HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-08-2014 - 6a 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 8, 2014
Action Agenda
Item No. 6-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:
February 27, 2014 BOCC Joint Meeting with Town of Hillsborough
March 18, 2014 BOCC Regular Meeting
April 1, 2014 BOCC Regular Meeting
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
I Attachment 1
2
3 DRAFT
4 MINUTES
5 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
6 HILLSBOROUGH BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
7 JOINT MEETING
8 February 27, 2014
9 7:00 p.m.
10
11 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Joint Meeting with the Town of
12 Hillsborough Commissioners on Thursday, February 27, 2014 at 7:00 p.m., in the Link
13 Government Services Center, in Hillsborough, North Carolina.
14
15 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Barry Jacobs and Commissioners Mark
16 Dorosin, Alice Gordon, Earl McKee, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich
17 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
18 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: James Bryan, Staff Attorney
19 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: Interim County Manager Michael Talbert and Assistant County
20 Managers Clarence Grier and Cheryl Young, and Clerk to the Board Donna S. Baker (All other
21 staff members will be identified appropriately below)
22 HILLSBOROUGH COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Mayor Tom Stevens and Kathleen
23 Ferguson, Commissioners Eric Hallman, Brian Lowen, Evelyn Lloyd, and Jenn Weaver
24 HILLSBOROUGH COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
25 HILLSBOROUGH STAFF PRESENT: Maragret Hauth, Planning Director
26 HILLSBOROUGH TOWN STAFF ABSENT: Town Manager Eric Peterson
27
28 Chair Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
29
30 Welcome and Opening Remarks
31 Mayor Stevens said he is glad the Board and the town are able to get together, and it
32 seems that interaction is good between the two groups of staff. He introduced Hillsborough's
33 two newest Town Commissioners: Kathleen Ferguson and Jenn Weaver.
34 Mayor Stevens noted that Town Manager Eric Peterson was unable to attend due to
35 illness. He said the town is excited about the delivery of the bridges for Riverwalk, and the plan
36 is to have the ribbon cutting in September. He also invited the Board to attend his State of the
37 Town address on March 24th at the Orange County Public Library at 7:00 p.m.
38 Chair Jacobs said he and the Mayor decided to forego formal titles and use first names
39 at the meeting tonight. He said the Board enjoys having these annual meetings with
40 Hillsborough, and the practice has spawned annual meetings with the other municipalities in
41 Orange County. He said it seems that sitting down and talking with people gets more done in
42 the long run, and it dispels misimpressions.
43
44 1. Transportation
45 a) Sidewalk Maintenance Related to Implementation of Safe Routes to School
46 (SRTS) Project
47 Abigaile Pittman read through the following information from the abstract:
48
49 On November 19, 2013 the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) held a public hearing on
50 the Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Action Plan, which includes recommendations for
2
1 improvements in the area of Cameron Park Elementary School, Charles Stanford Middle
2 School, and Grady Brown Elementary School. The Plan is scheduled to be reviewed by the
3 Orange Unified Transportation Board (0UTBoard).Orange County School Board and the Town
4 of Hillsborough Board of Commissioners, and returned to the BOCC on April 15, 2014 for
5 adoption consideration.
6
7 Abigaile Pittman said the provision and maintenance of sidewalks in the County's jurisdiction
8 will be an issue for SRTS implementation. This issue was previously discussed by the BOCC on
9 October 6, 2011 in the context of reviewing proposed subdivision development requirements. At
10 that time the BOCC did not adopt an official sidewalk policy, but expressed the intent of
11 revisiting the issue in the future. Orange County (as well as most, if not all, counties in North
12 Carolina) does not maintain local streets or sidewalks. Public roadways are part of the State
13 maintained system. The NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) does not build nor
14 maintain sidewalks. In municipalities, streets and sidewalks are generally maintained by a
15 municipal public works staffs or by homeowners associations. Several years ago Orange
16 County entered into a sidewalk maintenance agreement for a portion of Homestead Road
17 adjacent to the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro. The agreement is multi-party including
18 NCDOT, which allowed an encroachment agreement in its right-of-way. The Towns maintain
19 the sidewalk.
20
21 Commissioner McKee arrived at 7:12 PM.
22
23 Chair Jacobs asked if staff is proposing some action.
24 Abigaile Pittman said staff is proposing that the Board and town staff discuss the
25 potential for having a policy for the maintenance of sidewalks in the County, related to Safe
26 Routes to School implementation.
27 Chair Jacobs asked if this was for sidewalks in the County that attach to sidewalks in the
28 town and are part of the Safe Routes to School (SRTS).
29 Abigaile Pittman said this is for sidewalks to Grady Brown School and other schools that
30 are in the County's jurisdiction. She said the idea is for creation of a policy or agreement on
31 how to maintain these.
32 Chair Jacobs asked if that kind of agreement would indicate that Orange County would
33 contribute and pay for this maintenance, and the Town would administer the funds.
34 Abigaile Pittman said the precedent in the past was Homestead Road, where DOT was
35 the party for encroachments, and the Towns maintained it, while the County paid for that
36 maintenance.
37 Mayor Stevens said the Town only has a public works staff of 7 people, and the
38 sidewalk maintenance and needed repairs are contracted out. He said he does not see any
39 reason for not having an agreement and finding a way of sharing resources. He said he wants
40 to set the expectations that the Town does not do a whole lot of maintenance now.
41 Eric Hallman said the Orange County SRTS plan aligns with the Town's sidewalk plan,
42 which is driven by the schools as a nucleus. He said staff has been trying to get a pedestrian
43 overpass along Orange Grove Road to connect to Grady Brown.
44 Commissioner Rich said Orange County is not in the sidewalk business, and she asked
45 if the County has ever found itself in a situation where someone has to be hired to fix a
46 sidewalk. She asked if there are places in County jurisdiction where there are sidewalks, and
47 she noted that there was something in the materials that referenced maintenance of a parking
48 lot.
49 Abigaile Pittman said there are sidewalks on private property, within a development.
50
3
1 Michael Talbert said the County does not maintain sidewalks on private property;
2 however the County does maintain the sidewalks in and around County buildings such as the
3 library, the parking deck and West Campus.
4 Commissioner Rich asked if this is contract work.
5 Michael Talbert said this is generally specified work that is contracted out, and the
6 County pays for it.
7 Abigaile Pittman said many of the sidewalks in this project are not close to County
8 buildings, but many are a path from schools to and from residential areas.
9 Brian Lowen asked about sidewalks around schools that are not in the city limits. He
10 asked how this is handled.
11 Staff said that is what they are trying to figure out.
12 Brian Lowen asked if the state would be willing to take over maintenance.
13 Abigaile Pittman said the DOT will not maintain these.
14 Craig Benedict said there was a similar situation on Homestead Road. He said this was
15 Orange County's jurisdiction, and it was not within Chapel Hill and Carrboro's ETJ. He said this
16 required a 4 party agreement. He said it is okay, within an agreement, for municipalities to
17 maintain lands outside of their jurisdiction.
18 Chair Jacobs said Orange County is considering doing a bond issue in 2016. He said,
19 given that the state is not going to provide any funding for sidewalks, he would like Orange
20 County to have a discussion about asking voters to help promote walkability and alternative
21 modes of transportations with our own money. He said this should be part of the conversation
22 moving forward if the state is no longer supportive of alternative transportation.
