HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-21-2013 - 5a 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 21, 2013
Action Agenda
• Item No. 5-a
SUBJECT: MINUTES
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donna Baker, 245-2130
Draft Minutes
PURPOSE: To correct and/or approve the minutes as submitted by the Clerk to the Board as
listed below:
April 9, 2013 BOCC Regular Meeting
April 11, 2013 BOCC Budget Work Session
April 16, 2013 BOCC Meeting with Board of Social Services
(5:30pm)
BACKGROUND: In accordance with 153A-42 of the General Statutes, the Governing Board
has the legal duty to approve all minutes that are entered into the official journal of the Board's
proceedings.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: NONE
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board approve minutes as
presented or as amended.
1
1 Attachment 1
2
3 DRAFT MINUTES
4 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
5 REGULAR MEETING
6 April 9, 2013
7 7:00 p.m.
8
9 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, April
10 9, 2013 at 7:00 p.m. at the DSS offices, in Hillsborough, N.C.
11
12 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jacobs and Commissioners Alice M. Gordon,
13 Barry Jacobs, Earl McKee, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Mark Dorosin
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Frank Clifton, Assistant County Managers
17 Michael Talbert, Clarence Grier and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker(All other staff members
18 will be identified appropriately below)
19
20 NOTE: ALL DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE PERMANENT
21 AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE.
22
23 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
24 Chair Jacobs went through the items at the County Commissioners' places:
25 - White sheet—for Item 7a- Rogers Road Community Center Power Point
26 - Pink, blue and yellow sheets—for Item 7-b- Recycling letters
27
28 Due to a power outage earlier in the night, Chair Jacobs suggested changes to the
29 agenda. He asked the board to consider deferring items 4b and 4c, and to invite these people
30 back for another meeting.
31 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Price to
32 defer these items to a future meeting.
33
34 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
35
36 Commissioner Dorosin arrived at 7:02pm
37 Chair Jacobs introduced Amanda Page, District Representative from Congressman
38 Howard Coble's office, who will be based out of the Efland office.
39 Chair Jacobs also recognized Boy Scout Troop 822 from the Union Grove Methodist
40 Church and scoutmaster Alan Parker, who earned a merit badge.
41
42 PUBLIC CHARGE
43
44 The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge.
45
46 2. Public Comments
47
48 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
•
2
1 Don O'Leary said the meeting last week with the Chair and Vice Chair went well. He
2 shared the following quote from Mark Twain: "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the
3 majority, it is time to pause and reflect."
4 He said the differences of opinion are knowledge based and he offered a book on
5 agenda 2, (Behind the Green Mask, by Rosa Koire), which he left with Donna Baker and
6 encouraged the commissioners to read.
7 Chair Jacobs noted that he, Commissioner McKee, and David Stancil did recently have
8 a meeting with Don O'Leary and there was good discussion regarding the issues.
9
18 Annette Smith lives in Chapel Hill and serves as parent co-chair of the School
11 Improvement Team (SIT) at Culbreth Middle School. She expressed her support of the
12 proposed science wing. She said the members of her school endorse the proposed science
19 wing and respectfully request that it be funded in the 2013/14 Capital Investment Plan (CIP).
14 She reviewed the benefits of the wing and the improved academic space and function it would
15 provide to the school.
16
17 Beverly Rudolph, Principal at Culbreth Middle 8choo|, expressed her hope that the
18 science wing gets funded for next year. She noted the current small classrooms and invited the
19 Commissioners to come and tour the school to better see the needs. She noted that she will be
20 sending photos of the class sizes and said that she would like to see her students have the
21 same space and opportunity for science learning as the rest of the-district.
22
23 Catherine Courier lives in Mebane and expressed her concerns about personal property
24 ownership. She is specifically concerned with farmers losing the rights to wells on their
25 property. She said the county needs to adhere to the constitution in its decisions.
26
27 b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
28 (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda
29 below.)
30
31 3. Petitions by Board Members (Three Minute Limit per Commissioner)
32 Commissioner Pelissier made two petitions. The first was in reference to the
33 Orange/Alamance county line. She said last year a local bill was passed that resolved many of
34 the issues with the county line; but a commitment was not made to those that did not like the
35 changes- Morrow Mill and Mill Creek. She asked Chair Jacobs and Commissioner Mckee to
36 approach Alamance commissioners to begin discussion toward a local bill to finish the work that
37 was started.
38 Commissioner Pelissier made a second petition to Frank Clifton and Gayle Wilson to
39 investigate pay as you throw options to create and present a synopsis and recommendation to
40 the Board. She also suggested that the towns be approached to gauge interest.
41 Chair Jacobs said some of the Board members met with a group called Waste Zero,
42 who is interested in facilitating pay as you throw as an environmentally friendly alternative to
43 customary municipal solid waste disposal.
44 Commissioner Price questioned an item on the agenda for April 23 regarding the
45 Northern Human Services Center.
46 Donna Baker said that there is an item on the April 16m work session and invited Greg
47 Wilder to speak regarding this.
48 Greg Wilder said the item was originally scheduled to occur at the meeting in Chapel
49 Hill, but it has been reconfigured to be on the April 16mvvorhaeosion in Hillsborough.
3
1 Chair Jacobs said he was at the Walnut Grove Convenience Center when it was warm.
2 He requested that there be some consideration of putting concrete or something to mitigate the
3 heat for the benefit of the staff that will be there all day.
4 Chair Jacobs said Commissioner Gordon had petitioned the Board earlier this year
5 about formalizing closed sessions materials. He noted there had not been a response yet, and
6 he said he would like to add a petition for the manager, before putting a closed session item on
7 an agenda, to contact the Chair to discuss it ahead of time.
8 Commissioner Gordon said she had hoped that the response to her petition from the
9 agenda review team would have been a recommendation for a more formal process. She
10 asked thather request be re-visited. She said that perhaps the petition could be revised and
11 the addition from the Chair added to a revised petition. It was agreed that this would be
12 discussed at a later time.
13 Commissioner Price asked if her suggestion about Northern Human Services Center
14 would be put on an agenda that is in the northern part of the county.
15 Chair Jacobs said he will make sure this happens.
16
17 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/Special Presentations
18
19 a. Fair Housing Month
20 The Board considered a proclamation designating April as Fair Housing Month 2013 and
21 authorizing the Chair to sign.
22 James Davis, Civil Rights Staff for the Department of Housing, Human Rights and
23 Community Oeve|opment, read the following proclamation:
24
25 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD'OFCOMMISSIONERS
26 PROCLAMATION
27 FAIR HOUSING MONTH
28
29 WHEREAS, April 2013 marks the 45th anniversary of the Fair Housing Act of 1968 and the 30th
30 anniversary of the North Carolina Fair Housing Act prohibiting discrimination in
31 housing on the basis of race, co|nr, smx, oe|igion, national origin, handicap and
32 familial status; and
33
34 WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners enacted the Orange County Civil
35 Rights Ordinance on June 6, 1894, which affords to the residents of [)range
36 County the protections guaranteed by Title VIII and additionally encompasses
37 the protected classes of veteran status and age; and
38
39 WHEREAS, Orange County and the United States Department of Housing and Urban
40 Development as well as concerned residents and the housing industry are
41 working to make fair housing opportunities possible for everyone by encouraging
42 other to abide by the letter and the spirit of fair housing laws; and
43
44 WHEREAS, despite the protection afforded by the Orange County Civil Rights Ordinance and
45 Title VIII as amended, illegal housing discrimination still occurs in our nation and
46 in our County; and
47
48 WHEREAS, by supporting and promoting fair housing and equal opportunity, we are
49 contributing to the health of our County, State and Nation.
50
4
1 NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Board of County Commissioners of Orange County,
2 North Carolina, do proclaim April 2013 as FAIR HOUSING MONTH and commend this
3 observance to all Orange County residents.
4
5
6
7
8 A motion was made by Commissioner Phce, seconded by Commissioner Dorosin to
9 approve a proclamation designating April as Fair Housing Month 2013 and authorize the Chair
10 to sign.
11
12 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
13
14
15 b. LmcaY Historic Landmark Designation for Captain John S. Pope Farm
16 The Board was to consider and adopt an ordinance to designate the Captain John S.
17 Pope Farm in Cedar Grove as an Orange County Local Historic Landmark and authorize the
18 Chair to sign.
19
20 DEFERRED
21
22 c. Voluntary and Enhanced Agricultural District Demignstion—Multiple Farms—
23 Green, Ward, Pope, Walters
24 The Board was to consider applications from multiple landowners/farms to certify
25 qualifying farmland within the Cedar Grove, CaneCrenk'Buchhorn. High Roch/EUand. and
26 Caldwell Voluntary Agricultural Districts, and to enroll the lands in the Orange County Voluntary
27 Agricultural District (VAD) and the Enhanced Voluntary Agriculture District (EVAD) programs.
28
29 DEFERRED
30
31 5. Consent Agenda
32 Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
33 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
34 approve the remaining items on the consent agenda.
35
36 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
37
38 a. Minutes
39 The Board approved the minutes from February 5, 21, and 25, 2013 as submitted by the Clerk
40 to the Board.
41 b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds
42 The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release motor vehicle
43 property tax values for forty-nine (49) taxpayers with a total of fifty-six (56) bills that will result in
44 a reduction of revenue in accordance with NCGS.
45 c. Property Tax Releases/Refunds
46 The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release property tax
47 values for eight (8) taxpayers with a total of fourteen (14) bills that will result in a reduction of
48 revenue in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 105-381.
49 d. Applications for Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion
5
1 The Board approved two (2) untimely applications for exemption/ex lusion from ad valorem
2 taxation for two (2) bills for the 2012 tax year.
3 e. Refund of Overpayment of Tax/Revenue Stamps
4 The Board approved a refund of overpayment of tax/revenue stamps.
5 f. Bid Award—Road Tractor for Recyclinq/Solid Waste
6 The Board awarded a bid to Piedmont Peterbilt of Gnoonabono, North Carolina for a Road
7 Tractor for Orange County Solid Waste at a delivered cost of $107,648.
8 2, Changes in BOCC Regular Meeting Schedule for 2013
9 The Board approved two changes in the County Commissioners' regular meeting calendar for
10 2013 as follows:
11 1) Moved the May 14, 2013 BOCC work session FROM Link Government Services Center, 200
12 South Cameron Street, Hillsborough TO Southern Human Services Center, 2501 Homestead
13 Road, Chapel Hill, at 7:00pm
14 2) Moved the November 12, 2013 BOCC Work Session (7:00pm) FROM Southern Human
15 Services Center, 2501 Homestead Road, Chapel Hill TO Link Government Services Center,
16 200 South Cameron Street, Hillsborough.
17 h. Safe Routes to School Action Plan Overview and Proposed Schedule for Initial
18 Adoption Steps
19 The Board authorized staff to proceed with initial Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Action Plan
20 adoption steps according to the Amendment form for the SRTS Action Plan.
21 L Sexual Assault Awareness Month Proclamation
22 The Board approved a proclamation recognizing April as Sexual Assault Awareness Month in
23 Orange County and authorizing the Chair to sign.
24
25 6. Public Hearings
26
27 a. Amendments to Unified Development Ordinance Text: Revise Section 1.6'5 —
28 (Planning Board) Rules of Procedure - Public Hearing Closure and Action (No
29 Additional Comments Accepted)
30 The Board received the Planning Board's recommendation, closed the public hearing,
31 and made a decision on Planning Director initiated text amendments to the Unified
32 Development Ordinance (UDO) to revise Section 1.6.5— (Planning Board) Rules of Procedure,
33 to be consistent with current County processes and procedures.
34 Perdita Holtz summarized the amendment and recommendation.
35 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon seconded by Commissioner Rich to
36 receive the Planning Board's recommendation, close the public hearing and adopt the
37 ordinance contained in Attachment 2 which authorizes the text amendments.
38
39 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
40
41 7. Regular Agenda
42
43 a. Rogers Road Community Center Schematic Design Review
44 The Board considered
45 Reviewing and commenting on the schematic design of the Rogers Road
46 Community Center and authorize staff and consultant to move forward with
47 construction document preparation and construction bid process;
48 Authorizing the Manager to award a bid for construction and any unforeseen
49 conditions change orders for the Rogers Road Community Center in an amount not-
50 to-exceed the Board appropriated amount of $G50.000 approved within the FY2O12'
6
1 13 Capital Investment Plan in the event that the bid award occurs during the summer
2 break. This bid award and subsequent construction start would be contingent upon
3 the execution of a Lease Agreement between Orange County and Habitat for
4 Humanity, as well as the execution of an Operating Agreement between Orange
5 County and the Rogers Eubanks Neighborhood Association ("RENA"); and
6 - Authorizing the Chair to send a letter to the Town of Chapel Hill requesting that the
7 Town expedite the site plan review, permitting and other associated processes for
8 the project uoweUaavmaivea|| esaocia1edTowmfeaarelatodtothnsapnocesseo.
9
10 Jeff Thompson, Asset Management Services, reviewed background information. He
11 said the staff is moving forward on crafting the land lease agreement with Habitat for Humanity,
12 and is finalizing an o erating agreement with the Rogers Eubanks Neighborhood Association.
13 He said that the development and construction plans are being developed to build the facility in
14 a timely manner.
15 He introduced Joe Wagner and Patric Le Beau, architects from Perkin+Will, and noted
16 their design work is being done at no cost to the county. He said the schematic design would
17 be presented and the desired outcome is approval of this design to allow staff to move forward
18 with a goal of beginning construction in the summertime.
19
20 PUBLIC COMMENT:
21 Patric Le Beau thanked Reverend Campbell and his partners at this law firm who
22 donated their time to this project. He then reviewed four Power Point slides of schematic
23 designs, which are included as attachments land 2 of item 7a.
24 He first reviewed the locater map from attachment 1 showing the site location for the
25 Rogers Rcad Community Center.
26 He said his firm became involved in this project ject through the Chapel Hill Preservation
27 Society. He said originally there were discussions about renovating the existing Hogan house
28 into a community center, but this was too cost prohibitive.
29 He said this is a great location for a community center because it is on the first corner
30 off the neighborhood and is located off the main street.
31 He reviewed the site plan in attachment 2 and gave details regarding tree plantings,
32 landscape features, porch layout and other features outlined on the plan. He noted the
33 inclusion of a kitchen with space to accommodate community gatherings, after school lunches
34 and other events. He noted 4 main classrooms and a library/computer space, as well as a staff
35 area.
36 Chair Jacobs thanked him and asked for Board questions and comments.
37 Commissioner Gordon thanked Patric LeBeau and his firm for their pro bono work. She
38 asked how man staff members would be accommodated in the staff room on the plan.
39 Patric LeBeau said he did not know at this point, but the plan would allow enough space
40 for at least 4-5 desks.
