the state. He said that for town services to be provided, the town has legal restrictions with what it can/cannot do outside of the town limits. He said there needs to be a lot of thought, as plans are made for extending urban services into these joint planning areas. He said there are many factors that distinguish this area from a rural area, yet this will never become part of the Town in any Town initiated process. He feels the Board needs to incorporate a response to this into its discussions. He questioned, if it is decided that this will never be part of the Town of Chapel Hill, whether urbanizing this area is a wise effort or not. He questioned whether the Board should consider transitioning this area into the Town through other mechanisms. He said that the neighborhood's continued demand for urban services, like water and sewer, will put development pressure that may lead to voluntary annexation by a developer. Commissioner Dorosin said the Mayor's comments are important context for discussion, but the Board of Commissioners needs to keep in mind that the issues related to Rogers Road come in the form of remediation. He said this makes it more distinct then other ETJ areas and this is a unique issue. Mayor Kleinschmidt said he was just adding this to the conversation. Commissioner Price said Commissioner Rich said they brought the information about this proposed legislation in reference to the elimination of ETJs by the legislature to the meeting yesterday of the Task Force and it was discussed. Mayor Kleinschmidt asked if the task force could be encouraged to add this to their on- going discussions. Commissioner Rich said when the Task Force discussed this last night, it got mixed reviews. She said the bills are coming to the Board of County Commissioners' so quickly these days that County Commissioners often can't meet on time to discuss them so the Board has had to amend how it does business. Commissioner Rich said the reaction of the task force is to have the conversation in spite of the bill and she is not clear on what Mayor Kleinschmidt wants. Council Member Donna Bell arrived at 7:15. Mayor Kleinschmidt said one response would be to come to an agreement on the zoning intensity desired for this area to keep it from becoming an urbanized area outside the city. He said this might be underscored more, instead of just being one of the principals. Commissioner Rich said that would be something the Task Force would be considering in its discussion of gentrification anyway. She asked if he wanted to add the zoning issue to that portion of the charge. Council Member Jim Ward said he does not feel the vision for this area should be changed based on proposed legislation. He said that as this area grows, it will make more sense for that part of the community to be part of Chapel Hill. He said he feels that moving forward, it should be ensured that what is being done with regard to possible utility service districts is legal, even if ETJs get discontinued. He said another question that came up was regarding the fact that there is no ETJ out there; it is a joint planning district and it is unclear if it will be affected by ETJ legislation. Commissioner Dorosin suggested the audience might benefit from an explanation about the proposed legislation. Mayor Kleinschmidt said the first important point is the change in the annexation rule that was enacted last year. He said that in any state with limited ability to grow, even temporarily, it becomes permanent; because the political will to return to thoughtful growth planning never arises. He said the second concern is a more recent piece of legislation that continues to handicap the ability of towns to plan for their future by proposing elimination of ETJ altogether. He said this is a short bill currently before the general assembly, and coupled with other legislation, it would greatly limit the Town's ability to design standards. He said there needs to be thoughtful long term planning for the community. He said the impact of these bills needs to considered, and efforts should be made not to plan for creation of urban areas outside of the town limits. He said another option is to require, when changes occur in their planning areas or zoning, there is a condition of petition for voluntary annexation into the city. Council Member Harrison said it would help if counties made it clear to the General Assembly that this bill is not supported. Chair Jacobs said Orange County is different, partially because the county was able to come up with a joint planning agreement with the municipalities without the "wars" that often occur between elected bodies and citizens. He said the Task force should move forward as planned, regardless of possible legislation. He said there should be more discussions about ETJs and how to plan for these areas. He said the question should be asked, if it is in the best interest of municipalities to incorporate these areas into the urban town limits. He said that, because of the joint planning area, there is more authority to say where water and sewer will and will not go. He noted that the Rogers Road group is not going to report back to the Board of County Commissioners until September, so there is time for future discussion in light of the consequences of the legislation. He suggested more joint planning, especially in light of the Rogers Road process. Council Member Jim Ward said the task force has incorporated OWASA into its discussions. He said the latest plan for that now encompasses more area than just the Historic Rogers Road area. He