23 He suggested the Town and County staff should work together to approach the
24 contractors used by the Town of Hillsborough to do the maintenance for these proposed
25 sidewalks.
26 Eric Hallman said the current agreement can be used as a boilerplate for this.
27 The Boards agreed by consensus.
28
29 b) Implementation of Downtown Hillsborough Access Study Improvements
30 Margaret Hauth said staff is still moving forward with DOT and Orange County's support
31 on the sidewalk in front of the courthouse. She said the project is closer to the start of
32 construction. She said the Town Commissioners will be providing feedback this weekend, and
33 some portions of the plan may be flip flopped in order to address the Bank of America Parking
34 lot, which is leased by the town. She said this is to be reconfigured to function more normally
35 and to provide a place for off street loading. She said there are still questionable issues with
36 the DOT, but staff still feels this is a viable project.
37 Commissioner Rich asked if the local money has changed.
38 Margaret Hauth said the method DOT used to distribute funding to them is no longer
39 available. She said DOT has committed to working within existing funds to find a way to qualify
40 this project for those funds. She said this is considered a committed project and the DOT is
41 very supportive. She said she is very sure they will get the funding from DOT.
42 Chair Jacobs asked about a reference to parking on the eastside of Churton Street.
43 Margaret Hauth said this is not about parking. She said the re-surfacing of Churton
44 Street qualifies for assurance of handicap accessibility and ADA compliance with each and
45 every crosswalk. She said the west side was being addressed, but the east side was not being
46 touched; however the new rule is that everything must be ADA compliant. She said this triggers
47 work on the east side of the street.
48 Chair Jacobs asked if staff can re-visit the idea of having a crosswalk by Radius
49 Restaurant.
4
1 Margaret Hauth said staff has looked at this, and there is no situation in that area that
2 meets DOT's regulations.
3 Commissioner Price said the other issue is the bus stop in front of the police station.
4 Margaret Hauth said there is a turn lane and too much going on there to put up a
5 crosswalk.
6
7 0 Access Management Planning in Economic Development Districts — 1-40
8 Interchange and Hampton Pointe Areas
9 Craig Benedict said Orange County and Hillsborough have been working in the access
10 management plan arena for a long time. He said when you vie for money at the MPO level or
11 from DOT or environmental agencies, if you have an adopted access management plan, your
12 potential to receive funding increases greatly. He said County staff has worked on several
13 access management plans in the Eno Development District and in the Efland/Mebane area. He
14 feels it would also be prudent to work with Hillsborough to look at interchanges around
15 Interstate 85 and new Highway 86. He said there is a plan based on work done in the early
16 2000's. He said the more work done to find feasible locations for traffic devices and widening
17 of roads, the greater the potential for funding.
18 He suggested that staff begin a dialogue regarding an interchange at Waterstone. He
19 said there are 4 quadrants, and only 1 of those is really being developed at this time (the
20 northeast quadrant). He said this is setting the stage for continued development to the
21 Northwest quadrant. He said staff should look south of the interchange as well. He said the
22 connection from Waterstone going east to west between New 86 and Old 86 was picked up by
23 a developer, and without that connection, development would have been a struggle.
24 Craig Benedict said it is not as easy in North Carolina to show a roadway on a map and
25 then tell a development to reserve and dedicate the roadway. He said this plan is not just for
26 public sector work; it is to set a game plan for making separate developments fit together.
27 Chair Jacobs asked if the direction to staff would be to engage in joint planning on how
28 to plan these areas.
29 Craig Benedict said yes. He said he will coordinate with planning staff, and the
30 Department of Transportation (DOT) will be asked to look at the work. He said the half million
31 dollar road that DOT is building for Morinaga was augmented by the access management plan
32 that was approved 2 years ago. He said the land use change that was done in that 423 acre
33 area, though it was basic and just included a dashed line, was helpful when going through
34 environmental approvals for the roadway design.
35 He said he is asking elected officials for approval so that staff can move forward. He
36 said these basic access management plans should be brought forward in the next 4-6 months
37 to set a game plan for development in and around these economic development areas.
38 Commissioner Dorosin asked if there is a generalized plan on paper now.
39 Craig Benedict said there is nothing on paper for the Hillsborough area; but there are
40 dashed lines on a map for the Efland/Mebane area. He said this indicates to developers where
41 the best locations are for signalized intersections.
42 Eric Hallman said he thought the DOT had done some preliminary drawings on both the
43 Old 86 and New 86 interchanges
44 Craig Benedict said those were only for the entrance and exit points off the interchange.
45 He said there is more work within the quadrants that needs to be addressed.
46 Commissioner McKee asked if this will be done in concert with the Hillsborough
47 Planning Board.
48 Craig Benedict said yes.
49
5
1 Chair Jacobs said he thought the planning group in the early 2000's for the Hillsborough
2 Economic Development Districts also did roads across from Hampton Pointe to get Highway 10
3 to align better with 86. He asked if this was part of the plan.
4 Craig Benedict said that is part of the plan, but this access management plan will take it
5 to a higher level. He said that was the early study work, and there was a line drawn with an
6 idea of that road continuing; but when development did not happen on that side, DOT put a light
7 at Old NC 10. He said this is still not the best location. He said this access management plan
8 is the type of plan needed to clearly ask a developer to move forward.
9 Chair Jacobs referred to the Orange Grove Road access management plan and the
10 development that straddles Eno Mountain Road. He thought the agreement was to line up
11 Mayo Street and Eno Mountain Road. He asked if this is going to happen.
12 Craig Benedict said there was a courtesy review of this, and comments were sent to
13 DOT. He said staff is looking for a reservation to the northern side of this, meaning Eno
14 Mountain would move a little. He said there have been no decisions made regarding who will
15 build it.
16 Margaret Hauth said there is no feasibility study from DOT, so no one knows where the
17 alignment will be at this point. She said there is not enough information about where a road
18 might go to require a reservation.
19 Chair Jacobs asked if there would ever be a reservation if development moves ahead.
20 Margaret Hauth said if it gets designed, it will have to move around any development
21 that is built in its way. She said the town was inconsistent in its support for the alignment in
22 years past, but it is back on the list now.
23 Craig Benedict said there may need to be action to jumpstart DOT's feasibility plan. He
24 said DOT wants more specifics to see that this is achievable and to see what the impacts will
25 be. He said a line on a map used to be better than nothing, but it is not that easy now.
26 Mayor Stevens said he felt that this was a catch-22. He said there was enough
27 information, and it was a small enough project to interest a developer; but there was not a lot
28 that could be done, given the DOT road.
29 Margaret Hauth said with so many roads controlled by the state and funding the way it
30 is, it behooves a municipality to go ahead and spend local funding to do the analysis in order to
31 move a project forward.
32 Commissioner Price said the previous transportation administration had agreed to work
33 on the alignment on Churton Street.
34 Chair Jacobs said this could be brought up at their DOT quarterly meeting, and the
35 Board could ask about a possible feasibility study being done for this area.
36
37 d) Widening of Interstate 85, Especially Bridges
38 Mayor Stevens said the area around 1-85 is very critical to Hillsborough's economic
39 development.
40 Eric Hallman said two years ago there was a discussion about how Hillsborough and the
41 County had not prioritized this area for development. He said they are paying the price now for
42 projects being pushed out. He requested that, as the prioritization process for the
43 transportation improvement plan moves forward, everyone do what they can to encourage this
44 project.