41 Commissioner Dorosin asked John Roberts for clarification on how this arrangement will
42 work for Habitat.
43 John Roberts said it is long term lease on the land for the county and the county will own
44 the building.
45 Commissioner Price thanked the firm for their work.
46 Commissioner Rich asked for occupancy rate of the building and Patric LeBeau said
47 about 130-190.
48 Commissioner Rich asked if the kitchen would need to be inspected if it is not a
49 commercial kitchen.
7
1 Patric LeBeau said the intention is to design the space to the level of a commercial
2 kitchen and if inspection is required, it will be done.
3 John Roberts said he was not aware that there was a commercial kitchen here and so
4 the draft agreement will need to be re-written.
5
6 PUBLIC COMMENT:
7 Ree Ree Wei lives in Phoenix Place and said her parents purchased their home from
8 Habitat for Humanity after first living in an overcrowded basement apartment with no safe place
9 to play. She said that when the family first moved to Phoenix Place, the RENA Community
10 Center allowed the children in her family to be involved in computer classes, tutoring, leadership
11 training, and food distribution. She said that some of the activities continued after the center
12 closed, and that she wants the new community center to open. She noted the financial
13 difficulties that her parents have in paying for afterschool programs and summer camps. She
14 said that the community center would provide these things for her family and asked for the
15 Board for help.
16 David Caldwell asked the people from the Rogers Road community to please stand up
17 and he thanked everyone who has assisted with this p 'ect.
10 Jennifer Prater lives in Phoenix Place and said she is here to give an example of how
19 important this center will be. She said there is need for a place for the neighborhood parents
20 and children to meet. She said this is what the community center will be used for, and it is
21 important. She thanked everyone for expediting this process.
22 Felicia VVeaver, also a resident of Phoenix Plmoe, said that RENA welcomed her with
23 open arms. She said when she first moved there, the then existing community center provided
24 activities and classes for her children, as well as the neighborhood parents. She said there is a
25 need for a community meeting facility as well as for after school programs and activities for the
26 children.
27 Pam Hemmingerurged the Board to keep this pr ject on the fast track. She noted that
28 the site has been cleared and said that there are good reasons to approve this quickly. She
29 said the desire is to have the center opened before the summer of 2014. She noted that there
30 was no center last summer and there will not be one this summer; and she said that without on-
31 going programs, both social and educational, the children go lacking. She said she has been
32 working with several groups on a business plan to make this site successful, both financially
33 and operationally. She said it would be great if the county could break ground before the
34 Landfill closes in July 2013.
35 Commissioner McKee said these comments are why he has pushed this community
36 center forward and it is heartening to see it coming to fruition. He encouraged the Board to
37 move this p ject forward and to approve all of the manager's recommendations.
38 Commissioner Rich asked Patric LeBeau to step forward. She said that he is doing this
39 work pro bono. She said the task force put pressure on him to give estimates even before
40 plans were finalized and he pulled through every time. She wanted to recognize him for his
41 dedication. She said there had been discussions about Chapel Hill waiving some of the
42 permitting fees.
43 Jeff Thompson said he met with Chapel Hill staff last week and was told that all of the
44 fees would be waived, but he is hoping to get this in writing.
45 Frank Clifton said it would be best to formalize this in a written letter.
46 Chair Jacobs said he was under the impression that the town had done this and he did
47 write a letter to Mayor Kleinschmidt to see if this was the case. There has not been a response
48 back, but Chair Jacobs agreed that it is good policy to get it all in writing.
49 Commissioner Dorosin asked who did the clearing of the site and how it was paid for.
8
1 Jeff Thompson said this was done by the Habitat organization, who owns the land. The
2 land was identified as a Community Center site, and nothing else will be built there. He said,
3 there will be a lease agreement, after vvhichfundowj\| rnovefonwardfnommthacountyhzrvertioa|
4 construction on the site.
5 Commissioner Dorosin asked if grading was done or will be part of the construction
6 process.
7 Jeff Thompson said it is going to be graded and is ready to build on.
8 John Roberts said Habitat has asked to be reimbursed for costs and this will be
9 reviewed and decided on by the Board.
10 Chair Jacobs suggested that the motion reflect changes to item 3 that will address the
11 waiver of permitting fees. This change is bolded in the motion below.
12
13
14 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Price to:
15 1) Review and comment on the schematic design of the Rogers Road Community Center, and
16 authorize staff and consultant to move forward with construction document preparation and
l7 construction bid process;
18 2) Authorize the Manager to award a bid for construction and any unforeseen conditions
19 change orders for the Rogers Road Community Center in an amount not-to-exceed the Board
20 appropriated amount of$650,000 approved within the FY12-13 Capital Investment Plan in the
21 event that the bid award occurs during the summer break. This bid award and subsequent
22 construction start would be contingent upon the execution of a Lease Agreement between
23 Orange County and Habitat for Humanity, as well as the execution of an Operating Agreement
24 between Orange County and the Rogers Eubanks Community Association ("RENA"); and
25 3) Authorize the Chair to send a letter to the Town of Chapel Hill requesting confirmation
26 that the Town will expedite the site plan review, permitting and other associated
27 processes for the pr ject as well as waive all associated Town fees related to those
28 processes.
29
90 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
31
32 b. Operational and Funding Options for Orange County's Solid Waste and Recycling
33 Programs
34 The Board considered and discussed operational and funding options for Orange
35 County Solid Waste and Recycling Programs.
36 Chair Jacobs said before public comment is solicited, the Board of County •
37 Commissioners will have an opportunity to ask questions after staff presentations. He said the
38 Board appreciates all of the letters of concern and support for the County's recycling program.
39 He assured the public that the Board of County Commissioners is still committed to the best
40 recycling program in the state and will be looking at options to ensure that the County remains
41 progressive, collaborative and effective from the perspective of both cost and reduction of
42 recycling.
43 He said it is noted on page 3 of the agenda abstract that a public hearing is set for April
44 23 at Southern Human Services Center and the primary purpose ioodiacussionofhenohise
45 options. He said that if it is the board's pleasure, this meeting topic can be changed to a
46 discussion of all of the narrowed down options to consider. He said this will be a better time to
47 get a sense of public comment.
48 Michael Talbert, Assistant County Manager, outlined the topic and noted the following
49 attachments included with this item:
50 • General Statutes 150A'13G. 1OOA-327. and 153/\'421
9
1 • Solid Waste Schedule of Revenues and Expenditures
2 • Solid Waste Advisory Board Resolution
3 • Summary of Solid Waste and Recycling Service
4 • Information from Commission for the Envinznnnont(CfE)
5 • Information from Town of Hilisborough
6 • Letter from Recycling Employees
7
8 Michael Talbert said Orange County is recognized as being number one in the state for waste
9 reduction, reaching 59% of its 61% aggressive reduction goal. The County is disposing only
10 0.56 tons/person compared to the base year of 1991-92, when the disposal rate measured 1.36
11 tons. In the region, Wake County has achieved a 25% reduction rate, Durham County rate is at
12 21%, Chatham County is at 37%and Alamance County at 26%. Orange County's 61%waste
13 reduction goal was adopted in 1997 by the County and by the Towns of Carrboro, Chapel Hill
14 and Hillsborough as part of the County's original Comprehensive Solid Waste Plan. The
15 County is committed to continuous robust public education services and waste reduction
16 programs regardless of the funding or operational program implemented by the Board.
17 The County's Reduce, Reuse & Recycle (3-R) Fees consists of four annual recycling
18 fees adopted by Orange County in 2004 to fund recycling programs and services that are billed
19 in co junction with the annual property tax. The fee consists of a Basic Fee ($37/year) that is
20 charged to all improved properties county-wide and funds various recycling operations such as
21 the county To)dcity Reduction Improvement Program (Household Hazardous Waste, batteries,
22 waste oil, e\ectrnnics, otc.), reoyc|ingdrop'oYfa)tes' recycling at solid waste convenience
23 centers, education and outreach, enforcement, planning, etc. An Urban Curbside Fee
24 ($52/year) is assessed to improved residential properties within incorporated municipalities and
25 funds weekly curbside recycling service.
26 A Rural Curbside Fee ($38/ r) is charged to residential property in areas of
27 unincorporated Orange County eligible to receive bi-weekly curbside recycling service. Finally,
28 a Multi-family Fee ($19/year) is charged multi-family units throughout Orange County for multi-
29 family recycling services. (Attachment 4, Solid Waste Recycling Division Schedule of Revenues
30 and Expenses for Fiscal 2011/2012. Not related to recycling, the County also assesses a
31 county-wide Solid Waste Convenience Center Fee that is billed in conjunction with the annual
32 property tax.
33 The Unincorporated Areas Fee is ($ r/H h |d)' |noorpomdadAreasFeeia
34 ($10/vear/Houaeho|d), and Multi-family Fee is ($2/year/multi-family unit). This basic Solid
35 Waste Convenience Center Fee covers a portion of the operating costs of the County's five (5)
36 Convenience Centers.
37 A recent court decision, Lanvale v Cabarrus County, essentially says that where there is
38 no direct statutory authority to levy a fee, a local government cannot levy a fee. Since the
39 Lanvale opinion was issued, Orange County's staff has been engaged in discussions regarding
40 how, going forward, the County can best address the issues created by this action of the
41 Supreme Court. The Basic Fee is likely consistent with existing law, but the Urban, Rural and
42 Multi-family recycling fees may not be consistent with existing case law. The County Manager
43 will recommend that the Board of County Commissioners cease assessing the Urban, Rural
44 and Multi-family recycling fees beginning with the Fiscal 2013/14 Annual Budget.
45 The County Manager further recommends funding these services for Fiscal 2013/14
46 only with solid waste enterprise fund reserves to allow the County time to transition to an
47 alternative solution. The Rural Curbside program currently is limited to 13,730 households
48 eligible in the unincorporated area of the County. A rural curbside recycling fee is charged to
49 those households where recycling services are made available. These services are provided by
50 County Staff. Just 6,000 households lack access to rural curbside service at this time and are
10
1 not charged the Rural Curbside Fee. Waste collections in unincorporated Orange County are
2 provided by private haulers, without a County Franchise Agreement, on a voluntary basis to
3 those using the services.
4 The Urban Curbside recycling fee is charged to Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Hillsborough
5 municipal residents by the County for urban curbside recycling services. The services are paid
6 for by Orange County Solid Waste under contract with Waste Industries, Inc. and the towns are
7 responsible for household solid waste within their town limits.
8 The Multi-family Fee is charged to each multi-family establishment in both incorporated
9 -and unincorporated Orange County based on the number of residential units for collection of
10 recyclable materials at each of these locations. The multi-family recycling services are provided
11 by Orange County Solid Waste staff.
12 North Carolina General Statute 153A-136 (Attachment 1) Regulation of Solid Waste,
13 gives counties the authority to grant a franchise for the exclusive right to collect or dispose of
14 solid waste within all or a defined portion of the county and prohibit others from collecting or
15 disposing of solid wastes in that area. The County is exploring a franchise agreement process
16 for the unincorporated areas of the County which would include the privatization of curbside
17 household solid waste and recycling. The County may by resolution permit a Solid Waste
18 Ordinance to be adopted by the Towns and applicable within the Town limits. The Towns may
19 negotiate a fee schedule that differs from fees established by the County for privatized curbside
20 solid waste or recycling services.
21 North Carolina General Statute 160A-327 (Attachment 2) provides that a unit of local
22- government may displace a private company that is providing collection services for household
23 solid waste or recovered material. The County is following the procedure outlined in GS 160A-
24 327. The earliest possible date for the Board to hold a hearing to consider implementing
25 provisions of the statue is April 23, 2013.
26 On March 7, 2013 the Board approved the scheduling of a public hearing on April 23,
27 2013 to discuss a proposal to move toward a county-wide Franchise agreement for curbside
28 Solid Waste and Recycling Services in the unincorporated areas of Orange County and
29 directed staff to proceed with the various steps required in NC General Statutes. Both rural
30 solid waste collections and rural curbside recycling could be included in a county-wide
31 Franchise Agreement.
32 The Board requested that staff present available options for Orange County to fund the
33 County's Recycling. A county-wide Franchise agreement for curbside Solid Waste and
34 Recycling Services in the unincorporated areas of Orange County is only one option being
35 considered by the Board.
36 Option 1 creates an Authority which would operate much like Orange Water and Sewer
37 Authority(OWASA), as a standalone regional solution. This option would require the
38 cooperation of two (2) or more local governments to form an Authority. An Authority would not
39 be included in the County's General Fund Budget and would be governed by an independent
40 board.
41 Options 2, 3, &4 explore the creation of a Solid Waste Tax Service District which would
42 function much like a Fire District. The size of the district and scope of services provided by the
43 district would be determined by the Board. A Solid Waste Tax Service District would not impact
44 the County General Fund but would be an independent special revenue fund.
45 Options 5 & 6 propose to create a Solid Waste Franchise Agreement which could
46 privatize rural curbside solid waste and/or rural curbside recycling. If Solid Waste collections
47 are part of a comprehensive franchise agreement solution, unincorporated Orange County
48 could be divided into districts which could be serviced by multiple private haulers. With either a
49 county-wide franchise agreement or dividing the County into districts, a number of the existing
11
1 twelve (12) private haulers may be displaced. Towns could opt in or opt out of a Franchise
2 Agreement.
3 Option 7 is the only option that would impact the County's General Fund Budget, by
4 financing recycling via the General Fund, and would possibly have impact on the funding
5 formula for Education, based on the 48.1% of the County's General Fund commitment to
6 Education.
7 Option 8 could eliminate rural curbside recycling, relying on Convenience Centers and
8 Drop-off sites. Urban and multifamily curbside recycling would be left up to the Towns.
9
10 Michael Talbert reviewed the options in more detail below:
11
12 Municipal Solid Waste& Recycling Funding Options:
13 1) Eliminate all 3-A Fees & Create a County-Wide Solid Waste Management Authority.
14 North Carolina General Statute's 153A-421 (Attachment 3) outlines how two or more units of
15 local government may create a regional solid waste management authority by adopting
10 substantially identical resolutions to that effect in accordance with the provisions of this Article.
17 The resolutions creating a regional solid waste management authorityandanyannmndnments
18 thereto are referred to in this Article as the"charter" of the regional solid waste management
19 authority. Units of local government which participate in the creation of a regional solid waste
20 management authority are referred to in this Article as "members". The purpose of a regional
21 solid waste management authority is to provide environmentally sound, cost effective
22 management of solid waste, including storage, collection, transporting, separation, processing,
23 ranyo|ing, and disposal of solid waste in order to protect the public hea(th, smfety, and welfare.
24 (The Basic 3-R Fee could remain in place as part of decisions an Authority might make in
25 determining revenue sources as services are ectended county-wide.)