said this was done to reduce the cost per household. He said there is some pushback, but the intent of the group is to move forward with this kind of design. He said he hopes there will be support for finding a way to fund the water and sewer for Rogers Road and the extended areas. He said that efforts are being made to get some figures for the cost of this. Commissioner Rich said it may be a good idea for staff to share the new map with all elected bodies. She said that the discussion was originally about just the historic area, and now the conversation is about a utility district and includes more homes than proposed before. This does make it more cost efficient. She said there was some push back during the meeting yesterday, so more estimates and a diagram will be presented at the next meeting. Commissioner Price said a lot of this has to do with costs, which is why there was a request for estimates and a diagram. She said that the goals will not be accomplished if the utilities are installed and then people cannot get the service. Council Member Jim Ward said another piece of the puzzle is that the figure of$6 million was for water and sewer to Historic Rogers Road only. He said including the other areas will double the cost, but will triple the coverage. This is where the savings comes in. He said all of the boards need to have this discussion, because this infrastructure is put on the landscape so that most of it is with the Chapel Hill town limits. He said the other parts are in the Orange County and Chapel Hill joint planning area and he questioned what this means for funding. He proposed that the portion that is in Carrboro should be paid for fully by Carrboro; and the portion in Chapel Hill and Orange County needs to be discussed by these two entities. He said the normal population equation will not work for this. He said that this is an issue for the Town and the Board of Commissioners. Commissioner Price said her understanding from the Town of Carrboro was that the 14% would be spread out. She said there has been a request for specific numbers to be presented at the next meeting. Mayor Kleinschmidt said that the Mayor of Carrboro said that their $900,000 will all be spent in the portion of the area in Carrboro. Commissioner Rich said that Carrboro has said that its money will only be spent in Carrboro, regardless of comments by representatives at Rogers Road Committee meetings. She said Carrboro's manager and attorney have made it clear that money is only to be spent in the city limits and on Roger's Road residents in Carrboro only. Commissioner Rich said, regarding the maps, it is important to remember that the utility district does not have to be built in its entirety all at once. She said it can be built in phases with Roger's Road as phase 1. Commissioner Dorosin said he attended the task force meeting, and the residents were encouraged about the commitment to finding funding to make the connections. Council Member Jim Ward said funding is another piece, and one option is to consider the Greene Tract as a funding source. He said there might be some agreement with a joint conversation concerning affordable housing, affordable commercial area, school site, green space, etc. He said this conversation needs to be re-opened and a footprint defined in order to sell to a developer. He said these funds could go toward funding improvements on Rogers Road. 2. Update on Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan (OCBRIP) Implementation Orange County Planning DirectorCraig Benedict said this is an update on the OCBRIP. He noted that the sales tax passed last November and will go into effect April 1 st. He said Triangle Transit is the implementing agency that will handle these funds. He said that Triangle Transit has met with other local transit agencies to begin implementing the OCBRIP. He said the implementation will include Martin Luther King bus route, Light Rail Alignment, Amtrak Station in Hillsborough, as well as some rough funding formulas from the state and local government. He said an additional document, the Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan Interlocal Implementation Agreement, was approved between Orange County, Triangle Transit and the DCHC-MPO (Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization). He said this implementation agreement has a staff working group and includes all the local governments and transit agencies as well as adjacent MPO's. Craig Benedict said to implement this plan, revenues from the tax will be looked at. There have been estimates of anticipated first year revenues to be used for bus service enhancements or support of existing services. He said this figure is $730,100, and this money will be distributed to the local transit providers. He said that the shares are divided as follows: Chapel Hill Transit with a 64% share; Triangle Transit with a 24% share; and Orange Public Transportation with a 12% share. He said Triangle Transit has requested all local transit planning agencies to come up with priority routes for the first year. He said these reports will be communicated to Triangle Transit in the next 10 days. He said the implementation agreement also identifies an annual review of revenues, cost of service and cost of projects. He said this is still in the formative stages and the first rollout of services may be later this year, but will most likely come in 2014. 