45 Commissioner McKee asked how this project is ranked with DOT.
46 Craig Benedict said the 1-85 widening was put out between two different TIP programs.
47 He said it makes it more problematic that it was half in the end of one 10 year period and then
48 in the start of another 10 year period. He said it was pushed back last year due to the amount
49 of money that was available. He said this is about weighing priorities, and he thinks that after
50 this first strategic transportation initiative funding formula, maybe staff can figure out how to
6
1 move a project up. He said an interchange cannot be done without doing a full widening of I-
2 85. He said if you can keep it in a 10 year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) you are
3 better off than if it is pushed out 15-20 years.
4 Chair Jacobs said he thinks that the new formula and the focus on regional projects
5 indicates the interstates in Orange County may be addressed more quickly.
6 Commissioner Gordon said her understanding is that the prioritization 3.0 scoring
7 formula puts interstates in a higher tier and makes this project more likely to receive favorable
8 consideration.
9 Kathleen Ferguson asked what can be done to increase prioritization.
10 Craig Benedict said each year Orange County and other jurisdictions put in their priority
11 list. He said this is pulled together, and the priorities have to be co-mingled. He said the DOT
12 then looks at the list and considers their regional priorities. He agrees that interstates could
13 move up in importance. He said it is important to vie to keep it high in the MPO priority list.
14 Margaret Hauth said staff has gone through the submission of local priorities and are
15 now waiting on the DOT to score it. She said that the last step is for the County and Town to
16 lobby for as many points as possible to be put on Interstate 85.
17 Kathleen Ferguson asked if there was anything else.
18 Margaret Hauth said that is the only step left to be done.
19 Commissioner McKee said the more aligned the affected governmental entities are, the
20 better the chance of getting the project approved.
21 Commissioner Price said she thinks, based on the TARPO meetings, that because 1-85
22 connects the economic development areas, this will be prioritized at the state level. She asked
23 about the status of the bridge.
24 Craig Benedict said the bridge on new 86 would be widened as part of the project. He
25 said the one on Churton Street would be a completely new bridge.
26 Margaret Hauth said these will both be new bridges, in part because there are widening
27 projects for both 86 and South Churton Street that are waiting for 1-85 to be widened in order to
28 properly configure the interchanges.
29 Craig Benedict said the points system is not just internal to the MPO. He said the
30 projects rated in the MPO have to vie against other MPO's. He said there is competition for
31 money to come to division 7. He said the re-negotiation will be an important step, and
32 decisions may have to be made about where to put the chips in the MPO.
33
34 2. Transit
35 a) Update on Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan (OCBRIP)
36 Implementation
37 Craig Benedict noted that Eric Langfried was in attendance from Triangle Transit.
38 Craig Benedict said the Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan (OCBRIP) was
39 approved by the BOCC in June 2012 and in November 2012 voters approved a one-half cent
40 sales tax to implement the program. He said this plan addresses a variety of transportation
41 modes including: the Amtrak station; the bus rapid transit along the Martin Luther King corridor;
42 the light rail project; as well as the additional bus service hours, which is the focus tonight. He
43 said the bus service hours will be available to three bus providers: Orange Public
44 Transportation (OPT), Triangle Transit Authority (TTA), and Chapel Hill Transit. He said the
45 monies are now becoming available from the half cent sales tax and the $7 vehicle tag fee. He
46 said there will be another $3 regional tag fee by the first part of next year.
47 He said the amount of hours available for new service over the next 4 years will be
48 about 30,000 hours. He said Chapel Hill runs about 200,000 hours per year, and OPT runs
49 about 20,000 hours per year, including the demand response service and the Hillsborough
50 circulator. He said of those 30,000 hours; 64 percent of the funding goes to Chapel Hill; 24
7
1 percent goes to Triangle Transit; and 12% goes to OPT. He said staff has been working with
2 TTA for the past year on the OPT and Triangle Transit routes that would service central and
3 rural Orange County.
4
5 b) Central and Rural Orange County 5-Year Bus Service Expansion Program,
6 Including Update on Hillsborough Circulator
7 Craig Benedict said staff is looking at some routes based on community outreach and
8 will be providing a formal presentation with Triangle Transit to the Board of County
9 Commissioners on April 1St
10 Craig Benedict reviewed the routes while referring to a display map. He said the majority
11 of the money in this new program will be put toward an East/West route in Mebane, Efland,
12 Hillsborough and over to Durham. He said the important piece in this is stopping in northern
13 Hillsborough and creating some sort of transit stop to hook up with the Hillsborough circulator
14 route and the 420 route.
15 Kathleen Ferguson asked if this would include the grocery stores and stops along 70.
16 Craig Benedict said this would be more of a regional express route. He said the
17 Hillsborough circulator might be able to branch out to go to the Food Lion, but this would be
18 more of a local route.
19 Kathleen Ferguson said it is critical that the 70 corridor have a route with stops for
20 northern residents. She said this is vital, as it is the only transportation for many of those
21 citizens.
22 Craig Benedict said there are many different types of routes, and the task will be finding
23 a combination of routes that serve the community best. He said conversations have been had
24 with Hillsborough residents about this. He said there are limited hours available to add, and
25 one full day route is 3,500 hours.
26 Kathleen Ferguson said she understands this, but this is about people who have no
27 other option. She said if that group of citizens is not being served she does not see the point.
28 Commissioner Price agreed and said the majority of residents she has spoken with are
29 looking for a local bus with local stops. She said maybe the percentages need to be
30 reconsidered. She said there are more people moving in at Hampton Pointe and in the new
31 development on Business 70, and these residents are going to need bus service.
32 Craig Benedict said he does not disagree with the needs along 70; however it may
33 require using a variety of routes and providers to make this work. He said there are limitations,
34 and maybe these numbers can be reviewed at a subsequent meeting. He said these
35 comments are being noted and will be kept in mind by his staff and TTA.
36 He finished reviewing the display map.
37 Craig Benedict said OPT received $88,000 the first year; it will receive $200,000 this
38 year, $300,000 the following year, and $380,000 the last year. He said that is a reasonable
39 amount of money; but there is about $800,000 now in OPT's budget, $400,000 of which is out
40 of OPT's pocket, with the rest being leveraged by state and federal dollars. He said this runs
41 20,000 hours, so $300,000 doesn't stretch too far. He said Commissioner Gordon and
42 Commissioner Price have stressed in past meetings, the importance of additional bus hours,
43 and staff is examining this.
44 Commissioner McKee said that the focus must be on the needs of the users, rather than
45 the convenience of the service providers.
46 Kathleen Ferguson said those with no options or few options should be served before
47 those who have multiple options.
48 Craig Benedict said staff has developed maps of transit dependent populations, and
49 these are noted in northern Hillsborough the Efland Cheeks area. He said the senior citizen
8
1 populations are being considered. He said there are more people over the age of 60 outside of
2 Chapel Hill and Carrboro than there are in Chapel Hill and Carrboro.
3 Commissioner Price said people want to age in place, and it is important to serve them.
4 She said she has a problem with buses only going through 5:00. She said people need
5 transportation to work, and to and from school, and the bus should provide this.