26
27 2) Keep only the Basic 3-R Fee in place and supplement recycling with the creation of a
28 County-Wide Solid Waste Tax Service District to serve unincorporated areas of the County.
29 Encourage the Towns to join the District, otherwise Urban and Multi-family curbside recycling
30 would be left up to the Towns.
31
32 3) Eliminate all 3-A Fees including the Basic 3-R Fee & Create a County-Wide Solid
33 Waste Tax Service District, to serve unincorporated areas of the County. Allow the Towns the
34 option to join the District, otherwise Urban and Multi-family curbside recycling would be left up
35 to the Towns. The new Solid Waste Tax Service District would fund the operation all five (5)
36 Convenience Centers and recycling Drop-off Sites.
37
38 4) Keep the Basic 3-R Fee and Create a Solid Waste Tax Service District for current
39 Rural Curbside Routes serving 13,730 households. Urban and Multifamily curbside recycling
40 would be left up to the Towns. A Solid Waste Tax Service District could be expanded to include
41 all of the unincorporated areas of Orange County.
42
43 5) Keep only the Basic 3-R Fee in place and create a County-Wide Solid Waste
44 Franchise Agreement that could cover all Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Collections and
45 Recycling in the unincorporated areas of Orange County. Municipalities within the County could
46 have the option to participate in the Franchise Agreement and negotiate a fee schedule that
47 differs from the fees established by the County. An anticipated time line is discussed above.
48
49 6) Keep only the Basic 3-R Fee in place and create a County-Wide Recycling Franchise
50 Agreement that could cover all curbside recycling in the unincorporated areas of Orange
12
1 County. Municipalities within the County could have the option to participate in the Franchise
2 agreement and negotiate a fee schedule that differs from the fees established by the County.
3 Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Collections by the Towns and private haulers in the
4 unincorporated areas of the County would not change.
5
6 7) Keep only the Basic 3-R Fee in place and supplement recycling with a contribution
7 from the General Fund, estimated to be $1.7 million annually,to keep Urban, Rural and
8 Multifamily curbside recycling in place. A contribution of $1.7 million from the General Fund to
9 the Solid Waste Fund would equal 1.1 cents on the County Property tax rate. The funding
10 formula for Schools sets a target of 48.1%of General Fund Expenditures for Schools. This
11 would add $1.6 million for a total cost to the County of$3.3 Million or 2.1 cents on the County
12 Property Tax Rate to supplement recycling with a General Fund Contribution.
13
14 8) Keep the Basic 3-R Fee, eliminate all other 3-R Fees, and eliminate rural curbside
15 recycling, relying on Convenience Centers and Drop-off-sites. Urban and Multifamily curbside
16 recycling would be left up to the Towns. The County could increase the number of Recycling
17 Drop-off-sites, both urban & rural, and increase the Basic 3-R fee to pay for the operation of the
10 new Centers.
19
20 Michael Taibert said that any and all of these options could be done.
21
22 Commissioner McKee noted a correction to the discussion of item 3 and said that this
23 item does eliminate the basic 3R fee, though 2 and 4 do not.
24 Frank Clifton said there may be other tweaks on any of these options. He said this
25 challenge was presented following a court decision it presents an opportunity to discuss solid
26 waste county-wide. He said each of the towns has been pursuing other alternatives and these
27 proposed options are a continuation of discussions from the transfer station.
28 He reviewed and commented on the following recommendations:
29
30 1. The optimal long-range solution for Orange County in this situation may be the
31 formation of a Solid Waste Management Authority provided for within North Carolina General
32 Statutes. The hurdle to this approach is that at least one of the three primary Towns within the
33 county must also agree to the creation of the Authority. A comprehensive approach to both
34 solid waste and recycling services can then be pursued that is functional and fundable via many
35 various options. Services can be provided by County staff, contracted, franchised, optional or
36 mandatory programs can be developed and/or otherwise formulated to compensate for a
37 transitional process that ensures solid waste management and recycling remain an
38 environmental priority in Orange County. (Consensus on this approach among the towns may
39 evolve into a protracted process; a timely decision would be essential to success.)
40
41 2. If no town is willing to work with the County on the Solid Waste Management
42 Authority ap ach, then a county-wide Solid Waste Tax Service District approach is the more
43 comprehensive and flexible option. It can provide services via County staffing, franchised,
44 contracted, optional or mandatory programs or otherwise formulated approaches to both solid
45 waste and recycling services as long as services are delivered and funded on some basis
46 county-wide in the unincorporated areas of the County and can allow one or more towns to opt
47 into the District once created. (This approach could include some combination of the Basic 3R
48 Fees along with a county-wide tax.)
49
13
1 3. If either the Solid Waste Management Authority or the County-Wide Solid Waste Tax
2 Service District approaches are not acceptable, then some configuration of a modified franchise
3 approach to providing both solid waste and recycling services within the unincorporated areas
4 of Orange County on a voluntary participation basis offers a solution. It allows existing
5 participants in the unincorporated areas to gain the services (and pay for them directly) and
6 does not require persons not using the services to pay for services they are not using (even
7 though the services are available). Towns can pursue individual franchise agreements for
8 services and/or be included in the County's efforts if they choose. (Again, the Basic 3R Fees
9 could remain in place to supporrconvenience center operations.)
10
11 He said that the third option is more complicated due to the requirement to send out
12 individual notices to each property owner involved, which would be 13,000 plus notices.
13 He said that, in concept, the issue is to address what is in front of the Board now; but
14 the reality is that there is an opportunity to pursue a more comprehensive approach and long
15 term solution.
16 He pointed out that this is not a staffing issue with the County. He said that the
17 employees at the landfill are being transferred to other open spots. He pointed out that the
18 County currently contracts the curbside services within all three towns. The county crews only
19 pick up at multi-family units and governmental bui|dinga, and the other areas are on month to
20 month contracts for curbside recycling pickup.
21 Chair Jacobs said, after receiving a letter from Mayor Stevens, he asked Mayor Stevens
22 if he were amenable to working with Orange County. He said the Mayor indicated, yes.
23 Chair Jacobs spoke with Mayor Chilton yesterday and was told that he was interested
24 and Chair Jacobs received a letter las month indicating that the Town board would be
25 interested in maintaining the same system and was interested in working with the County.
26 Chair Jacobs said he had lunch with Mayor Kleinschmidt last week and brought up this
27 issue.
28 He said that if a tax service district is to be conaidered, that would involve the towns. He
29 would like to talk to the three Mayors to flush out what would be possible.
30 Frank Clifton said if a solid waste authority or tax district were innp}emented, it would not
31 apply until the next fiscal year.
32 Commissioner Price asked what would happen to private haulers under options 2, 3,
33 and 4.
34 Frank Clifton said there could be more than one hauler, even under a franchise
35 situation. He said either the authority or the tax districts can maintain services as they are now,
36 though the fee structure may have to change.
37 Commissioner Price said she is more concerned about the 12 private haulers and their
38 sustainability.
39 Frank Clifton said right now there is no relationship with these haulers. He said it is an
40 open market system.
41 Chair Jacobs said, if it is a taxing district for recycling, there would be no effect on
42 municipal solid waste haulers who are currently picking up household garbage.
43 Commissioner Dorosin said Chair Jacobs talked with the jurisdictions and he needed a
44 clarification on the options. He said that he understood that the taxing districts in 2, 3 and 4
45 don't require the municipalities to participate and the only one that requires participation is the
46 solid waste management authority. He asked if any of the conversations with town leaders had
47 included discussions of involvement in a solid waste management authority.
48 Chair Jacobs said the conversations were addressing the current integrated recycling
49 system, and the mayors were supportive of options that maintain this system and were
50 theoretically committed to participation. He only brought up the waste authority option with one
14
1 mayor, who was not very interested at this point. He noted that this will likely be a lengthy
2 process and there will be many more discussions.
3 Frank Clifton said the towns would have to agree to be part of a district in the
4 countywide system. He said that the towns have the authority to regulate recycling in their own
5 jurisdiction. If the towns desire to continue the current system, each of them would have to
6 agree to opt in for recycling services that would be paid for with a countywide tax.
7 Commissioner Dorosin noted that if the towns do not opt in the county could still move
8 forward.
9 Frank Clifton said yes, but it would be only for unincorporated areas. He said that a
18 special tax can be enacted for the unincorporated areas, but the towns have to agree to
11 participate.
12 Commissioner Pelissier asked if the municipalities have the authority to levy fees, and
13 would it help or hinder the Board in any of these options.
14 John Roberts said the court said the county did not have the authority to levy a fee, but
15 that the municipalities can levy fees. He said he believes the towns have that authority, but the
16 town attorneys disagree.
17 Commissioner Pelissier asked if it would help the situation if the towns agreed that there
18 were such authority.
19 John Roberts said it would result in a situation where the towns could, by resolution,
20 declare the county has the right to continue the current service within town jurisdiction. The
21 towns would then handle establishment of the fee through their budget process, and would
22 authorize the county to collect the fee and run the program. He said this would be considerably
23 easier.
24 Commissioner Pelissier asked how long it would take to establish an authority. She also
25 mshed, if only one municipality agreed tu participate, would it be possible to add others to the
26 authority later on down the road.
27 John Roberts said he does not know how long the establishment would take, likely
28 several months at the least. He said it is a step by step procedural process. He said
29 municipalities can opt in later.
30 Frank Clifton said that if one town agreed to participate, the process could be started
31 fairly quickly and then other towns could join later by following the process. He noted that the
32 eastern part of the state has a large solid waste authority, involving 4 or 5 counties. He said
33 that the towns all have their own solid waste oo||action, paid for out of general funda, and the
34 focus should be on recycling, as this is why towns would join.
35 Commissioner Rich said she would like to hear more information from Gayle Wilson on
36 his professional opinion regarding the options that have been presented.
37 Gayle Wilson said ultimately a solid waste management authority would be best, but this
38 may take up to 3 years. He said he is not aware of any solid waste authority that doesn't have a
39 transfer station, landfill, or some sort of infrastructure that serves as an anchor and a financial
40 source.
41 Gayle Wilson said that, for Option 8, he respectfully observes that it does not appear
42 that the board is ready and able to enter into multiple siting processes for additional
43 convenience centers and drop off sites.
44 He said that Option 7 can be implemented fairly quickly but will not be a long term
45 option.
46 He said that Options 5'6' recommend frmnchising, and he does not think franchising of
47 municipal collection is an appropriate method. He said the franchise option is a deal killer for
48 jointly working with towns. He said franchised recycling collection tends to perform poorly.
49 He said that district taxes seem to be the most viable option, either on the way to an
50 authority, or in lieu of an authority. He said that Option 3 would need a year or so of study to
15
1 figure out details. He said that the county wide district would be the easiest option, minus some
2 equity issues. He said that if a county wide district is implemented, there would have to be a
3 plan to extend services to the currently un-served areas. He said that a solid waste district that
4 only includes the current service area or a slightly expanded area would be more complicated to
5 set up but still has potential.
6
7 Commissioner Rich asked if he wanted to combine options.
8
9 Gayle Wilson said yes, maybe some variation of 2 and 4, maybe ending up with 3, once
10 an evaluation is done of fees-that can be consolidated. He said-he is not sure this can be done
11 in the short term. He said that countywide or existing service area would be best in the short
12 term. He said that he would not look at an option that did not include the towns.
13 Commissioner Rich asked if he was suggesting that the next step strategy is to engage
14 the towns.
15 Gayle Wilson said the board needs to coalesce around their favorite option to have a
16 solid concept before going to the towns.
17 Commissioner McKee said he wanted to provide clarification based on some emails he
18 has received with misinformation about the recycling program. He said that he wants to make
19 clear that no member of the Board of County Commissioners has mentioned anything about
20 dismantling the recycling program.
21 He said that he has had conversations with several town council members and there is
22 some support on the part of a few people, but this is for future discussion.
23 Commissioner McKee asked John Roberts if an inter-local agreement be used as a
24 short term bridge with the towns to continue the urban recycling program for a couple of years
25 without depleting reserves or utilizing general funds.
26 John Roberts said an inter-local agreement could be used, and he believes the towns do
27 have that authority. He cited-statute 168-17, subsection D, which backs up his belief but
28 stressed that many of the town attorneys do not agree.
29 Commissioner McKee said he is convinced that if there is not a discussion with the
30 towns upfront, the result will be a fragmented system.
31 Chair Jacobs said he has been chair of this board before, and it is difficult to get others
32 to talk about solid waste. He said that the closure of the landfill will now force something to be
33 done differently. He said that when the Board decided not to site a transfer station in Orange
34 County, there was a commitment to explore partnerships with other jurisdictions. He said that
35 the towns have had those conversations but the Board has not, which leaves a lot of
36 opportunity to connect.
37 He said he is interested in third party facilitation of pay as you throw.
38 He said that, as far as the schools, there is an understanding of the difficult
39 circumstances and he said that options 2, 3 and 4 would involve a separate fund. He also said
40 it is possible to fold this into the solid waste enterprise fund or into a new fund.
41 Chair Jacobs said there were seven people signed up to speak and then the Board can
42 come back to what the best options are best to consider moving forward. Those issues will be
43 researched and put on the agenda for the April 23 public hearing.
44 Chair Jacobs said a letter had been received from staff with questions. He said that
45 hopefully these questions will be answered during the discussions of options.
46
47 PUBLIC COMMENT:
48 Sue Scope spoke and said the following (which is included in hard copy form in the
49 abstract):
16
1 My name is Sue Scope I am a parent of 2teenagers that go to CHHS. I live in the
2 unincorporated area of Orange County As a parent, resident of OC, and someone who cares
3 about the environment, I am speaking out tonight against the idea of franchising, because I
4 believe that trash is a pubUc-responsibility. I believe that the government should always be at
5 the helm of the trash disposal and trash management process. I know that Orange County has
6 done an outstanding job of keeping all of the waste issues connected in order to improve
7 disposal. For those who may not know, currently our public system integrates many of the
8 pieces of this puzzle. This includes, but is not limited to:
9
10 a. Convenience Sites
11 b. Hazardous Waste Services.
12 c. Government Building Recycling
13 d. The Organics Program
14 e. Commercial recycling of business waste
15
16 Personally, I have been involved in the issues of waste and composting since last year.
17 In November of 2012, my friend Bing Roenigk and I approached Todd LoFrese, the assistant
18 superintendent of the Chapel Hill Carrboro School District and asked that polystyrene (ps) trays
19 be removed from school lunch rooms. We knew that ps is considered a possible carcinogen by
20 the EPA and FDA, and especially when heated, poses a chemical danger to humans. The heat
21 aspect is important because our kids are eating hot meals off of these trays; and in particular,
22 when a meal is especially good, the kids are scraping the tray to get as much food off of it as
23 possible, thus increasing their exposure. In addition,they are not compostable, and take
24 roughly 5,000 years to decompose. Todd and many other dedicated people, including Muriel
25 Williman, Blair Pollack, Liz Caftan°, David Dean, Carolyn Buckner, Amy Rickard, Amy Brooks,
26 and others, helped us to understand this issue. I was truly surprised and encouraged by the
27 sense of community and the dedication of all of the people who helped us.