3. Smoke Free Public Places Orange County Health Director, Colleen Bridger, presented the following PowerPoint Presentation: Orange County Board of Health Overview of the Rule Where is smoking prohibited? • Indoors - Where the public is invited or allowed - Regardless of public or private business ownership • Outside ■ Municipal or County owned/controlled property - Sidewalks - Parks and Recreation facilities - Bus Stops Overview of the Rule Where is smoking not regulated by the rule? Overview of the Rule Enforcement— Effective July 1, 2013 Smoke-free public places RECENT history 2009 • House Bill 2 (HB2) passes • November - TRU students present Tobacco-Free Public Places idea to the Board of Health 2010 • January 2 - HB2 goes into effect as the NC Smoke-Free Restaurants and Bars Law 2011 • February— UNC School of Government Webinars on Local Authority • April — Board of Health and Intergovernmental Park Workgroup Presentations • November— Orange County Tobacco Control Workgroup Formed 2012 • February—Workgroup recommends BOH adopt Tobacco-Free Public Places • June — BOH hears presentations by NC Tobacco Prevention and Control Branch and Gayle Harris, Durham County Health Director. BOH adopts Strategic Plan to review current smoking ban policies for expansion • August - BOH Tobacco Subcommittee recommends Tobacco-Free public places to BOH. BOH discusses and decides to limit consideration to Smoke Free public places only. • Smoke-free public places Preparing for the vote 2012 • Early September— BOCC Chair met with municipal mayors to gauge support for the Rule • September— Elected Leader survey • September - October— Public input 1. online survey 2. e-mail 3. telephone comment line 4. U.S. Mail, and 5. a public hearing • October— Community Leader Forum held with 18 local leaders including elected officials from 3 out of 4 municipalities • October— BOH holds public hearing, votes and adopts rule 10-1 • Smoke-free public places Preparing for the vote 2012 • November— Legal notices run in the local newspaper • November— OCHD staff meet with law enforcement officials to discuss consistency in enforcement and other concerns • November— BOCC holds public hearing, votes and approves The Board of Health's Rule 6-1 • Smoke-free public places Jurisdictional Authority After the BOH/BOCC Vote • Municipal attorneys for Chapel Hill, Hillsborough and Carrboro question the jurisdictional authority of the Board of Health - Believe Councils must "opt-in" to participate • Jill Moore from the School of Government publishes a whitepaper on jurisdictional authority finding: - Board of Health Rulemaking Authority applies to all jurisdictions in the County and the BOCC approval is a procedural step similar to when they approve BOH fees • NC Attorney General's Office sends an Advisory Letter also stating the BOH Rule applies to all towns within Orange County • Durham and Orange County Attorneys concur • Implementation January 1, 2013 • "Soft Implementation" no penalties for non-compliance Start with focus on 3 key areas • Cessation • Public Education / Communication • Signage July 1, 2013 • Enforcement begins Implementation Philosophy • Education and empowerment are the essential components to the adherence of this Rule. Enforcement will only be used when absolutely necessary. Presentation turned over to Board of Health Chair, Tony Whitaker Board of health's rationale • Tobacco use and exposure to smoke are leading preventable causes of illness and death in Orange County • There is no safe level of second hand smoke • Orange County is one of the healthiest counties in the state, in part due to the fact that we are a progressive leader in public health • Boards of Health have the responsibility to protect the public's health and to adopt rules necessary for that purpose (NC GS 130-39(a)) • BOH was committed to a deliberative, inclusive, thoughtful process that spanned nearly 2 years BOH Chair Tony Whitaker said that there has been a dramatic and immediate positive impact on public health in communities across the country where smoking bans have been implemented. He said that the BOH has the authority to implement rules for the protection of the public health, as well as a mandate and the ability to do so because of legislation. He said there has been a lot of time spent sifting through the logistics and legal basis for actions the County might take, and he outlined sources of information. Commissioner Price asked how enforcement will play out. Colleen Bridger said experience with experience with no-smoking in restaurants has shown that the majority of enforcement is done with education by fellow citizens. She believes this will be the same situation in the vast majority of cases with the new rules. She said it is anticipated that this could be burdensome to law enforcement; and systems are being designed to re-direct any 911 calls regarding this away from law enforcement. She said there are teams of educators being sent to heavy smoking areas, such as the courthouse. These teams will do as much as possible to educate and divert the burden from law enforcement. She made a comparison to the open container law and the discretion required in the decisions regarding when and where enforcement is needed. Mayor Kleinschmidt said he does not feel the analogy with restaurants works because of the contrast between the outdoor and indoor situations. Council Member Jim Ward asked how is the county addressing funding and resources for signage and education within Chapel Hill and other municipalities versus more rural areas. Colleen Bridger said they are concentrating most resources in areas where the population is most concentrated. Council Member Jim Ward asked if there was collaboration with