6 Craig Benedict said one last thing that will be funded with the Bus and Rail Investment
7 Plan monies is the continuation of the Hillsborough circulator route. He said there are currently
8 monies earmarked with the plan for when the congestion management air quality grants dry up.
9 He said there will be additional monies necessary to upgrade the service to include weekends.
10 He said there is a three party agreement between MPO, TTA and Orange County that talks
11 about funding that might not be completely explained in the plan or the implementation
12 agreement. He said the three parties will have to sign off on the new funding arrangement in
13 order to have sustainable funding for the circulator route. He said staff is trying to use money
14 from the tag tax to fund it, as money from the sales tax is not supposed to be used for existing
15 services.
16 Jenn Weaver asked for clarification on the circulator route. She asked if there were any
17 immediate plans to add a route going in the other direction.
18 Craig Benedict said the plan is to keep the one route, and change locations as
19 necessary. He said running a bus in the opposite direction doubles the cost. He said the
20 circulator costs $90,000 - $110,000 per year, so funding another route in the other direction
21 would mean finding another $100,000. He said OPT has not vied for urban monies from the
22 MPO in the past, as it was a rural area, and the MPO didn't cover all the way to Efland. He said
23 this is changing, and OPT is asking for their fair share based on population served in the
24 urbanized area.
25 Commissioner Pelissier said she would like to put the issue of various bus service needs
26 in perspective. She noted that she is on the Board of Health and is the liaison for the Master
27 Aging Plan. She said the Master Aging Plan talks a lot about the need for transportation for
28 seniors, and then last night the Board of Health passed a resolution stating the need to make
29 sure there is transportation for residents who need it for health reasons. She said there is a
30 tremendous expressed need for transit. She said the sales tax is not going to solve all of the
31 transit problems, and the reality is that projects are going have to be prioritized.
32 Commissioner Gordon said the abstract says this will come back to the Commissioners
33 in April or May for approval of financial assumptions. She said it sounds esoteric that that
34 would be important. She said there is an inter-local agreement that says if the conditions
35 materially change it has to come back to the Board. She said there are material changes. She
36 questioned what will be done if sales tax revenue goes up, but some of the other state or local
37 revenue sources go down. She said this will be an important conversation in May. She said
38 the bus hours are critically important, and the Board wants to rectify this when extra money
39 comes in.
40 Commissioner Gordon said it is important to remember that 75 percent of the money
41 goes to the light rail transit. She said the bus and rail plan passed by the voters is pretty
42 specific, but there are some changes, and the question is what will be done in April. She said
43 she is hearing the Board say that the bus service is the priority.
44 Commissioner McKee congratulated Eric Langfried on the approval to move to
45 development stage. He said this does not change his stand on the light rail, but it was evidently
46 a well put together plan. He referenced a proposal put forth this summer regarding the
47 possibility of an east/west route from Mebane to Durham down 1-85. He asked if this has been
48 put away or if it is still on the table.
49 Eric Langfried said he does not know the final recommendation on this.
9
1 Commissioner McKee said he would like to see this taken off the table. He said he
2 realizes that the half cent sales tax cannot address all of the needs, but without the light rail
3 component, it would address the majority of them.
4 Eric Hallman asked what happened to the funding for the circulator route. He said the
5 plan voted on by the Town had the circulator route covered as new coverage, given the date it
6 went into operation. He said this plan has since been manipulated so the circulator plan now
7 can't be funded by the half cent sales tax. He said this is not the plan that was approved.
8 Craig Benedict said, at first the plan described new service as something after July
9 2009. He said the Hillsborough circulator started out after that; so it was considered new. He
10 said late in the implementation agreement process, the date for new service became the
11 referendum date of November 2012. He said the circulator was running at that point, so it was
12 considered an existing service, which could not be funded with the sales tax. He said staff
13 stated its case on this issue.
14 Craig Benedict said there is a way to fund the circulator using only tag tax revenue,
15 which equals $788,000 in a the first full year; however the share for the circulator and OPT will
16 be based on how much money is spent by the local government entities, you get a 92 percent -
17 8 percent split on the tag revenue. He said that 8 percent split is probably $40,000 or $50,000
18 per year. He said this does not completely pay for the Hillsborough circulator; but some money
19 has been accrued, and it is sustainable for the first 4 or 5 years. He said the managers and
20 TTA are working on determining whether the split is sustainable. He said the math shows that
21 the 8 percent will get smaller as time goes on, because the Chapel Hill system will spend more
22 than OPT spends. He said this will need to be resolved in the coming years.
23 Eric Langfried said both TTA and the MPO were fine in understanding that some of the
24 new monies would be spent to continue the Hillsborough circulator, but it is really just about
25 finding the legal mechanism to do that. He said the notion that the circulator should continue
26 to be funded is not in doubt.
27 Eric Hallman said it is something his board should advocate for
28 Commissioner Price said her understanding was that there would be a bus going in the
29 opposite direction, because one of the major complaints about this route was the inconvenience
30 of having only one bus going in one direction. She said there needs to be another bus so that
31 more people would use it. She would be in favor of another circulator bus.
32 Craig Benedict said staff will take roughly $400,000 and put price tags on a reverse
33 route and on mid-day service on Highway 70. He said this will show how this money gets
34 allocated. He said staff is also trying to put some senior citizen money in to bring people to the
35 senior center. He said the current draft lists 5 things that staff believes can be funded in the
36 first 5 years. He said he doesn't see funding for an extra $100,000 route for the circulator
37 unless another $100,000 in associated hours is cut out. He said staff will try to list out the costs
38 of these routes.
39 Commissioner Price said she believes there should be a re-allocation of money. She
40 does not see why the northern and central parts of the County should be short-changed. She
41 said there are people up there that need service.
42 Kathleen Ferguson said the County is not Chapel Hill/Carrboro; the County is the
43 County.
44 Commissioner Pelissier said she believes the Board wants to honor the original plan
45 regarding the circulator route. She said, regarding the addition of a reverse direction of the
46 circulator, she thinks it needs to be clear that this could be funded out of the half cents sales
47 tax, as this will be a new service.
48 Craig Benedict said this will still be limited by the overall $400,000. He said when this
49 comes to the Commissioners on April 1St and May 8th, the financial plan will be included, and
50 this will show the proposed growth rate of 4.4 percent to 2035. He said staff thinks the half cent
10
1 sales tax will start at $6.2 million per year and grow at this rate moving forward. He said if you
2 increase the growth rate at .8 percent, the revenue increase will equal $60 million through 2035.
3 He said some of the decisions coming to the Board are going to involve allocation of money in
4 the face of changing revenue sources and expenditures.
5 Mayor Stevens said with the circulator route being as popular as it is now, the addition of
6 another route will likely mean triple return rate. He said this will have a social equity impact, as
7 well as an economic impact. He expressed appreciation for the widespread support.
8 Chair Jacobs asked Eric Langfried if there have been any changes to the numbers.
9 Eric Langfried said no. He said his staff has been working with the County on decisions
10 about how the money can be spent. He said it is very important to have a good local network
11 that feeds into a larger regional network. He said some of the connections and loop routes
12 could be made with the east west routes and the extension of routes up to Cedar Grove, as well
13 as more frequent service. He said there are a lot of new connections that can be made. He
14 said it would be good to see how everything plays out before deciding on a change in priorities.
15 Chair Jacobs said he thought Eric Langfried had said it wasn't necessarily that the
16 existing circulator route could not be funded with new funds.