28 Through this issue, I realized that Orange County has a process that looks to the future.
29 It exists when a Phillips Middle School parent can test and implement a program that now
30 enables the schools to reduce the weight of their trash, as well as recycle milk cartons. It exists
31 when schools are starting or growing student-led Sustainability Clubs. It exists when there are
32 Sustainability Awards given out to those in the community who have made a difference in
33 teaching the importance of the environment. The new elementary school in Chapel Hill will
34 have many sustainability practices from the time its doors open. And it exists when two parents
35 can ask for, and get the help of, so many of our public sector's employees in order to address a
36 health issue.
37 Timer went off, and her statement was cut short. She concluded with the followi
38 So my primary purpose here tonight is to ask you to close the door on the franchise
39 discussion. The manager's focus, while addressing, the letter of a legal issue that needs
40 attention, is missing the primary point of this endeavor. The point is our children. So I am
41 asking you to use that time to decide on the best way forward that uses government resources
42 in the best way possible. Let's continue on that path and encourage each school, business, and
43 homeowner to continue to make theinterre|a1innship'thenwvvnornne|^ forourcornnnunity.
44
45 Bing Roenigk introduced herself and made the following presentation:
46 For some of you that do not know, my past career was in local government in the
47 financial and budget area. I am going to put my budget hat on here and express some concerns
48 about the County Manager's proposal.
17
1 1. In reading the agenda abstract, the Manager proposes to use enterprise fund reserves
2 to allow the County time to transition to an alternative solution. Typically, reserves are
3 savings set aside for some specific future need or purpose.
4 What are you deciding not to do if you spend the reserves on maintaining the integrated public
5 recycling program? Ijust-want to make-sure that this is not the death knell of the integrated
6 recycling program.
7 2. I question the cost-effectiveness in shifting from a centralized and integrated operation
8 to a decentralized franchise operation. Administrative costs will be shifted to the
9 schools, towns, and county because they will have to spend time searching for the best
10 service/price.
11 a. It seems like fees will be higher for many residents with this loss of economy of
12 scale that is currently embedded in the fees for integrated public recycling
13 services.
14 - I understand that several years ago both school systems joined the public
15 recycling program b/c it was a huge savings ($80K).
16
17 Operational Concerns
18 1. By going to a franchise arrangement and allowing residents to "opt in", county oversight
19 is removed and this, by its very nature, will reduce the effectiveness of public recycling
20 program in-terms of waste diversion commitment. Need consistency is what is recycled
21 —when, where, what. We are better together than apart.
22 2. The county currently has a commercial composting program. Will this program continue
23 to exist? Think of the million plus trays from the school systems that could be diverted
24 to compost! Orange County is the only county in the state that provides this service! We
25 need to continue to be the leaders! This is the future of waste diversion!
26 CONCLUSION
27 Stop franchise discussion and efforts until all other options are vetted.
28 - Maintain and expand integrated public recycling program
29 Establish a short- and long-term plan to manage solid waste in Orange County in a
30 comprehensive and sustainable manner that continues to further divert the current
31 waste stream from the landfill.
32 Include public input and a process for public recommendation in that plan.
33
34 Final Comment: In making budget decisions, be penny wise, but not pound foolish when it
35 comes to garbage.
36
37 Jessica Bollinger, owner of the Efland Trash Service, said there are two issues she
38 would like to address, and the first is the proposed waste franchise in Orange County. She said
39 that by implementing this system, small business such as hers are in danger of being displaced.
40 She said that residents of Orange County should have the option to choose which trash
41 recycling services they utilize. She said that her company and other private companies are
42 specifically designed to accommodate residents in rural areas and can travel down drives and
43 roads that larger and heavier trucks cannot travel. She said her business also provides
18
1 backdoor service to elderly and disabled oustonners, as well as recycling at no ex ra charge.
2 She said that a waste franchise would have a negative impact on those s ia| needs
3 residents. She said that option 6 seems to provide the best opportunity for businesses like
4 hers to remain in business. She said the second issue is the alternative dumping options due
5 to the closing of the Orange County Landfill. She said that the only current option is to
6 transport the trash to Durham,which is a 50 mile round trip and doubled dumping fees. She
7 said that all other surrounding counties and landfills have denied use of their facilities. She said-
8 thmt, being a small company, these private businesses transport less than one ton of recycling
9- or trash per trip and with the increased ratea, mileage and time, will soon be out of business.
10 She proposed that small, registered trash companies be allowed to dump at the convenience
11 centers with a special permit and a flat rate pay system that is currently in use at the landfill.
12 She said that this would include only companies that hand unload and separate trash and
13 recycling. She said that a pay as you throw system might benefit individuals, but it would more
14 than double small company fees. She said that this proposal would allow Orange County to
15 continue collecting a portion of the revenues lost at the closing of the landfill. She said that her
10 company alone paid over$7,000 in dumping fees. She said it would also support local
17 business and local economy.
18
19 Bonnie Hauser, Orange County Voice, read the following:
20 We studied the rural curbside recycling 5 years ago. At the time, the county wanted to
21 close convenience centers and introduce waste franchises. We surveyed the trash and
22 recycling habits of rural households. Dr Karl Hoffman, demographer, led our team—and we
23 had 881 responses from households throughout the county north and west of Chapel Hill.
24 Based on our survey responses, 85%of rural residents recycle regu|edy. 60%compost yard
25 waste, 48% compost kitchen waste. Given trends in composdng, those numbers could be
26 higher now.
27 First some basics- The County's five convenience centers are the county's most
28 important recycling service. The county's website reports that over 40% of the residential
29 recyclables go to convenience centers and drop sites. That is over 5000 tons a year. The rural
30 curbside recycling program is much smaller—about 15%. or just over 1800 tons a year.
31 Today the county provides rural curbside recycling to roughly 13,500 rural households.
32 Thousands of those households DO NOT USE THE SERVICE TODAY. They already opt out.
33 Our survey, which was consistent with the county's own dsta, suggested that about 40%of the
34 13,500 households opted out. That's about 5000 families.
35 Our survey asked why. Most respondents (about 80%) said it was easier to take their
36 recyclables to the convenience centers when they took their trash. Others mentioned service
37 issuea, mostly access to their home and frequency of service.
38 You may want to verify with the county, but we're guessing that thousands of families
39 still opt out of rural curbside recycling. Since our waste reduction rates are at an all time high,
40 there is no evidence that"opting out" has adversely impacted recycling rates in any way.
41 There is an issue of fees. According to UNC's School of Gowernnnent, the county is
42 legally required to allow households to"opt out"of paying the curbside collection fee of$38 a
43 year. We can't say how many people would opt out of the fee or how that impacts the
44 economics of the program. In the interests of transparency, we hope you'll explore those
45 economics further.
46 We realize that the county is facing difficult economic issues with all aspects of trash
47 and recycling. One thing is nertain, rural residents care about recycling; and even though
48 thousands already opt out of rural curbside recycling pnogranm, they recycle heavily and
49 contribution to county's waste reduction results.
50 Thank you.
19
1
2
3 Rob Taylor introduced himself as a resident of uninco Orange County and a
4 former Orange County Recycling Programs Manager 10). He referenced the seven
5 municipalities in NC who assess a fee directly to residents for solid waste or recycling services;
6 and he offered to provide this list if it would help convince the municipalities to think about that
7 option. He mentioned that the Orange County Voice statement regarding the amount of
8 material coming from rural areas. He said that the tonnage also includes the urban drop off
9 sites as well, which serve urban businesses. He said that a franchise system where
lO governments must engage directly with a private service provider is not the right solution for
11 Orange County. He said these systems have substantially lower participation than the current
12 systems and this would increase the amount of waste rather than optimizing recovery.
13 He said that that the integration of the current systems increases e#ic)enoy, and this will be
14 disrupted if the system is taken apart with the franchise plan. He noted that the rural route also
15 serves parks, fire departments, businesses and other county facilities. He said that other
16 municipalities have expressed desire to participate and the Board needs to find a way to make
17 that work. He said that funding the recycling system out of reserves will undermine public
18 recycling on funding the next fiscal year. This is because the money was saved for equipment.
19 He said that the franchise should be rejected anda000peradvesyaternputinp|one. vvhioh
20 keeps everyone together.
31 Amy Brooks represents her company, Brooks Contractor, with a hauling and composting
22 facility in Chatham County and her business is contracted by Orange County Solid Waste to
23 collect from 32 locations in the County. She said the venture into waste collection started with
24 the cooperation of the county and serves environmentally minded residents. She feels that the
25 only reason this program is on the chopping block is because it is so successful. She said that
26 there is an environmental mess to clean up and a public to educate. She said that Orange
27 County has been a light to lead the way and the surrounding communities are making moves
28 toward implementing programs that follow the example. She said that 1,600 tons of waste has
29 been collected and composted by her company in Orange County this fiscal year. She said that
30 4,000 cubic yards of compost and compost blends were also shipped out to local farms,
31 community gardens, and landscape communities. She urged the Board not to let this program
32 die.
33 Anagha Kalvade introduced herself as a volunteer and coach for the Friends Recycling
34 Team. She said that the team has been active and in the news lately. She noted that the
35 project started with the announcement about the landfill closing and a study was done to look at
36 how much material could have been saved from the landfill and sent to recycling. She said
37 that over a period of 20 days, 690 pounds of recyclables ended up in the landfill. She said that
38 a big part of the success of the pr ject was the Solid Waste Management Team and she
39 recognized their efforts. She said that there is a lot of education tied into this department, and
40 she noted plans to execute this in all of the County schools. She said that if only cartons are
41 recycled in these schools, it will account for 170,000 pounds of material. She said that the
42 closing of the landfill presents the wrong time to put more burdens on schools and citizens and
43 she stressed the need for education about recycling and composting. She expressed hope that
44 the current system would not be changed.
45 Commissioner Mckee asked if there was an issue with the earlier request from Jessica
46 Bollinger to allow small trash pickup businesses to dispose of waste at convenience centers.
47 John Roberts said he does not know of any issues with this, and he referred to Gayle
48 Wilson for input.
49 Frank Clifton said those are convenience centers, not transfer stations, and there are
50 some permitting issues.
20
1 Gayle Wilson said he would have some concerns and would have to have discussions
2 with waste management. He does think that this would potentially characterize the convenience
3 centers as transfer centers and would subject them to permitting and a new arena of rules and
4 regulations. He said that once these centers begin to receive commercial waste, it changes
5 things and the state would have to interpret it. He said there would need to be considerable
6 analysis before he would recommend this arrangement.
7 Commissioner McKee said he just wanted clarification of this issue.
8 Commissioner Rich-said she would like to take franchise option off the list. She noted
9 that there has been no positive input on this from anyone involved.
10 Commissioner Dorosin said that he would like-to look at the goals. He said that he feels
11 there are three goals: 1) Continue to maximize recycling; 2) Ensuring the maximum equity for
12 residents; and 3) Trying to ensure fairness for small businesses and county staff.
13 He said with that in mind, the tax districts, the authority, or eliminating curbside would be
14 the options that maximize the three goals.
15 He asked for clarification that, with the tax districts, anyone in the district would be
16 assessed a tax and everyone would be provided the service.
17 Frank Clifton said in the case of a large lot of land, the relationship between the fee and
18 the service is different now. He noted that everyone who pays the fee does not use the service,
19 even though it is available, but the cost is linked to the estimates of service provided. He said
20 that the tax would be appried by valuations within the district that would determine how much
21 each individual paid, not necessarilythe waste stream or usage. He said this has to be looked
22 at more closely and there would be isSues to work out and modifications be made over the
23 years, based on the cost of the services. He said that the authority has more flexibility than the
24 tax district in how revenue is raised.
25 C|onmnnissinne, Pelissier said her first choice is a solid waste authority although other
26 things may have to be done in the meantime. She addressed the issue of equity, and noted that
27 there were discussions about the convenience centers and charging access fees that were
28 more expensive in rural areas than in urban areas. She asked if this might be a consideration
29 in the current equity discussions with the tax district.
30 Frank Clifton said that there can be a combination of countywide tax and user fees to
31 accommodate for the equity issue.
32 Commissioner Price said that there needs to be a look at the volume of the smaller
33 haulers and consider that they are providing a convenience service for residents who would
34 normally come the convenience centers anyway.
35 She said she is also ready to remove the franchise option off the table.
36 Commissioner Mckee said he supports taking the franchise agreement off the table. He
37 said that he feels the Board will have to move forward with discussion of the tax district or solid
38 waste authority. He said that it makes him uncomfortable to move forward without a discussion
39 with the three partnering municipalities. He said those discussions should not happen as an
40 afterthought and he feels these conversations should happen before decisions are made. He
41 noted that there will be an interim solution.
42 Commissioner Rich agreed with Commissioner McKee and said the conversations need
43 to be opened up to everyone before decisions are made. She said that there also needs to be
44 a fourth goal, to not use reserves for funding.
45 She feels that in the long run,the authority is the way to 0o, but there is a process to get
46 there and it took OWASA a number of years to get there. She said her suggestion would be to
47 start with a tax district and move to an authority down the road. She suggested that the current
48 rural district be kept.
49 Commissioner Gordon said that there should be goals and recycling should be
50 maximized. She said there is no information on how cost effective these plans are, and this
21
1 makes it difficult to make a decision. She said there also needs to be a goal that the county will
2 consult with the towns as potential partners, and there needs to be more analysis of the pros
3 and cons of each option. She noted that this problem has been around for a long time and
4 through all of the difficulties, the recycling program-has been stellar and this needs to be
5 maintained.
6 Chair Jacobs said he would also add-a goal of creating a system that enhances the
7 possibility of a comprehensive solid waste system in partnership with the towns. He said he
8 has nointenaatinanauthorityifitdoesnotmddreseso{idwaste.
9 He stated his five goals as follows: 1) Cost effectiveness, 2) Maximize recycling, 3)
10 Maximize equity, 4) Fairness to staff and haulers, and 5) a system that advances
11 comprehensive waste reduction in partnership with the towns.
12 Chair Jacobs said he is with the m jority in wanting to get rid of the franchising option.
13 He said that he sees the point of not using reserves, but he does not feel this is part of the
14 basic goal of solid waste planning. He said this just needs to be part of the diocuooion, along
15 with creation of a time frame and agreements with the municipalities and planning for a solid
16 waste authority if that is the option that is chosen.