the Town of Chapel Hill staff to assist with identifying these areas and Colleen Bridger answered yes. Council Member Jim Ward asked about the area of Chapel Hill in Durham County. Colleen Bridger said Durham County enforces this area because it has a similar policy. Council Member Sally Greene asked about enforcement and fines and how this is managed in different scenarios. Colleen Bridger said that she imagines, 99% of the time, if an officer sees someone on the sidewalk smoking, the person will be asked to put out the cigarette; the cigarette will be put out and the officer will move on. She said there may be some scenarios, especially where alcohol is involved, where the person is belligerent. In these cases it will be the discretion of the officer in delivering citations. She said that in scenarios where there is outdoor eating, such as in Hillsborough, where the sidewalks are owned by the town; it is the restaurant owner's responsibility to inform people that they cannot smoke at those tables. Council Member Matt Czajkowski asked what instructions law enforcement are being given for addressing this issue with residents. He said that requiring an officer to apply the type of discretion being discussed is not police procedure. He said his request is to have the police chief to come to explain the instruction officers are being given and how much burden this places on them. Mayor Kleinschmidt said he also feels this would be helpful and he feels that most of the time officers will just ignore the smoking. Council Member Lee Starrow said this brings to mind the seatbelt ordinance. He said he would hope that the law enforcement doesn't spend the bulk of their time only enforcing seatbelt ordinances. He said is easy to get stuck in the small details, but overall this is about public education and setting cultural norms. Mayor Kleinschmidt said he is most concerned about the calls to the police, because these calls will require follow up. Council Member Matt Czajkowski said this same discussion occurred regarding cell phones. He said a law is passed with an enforcement mechanism, with the presumption that the police will ignore it. He questioned the legal structure of this and he said the police need to be informed and able to enforce it. He said if it is about education then there should be an educational program, not the creation of a criminal offense. Council Member Lee Starrow asked if the seat belt law should also be done away with. Mayor Kleinschmidt said that is a state law and he agreed with Council Member Matt Czajkowski. Commissioner Price said she feels the market will take care of the issue in restaurants, but she is concerned about law enforcement. She questioned what the recourse will be if smokers are driven off the sidewalks and then just move into the streets where the cars are. Colleen Bridger said smoking in the streets obviously cannot be banned. She is hopeful this will not be the case for the majority of people. She said this does move second hand smoke away from the public areas. Commissioner Pelissier noted that Durham County implemented a very similar rule about a year ago. She asked about their outcome, and if there have been problems as it relates to law enforcement. Colleen Bridger said she has not heard about that in any discussions with Durham about the challenges. She said Durham County had the same questions about jurisdictional authority and decided that the BOH had the authority to pass the rule and it does apply to the City of Durham. She said the effort is an attempt to change the culture, and overnight results are not expected, nor are heavy handed enforcements. The focus should be on education and empowerment. Mayor Kleinschmidt suggested wrapping this up and said he would ask for follow up with the police and sheriff. Chair Jacobs said there should also be a request for a report on how this is working in Durham, and how it affects law enforcement. Mayor Kleinschmidt said he does not believe there are any signs about smoking in downtown Durham, so in seeking information from Durham, it needs to be relevant data. He said the program is now three months into the 6 month period education span and he works in downtown Chapel Hill. He said he would like to know what is going on with this education component in their area because he sees no evidence of it. Mayor Kleinschmidt personally objects the BOH's jurisdiction over Chapel Hill and its law enforcement. Colleen Bridger said their education campaign has been slowed by questions similar to those discussed tonight. She said it has been a challenge to work with town staff that is unsure whether town leadership will support their involvement. She said the BOH is waiting for clarity on this before heading out with public works and planning folks to determine signage needs. Mayor Kleinschmidt said he would ask that the 6 month education period be started and not be incorrectly noted to have begun on January 1St if it did not. Colleen Bridger said her request is to have a deadline by which these issues are resolved so that it does not drag on and prevent enforcement of the rule. Mayor Kleinschmidt said this will be talked about at the Town Council Meeting. Council Member Jim Ward said Mayor Kleinschmidt is the mayor and he does not speak for everyone on the Council. He said he is personally supportive of the BOHs efforts and of working with the police staff to see how the town can be part of the solution. Mayor Kleinschmidt said he has no objection to the rules being discussed by the BOH, but he has objection the Board of Health's