17 Eric Langfried said the sales tax funds cannot be used, but the vehicle registration fee
18 could be used for the increased cost of service. He said the other difficult alternative would be
19 to change the implementation agreement and to change that date back to the retroactive play.
20 He said it is important to find a common understanding of the best legal way to do this.
21 Chair Jacobs asked Craig Benedict who made the decisions about how the money was
22 applicable to new projects.
23 Craig Benedict said this was Triangle Transit.
24 Commissioner Pelissier said it was a legal issue.
25
26 0 Amtrak Station Update
27 Margaret Hauth said everyone is working hard to get this train station going. She said in
28 December, the North Carolina Rail Road (NCRR), Norfolk Southern and Triangle Transit
29 entered a contract to perform a capacity study on the rail corridor to help determine future
30 needs (dual tracking, etc.) which could impact the station or its location. She said this study was
31 identified last year as the critical next step, and it has begun and will be completed by
32 September 2014. She said following the capacity study, the Town and Triangle Transit will
33 pursue environmental documentation for the site to continue improving its feasibility for funding.
34 She said the recent prioritization 3.0 process saw the potential cost of the station
35 balloon to $30 million. This was due to the inclusion of additional track work along with the
36 station for freight which has since been taken out. She said this included a large number of
37 improvements to address moving freight, as well as passenger trains that may not even stop in
38 Hillsborough. She said high speed rail is only meant to have 8 stops and would not stop in
39 Hillsborough, but there would have to be more by-pass tracks to accommodate this.
40 Margaret Hauth said NCDOT Rail staff recommends the scope be reduced to align with
41 the $4 million previously proposed for site access, utilities, parking and a modular station.
42 She said the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) has suggested that the $8 million
43 permanent station be included in the Transit Plan and should be pursued since the transit tax
44 supports this phase.
45 Commissioner Gordon said there was a lot of money added to not to stop the train in
46 Hillsborough. She said she would be interested in knowing what Hillsborough wants. She
47 asked if the Town would rather have the $4 million project or the $8 million project.
48 Margaret Hauth said the projects have all been submitted to DOT for scoring purposes,
49 and the $8 million project was submitted.
11
1 Commissioner Rich asked for clarification on what the cost is if the by-pass rails are not
2 built.
3 Margaret Hauth said the capacity study will give a lot more information. She said the by-
4 pass won't be as elaborate for three trains. She said, because there is no funding for the
5 passenger trains that will not stop in Hillsborough, there is no need to build the tracks for those
6 trains. She said the extra by-pass rails were only needed if there were funded trains that would
7 not stop in Hillsborough. She said all of the passenger trains funded today are scheduled to
8 stop in Hillsborough.
9 Margaret Hauth noted that freight does not run on as tight of a schedule as passenger
10 trains.
11 Commissioner Pelissier asked about the location of single tracks versus double tracks.
12 Margaret Hauth said her understanding is that dual tracking is slowly being brought
13 north out of Charlotte.
14 Commissioner Dorosin asked for the substantive difference between the $4 million
15 station and the $8 million station.
16 Margaret Hauth said it is the difference between a modular train station building and a
17 brick and mortar, 6000 square foot building. She said it also involves the parking.
18 Commissioner Price said she thinks it would help economic development to do the brick
19 and mortar building.
20 Commissioner Dorosin asked why the modular was ever recommended.
21 Margaret Hauth said this was suggested to get the station open earlier.
22 Commissioner McKee noted that this was the last project added to the bus and rail
23 investment plan. He is concerned that the last project in may be the first project out, and he
24 feels it is important to stay aware of what is going on.
25 Eric Hallman said one of the ways he hopes to accelerate this process is through a
26 public private partnership, given that the town owns the 20 acres for the building development.
27 He said he would look to the County to help push this.
28 Margaret Hauth said the town needs to develop the vision on paper to share with
29 people.
30 Mayor Stevens said the town is funding some of the impact study for this project, and
31 there are efforts being made to keep this moving.
32 Commissioner Pelissier said Triangle Transit is having a lot of different financial models
33 run and is looking at options, including public private partnerships. She said she is attending
34 conferences in reference to this, and there is a public private partnership conference on transit
35 in Charlotte next week. She said the Board is going to look at all of the options on the table to
36 make sure the plan that everyone agreed to is implemented.
37 Commissioner Price asked if Amtrak is still a big player.
38 Margaret Hauth said Amtrak is very supportive but they are not offering any financial
39 assistance.
40 Commissioner Price asked who owns the rail line.
41 Margaret Hauth said NCRR owns the rail line, but there is an operating agreement with
42 Norfolk Southern. She said this means Norfolk Southern also has to sign off on this, and they
43 have signed off on the capacity study.
44
45
46 3. Town of Hillsborough/Orange County ETJ Adjustment Process
47
48 Margaret Hauth referred to the blue handouts at the Commissioners' places. She said
49 the town and the County have been working since 2006 to develop a strategic growth plan for
12
1 the Hillsborough area and Central Orange County. She reviewed the following timeline and
2 information from the handouts:
3
4 In 2006, the town and county jointly crafted the Strategic Growth Plan with these 6 goals:
5 • Preserve and enhance the Hillsborough core area
6 • Preserve significant cultural and natural resources
7 • Coordinate growth with water/sewer availability
8 • Grow in a fiscally-responsible way
9 • Keep existing businesses healthy
10 • Assure continuity in public service provision
11
12 In 2009, the town and county jointly adopted an Inter local Agreement to implement the plan. The
13 term "development" in this agreement is not undefined and is not assumed to match the definition
14 in the Courtesy Review Agreement.
15
16 In 2010, the Water & Sewer Boundary Agreement was amended to reflect the Urban Services
17 Boundary agreed to in the Strategic Growth Plan and Inter local Agreement. The USB represents
18 the area that the town is planning to serve with utilities at some point in the future.
19
20 In 2013, the Town of Hillsborough prepared and adopted a Future Land Use Plan (FLUP) that
21 envisioned future uses throughout the Urban Services Boundary. This plan is a component of the
22 town's comprehensive plan. To be consistent with a state law effective in 2006 (NCGS 160A.383),
23 the town adopts a statement of consistency with each zoning map amendment and ordinance
24 amendment. This helps insure the implementation of the town's FLUP on a case by case basis.
25 Amendments that are not consistent with the town's FLUP must have an accompanying request to
26 amend the FLUP or risk denial. Also in 2013, Orange County adopted the town's FLUP, but did
27 not formally incorporate it into the County's comprehensive plan. Orange County intends to
28 integrate the town's FLUP into its comprehensive plan following the implementation of the
29 Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) amendments.
30
31 What's Next:
32 We are in the middle of the process of swapping ETJ areas — adding about 600 acres to the
33 town's area and releasing about 400 acres back to Orange County. A public information meeting
34 was well attended on January 9, primarily by residents scheduled to be added to the ETJ. They
35 understandably raised concerns about adding a new layer of regulation without a clear path of
36 representation. Most of the properties to be added to the ETJ are already developed.
37
38 The Remaining Steps:
39 1) Following the ETJ swap, the county plans to integrate the Inter local Agreement and the
40 town's FLUP into the County comprehensive plan.
41 This requires a robust out-reach and public notification process. Affected properties
42 plus those within 500 feet of affected properties must receive written notification of
43 any public hearing by certified mail ($6 per letter).