17 He said that it seems that 2 options have really been the focus- Option 1, and some
• 18 permutation of Options 2, 3 and 4. He made suggestions for moving forward.
19 Commissioner McKee said he feels that the Board should not remove any funding
20 option such as reserves. He said that the limited time and the long time frame of putting
21 something in place need to-be considered.
22 Commissioner Dorosin agreed with all of the comments and said that he feels Option 8
23 should be part of the discussion, because the issue of serving the rural area falls to the Board.
24 Frank Clifton suggested the choices be narrowed down and if the franchise option is off
25 the table then the public haulers should be notified before the public hearing that their concerns
26 no longer exist. He noted that the towns are in the same process as the county and will take a
27 break in June.
28 Chair Jacobs reviewed the discussion points, goals and options.
29 A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin seconded by Commissioner Rich
30 to approve:
31 1. Adopting 5 goals related to recycling and solid waste:
32 a. Want a system that is cost effective;
33 b. Want a system that maximizes recycling;
34 c. Want a system that maximizes equity;
35 d. Want a system that is fair to staff and private haulers;
36 e. Want a system that advances the possibility of comprehensive waste
37 reduction in partnership with the towns.
38 2. Consider options 2, 3, 4 permutated into one option; consider option 1 for a solid
39 waste authority for either a long term or alternative option; and leave on the table
40 option 8 that would have a 3-R fee with no curbside recycling.
41 3. Hold a public hearing on April 23 where the three options will be presented.
22
1 4. Notify haulers that the Board is removing from options under consideration the
2 franchising system.
3 Chair Jacobs clarified that options 2, 3, and 4 were related to a countywide tax
4 district; staff will provide pros and cons, with costs and revenue sources for each option,
5 and a timetable for implementation of each option.
6 Commissioner Gordon asked what was done with option 7, and Chair Jacobs said this
7 option only-addresses cost effectiveness and how to pay for things, without being an option in
8 and of itself.
9 Commissioner Gordon noted the statement of the motion should include the pros and
10 cons, with costs and revenue sources, for each option, as the Chair previously said.
11 Commissioner Pelissier said she does not understand of cost effectiveness and how this
12 can be interpreted.
13 Frank Clifton said that looking at the system as it is now, but there are cost efficiencies
14 that could be acquired to deliver the same service or an expanded service, because of
15 methodology used. He gave the example of an automated system with roliout cans providing
16 labor and equipment savings that allow for a larger service district for the same cost.
17 ' Commissioner Pelissier said this means that it is really more about efficiency in how
18 things are done, rather than how charges or taxes are done.
19 Frank Clifton noted that the least costly system for the county is to have more drop off
20 sites as this eliminates drivers and trucks. He said that even this has pros and cons and all of
21 these will have to be looked at.
22 Chair Jacobs asked if it made sense to substitute efficiency for effectiveness in the
23 motion.
24 Commissioner Dorosin accepted this as a friendly amendment and Commissioner Rich
25 seconded.
26 Gayle Wilson asked if the discussion is regarding efficiency in rural and urban curbside.
27 Chair Jacobs said that this discussion is related to recycling.
28 Vote was taken on the following motion, which included the friendly amendment:
29
30 1. Adopting 5 goals related to recycling and solid waste:
31 a. Want a system that is cost efficient;
32 b. Want a system that maximizes recycling;
33 c. Want a system that maximizes equity;
34 d. Want a system that is fair to staff and private haulers;
35 e. Want a system that advances the possibility of comprehensive waste
36 reduction in partnership with the towns.
37 2. Consider options 2, 3, 4 permutated into one option; consider option 1 for a solid
38 waste authority for either a long term or alternative option; and leave on the table
39 option 8 that would have a 3-R fee with no curbside recycling.
40 3. Hold a public hearing on April 23 where the three options will be presented.
41 4. Notify haulers that the Board is removing from options under consideration the
42 franchising system.
23
1
2 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
3 c. Performance Evaluation Process for Three Staff Members Appointed by the Board—
4 County Attorney, Clerk, and Manager
5
6 The Board reviewed and considered approval-of the performance evaluation process for
7 three staff members appointed by the Board—County Attorney, Clerk to the Board and
8 Manager, including proposed scopes of work.
9
10 Attachment 1 is the Employee Evaluation Process for the County Attorney and Clerk to the
11 Board, which includes the a) Process Prior to the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC)
12 Evaluation Meeting; b) the actual process during and after the BOCC Evaluation Meeting (Closed
13 Session); c) Employee's Work Plan/Goals; and d) Employee's Current Salary and Status.
14 At the March 12, 2013 work session, the Board of Commissioners discussed informally
15 an evaluation process for the three staff members who are appointed by the Board. The
10 Board's direction from that work session was for the sub-committee (Commissioner Renee
17 Price, Commissioner Penny Rich and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker) to bring back a revised
18 Performance Evaluation Process for the Clerk to the Board and the County Attorney, along with
19 examples of evaluation forms for the Board to review; and to bring back a proposed scope of
20 work for facilitating the County Manager's performance evaluation process with the use of a
21 consultant with a funding option not to exceed $3,300.
22 The proposed pr ject goals for the evaluation process are:
23 O Provide County Attorney, Clerk, and Manager with feedback on her/his performance,
24 identifying strengths and areas for improvement
25 O Foster effective communication and strengthen working relationship between Board of
26 Commissioners and County Attorney, Clerk, and Manager
27 0 Link performance evaluation to decision about compensation for coming year
28 There is a financial impact of up to $3,300 associated with the County Manager's
29 performance evaluation process. Funding would come from the Clerk to the Board's annual
30 budget.
31 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Dorosin to
32 accept attachment 1 as the Orange County Board of Commissioners evaluation process for
33 county attorney and clerk to the Board.
34
35 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
36
37 Chair Jacobs clarified that the process will include a conversation with the employee and
38 a conversation with the board before any feedback is given to the employee.
39
40 Commissioner Gordon noted that there will be a review soon and, to her knowledge,
41 there has been no evaluation instrument adopted.
42 Donna Baker said that there are proposed forms, and she mentioned the issue of hiring
43 a consultant for the manager review.
44 Chair Jacobs suggested there be two more motions, one regarding the evaluation
45 instrument and one regarding the manager.
46 Commissioner Gordon said that the forms cannot be changed much at this point, but
47 that by the end of the process there should be an evaluation of the evaluation process. She
48 said that the two evaluation instruments presented are very different from each other. She
49 suggested that the instrument should conform to the process with regard to rating categories.
50 She said the rating scales should be standardized.
- -
24
1 Donna Baker suggested that a consultant look over the forms She suggested that the
2 current forms could be used now because of time constraints.
3 Commissioner Gordon suggested that the board adopt the forms for this evaluation, with
4 the changes that will-conform the evaluation forms to the process.
5 Commissioner Gordon made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Rich, that the
6 evaluation process 1) Conforms to the adopted procedures,2) has a standardized rating scale,
7 and 3) re-visits the instruments subsequent to the review of the attorney and the clerk.
8
9 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
10
11 Donna Baker asked about supportive documentation, such as information from prior
12 evaluations. She asked if this is acceptable to attach to the evaluation.
13 Commissioner Gordon said yes.
14
15 Commissioner Rich made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Price to appropriate up
16 to $3,300 to work with a consultant in developing a performance evaluation process for the
17 manager.
18
19 Commissioner Dorosin said when this was discussed earlier he expressed his opinion
20 that he does not believe an outside consultant is needed to evaluate the manager; he would
21 advocate an internal process.
22 Commissioner McKee asked what the Board is hoping to achieve with the consultant.
23 Commissioner Rich said it seems there is no consistent way to review the manager and
24 when a consultant was brought in to discuss this, she felt there needed to be more consistency.
25 She said that the manager is happy to set this up. Commissioner Rich has worked with the
26 consultant in question and she is experienced in this area.
27 Commissioner McKee said he is conflicted because this is a lot of money to be spent,
28 but he has participated in two of these evaluations and he did not feel it was fair to the manager
29 or the county. He said he will support this, although he has some reservations.
30 Commissioner Price said the total amount may not need to be spent. She said that with
31 nothing currently in |aCe, the consultant can be very helpful and in the future there will be
32 something standardized in place.
33 Commissioner Pelissier said she does not have a problem with steps one and two,
34 which involve coming up with the process, but she does have a problem with spending money
35 to compile the ratings. She said she does not want someone else to be part of that process.
36
37 VOTE:Ayes, 5 (Chair Jacobs, Commissioner Gordon, Commissioner McKee, Commissioner
38 Price and Commissioner Rich); Nays, 2 (Commissioner Dorosin and Commissioner Pelissier)
39
40 MOTION PASSED
41
42 8. Reports
43 NONE
44
45 9. County Manager's
46 NONE
47
48 10. County Attorney's Report
49 NONE
50
25
1 11. Appointments
2
3 a. Orange County Arts Commission—Appointments
4 The Board considered making appointments to the Orange County Arts Commission.
5 The Arts Commission will be awarding their Spring 2013 grant allocations in June and
6 have indicated that experienced Board members are needed for choosing the recipients of
7 these grants.
8 The newly adopted Board of County Commissioners Advisory Board policy states:
g
lU • No person appointed to an Orange County advisory board shall serve on that
11 board for more than two consecutive terms of three years each.
12 • Extension of a member's term may be approved by the Orange County Board of
13 Commissioners if it is determined that it is in the best interest of Orange County
14 to allow an individual to continue to serve.
15
10 Therefore, the Arts Commission would like for the following members to remain on the Arts
17 Commission Board for an extended period through the Spring grant allocation.
18
19 • Appointment to an extended term for Ms. Leah Rade, Ms. Bronwyn Merritt and Mr.
20 Charles Hochman for up to six months or until replacements are appointed. ([he
21 regular terms for each expired D3/31/2O13).
22
23
Position Number Representation Expiration Date
6 Ms. Leah R. Rade At-Large 09/30/2013
7 Ms. Bronwyn Merritt At-Large 09/30/2013
14 Mr. Charles Hochman At-Large 09/30/2013
24
25 A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Price to
26 appoint to extended terms: Ms. Leah Rade, Ms. Bronwyn Merritt and Mr. Charles Hochman for
27 up to six months or until replacements are appointed. (The regular terms for each expired
28 03/31/2013).
29
30 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
31
32 b. Orange County Parks and Recreation Council—Appointments
33 The Board considered making appointments to the Orange County Parks and
34 Recreation Council.
35 The Parks and Recreation Council will be completing the ongoing Parks and Recreation
36 Master Plan within the next three months. Ms. Dickinson's experience will be of great
37 assistance during this transition.
38
39 The newly adopted Board/Commission advisory policy states:
40
41 • No person appointed to an Orange County advisory board shall serve on that
42 board for more than two consecutive terms of three years each.
43 • Extension of a member's term may be approved by the Orange County Board of
44 Commissioners if it is determined that it is in the best interest of Orange County
45 to allow an individual to continue to serve.
46
26
1 Therefore, the Parks and Recreation Council would like for the Ms. Denise Dickinson to
2 remain on the Parks and Recreation Council for six months or until a replacement is
3 appointed. (The regular term for Ms. Dickinson expired March 31, 2013.)
4
5 The following appointments are for Board consideration:
6
7 • Appointment to an extended term for Ms. Denise Dickinson for position #10.
8
9 • Appointment to afirstfullterm, expiring 03/31/2016 for Ms. ToriVViUianno Reid to fill the
10 vacant Hillsborough Township position.
11
12 • Appointment to a first full term, expiring 03/31/2016 for Ms. Jamie Paulen to fill the at-
13 large position for the expiring term of Mr. Keith Bagby.
14
15 • Appointment to a first partial term, expiring 03/31/2015 for Mr. Michael Stewart to fill the
16 vacant Cheeks Township position.
17
Position Number Representation Expiration Date
10 Ms. Denise Dickinson Hillsborough Town Limits 08/30/2013
2 Ms. Tori Williams Reid Hillsborough Township 03/31/2016
5 Ms. Jamie Paulen At-Large 03/31/2016
6 Mr. Michael Stewart Cheeks Township 03/31/3015
18
19
20 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon seconded by Commissioner Price to
21 appoint to the Parks and Recreation Council:
22
23 • Appointment to an extended term for Ms. Denise Dickinson for position #10, with six
24 months or until a replacement is appointed.
25
26 • Appointment to a first full term, expiring 03X31/2016 for Ms. Tori Williams Reid to fill the
27 vacant Hilisborough Township position.
28
29 • Appointment to a first full term, expiring 03/31/2016 for Ms. Jamie Paulen to fill the at-
30 large position for the expiring term of Mr. Keith Bagby.
31
32 • Appointment to a first partial term, expiring 03/31/2015 for Mr. Michael Stewart to fill the
33 vacant Cheeks Township position.
34
35 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
36
37 c. Equalization and Review Board—Appointment
38
39 The Board will revisit an appointment to the Board of Equalization and Review.
40 John Roberts said when this appointment first came up at the last meeting,
41 Commissioner Dorosin brought up the question of a vote for his partner, which John Roberts
42 interpreted as meaning business partner but which was, in fact, his spouse. He said that in this
43 event, Commissioner Dorosin should have been excused from voting on this since the general
27
1 voting statute states that a Commissioner should not vote in issues that involve their own
2 financial interest.
3 He recommended that the appointment be rescinded and the nomination be re-done
4 with Commissioner Dorosiri be excused from the vote.
5
6 Commissioner Pelissier made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Price to rescind the
7 appointment of Ms. Bronwyn Merritt to the E&R Board.
0 .
9 This motion was tabled.
10
11 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner McKee to
12 recuse Commissioner Dorosin from participating in the next two votes.
13
14 VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Dorosin recused)
15
16 The earlier motion was returned to the table.
17
18 VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Dorosin is recused)
19
20 A motion was made by Commissioner Price seconded by Commissioner McKee to
21 appoint Ms. Bronwyn Merritt to the E&R Board.
22
23 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
24
25- Chair Jacobs suggested a discussion in May regarding appointments, vetting, and fiduciary
26 responsibilities.
27 Commissioner Dorosin said he regularly refers to his wife as his partner and this was not
28 an intention to mislead.
29
30 12. Board Comments (Three Minute Limit Per Commissioner)
31
32 Commissioner Dorosin - none
33 Commissioner Pelissier gave a heads up that there will be a revised plan for partnership
34 for homelessness coming before the Board. She said there have been federal changes in
35 legislation that precipitate some of the information on best practices.
36 She said Triangle Transit is doing a study, along with other partners in the region, to
37 look at fees, which have not changed since 2005. She said that the system cannot be
38 sustained if the fees are never increased.