extension of jurisdictional authority over the town. 4. Solid Waste/Recycling a) Discussion on Process to Develop New Inter-local Agreement Michael Talbert said this is the process of developing a new inter-local agreement. With the closing of the landfill on June 30th, the existing inter-local agreement from 1999 goes away. He said that as the landfill closes, many other things associated with solid waste will continue. These items include: recycling, construction and demolition landfill, convenience centers, and yard waste and light goods programs. He said staff, the Solid Waste Advisory Board (SWAB), and the Assembly of Government feel that an inter-local agreement is a good thing to have in place to optimize recycling and conservation easements in regard to solid waste. He said there was a work group established in 2010 to work on a new inter-local agreement, but this did not come through. He said Chapel Hill staff and county staff have been working on this issue for the past several months and would like to bring this agreement forward at some point. Chair Jacobs said that there have been several questions from Carrboro regarding when the Solid Waste Advisory Board would begin meeting again. He said that the response always stated this would happen when there was a new inter-local agreement. He said that if there is to be an entity working on solid waste issues on behalf of the three municipalities in the County, there needs to be a framework for operation. Chair Jacobs said it is not clear how the SWAB can continue to meet without an agreement. He said it would be good to find out what all the different entities envision in order to move forward. Frank Clifton said there are a lot of undecided issues and it really does not make sense for a group to meet without a clear charge. He said hopefully in the coming months boundaries can be resolved and the charge can be re-established. He said that the actual charge needs to come from the elected officials, not staff. He said he senses some frustration that the elected boards and jurisdictions have not been able to come together on some of the issues. Town Manager Roger Stancil said the county manager has been keeping the town informed about the Board of County Commissioners' actions. He said the garbage disposal is being moved to Durham County and this is being coordinated with county staff. He said there have been conversations with Carrboro about mutual work in the collection of commercial garbage and the efficiencies to be gained by working together. He said that once this works, the discussion can be applied to residential garbage. b) Town of Chapel Hill's Solid Waste Plans Town Manager Roger Stancil there are preparations for a potential transfer station on town owned property. He said an RFP is being looked at for getting bids from private entities to do a turnkey provisional transfer service; and there is also consideration of a town-owned and operated transfer station in partnership with Carrboro. He said, with the decision of the county to change its recycling model, the three managers think it may be good to put out an RFP for recycling services within the towns. He feels that, with the housing density, there would be savings for the towns to operate recycling in the urban areas and for the county to continue that in the rural areas. He said the direction is that the three towns put out an RFP to get more information. c) Franchise and Recycling Options Chair Jacobs said the county has not decided anything about recycling yet and will have a discussion at their April 9th meeting. Town Manager Roger Stancil said Frank Clifton has kept them informed and he just wants to be ready to act. Frank Clifton gave some general background information. He said the Board of County Commissioners has only taken actions as required by state statute in order to keep all options open. Frank Clifton said, prior to 2004, recycling was funded out of landfill fees. In 2004 the county implemented a fee to cover countywide recycling services. This was followed, in 2011 with a solid waste fee to support those who use convenience centers. He referenced rulings last year by the Supreme Court that local governments have no authority not granted by legislature. He said unless there are changes to the rules in the legislature, there will need to be a new methodology to fund recycling. Frank Clifton said one option to consider is the franchise process, which would be a voluntary, fee based system with the potential for multiple vendors. He said if a decision was made for the county to afford recycling, there are enough reserves set aside for equipment and operation within the existing program to cover this upcoming fiscal year. He said there are no funds to extend it beyond that year, and work would need to begin early to set up for transition to the vendor, franchise system. Frank Clifton gave the following other options: 1) The county could do away with curbside recycling, which is certainly not a popular option. 