44 2) Implement the two types of urbanizing areas as defined by the Inter local Agreement.
45 • This involves transitioning another 1,000 acres to the town's zoning jurisdiction
46 through the Hillsborough Urbanizing designation. The notification requirements are
47 similar and about one half of the affected owners are already developed areas.
48 • If the town follows its FLUP and essentially "pre-zones" the undeveloped areas
49 during the transition, it removes an important negotiating aspect of the development
50 review process from the town's toolkit.
13
1
2 Margaret Hauth noted that the ETJ has town zoning category, and this does not
3 line up 100 percent with the County. She said AR in the town and AR in the County may not
4 mean the same thing. She said the town has R-10 and R-40, and the County has R-1 and R-2.
5 She said this requires a formal re-zoning process.
6 Margaret Hauth said before the move forward on this public process staff wanted to ask
7 the boards is this something they want to do. She said it is important to note that if the town re-
8 zones the properties coming into their ETJ consistent with the future land use map this will
9 involve pre-zoning a fair amount of property and putting in districts that will subject it to fairly
10 intense development. She said this takes away the town's tool of negotiating with property
11 owners through the special use zoning process.
12 She said the point of ETJ's is to prep areas for annexation to bring them more in line
13 with municipal regulations. She said a lot of the areas being added are already developed.
14 She noted that the Wildwood subdivision is actually developed at a smaller minimum lot size
15 than the town currently has in its unified development ordinance.
16 She said the lines of communication are open, and all projects of 5 acres or 20 dwelling
17 units or more that come within the town's planning jurisdiction are shared with the County
18 planning department for comments. She said when the County gets a request for a project that
19 wants water and sewer service in the urban service but outside of the planning area, this is sent
20 to the town for comments.
21
22 Margaret Hauth reviewed the following from the handouts:
23
24 Have we achieved what we wanted to achieve?
25 • The lines of communication are open between the two planning department staffs during
26 the development review process.
27 • The amended Water and Sewer Boundary Agreement memorializes the Urban Services
28 Boundary and documents the commitment to the boundary.
29 • Unlike twenty or more years ago, the town rarely approves utility extension agreements
30 without annexation due to the equity issues regarding paying for the town services used
31 and to minimize customers that must pay higher out of town utility rates.
32 • Due to local preferences and amendments to the state annexation laws, the town rarely
33 annexes using the involuntary process (once in the last 22 years).
34
35 Does the full implementation of the Inter local Agreement achieve substantially more?
36 ETJ is intended to ensure that new development in areas that are likely to be annexed is
37 consistent with the development regulation of the annexing community. Recent changes to
38 the annexation laws reduce the likelihood of the proposed ETJ areas being annexed,
39 except in the case of major redevelopment. Moving developed neighborhoods into the ETJ
40 after they are developed provides no protection to the residents of the neighborhood and
41 adds permitting steps to any project current residents take on (zoning permit from the town
42 followed by building permit from Orange County—2 locations, 2 fees).
43
44 If the intent of adding areas to the town's ETJ is to ease annexation for neighborhoods
45 already being served by town utilities (and lowing their utility bills), this will not be effective.
46 The changes in the state's annexation laws are a much bigger obstacle than the ETJ
47 location. The town has historically not pursued annexation of neighborhoods under the
48 involuntary process. The town remains willing to discuss annexation with any
49 neighborhood or group of property owners interested. The town has also studied the
14
1 impact of annexation and water rates on houses of various price points to help
2 neighborhoods determine what is in their best interest.
3
4 The town is willing to release the 400 acres of ETJ to the County without receiving
5 additional acreage in return. These areas are difficult to serve with utilities and are unlikely
6 to be considered for annexation, so releasing them from the ETJ manages expectations
7 more clearly. This process does involve notice and public hearings by both entities.
8
9 Commissioner Dorosin said an ETJ is an unusual situation where residents are subject
10 to the control of a governing body that they have no power to elect. He feels that when this was
11 first adopted by the legislature, the trade-off was that cities got the control beyond their borders,
12 because the areas ultimately become annexed and become part of the city. He said, given the
13 changes in annexation laws, this is not going to happen, and much of the areas here are
14 already developed. He said he does not see any rational justification for subjecting these
15 residents to the additional level of oversight by a board to which they have no political voice.
16 Margaret Hauth said she has struggled to find an upside for the residents, other than to
17 say that in North Carolina it's nice to have ETJ's around city limits.
18 Commissioner Dorosin said this is also not a situation where you have two cities butting
19 up against each other with the ETJ as a buffer. He said this gives him a tremendous amount of
20 reluctance. He said any of these areas, in the ETJ or not, could be voluntarily annexed.
21 He asked about the demographics for the areas being let out.
22 Margaret Hauth said most of this area is Duke Forest, and the others are very low
23 density areas. She said there are only about 22 property owners.
24 Commissioner Dorosin said given all of that, he feels that this change merits a much
25 closer review.
26 Commissioner Gordon asked if the proposal, as referenced it the "What's Next" section
27 of the handout, is proposing that this just stop.
28 Margaret Hauth said the boards could just stop, but the town is still willing to give the
29 400 acres back to Orange County, as it is unreasonable to have this in the town's ETJ to begin
30 with. This would be a release, instead of a swap.
31 Margaret Hauth said there is no benefit to fully implementing the interlocal agreement if
32 this is done. She said, after this step, the agreement just calls for even more areas to be
33 treated as quasi ETJ.
34 Commissioner Gordon said this is sounding like an argument not to do this. She
35 summarized that what the board would like to do is: not change the interlocal agreement;
36 release the 400 acres to Orange County; and not expand the ETJ.
37 Margaret Hauth said it would be best, since there is a sunset provision, to have both
38 boards pass a joint resolution after these two things are done, that this will not continue.
39 Chair Jacobs said part of the original purpose of the interlocal agreement was to set
40 boundaries for growth and to memorialize a joint vision of how Hillsborough and its
41 surroundings would grow or not grow. He said if the boards think it is sufficient to stop now, he
42 wants to make sure that there is preservation of the fact that there is an agreement that
43 envisions certain elements as to what the surroundings of Hillsborough will be. He said there
44 was essentially an agreement that there would be a collar of lower density for the benefit of
45 both parties. He does not want this to be lost, and it is consistent with this to take the 400 acres
46 and put it into a lower density use.
47 He said it may be the best decision to stop, but he wants to make sure both parties
48 agree that this is stopping at a place that is consistent with the vision that was articulated.
15
1 Margaret Hauth said the only other task that might need to go forward would be bringing
2 the town's future land use plan into the County's comprehensive plan. She said this could
3 happen without changing the homeowners' lives, and it would further memorialize the effort.
4 Commissioner McKee said he is sensing a change of direction since the informational
5 meeting held in January, and he is glad for this. He said he spent a lot of time addressing
6 citizen concerns about this, and the feels the idea being proposed, of moving the land back to
7 the County, and setting a hold on the area in the south, is the best idea.
8 Commissioner Price agreed with Commissioner McKee. She noted that there were
9 some people in Wildwood who may have wanted to be annexed since they wanted urban
10 services. She said it might be good to check in with these people before this is taken entirely
11 off the board.
12 Chair Jacobs said it may be good to have a forum for these particular residents in order
13 to close the loop.