39 She said there were some delays in the light rail application.
40 Commissioner Price said she attended Durham Tech BOT meeting and continues to get
41 positive feedback on having the campus here. She said that enrollment is going up in both
42 Orange and Durham Counties.
43 Commissioner McKee thanked staff for adding attachment 6 to the recycling abstract.
44 He said he and Commissioner Price met with residents from northern part of the county
45 and discussed concerns about the Northern Human Services Center and the interest in seeing
46 this move forward. He said that Commissioner Price's comments about meeting dates reflect
47 the concerns of those residents, that the discussions be held in Hillsborough, rather than in the
48 southern part of the county.
49 Commissioner Gordon— none
28
1 Commissioner Rich said she meant to read the proclamation regarding Sexual Assault
2 Awareness Month and she wanted to bring this to everyone's attention.
3 She said that she visited Efland Cheeks Elementary for a discussion on what a County
4 Commissioner does. She said the kids were great and she learned about the school and its
5 history. Shesaidtherovvmuagnoddioouasionnfpo|idosand |ooa| govemnmmnt. andtha
6 students were interested in visiting the Board. She suggested finding a way to make this
7 happen.
8 Chair Jacobs said that he, Commissioner McKee and the Manager are-meeting with
9 Congressman Price on April 15th and will-solicit from Board members, any issues to be
10 discussed.
11 He said there are also efforts to set up a meeting with the Chatham County
12 Commissioners in May and the next group will be the Alamance County Commissioners. He
13 noted to Commissioner Pelissier that this will allow discussion of the County line.
14 He said there was a school collaboration meeting last week and discussed pre-k classes
15 and the counting of those classes toward school capacity. He said there will need to be more
16 discussion of this. He said there was also good discussion of school funding trends.
17 He noted that the Junior Livestock Sale is next Thursday.
18 He noted that the Board is awaiting a response from the head of Triangle Transit to set
19 up a meeting with Commissioner Pelissier.
20 Commissioner Pelissier said that Triangle Transit will be writing back in response to the
21 letter.
22
23 13. Information Items
24
25 • March 19, 2013 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List
26 • Tax Collector's Report—Numerical Analysis
27 • BOCC Chair Letter Responding to Petitions during March 7, 2013 Regular Meeting
28 • BOCC Chair Letter Responding to Petitions during March 19, 2013 Regular Meeting
29 • Memorandum Regarding Mattress Recycling Pilot Final Report
30
31 14. Closed Session
32
33 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee seconded by Commissioner Price to add
34 a closed session to the agenda for the purpose stated below:
35
36 Pursuant to N.C.G.S. 143-318.11(a)/4\:
37 To discuss matters relating to the location or expansion of business in the area served
38 by this body.
39
40 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
41
42 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to go into
43 closed session at 10:25pm for the purpose of:
44
45 Pursuant to N.C.G.S. 143-318.11/a\(4):
46 To discuss matters relating to the location or expansion of business in the area served
47 by this body.
48
49 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
29
1
2 RECONVENE INTO REGULAR SESSION
3
4 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon seconded by Commissioner McKee to
5 reconvene into regular session at 10:50pm.
6
7 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
8
9
10 15. Adjournment
11 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon seconded by Commissioner McKee to
12 adjourn the meeting at 10:50 pm.
13
14 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
15
16
17 Barry Jacobs, Chair
18
19 Donna S. Baker, CMC
20 Clerk to the Board
21
1
1 DRAFT Attachment 2
2
3 MINUTES
4 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
5 BUDGET WORK SESSION
6 -April 11, 2013
7 7:00 p.m.
8
9 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Budget Work Session on Thursday,
10 April 11, 2013 at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, N.C.
11
12 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jacobs and Commissioners Alice M. Gordon,
13 Barry Jacobs, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Earl McKee
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT:
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Frank Clifton, Assistant County Managers
17 Michael Talbert, Clarence Grier and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker(All other staff members
18 will be identified appropriately below)
19
20 NOTE: ALL DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE PERMANENT
21 AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S-OFFICE
22
23 Chair Jacobs reviewed items at the County Commissioners' places:
24
25 - Durham Tech presentation information
26 - Salmon-colored sheet - regarding revision for health insurance
27 - White sheet- History of health insurance cost increases
28 - Copy of SAPFO information from March 19th agenda
29
30 Chair Jacobs noted that Commissioner McKee would be late this evening.
31
32 1. Durham Technical Community College Presentation
33 Dr. Bill Ingram, President of Durham Tech Community College (DTCC), recognized
34 Penny Cluck, Executive Dean of Durham Tech—Orange County Campus and Robert Keeney,
35 Vice President of Finance and Administrative Services. He said DTCC would be working with
36 staff to finalize and submit a budget proposal for the Orange County Campus. He gave the
37 new Board of County Commissioners some background on the good relationship between
38 Orange County and Durham Tech. Durham Tech started classes in Orange County in the mid-
39 80's and have been working with Orange County for the past 10 years to open a free-standing
40 Orange County campus. This was opened in 2008. Since then, Durham Tech has seen an
41 increase in student enrollment. One of the classes unique to Orange County is the
42 sustainability class. UNC Hospitals is building a facility across from the campus and lab classes
43 will be added. There has also been growth in the EMS programs, medical coding, and ICD 10
44 coding. Durham Tech has a strong relationship with both school systems. There are
45 opportunities for dual enrollment and high school students are able to take college courses
46 tuition free. He said for the past five years they have seen their funding cut but they have been
47 able to grow despite of that. He presented the County Commissioners with a preliminary
48 budget that has a moderate increase. He said Commissioner Price has joined the Board of
49 Trustees.
2
1 Frank Clifton said Durham Tech is the primary component in industrial business
2 recruitment from a training perspective. He said Durham Tech has worked closely with
3 Economic Development Director Steve Brantley in reference to industrial business recruitment.
4
5 Commissioner Dorosin made reference to the last page of the handout in the packet
6 about funding needs and the last bullet point regarding a 2% increase for salary for security and
7 maintenance. He asked if the positions funded by the County were being paid sufficiently and if
8 the 2% increase should be given regardless of whether the State funding happens or not.
9 Dr. Ingram said the employees are Durham Tech employees regardless of the source of
10 funding. He said they try not to draw distinction among them as it relates to the funding of
11 salaries. He said most of the employees funded by county funds are technical/paraprofessional
12 in nature. He said they need to have funds to pay for the inequities that arise and they are
13 mindful of these situations.
14
15 2. Employee Benefits Update, Preliminary Renewal Estimates Regarding Calendar
16 Year 2014 Health Insurance, and Anticipated Health Care Reform Components
17 Human Resources Director Nicole Clark and Mark Browder from Mark III made a
18 Power Point presentation.
19
20 Health insurance update
21 2013 Enrollment Highlights and 2012 Plan Performance/2014 Plan Year Preliminary
22 Recommendations
23 April 11, 2013 Work Session
24
25 2012 Summary
26 - Year one with United Healthcare
27 Initial dissatisfaction with change in provider and plan structure
28 2013 Plan design recommendations addressed concerns
29 Renewal cost less than pr 'ectiono
30 - Enrollment process oucreaofu|, no significant complaints
31
32 Health Insurance Enrollment Comparison (chart)
33
34 Optional Benefits
35 New Enrollment Comparison (chart)
36
37 Benefits Activities and Programs
38 - ERC Meeting updates
39 Town Hall Meeting (December)
40 - Health and Wellness website demonstration (January)
41 - Know Your Numbers (February)
42 Health Care Cost Estimator (March)
43
44 Health Insurance RFP Timeline
45 April 15m RFP solicitation published
May 3m Response deadline
47 May 31st Evaluations complete
m
48 June 11 Recommendations presented during the Work Session
3
1 June 18th Vendor and plan funding approved with the FY 13-14 budget process*
2 *With the possibility of a new vendor and funding source, approval is needed to ensure timely
3 implementation in preparation for Open Enrollment in October 2013.
4 Medical Plan update
5 2012 Plan Performance/2014 Renewal Expectation (spreadsheets)
6
7
8 Frank Clifton gave same background on the process.
9 Chair Jacobs asked for an explanation of the difference between fully insured and self
10 insured.
11 Mark Browder said when you are fully insured you pay the premium to the insurer and
12 they take all of the risks for the plan. When you are self funded, you hire an administrator to
13 adjudicate your claims and you purchase stop loss insurance, which protects against
14 catastrophic claims. Over the long haul, it is better for a larger entity such as the County to be
15 self funded because there are lower expenses and fewer taxes.
16 Mark Browder made reference to slide 8 and the numbers highlighted in yellow. He said
17 the plan ran well in 2012. The target would be 85%, and Orange County might be getting
18 money back from UnitedHealth because of the spread from 78.16%and 85%. He went over
19 the health plans in detail and how the 80/20 plan works.
20 Starting in 2014, the definition of "full-time employee"will be 30 hours under health care
21 reform.
22 Frank Clifton said a lot of the part-time employees have retired and then come back to
23 Orange County and already have retiree insurance.
24 Commissioner Rich asked if there was credit for wellness programs and Nicole Clark
25 said not at this time. Commissioner Rich said BCBS has reductions in premiums for these
26 types of programs.
27 Frank Clifton said Orange County has tried to expand their wellness program in the last
28 couple of years and they are making some strides.
29 Commissioner Dorosin made reference to slide 11 and the fully insured calculation. He
30 asked if the "2014 Expected Cost"was a$2 million drop as it appears. Mark Browder said they
31 are looking for numbers coming in to be more competitive.
32 Commissioner Dorosin said Orange County switched from Cigna to UHC in 2012 and
33 now they are considering a change again. He asked for the motivation for getting bids.
34 Frank Clifton said the motivation is to make sure Orange County gets competitive
35 pricing on health insurance.
36 Commissioner Dorosin said his opinion is that it is not easy to change plans.
37 Mark Browder said they got direction from the Board last year to go out to bid in 2014.
38 The dissatisfaction last year was the fact that the new plan with UHC was not as rich as the
39 previous plan the County had for years.
40 Commissioner Dorosin asked if the county had ever been self-funded and the answer
41 was no; only with dental insurance.
42 Chair Jacobs asked Mark Browder to articulate more on the advantage of being self-
43 funded. He asked if there was more flexibility in self-funding.
44 Mark Browder said every fully insured insurer files their plans with the state, and if you
45 want to change parts of the plan and it is not in the state's plan design, it is difficult. If an entity
46 is self-funded, it can change the plan without state approval.
47 Chair Jacobs made reference to the revised salmon-colored sheet. Nicole Clark said
48 the original one had a May 10th date and should have been May 3`d. This is the only revision.
49 Commissioner Price asked if there was anything broken with the current system.
4
1 Frank Clifton said they go through comparative bids on a regular basis to ensure
2 employees are getting the best rates for insu / oo.
3
4 3. To Continue Review and Discussion of the Manacjer's Recommended FY 2013-18
5 Capital Investment Plan
6 Paul Laughton said he wanted to present items on questions from their last meeting and
7 they are bullet points on the first page of the abstract and shown below:
8 Attachment A reflects a comparison by Function of the Manager's
9 Recommended 2013-18 CIP with the FY 2012-17 and FY 2011-16 Capital Investment
10 Plan
11 ' Attachment B provides a summary of a proposed Agricultural, Environment, and
12 Parks Center at Blackwood Farm Park, including a permanent Parks Operations Base,
13 to be phased in over a three-year period (FY 2015-16 through FY 2017-18). See page
14 37 in the CIP document for a complete funding scenario for this building and park
15 facilities.
16
17 Chair Jacobs gave some review and direction about the process tonight.
18 Paul Laughton said the intent was to bring information items back on the bulleted items
19 and then a Triangle Sportsplex presentation on the new programs and expansion, and then
20 they will move into the notebook and go through each p ject as needed.
21 Paul Laughton made reference to Attachment B and the proposed Blackwood Farm
22 Park Ag, Environment and Parks Center. It is proposed to be two phases. This is outlined on
23 page 37 of the CIP notebook. The pr jected cost is$5,300,000.
24 Chair Jacobs said he brought up two years ago the prospect of using a bond on a past
25 project. He said in the past the County started putting together a bond package six months to a
26 year before a p joct begins. He said this is a p ject that would be suitable for a bond project.
27 This property was bought with bond funds.
28 Frank Clifton said the time is approaching for that thought process of a potential bond to
29 move forward.
30 Commissioner Price said there is a recommendation to move offices from Revere Road
31 to Blackwood Farm and she asked when this was decided.
32 Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks and Recreation (DEAPR) Director Dave
33 Stancil said in the master plan there was a vision in it for a parks operation base but that pre-
34 dated what there is now. There was an Ag Center Work Group that thought this was a good
35 location for an Ag Center and he said their department has grown and so then there was a
36 strong synergy to have all like departments to be in the same vicinity. He said no decision has
37 been made yet. All of the agricultural agencies identified this as a suitable site for the offices.
38 Chair Jacobs said there was a jump from mentioning this idea to a proposal in the CIP.
39 He said the Board has not had a discussion yet.
40 Frank Clifton said this is one of the few sites in Orange County that has water and
41 sewer. He said the County Commissioners asked the staff to evaluate the prospect of a county
42 fair. The thought is that this is a potential site.
43 Chair Jacobs said there is not a smooth way to get things from staff conception to the
44 CIP yet.
45 Paul Laughton made reference to page 2 of the agenda abstract and the things being
46 brought back from the March work session, and referenced the material in Attachment B that is
47 related to the Science Wing atCu|breth Middle School.
48
49 - Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools submitted as part of their unfunded new facilities
50 projects a Science Wing Addition at Culbreth Middle School totaling $4,971,676. The
5
1 majority of construction costs would occur in FY 2014-15, with an anticipated opening
2 date of August 2015. Currently, this project is not included in the Manager's
3 Recommended FY 2013-18 CIP. The impact of including this project in the CIP would
4 increase annual debt payments by a total of$477,281 ($57,600 in FY 14-15, $427,388
5 in FY 15-16, and $477,281 starting in FY 16-17 and future years).
6
7 Commissioner Gordon said she would like to direct staff to provide the Board of County
8 Commissioners with a funding plan for the science wing, using the-timeline provided by CHCCS
9 and add it on to the CIP-. -She would like to see how that affects the budget. She thinks that
10 there is enough room in the available debt capacity, and she cited the debt capacity numbers.
11 Commissioner Dorosin asked how much would have to be taken out of the budget to
12 fund this.
13 Frank Clifton said the easiest thing would be to move Lands Legacy to years 6-10.
14 Clarence Grier said in order to assume that debt,they would have to move$7.6 million
15 worth of projects out to accommodate this.
16 Frank Clifton said the south library could be moved to a later date also.
17 Commissioner Dorosin wants to know the max number that can be kept in the CIP and
18 the number that has to be removed to accommodate this science wing.