2) The county could establish a volunteer program where people can buy in or out. This has potential for abuse and sharing of service, and the county will get the recycling, but may not get the full revenue to pay for it. 3) There could be creation of a service district concept, similar to fire districts. One could be county-wide with a segregated county wide tax levied to pay for it. This would be similar to the system now. He said the county only serves 1/3 of the area outside of the towns with rural curb-side. He said a special tax district could be created for that area. 4) The final option is to put this in the county general fund and forget about it. He said the reality is that there are a lot of demands already on the general funds. Frank Clifton said he personally feels the county has focused on recycling and landfills, but has not paid enough attention to solid waste, county wide. Chair Jacobs said the legislators have introduced a draft bill related to this. He read the title and said it is another route being explored. Commissioner Rich said this is a shame because the county has an amazing recycling program and staff and are known throughout the state for this program. She said many people in the community have spoken up and expressed their disappointment. Commissioner Pelissier said she looked at this as an opportunity and suggested consideration of pay as you throw programs. She would like to find a way to incentivize recycling. Council Member Jim Ward asked if the fees are still being collected. Frank Clifton said the 4-r collections have already been done in January. He said the budgetary recommendation is not to levy the 3-r fee for recycling until there is clear authority to do so. Council Member Jim Ward asked when the court case took place and Chair Jacobs said in December. Frank Clifton said this case has been through all of the courts in North Carolina, and the State Supreme Court was the last to rule. Council Member Jim Ward asked if this fee had been levied until the end of 2012 and Frank Clifton said yes. Council Member Jim Ward said he does not understand why there would be consideration for continuing the program if it is not set up to pay for itself, and Frank Clifton said it is not being continued. Mayor Kleinschmidt said those fees that have been ruled as not collectible will not be billed in the next cycle. Frank Clifton said he understands it is the Board's decision, but his recommendation is that those fees are not levied until the issue is resolved. He said there are only 2 of the 4 fees in question. Council Member Jim Ward asked if there is obligation to return that money. Frank Clifton said he hoped not. Council Member Jim Ward said he hoped on April 9th the town will hear about the implications to Chapel Hill. He said he doesn't understand what happens to all of the education programs and associated recycling efforts. He wonders if those efforts stay as is or if the town will be on its own. Frank Clifton said some of the educational efforts will stay as is and some won't. He said the issues are curbside recycling and multi-family recycling. He said the programs between governments will be discussed, but much depends on the course of action taken. He said the service district gives the county the greatest number of options to continue all services and perhaps justify expansion. This will only occur if the towns opt in to participate. He said that the reason for the year option was to give communities the chance to sort through options. He said the reserves fee is substantial enough to fund the greater portion of the next fiscal year. Council Member Jim Ward said he hopes the county and town look beyond costs and saving money, because this is a great program. He does not feel the current customer service can be duplicated by someone who is not an invested part of the community. He said the county's leadership in recycling is so great and he questions the implication of moving to franchise. He does not want to see quality of service and the rate of recycling lost in the shuffle. He said he feels the county manager's proposals and the town's reactions bode poorly for quality of service. Town Manager Roger Stancil said it was the three town managers' opinion that the same level of service would be able to be achieved for less cost, because of density and the ability to integrate the program with pay as you throw and other collections. He said solid waste is a big core service and there are some real ways to gain efficiency. He said he is not advocating for anything at this point. Chair Jacobs referenced the legislative ruling from the State Supreme Court on Lanvale Properties LLC versus Cabarrus County. He said if you read comments from State Legislators further restricting counties, this case is cited as part of the rationale. Council Member Lee Starrow said he gives thumbs up to the pay as you throw option. He said there is something very unsatisfying about a voluntary program, and he feels that the final two options the Manager laid out seem to be the most successful. Chair Jacobs said he agrees with Commissioner Rich and Council Member Jim Ward. He said that it seems that the county and the towns are not planning together and he is disappointed. He asked why the county is not part of the conversation about the transfer station. He questioned why the elected officials are not meeting together to figure out joint solutions rather than waiting to see what other jurisdictions are doing. He asked how a comprehensive system can be achieved if everyone is operating in different realms. He is willing to meet with other elected officials about this. He said the reason solid waste has been so successful is because elected officials in the past made decisions to do solid waste together and set an aggressive goal. He urged his colleagues to plan more together. He said SWAB does not have a charge at this point. He said that a short term charge could be developed to allow meetings and development of a new inter-local agreement. Mayor Kleinschmidt said there is some tension here because this is a transition point in a process that had