14 Margaret Hauth said there has never been a formal request from Wildwood to be
15 annexed. She said there have been individual inquiries on a regular basis. She said she has
16 created a spreadsheet that can be filled out to tell people whether it is in their interest to be
17 annexed. She said it appears that there might be a provision in the Wildwood covenants that
18 requires an extraordinary majority of residents to even petition the town for annexation.
19 Commissioner Rich asked what happens to the 400 acres being released back to the
20 County.
21 Craig Benedict said this area would have an agricultural/residential land use and zoning.
22 He said it is in a critical watershed area for Hillsborough's water source, and some of it is Duke
23 Forest. He said there is not much development potential there at all, and nothing would really
24 change for that land.
25 Brian Lowen said he has thought that Wildwood would be a perfect candidate for
26 annexation, as it already has city water and sewer, and so many residents are paying high city
27 rates. He said he initiated a meeting with the officers of the home owner's association and this
28 was cancelled at the very last minute, because so many residents did not want to be in the city
29 limits.
30 Commissioner Pelissier said she did not understand Margaret Hauth's suggestion of
31 incorporating the town's land use plan into our comprehensive plan. She asked what the
32 advantage would be.
33 Tom Altieri said Orange County has a jointly adopted land use plan that covers all of the
34 land area within the town's urban services area. He said this plan has been adopted, but it has
35 not been fully implemented with comprehensive plan amendments referencing the document.
36 He said that would need to be done.
37 Mayor Stevens said the general attitude of the town board is that they are open to
38 voluntary annexation, but the amount of energy it takes to do that is enormous, and it is not
39 conceivable at this point.
40 Craig Benedict said there is an additional step that would be helpful to both jurisdictions.
41 He said the town has moved from a blurry line to a more specific urban service boundary line.
42 He suggested the creation of a water and sewer agreement between Orange County and
43 Hillsborough. He said this would mean if a development proposal comes forward in this area,
44 there will be a discussion by both entities. He said this could be a staff project, and this would
45 give some clarity on the clarity to help anticipate water and sewer potential for economic
46 development projects. He said this will be similar to the Mebane/Orange County agreement.
47 Chair Jacobs asked if this was an amenable concept.
48 Mayor Stevens said this is interesting on the surface, and the town is interested in
49 economic development. He said the town has to pay close attention to capacity. He said there
16
1 is capacity now, but there are some defined limits. He said he understands having some kind
2 of general agreements, and it is worth a discussion.
3 Eric Hallman said the water and sewer agreement is used to leverage annexation. He
4 said this is worth a discussion by our board.
5 Commissioner Dorosin said there is a line being drawn where water and sewer are and
6 are not available. He does not understand this additional level of negotiation. He said if the
7 development is slated to be within the boundary, they are eligible to have water and sewer, and
8 if they are outside there is no eligibility. He asked if there is some level of subjectivity being
9 reinserted here.
10 Craig Benedict said this is more about what parts that will likely never have water and
11 sewer and which parts could have it.
12 Commissioner Dorosin confirmed that when you are outside the line, the possibility is
13 off.
14 Craig Benedict said just being within the boundary is not a guarantee. He said in the
15 case of Morinaga there needed to be a formal agreement that Mebane, if it extended utilities,
16 would maintain them afterward. He understands that no one wants to earmark water and sewer
17 capacity, but a little more specificity would be good to help keep parties interested and start the
18 negotiation process.
19 Margaret Hauth asked if this agreement would not necessarily apply to the entire urban
20 services boundary, but would focus at the EDD.
21 Craig Benedict said yes. He said this would focus on the new growth areas. He said
22 economic development prospects want to know their likelihood of water and sewer. He said
23 there is an understanding that there are limitations and projects with large usage have been
24 turned down. He said this would just give more specificity and allow for working within the
25 constraints. He said the County is working on the Jordan Lake allocation and wants to know
26 that Hillsborough has water to service the areas within their city limits and ETJ. He said the
27 County will be asking for Jordan Lake allocations and Hillsborough may also be asking for
28 allocations. He said the coordinated planning is very helpful in this.
29 Discussion ensued about colors on the display map for delivery of water and sewer
30 services.
31
32 Chair Jacobs summarized the following discussion points:
33 • Need to articulate where the boards are stopping and the ramifications of the 400 acres
34 • Decision on whether to Incorporate in to Orange County's comprehensive plan
35 • To have a discussion of possible guidelines for water and sewer for economic
36 development purposes
37
38 Craig Benedict said staff will discuss this. He said, in the CIP for Orange County, some
39 of the quarter cent sales tax monies are being used to augment the economic development
40 zones. He said money is earmarked in the later years for the Hillsborough economic
41 development zone. He said staff would like to know that if dollars are spent in the Hillsborough
42 EDD, such as running sewer under the interstate, there is likelihood this investment would be
43 used.
44 Mayor Stevens said if there are infrastructure investments then there is more to talk
45 about in terms of outlining expectations.
46 Commissioner Rich asked who is responsible for telling residents that the ETJ is not
47 going to happen
48 Margaret Hauth said she would send update letters to those who received a letter about
49 the open house.
17
1 Chair Jacobs said nothing can be guaranteed until the two boards vote; but residents
2 can be made aware of where things stand.
3 Commissioner McKee asked what the time frame would be for this process.
4 Margaret Hauth said the town would have to develop a calendar. She said there has to
5 be a public hearing to release those 400 acres, and the County has an obligation to take a few
6 steps. She said notices could be sent now, noting that the Board appears to not be moving
7 forward, and specific dates could be provided for the final decision. She said this would allow
8 time for comments.
9 Craig Benedict said it would take 4-6 months to release the present ETJ back to Orange
10 County and assign the new land uses and zoning.
11 Chair Jacobs thanked the Town of Hillsborough for their collaborative spirit.
12
13 4. Update on Memorandum of Agreement to Protect Archaeological Resources on
14 Town and County Properties
15 Margaret Hauth said there is no map associated, per the state's preference that the
16 location of known resources not be overly publicized. She said there is a draft agreement in the
17 packet that lays out a few points on sharing information among staffs. She said County staff
18 was more than happy to house and update the database. She said this agreement will be
19 brought back to both boards in the near future.
20 Commissioner Gordon asked about the definition section. She said the cultural and
21 ecological resources sections refer to "man-made" modifications. She suggested "human-
22 made" as gender neutral language here.
23 Commissioner Gordon asked about the significance of the red line on the next page.
24 Margaret Hauth said this is just from left over track changes that did not get deleted.
25 Commissioner Price said she has an issue with the difference between cultural and
26 archaeological being the introduction of European culture. She said this is not in any federal
27 definition and should be changed.
28 Chair Jacobs agreed and said he feels the words cultural and archeological could be
29 taken out.
30 Margaret Hauth said the point was to distinguish between two different types of
31 resources. She said within the population of experts there is a difference between archeology
32 and cultural. She said archaeology is much older.
33 Commissioner Price said archeology indicates an age of 100 years or more.
34 Margaret Hauth said there are people who want things preserved from the 40's, 50's,
35 and 60's, and these are cultural resources.
36 Commissioner Price said this will need to come back to the Board, and the rest of it is
37 fine. She said the Board could work with Peter Sandbeck.