19 Paul Laughton said CHCCS stated that if this wing was funded, it could defer middle
20 school #5 for two years.
21 Frank Clifton said no projects would have to be removed, but only moved around to later
22 years.
23 Chair Jacobs asked Paul Laughton to include these other factors along with
24 Commissioner Gordon's request to answer the questions tonight. He also asked that Paul
25 Laughton address pages 101-102 regarding debt capacity that is not totally committed.
26 Paul Laughton made reference to the last two lines on page 102 and the debt the
27 County has now and the new debt that will be added in 2012-13. The debt service is at
28 13.83%. The goal is to stay-below 15%. To stay at the 15%, there is $2.1 million available to
29 incur in 2012-13. The County will not get over the 15%debt service capacity until FY 2017-18.
30 Chair Jacobs asked if there was `wiggle" room.
31 Clarence Grier said it is only assumed "wiggle" room and is contingent on the budget
32 each year.
33 Commissioner Gordon said the staff could just run the numbers to see what happens if
34 the science wing is added in.
35 Clarence Grier said if the debt were issued, it would be issued all at once.
36 Paul Laughton made reference to FY 17-18 and said the County would be over the 15%
37 by$1.2 million. If the science wing were added, it would be more than a penny on the tax rate.
38 Commissioner Gordon said the debt service capacity would only be over 15%if the
39 middle school is built as scheduled.
40 Paul Laughton said he would ask CHCCS about the two-year deferment and if it was
41 correct.
42 Commissioner Pelissier said the numbers need to be run several different ways. The
43 school boards also need to see this.
44 Commissioner Gordon said to be sure and look at the SAPFO to make sure all the
45 projects comport with that.
46
47 At this time, John Stock, General Manager of the Triangle Sportsplex made a
48 PowerPoint presentation.
49
50
6
1 Orange County
2 Situation Analysis
3 '
4 Under RFP management, the Sportsplex has grown revenues 75%over 6.5
6 - Annual growth 10%.
7 contract inception in 2005. RFP has a proven record of leveraging its staff and
8 management to
9 C�verthe contract support significant
'' financial performance —'
'-- improved from annual
10 losses of($800,000) prior to RFP, to consistent annual net operating results of
11 $400,000. A$1,200,000 improvement!
12 - has a 13 - But �Bmoaumm of'growth we lack'space for rapidly growing' progrenns for children
14 adults and seniors.
15 - RFP can meet growth needs and achieve similar incremental financial results through a
16 four stage physical expansion of the existing Sportsplex facility.
17
18 What is needed to make Vision a Reality
19 (Schematic Design)
20 1.3 Four Phase Renovation/Expansion
21 • Lobby (+ $110.000)
22 • Fitness Mezzanine over Pool ($950.000)
23 • Multi-use Turf($1,900,000)
24 • Versatile Court/$900.008\
25
26 Lobby Renovation
27 - Addition of 1,843 sq. ft. of Group X and Specialty training space. Modest cost and 18'
20 month year payback.
29 - Movable wall design divides the main Group X room into 5 distinct venues—significant
30 program flexibility and Kidsplex space.
31 - P/12/13 CIP includes$165,000 for Lobby cosmetic facelift.
32 (Flooring, Paint, Lighting).
33 - Design review revealed opportunity to add 1,843 sq. ft. of programmable Group X and
34 Specialty training space at a modest incremental cost of$110,000.
35 - A movable wall design can divide the main Group X room into 5 distinct venues—
36 facilitates significant program flexibility, lobby events and Kidsplex space.
37 ' This investment results in incremental programming and membership revenue growth
38 of$312,000 in the first year after completion.
39 - Leveraging staff and overhead, results in $200K annual contributions to the Fund
40 Balance - (18 month payback)
41
42 Pool Fitness Mezzanine
43 (overlooking pool)
44 - Highly cost effective mezzanine construction process resulting in high return on
45 investment.
46 - 5,400 s ft.
47 - Cardio for Adults
48 - Senior Programs
49 - Member lockers
50 - Weight loss room
51 - Therapeutic Massage
7
1
2 Fitness Mezzanine
3 - 5,400 additional;sq. ft. connected to existing ice rink mezzanine
4 - Private member change area compatible with Fitness Club projected to grow to 6,000
5 Members
6 - Dedicated rooms for Spin/Row/Therapeutic Massage plus 1,800 sq. ft. for recumbent
7 equipment, low intensity/impact strength area for older adults and seniors
8 - No Change in CIP Funds for FY14/15 ( $950,000)
9 - 670 additional members annually
10 - Five year revenue generation of $1,694,00 and $1,250,000 contribution to Fund
11 Balance
12 - (3.5 year payback)
13
14 Revenue/Income Generation from Turf Addition
15 Annual Member Growth $184,250
16
17 Five Year membership growth $921,250
18 Programming Revenue Growth over 5 years $3,600,000
19
20 Total Five Year
21 Revenue Growth $4,521,250
22
23 Five Year Contribution to Fund Balance $1,750,000
24 Approx. 5 '/2 Year Payback
25
26 Revenue/Income Generation from Court Addition
27 Annual Member Growth $184,250
28
29 Five Year membership growth $921,250
30 Programming Revenue Growth over 5 years $836,000
31
32 5 Year Incremental Revenue $1,757,250
33
34 Five Year Contribution to Fund Balance $900,000
35 Five Year Payback
36
37 Summary:
38 - By leveraging RFP resources, the combined net contribution to the Funds Balance over
39 the 5 year CIP period is $3,130,000, however including FY18/19, the total contribution to
40 the Funds Balance is $4,100,000, which fully pays back the$3,860,000 CIP costs within
41 a true five year fiscal horizon.
42 - Sportsplex membership will grow from 4,000 to 5,740 (43.5%). Combined with
43 significant new programming revenue, these projects will generate$6,100,000 in
44 incremental revenues over the 5 year CIP planning period.
45 - Together with existing programming annual Sportsplex revenues will be$5,000,000 and
46 Annual contributions to the Fund Balance of$1,400,000 can be re-invested in Orange
47 County recreation and wellness.
48 - State of the Art Recreation, Sport and Fitness Venue featuring Ice, Pools, Turf, Court,
49 Fitness and Child Development/Care.
- �
M
1 - Multigenerational community meeting and gathering facility for kids, families and
2 specialized resources for aging adults and seniors, with 60,000 monthly customer visits
3 stimulating health, wellness and activity.
4 Creation of a world class private/public partnership model for multi-generational and
5 diverse programming all under one roof.
6
7
O
9 Paul Laughton suggested having-staff answer specific questions about County p jecta.
lO
11 Chair Jacobs said he would like to see the cost of a southern library if it was smaller.
12 He said this is not a firm number. Similarly, the Blackwood Farm has a large amount of money
13 in the second year, and the Board has not discussed this as being a higher priority. He
14 suggested moving the Whitted Building up in the CIP. The Board also needs to discuss
15 whether this should be a meeting space and a potential multi-use space.
10 Commissioner Pelissier said she does not know when the cultural,center would have the
17 funds available for the upf it. If the County is going to upf it it for a meeting space, it might not be
18 done at the same time.
19 Frank Clifton said most of the upgrades would be for the County and the additional
20 items could come in between meeting dates, etc.
21 Commissioner Dorosin made reference to the sewer infrastructure for Rogers Road and
22 it is not in the CIP. He said there is commitment to do this and it ought to be figured in the CIP
23 somewhere.
24 Commissioner Rich asked about the sewer district and if it would be able to borrow
25 money.
26 Frank Clifton said it is probably a year from now before the financing aspect comes up
27 for consideration.
28 Chair Jacobs said he would like to keep a running list of things they may want to put on
29 a bond and this may be one of them.
30 Commissioner Dorosin made reference to the Whitted Building and the Board needs to
31 discuss whether it wants to use it as a meeting space at all or a multi- use space/shared space.
32 There are several options. He said he is not clear that there is a consensus from the Board to
33 use this as a meeting space yet.
34 Chair Jacobs said the Coun1yConnnmisaioneus need to have this conversation sometime
35 during the CIP Process. He said he knows that Commissioner Gordon has objections to it
36 because she thinks the meeting room should be built on the downtown Hillsborough county
37 campus; but he thought the others seemed interested.
38 Commissioner Rich said she feels that the conversation on the Whiffed Building is not
39 complete but there were some real concerns from the neighbors about the kind of functions that
40 would happen. She said the Board needs to have this conversation. She does think it should
41 be used as a multi-use space.
42 Commissioner Gordon said if the Board wants to use this space for meeting space then
43 that is fine; but down on the main campus they are putting in geothermal wells that may prevent
44 them from putting in future facilities. She would like to ask staff not to put any more wells down
45 until there is an updated facility report/study.
46 Jeff Thompson said there is a potential bid award for the project, but there is no
47 commitment yet for construction of geothermal wells.
48 Chair Jacobs asked that there be no construction until the Board has reviewed the
49 facility report/study.
50 Chair Jacobs asked the staff for permutations of where Whitted will go in the CIP.
9
1 Paul Laughton said the project is not scheduled for funding until year 3 at this time.
2
3 Commissioner Price asked about the Northern Human Services Center and said she
4 would like to have an investigation on this. She would like to have another look at this building.
5 The citizens are concerned that this is a historical landmark in the community.
6 Paul Laughton said there is $2 million scheduled for year 2.
7 Frank Clifton said the architects have discussed the options for this building. The
8 limitations of the building are related to the utility capacity.
9 Commissioner Price said she wants to revisit this for the community.
10 Chair Jacobsnaiditmaybeusefu|formtaf to meet with Commissioner Price before the
11 April 16th work session about the Northern Human Services Center.
12
13 Commissioner Price asked about page 23 and affordable housing. She would like to
14 include this in the bond and Chair Jacobs said this could be considered.
15 Commissioner Gordon asked for an explanation for the need for classroom space at
16 Cedar Ridge because according to SAPFO there is no need for new[}CS high school space for
17 10 years.
18 Paul Laughton said it was in the CIP last year and there was a memo about the growth
19 in Mebane and how that affects the OCS because Mebane is not included in the SAPFO.
20 Discussion ensued on the needs of OCS according to the SAPFO.
21 Chair Jacobs said staff could reconcile the numbers and get back to the Board.
22
23 4. Fiscal Year 2013-2014 Budget Process
24 Clarence Grier said the staff just wanted to provide an overview in the abstract of the
25 budget process and important dates of upcoming meetings.,
26
27 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
28 adjourn the meeting at 10:01 PM.
29 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
30
31 Barry Jacobs, Chair
32
33 Donna S. Baker, CMC
34 Clerk to the Board
1
1 Attachment 3
2
3 DRAFT MINUTES
4
5 Orange County Board of County Commissioners
6 Social Services Board
7 Joint Meeting
8 April 16,2013
9 5:30 PM
10
11 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Joint Work Session with
12 the Department of Social Services on Tuesday, April 16, 2013 at 5:30 p.m. in the Link
13 Government Services Center, in Hillsborough, North Carolina.
14
15 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jacobs and Commissioners Alice M.
16 Gordon, Barry Jacobs, Earl McKee, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich
17 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Mark Dorosin
18 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
19 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: Frank Clifton and Assistant County Managers Clarence
20 Grier, Michael Talbert, and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker(All other staff members will
21 be identified appropriately below)
22 COUNTY STAFF ABSENT:
23 SOCIAL SERVICES BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Pat Garavaglia
24 SOCIALSERVICES BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Claire Millar and
25 Arthrell Sanders
26 SOCIAL SERVICES STAFF PRESENT: Nancy Coston, Denise Shaffer, Lindsey
27 Shewmaker, Sharron Hinton, Dustin Lowell,Tina Clark, and Joyce Lee
28
29
30 1. Introductions
31 Chair Jacobs asked for a moment of silence for those who were injured or lost
32 their lives in Boston.
33 Pat Garavaglia, Chair of Department of Social Services (DSS), said there are
34 DSS members absent tonight due to illness or schedule conflicts.
35 Nancy Coston reviewed the agenda and said DSS is going through the biggest
36 changes in their programs especially in the area of economic support.
37
38 2. System Changes
39 i) NC FAST
40
41 Lindsay Shewmaker and Nancy Coston began a joint presentation of the
42 following PowerPoint Slides:
43
44 BOCC DSS BOARD JOINT MEETING
45 Orange County Department of Social Services April 16, 2013
46
47 Lindsay Shewmaker presented the following slides:
48 NC FAST
49 - North Carolina Families Accessing Services through Technology (NC FAST) is
50 an integrated case management system designed to replace 19 legacy systems
51 in the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services
2
1 - Implementation of this major automation project is being phased in over several
2 years
3 - Staff are currently involved in implementing the first phase,while preparing for
4 implementation of the second phase
5
6 NC FAST Phases(Graphic)
7 • Phase 1 (Current Phase)
8 - Food and Nutrition Services
9 • Phase 2 and 6 (Next Phase)
10 - Medicaid
11 - Work First
12 - Special Assistance
13 - Refugee Assistance
14 • Phase 3
15 - Child Welfare
16 • Phase 4
17 - Energy Programs
18 - Child Care
19 • Phase 5
20 - Adult and Family Services
21
22 NC FAST Issues (Learning Curve Graph)
23
24 NC FAST Issues(Computer Response Time Graph)
25
26 NC FAST Timeline(Graphic)
27
28 NC FAST
29 • Implementation of Phase 2 and 6 will include Medicaid, Work First, and Special
30 Assistance Programs
31 • Includes more than 10,000 cases
32 (Chart)
33
34 DSS Staff Member Lindsey Shewmaker began the PowerPoint presentation and
35 said NC Fast is a web based program that will automate all of the Legacy Systems and
36 combine them into one. She said this will happen in multi-year phases, with Phase 5
37 slated for completion in 2015/16.
38 She said there are over 6,000 food and nutrition services cases in Orange
39 County and staff has worked to get all of those entered into the system to complete
40 Phase 1. She said the green light for beginning work on the combined Phase 2 and 6
41 will be June 17, 2013. She referenced these in the slide on NC FAST Phases. Phase 3
42 is set to begin in the end of 2013 or beginning of 2014.
43 Lindsay Shewmaker referenced the slide on NC FAST Issues and said that this
44 web based application looks very different than what the staff are used to, and it has a
45 very steep learning curve. She referenced the number of cases due, versus the number
46 completed. She said that in December 400 re-certifications for food nutrition services
47 were completed out of 700 that came in. She said it was a struggle to get these done in
48 a timely manner. She said that these are normally completed a month ahead, versus
49 the current time of two weeks ahead.
3
1 She said that the other issue with the system is that the response times are slow.
2 This is being addressed with the IT department and efforts are being made to increase
3 bandwidth. She referenced the chart and said the counties to the right are the slowest.