previously worked so well. He said it is in the interest of all of the towns, which have limited their growth but expanded their numbers, to look at the alternatives to create efficiency. He said it is easier to pick up recycling and solid waste in high density areas. He said, with regard the countywide option, it would be unwise not to know what the opportunity, cost and trade-offs would be when marrying urban and rural service. Chair Jacobs said he is not sure that equal effort is being put into looking at the options. He said he understands that it is reasonable to question assumptions in this transition period, and to look at what is most cost efficient. He does not see the same effort going into investigating how to work together in reaching goals. Mayor Kleinschmidt thanked Frank Clifton for always including this as an option and he said he fully expects the manager and the Board to come up with solutions incorporating the varying densities of the entire county. He said the role of the county is to see the options county-wide, and the town's role is to consider the options that best serve the taxpayers of Chapel Hill. Chair Jacobs said he would just like to make sure both sides get back together before any decisions are made. Commissioner Price pointed out that the term county-wide does not include the entire county when referring to service areas. Mayor Kleinschmidt said he was referring to her responsibilities as a County Commissioner. Commissioner Price said she is looking forward to continuing to work with the towns in coming up with a solution. She said she appreciates Commissioner Pelissier's comment about viewing this as an opportunity. Frank Clifton said the services that are provided within the towns are a contract service. He said another option that he left out is to create a solid waste authority, like OWASA, with different service levels. He said all of the managers meet regularly and know that there are differences between all of them. He said the problem with a combined solution is that someone loses and someone wins. He said that is where the compromise in the leadership and the elected officials comes in. He said there will always be inequities in the service cost, but the managers try to find the best solutions and stay aware of the issues. Chair Jacobs said, if the Board of County Commissioners is going to be considering alternatives for recycling, and will be making a decision in the near future, he suggested that the elected boards get together to discuss things before making a decision that might drive them apart. Frank Clifton said, considering the timeframe, a solution needs to be in place by June 2014. He said it is incumbent for the elected officials meet again before anyone acts and he said the Chair and the Mayor need to take leadership roles. He said the managers talk constantly to stay on top of these issues. Mayor Kleinschmidt said that the managers are doing what they need to do in order to make sure the other officials are in a position to make a decision when needed. Chair Jacobs summarized that there should be an understanding that the towns and counties will get together again, before anyone makes an irrevocable decision, and Carrboro and Hillsborough will be included. Town Manager Roger Stancil said this has allowed the town to bring the university back into the conversation as a willing partner in the efforts. He said there are also joint conversations with the City of Durham. 5. Town Perspective on Annexation Changes and Joint Land Use Mayor Kleinschmidt said this was well articulated earlier in the discussion of item 1. Council Member Harrison left at 9:10. Chair Jacobs referenced earlier comments regarding the BOH intruding on prerogatives of the Town of Chapel Hill and said he has attended meetings with County Commissioners who feel the same way about municipalities annexing into county jurisdiction. He said that if there are unresolved issues created by the potential loss of ETJs, then meetings should be held in a collaborative spirit to figure out how to proceed. He said that if there needs to be a joint planning work session versus a public meeting, then the staffs could work toward this. He suggested that the Rogers Road Task force could also bring their report to this. Mayor Kleinschmidt said a meeting should be held in the fall for joint planning discussions. Commissioner Gordon said she strongly encouraged them to do this and she said this joint planning is unique to the county and she would like to see it continue. Frank Clifton said one of the options is for the county owned land and the jointly owned land around Rogers Road to become part of the town limits to clarify the issue and give the area plan more validity. He said Rogers Road planning should not be considered dead because of the legislative issues. Mayor Kleinschmidt said this option would keep Chapel Hill at the table and would preserve its ability to participate in the solutions of the task force. 6. Chapel Hill Development Agreement Process Update for Homestead Road Campus Mayor Kleinschmidt said last week the town began creation of a development agreement process for large scale, long term development projects. He said this agreement would require 25 acres or more, could reach out 25 years, and is free of quasi-judicial restrictions normally associated with permitting. He said it allows for incorporation of community and government elected officials to come to the table in meaningful conversations. He said the staff's proposal for how this will work has been adopted and will be applied to the Southern Human Services Center expansion/master plan. He said it does cost more on the front end, but in the end it is less expensive than going one permit at a time. Town Manager Roger Stancil said the next step would be for the town staff to meet with the county staff and explain the process and make a recommendation. Mayor Kleinschmidt said both parties would have a period of evaluating if this agreement should be done, before coming together to see if this is the best model for both. Chair Jacobs asked if there could be negotiation around spreading the fees over the lifetime of the project. Council Member Jim Ward said everything is negotiable. Commissioner Gordon said she would like to underscore this cooperation. She said this campus is a place to offer consolidated and coordinated services and provide access to many county services at once. She said she would love to see this move forward. 7. INFORMATION ITEMS a) Memorandum with Update on Town and County Library Activities No discussion b) Visitors Bureau Update Council Member Jim Ward suggested Chapel Hill/Orange County Visitors Bureau Director Laurie Paolicelli be given a chance to speak on this update. Laurie Paolicelli said, of the ten hotels in Chapel Hill, one of the biggest things is that weekends are selling out. She noted that only 25 cents of every business dollar is left at the hotel. She said travelers don't just come to pay for a hotel, but they come for another purpose. She said that the economy is starting to dip mid-week and this is the business that pays the higher rate. Laurie Paolicelli said the challenge regarding the hospitality industry was to come up with a campaign to stimulate mid-week business. She said it was realized that new audience needs to be cultivated in order to prevent taking away business from one hotel to another. This led to the placement of ads in the New Yorker, Wired, Golf Digest, etc. She said that rates are increasing and this is a good metric for success, even better than occupancy. She said that rates and revenues are up. She noted that Carolina Inn is suffering a bit. She said a study done recently asked what would make people most likely to come to the area. She said the respondents wanted to know about food, nightlife, economy, and entertainment, outside of the University. She said it was clear that Chapel Hill needs to be more in the foodie and music business. Laurie Paolicelli said the Visitors Bureau has partnered with UNC to create a national music campaign called Listen, and there will be much more coming out from a music standpoint. She said the bureau continues to work on the parking problems and there is some concern over the construction happening over the summer; however, she feels there has been good communication about this issue. She referenced the possible relocation of the Visitors Center, which is in its infancy. She said there is growing demand, a need for more parking, and a possible need to be strategically located on the interstate. She said the overall metrics are good and Chapel Hill has 90% positive feedback. Mayor Kleinschmidt said he thinks it is a big mistake for the Visitors Bureau (VB) to move out of downtown Chapel Hill and away from what it is selling-which is Chapel Hill. Laurie Paolicelli said that this consideration is based off of responses from visitors regarding difficulty locating the VB and difficulties with parking. She said this seems to be escalating, and the move is still a conversation at this point. Mayor Kleinschmidt said he is just concerned about the VB's ability to be successful in its mission. He said he feels this mission is undermined if the VB is not located in the area that it recommends to visitors. Council Member Matt Czajkowski said he would like for the old library to be back on the table as a venue for the Visitor's Bureau, and he noted that it has 27 parking spaces. Commissioner Price said she would like to see the VB stay in downtown Chapel Hill. Frank Clifton said the issue is that visitors are not necessarily walking to the Bureau, and they come by automobile and can't find a place to park. He said that with the community college next door, the parking lots stay full. He said the effort is to find an effective way to get business, not for the people that live here, but for the visitors. Mayor Kleinschmidt suggested the east end or next to a hotel. Laurie Paolicelli said the high traffic coming into town from 185 and 140 and MLK Edge project were all considerations. Mayor Kleinschmidt said that this is not what visitors are coming to target. Frank Clifton said the issue for the county is people not being able to find the visitors center. He said that if you are near enough to the interstate, it will allow signage on the interstate directing people to the Visitors Center where information can then be given on finding downtown. He said this creates more opportunity for interaction. Council Member Jim Ward questioned how the VB will know exactly where to put signage and said this will potentially only draw in a fraction of people coming in. He said that this will eliminate the other people because the VB will be on the outer spokes of the wheel, so to speak. Chair Jacobs suggested that this be discussed at a future meeting. Commissioner Dorosin noted that Chapel Hill has some OWASA appointments coming up and all current members are Caucasian. He said there needs to be consideration of adding some diversity on that board. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:35. Barry Jacobs, Chair Donna S. Baker, CIVIC Clerk to the Board