4 Referencing the timeline slide, shenaidthat EPass functionality starts at the end
5 of this month and will allow clients to apply online for food and nutrition services benefits.
6 CommissionerMcKee asked about what if people do not have access to, or
7 cannot use, internet services.
8 Lindsey Shewmaker said applications will still be available in the traditional ways
9 as well. She said there are also plans to provide teaching to clients on how to use the
10 online applications. She noted that each time a client comes in to the office, that person
11 is missing time at work.
12 She reviewed the rest of the timeline slide.
13 Nancy Coston said that other states who have the system say it takes a year or
14 two for people to become comfortable with the online only service and there will always
15 be a core group who prefer to talk in person. She emphasized the plan to educate and
16 help people feel comfortable using that service, while still maintaining a face to face
17 option.
18 Commissioner Price asked if people will need cable in order for the online system
19 to function properly.
20 Lindsey Shewmaker said she is not aware of th bilities of the system but
21 she is hopeful that the state is aware of this issue and has designed the system with that
22 in mind.
23 Lindsey said staff will be working, between now and September 91h, to get more
24 than 12,000 Medicaid cases into the system.
25 Nancy Coston said that when each of those Medicaid files is converted, it must
26 be touched in the system and several screens must be filled out for each one. This is
27 why this is a slow process and it is a challenge for employees. She said there is also a
28 compressed timeline with Medicaid because of health reform coming.
29
30 Nancy Coston presented the following slides:
31 Affordable Care Act
32 • First open enrollment period for qualified health plans in exchanges.
33 • Regardless of decisions on expansion and state exchange, people will begin
34 applying in October
35 • Will have to be ready to accept the"single streamlined" application on that date
36 and apply new rules and transfer information between Medicaid agency and the
37 exchange
38 • Requires process changes
39 - No Wrong Door
40 - Seamless
41 Streamlined
42
43 Affordable Care Act (Graph)
44
45 Work Support Strategies
46 • Work Support Strategies are business process changes that will enable counties
47 to handle system change.
48 Includes:
49 - Policy simplification and alignment
50 Retention of eligible families
51 - Increased use of performance data
- -
4
1 Holistic view of family
2 New roles for staff
3 • In Orange County, this may result in the creation of resource rooms or other
4 building enhancements
5
6 What do we need to be successful?
7 • Flexibility to use funds for overtime and temporary staff
8 • Additional technology including increased bandwidth and upgrades
9 • Expedited reclassification and recruitment when vacancies occur
10 • Minor building enhancements
11 • Partnerships with other county departments and outside private and nonprofit
12 agencies
13 • Education of clients, providers, partner agencies, and policy makers about
14 possible transition issues
15
16 Nancy Coston said that, regardless of whether Medicaid was expanded or not (it
17 was not expanded in North Carolina) one of the requirements of the Affordable Care Act
18 is a seamless opportunity to apply for Medicaid/Subsidized Healthcare. In North
19 Carolina, this means DSS. She said this means that DSS must have a single way to
20 help people who are not eligible for Medicaid but might be eligible for one of the tax
21 subsidies. This interface is being built from the ground up. She said that DSS is
22 naturally where lower income (250%and below poverty level) folks will come.
23 She said the Affordable Care Act also requires that people be able to apply by
24 phone, in person, on the computer, or by mail. She said that all of this is pushing the
25 effort to get the conversion of NC FAST for Medicaid by October 1, as this is the date
26 Affordable Care Act Subsidies can be accepted.
27 She reviewed the coverage percentage graph on the second Affordable Care Act
28 slide. She said the biggest hole is for the adults without children who make less than
29 $12,000 per year. She said these peo |e are not picked up by Medicaid and cannot get
30 a subsidy because the law did not anticipate Medicaid not being expanded.
31 Commissioner Mckee asked what the option would be for these people.
32 Nancy Coston said that the Department of Health and Human Services will send
33 these people to rural health clinics, like Piedmont Health.
34 Commissioner Pelissier asked if maybe some of the people who will be able to
35 get insurance through the exohange, could go elsewhere so Piedmont Health could help
36 the people who won't get subsidized.
37 Nancy Coston said that is the hope, as this was all built to get more people
38 insured, which would mean less people would have to be covered. She noted however,
39 that Piedmont is a m jor recipient of Medicaid right now, and Piedmont says this is
40 necessary to maintain a business model that works. She said the official word is to
41 clean up Medicaid and then move forward.
42 She said that the people in the 100%to 200% poverty |eve), who do not have
43 health insurance, will get health insurance with a reasonable subsidy. This will be a new
44 insured group as most of these have chosen not to have insurance in the past.
45 Nancy Coston moved to the Work Support Strategies slides. She said this is a
46 philosophy based on what the families need. She said that there will be opportunities,
47 as NC FAST and EPass go live, to let people meet DSS wherever is most comfortable.
48 She said there are minor changes being looked at for next year, including putting
49 computers in the buildings that staff can use in teaching people about online resources.
50 This will help more people utilize that option and free up staff to spend more time with
51 the seniors and others who need the one on onetime. She said that entering
5
1 information into NC PASS allows it to trickle down to everyone in the DSS system and
2 this frees up time on the part of both the applicant and the staff.
3 She reviewed the items needed to be successful. She said the transition in
4 Medicaid will be more difficult than the food and nutrition transition, as there is no simple
5 solution to a medical emergency if cards are not generated fast enough, etc.
7 Nancy Coston presented the following slides:
8 2. Budqet issues and Impacts
9
10 Budget Issues and Impacts
11 • Child Welfare Funding Cuts
12 • Work First Cash Changes
13 • Child Care Subsidy Funding
14 • Adult Services Program Changes
15 • Impacts of Sequestration
16
17 Agency Programs and Services (Graphic)
18
19 Nancy Coston reviewed the Budget Issues slide and said the child welfare cut
20 was a result of a re-interpretation of policy and it will cause less money to be received
21 each year to child welfare cases.
22 She said the Work First Cash, once moved to the new system, will no longer be
23 issuing checks but will be depositing money into client's bank account. She said this is
24 about 350 cases served at a time, but these are the clients who are likely to not have a
25 bank account or be in good standing at the bank. She said if a bank account cannot be
26 established, the cash will be placed on the same EBT card as food and nutrition. She
27 said this money will be free to spend on items other than food. The likely issue will be
28 people seeing what is known to be a food stamp card used on non food items. She said
29 this will likely cause an issue and DSS is working with banks to try and solve this issue.
30 She said that there will be less spent this year on Child Subsidy and there are
91 still applications being submitted for consolidated subsidy.
32 She said that The Adult Services Program, Adult Care Home Management
33 Program was privatized by the state last year and that funding has been lost, but Mental
34 Health Guardianship cases were given. The guardianship money was not as high and
35 the cases were more challenging.
36 She said the impacts of sequestration have not trickled down yet but are
37 expected to by next year. She said the main childcare funds are not supposed to be
38 subject to this.
39 Chair Jacobs said he, Commissioner Mckee, and the Manager met with
40 Congressman Price yesterday and the congressman requested a report on the impact of
41 the sequestration. Chair Jacobs asked Nancy Coston to provide her feedback on this as
42 she gets it.
43 Nancy Coston said the state office is taking much of the hit this year.
44 Frank Clifton said that so much of what is done is directed at the state first and
45 the state moves mone om nd which changes the impact.
46 Commissioner Gordon said it is important to let the public know how state and
47 federal cuts have impacted local programs. She said this is important; otherwise blame
48 for cuts is incorrectly placed.
49
50 4. Success Stories
•
6
1 Nancy Coston referred to the graphic slide of programs and services. She said
2 that there are a large number of programs under DSS and she would like to have the
3 managers highlight a few of them.
4
5 Sharron Hinton reviewed the following:
6 Adolescent Parenting Program
7 • Antonia gave birth to her daughter when she was 15 years old and in the 10m
8 grade at Orange High School
9 • The Adolescent Parenting Program gave her emotional and academic support,
10 parenting education, and access to resources
11 • Despite challenges she successfully graduated from high school and attends
12 Alamance Community College
13
14 Sharon Hinton said that the goal of the Adolescent Parenting Program is to work
15 with all of the pregnant and parenting teens. She said there are social workers
16 based in each of the local school systems- Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Orange
17 County. She said that the goal of the program is to offer support to help students
18 graduate and to help prevent a second pregnancy. She reviewed the individual
19 success story highlighted on the slide.
20
21 Denise Schaffer reviewed the following:
22 Consolidated Child Care Subsidy Program
23 • Maximizes use of state and federal funds
24 • Reduces administrative costs so more funds can be used for subsidy(815
25 children per month)
26 • Provides a seamless transition between funding sources
27 • Maintains one waiting list that clearly defines the number of Orange County
28 families waiting for subsidy /356 kids)
29 • Supports access to other agency programs for families and children
30 • Continues to assure the m jority of children are enrolled in high quality child care
31 programs (90%)
32
33 Tina Clark reviewed the following success story:
34 Consolidated Child Care Subsidy Program
35 • "Debbie" was a single mom struggling to find work and battling substance
36 abuse while trying to raise her 3 year-old.
37 • She began participating in the Work First program and receiving child care
38 subsidy. She was also referred to the Horizons program.
39 • Debbie successfully completed both programs within one year and remains
40 drug free. She has maintained employment and now has her own apartment
41
42 Sharon Hinton reviewed the following:
43 Youth Enhancement Fund
44 • The Youth Enhancement Fund was established by the Commissioners in
45 2011 to provide low-income youth with opportunities to participate in
46 recreational activities
47 (Graphic)
48 Sharron Hinton said The Youth Enhancement Fund was established by the
49 Commissioners in 2011 to provide low-income youth with opportunities to participate in
50 recreational activities. She said the program served 103 children last year, with an
51 average of 2 activities per child. She said the funding provided in the first year was at
7
1 $10.000 and it is at$20,000 for the current year. She said the goal is primarily children with reg��a1�nfees, for ecdv�es like swimmin . hockey|lessons,. and
3 gymnastics. This is a successful program and has a lot of interest from the community.
4 A lot of referrals are received from Parks and Recreation and Hillsborough Youth Athletic
c
5 Association (HYAA) and from social workers.
6 Commissioner Rich asked if there are problems with transportation for these
7 children.
8 Sharron Hinton said registration assistance is provided and parents are still
9 responsible for transportation.
10
11 Nancy Coston presented the following:
12 New Initiatives
13 • Food and Nutrition Services Employment and Training
14 • Food Distribution
15 • Second Family Program Expansion
16 • Community Response Program
17 • Emergency Solution Grant
18 • WIA Youth Grant
19 • Drug Treatment Court
20
21 Nancy Coston said that there are now federal dollars in place to pay for Food and
22 Nutrition Services training for people who have lost jobs in the recession. She said this
23 will be incorporated into other programs as well.
24 Joyce Lee k about food distribution. She said that DSS receives food from
25 the North Carolina Food Bank and People Offering Relief for Chapel Hill Carrboro
26 Homes (PORCH). She said backpacks are packed and given to residents who come in
27 needing food. She said that referrals are also done to OCIM and this year 561 referrals
28 have already been done. She noted that this is an increase in people needing food.
29 Dustin Lowell said Second Family Program Expansion works with youth and
30 adolescents who are in the custody of DSS. The organization takes foster children and
31 offers them opportunities such as tutoring, guitar lessons, summer vacations and college
32 visits, among other things. The focus is for this year is on adolescents getting summer
33 jobs, and there is a proposal to lease a county vehicle for a year and provide
34 transportation to and from job interviews and part time jobs.
35 Denise Schaeffer said the Community Response Program is a collaborative
36 project with Partnership for Young Children. Social workers are employed on a contract
37 basis to enhance protective factors in families with a history of issues. She said this
38 program is operating under a three year grant and this is the first year.
39 Sharron Hinton said the Emergency Solutions Grant is the second phase to
40 Homelessness Prevention Grant, a million dollar grant given in 2009 for a three year
41 period. This was to administer prevention and housing for people at risk of becoming
42 homeless. She said this funding stream changed and this grant is now limited to
43 $189'000. She said that$60,000 of this was contracted to |(]C in Carrboro to help with
44 shelter operation, and the balance is to go to housing.
45 Sharon Hinton said that the Workforce Investment Act Youth Grant(WIA Youth
46 Grant) was just applied for last week. Currently the Youth Initiative is implemented
47 through JOCCA. She said this was a prime time for Orange County to apply for funding,
48 and DSS anticipates being able to provide a program for at risk and low income
49 adolescents. These programs will provide these youth with opportunities for
50 employment and training opportunities. She anticipates hearing about the grant by July
51 1st.
8
1 Sharron Hinton said Drug Treatment Court is new to DSS and provides
2 administrative oversight for the drug treatment court, working with the district court
3 judges.
4
5 5. Social Services Board Chair Remarks
6 DSS Board Chair, Pat Garavaglia thanked the Board of County Commissioners
7 for being so supportive to social services and for continuing to fund the safety net
8 programs. She thanked them for the three, time-limited positions that were budgeted for
9 this past year during the implementation of NC FAST, as well as the overtime pay for
10 employees working on this p jmct. She said the gift cards for food were also
11 appreciated, as well as the childcare assistance for county employees. She said the
12 DSS staff members are dedicated, compassionate and knowledgeable.
13 Chair Jacobs asked about the possible drug testing of poor people to get benefits
14 Nancy Coston said that she heard food nutrition and work first programs were the
15 targeted programs and people will be required to pay for the drug test and bring in the
10 certification. She said the federal funding cannot be used for drug testing and she
17 be/ieveathmcountym/i|| have to reimburse.
10 Chair Jacobs asked if the DSS board taken a position on this.
19 Pat Garavaglia said there was not a quorum at the last meeting, so this issue has
20 not been voted on. She said that she feels it is unreasonable to ask people who cannot
21 feed their families, to pay for a drug test.
22 Nancy Coston said a drug test will cost around$38 and then the background
23 criminal checks will cost too. She said both of these issues are floating around as bills
24 right now. She noted that there will also be the financial burden of staff time to facilitate
25 this. She said the last bill she saw was that DSS would provide and pay for treatment.
26 She said DSS already has the right, in child welfare programs, to ask for a treatment
27 plan if it is believed that a client has a drug problem. She said, in the proposed bill,
28 everyone would be tested.
29
30 G. Closing Remarks
31
32 Chair Jacobs asked for DSS to provide some bullet talking points on this issue
33 for the next agenda review, for a resolution to be brought forth to the Board of County
34 Commissioners. He also asked if a press release could be put out if the Board of County
35 Commissioners passed a resolution opposing this bill.
36 He thanked DSS for their hard work and dedication.
37 The meeting adjourned at 6:51pm.
38
39 Barry Jacobs, Chair
40
41 Donna S. Baker
42 Clerk to the Board