38 Commissioner Gordon suggested the use of a time period.
39 Chair Jacobs suggested that it might be good to consult the Historic Preservation
40 Commission and the Alliance for Historic Hillsborough when some of the amenities are
41 identified.
42 Mayor Stevens said that might not actually be part of their overview.
43 Margaret Hauth asked if the Board is directing staff to consult with these two entities.
44 Kathleen Ferguson said if the area is are not in the Hillsborough historic district then that
45 would not be relevant.
46 Chair Jacobs said it would be relevant for the Historic Preservation Commission.
47 Mayor Stevens said the wording might state the need to consult with appropriate
48 entities.
49 Commissioner Gordon suggested this be referred to staff for investigation and brought
50 back to the Board with recommendations on language.
18
1
2 5. INFORMATION ITEMS (Not for Specific Discussion)
3 a) Update on Whitted Human Services Center
4 b) Update on Solid Waste/Recycling
5 c) Update on Riverwalk
6 d) Update on Consideration of County Fair
7
8 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Price to
9 adjourn the meeting at 9:51 p.m.
10
11 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
12
13 Barry Jacobs, Chair
14
15 Donna Baker
16 Clerk to the Board
1
I Attachment 2
2
3 DRAFT MINUTES
4 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
5 REGULAR MEETING
6 March 18, 2014
7 6:00 p.m.
8
9 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, March
10 18, 2014 at 6:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center, in Chapel Hill, N.C.
11
12 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jacobs and Commissioners Mark Dorosin,
13 Alice M. Gordon, Earl McKee, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: Interim County Manager Michael Talbert, Assistant County
17 Managers Clarence Grier, Cheryl Young and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other staff
18 members 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 called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m.
24
25 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
26
27 Chair Jacobs noted that items 11-e (Commission for the Environment appointments),
28 11-f(Planning Board appointments), and Item 6-f(Commemorative Plaque Proof for Recently
29 Commissioned Facilities) have been deferred.
30
31 He noted the following items at the Commissioner's places:
32 - White Sheet—- Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Item 5-a— Solid Waste Service
33 Tax District - Public Hearing
34 - Pink Sheet - Corrections for Item 6-a - Minutes
35 - Blue Sheet— Revisions for Item 6 e - Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan
36 Planning Organization Member Agencies Memorandum of Understanding Revisions
37 - Lavender Sheet— Item 6-d- Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (SAPFO) —
38 Receipt and Transmittal of 2014 Annual Technical Advisory Committee Report
39
40 Chair Jacobs dispensed with the reading of the Public Charge.
41
42 2. Public Comments
43 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
44 NONE
45
46 b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
47 (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda
48 below.)
49
50 3. Petitions by Board Members
2
1 Commissioner Pelissier petitioned, for board appointments where there are additional
2 questions, that all applicants (including those that have applied in the past) respond to the
3 questions. She said this will allow fair comparison.
4 Commissioner McKee requested that the Board ask the planning staff re-visit the issue
5 of impervious surfaces. He said there are quite a few long narrow parcels of land in the
6 County, and the driveways use up a great deal of the impervious surface.
7 Commissioner Dorosin noted that they Board members recently received an email with
8 information about Building Integrated Communities, an organization dedicated to improving
9 civic engagements and economic and educational advancement for immigrants in North
10 Carolina. He said their grant cycle is kicking in, and there is an informational webinar tomorrow.
11 He asked if someone from staff could do the webinar to determine whether the County should
12 pursue a grant opportunity.
13 Michael Talbert said he would follow up on this.
14 Commissioner Rich petitioned that the Chapel Hill Lady Tigers, who won the state
15 basketball championship, be recognized at a future meeting.
16 Chair Jacobs said his petition is in response to a citizen's question regarding the
17 possibility of Google bringing high speed internet to Orange County. He suggested that staff
18 reach out to Google to get information to share with the public
19 Chair Jacobs said Time Warner Cable has changed the meeting channel to 1301.
20
21 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
22
23 a. Proclamation Recognizing Chapel Hill High School's Fencing Team Winning
24 the 2014 State Championship
25 The Board considered a proclamation recognizing the Chapel Hill High School Fencing
26 Team for winning the 2014 State Championship and authorizing the Chair to sign.
27
28 Commissioner Rich read the following proclamation of recognition:
29
30 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
31
32 PROCLAMATION OF RECOGNITION ON
33 CHAPEL HILL HIGH SCHOOL'S FENCING TEAM WINNING THE
34 2014 STATE CHAMPIONSHIP
35
36
37 WHEREAS, on February 8, 2014 Chapel Hill High School's Fencing Team captured the North
38 Carolina Fencing League's State Fencing Championship; and
39
40 WHEREAS, under the guidance of Coach Doug Guild, Chapel Hill High School's Fencing Team
41 earned its second state title, also winning the trophy in 2012; and
42
43 WHEREAS, Nikhil Shankar, Nathaniel Montano, laan Hufford, Ariel Hoerter and Natalie Bulick-
44 Sullivan contributed to winning the State Championship with the support of team
45 members Joel Anil, Jesse Chen, Hagan Connell, Johnny Huang, Alex Obringer,
46 Jack Obringer, Brody Rich-Voorhees and Giovanni Silva; and
47
48 WHEREAS, through hard work, dedication, teamwork, and commitment, the Tigers brought
49 honor upon themselves, Chapel Hill High School, the Chapel Hill / Carrboro
50 School District and Orange County;
3
1
2 NOW, THEREFORE, be it proclaimed that the Orange County Board of Commissioners
3 expresses its sincere appreciation and respect for the Chapel Hill High School
4 Fencing Team, for the Tigers' outstanding achievement, and their inspiration to
5 youth across North Carolina through their dedication, teamwork, and athletic
6 prowess.
7
8 This, the 18th day of March 2014.
9
10 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Dorosin to
11 approve a proclamation recognizing the Chapel Hill High School Fencing Team for winning the
12 2014 State Championship and authorize the Chair to sign.
13
14 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
15
16 5. Public Hearings
17 a. Solid Waste Service Tax District— Public Hearing
18 The Board conducted the first of two public hearings, pursuant to North Carolina
19 General Statutes 153A-302, to receive comments with regard to the proposed establishment of
20 a Solid Waste Service Tax District in unincorporated Orange County.
21 Chair Jacobs noted that there were lists of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) available
22 for the public in the back of the room. He said these are based on emails from citizens. He
23 said that the public hearing is not typically a question and answer time, though Gayle Wilson
24 may be able to answer some general questions. He said all questions will be noted for the next
25 public hearing and will be answered on the website prior to that.
26 Gayle Wilson gave a brief background of the curbside recycling program. He noted that
27 it was initiated in 1993 and funded by landfill revenue. He said a new method of funding
28 through a rural 3-R fee was approved in 2004, with an every-other-week collection program for
29 about 13,000 residents in the County. He said the County manager and the County attorney
30 expressed concern regarding the statutory justification for the fee and recommended that it be
31 eliminated in favor of other means of funding. He said the 2012 tax bill was the last time the 3-
32 R fee was assessed, and it was $38 per year at that time. He said the Board provided interim
33 funding from landfill reserves in 2013 and began consideration of various options to address the
34 funding problem. He said over 50 percent of residents participated in the program. He said
35 after considering and rejecting numerous alternatives, in December 2013 the Board indicated
36 intent to implement a Solid Waste Service District Tax as a means to replace the lost funding.
37 He noted the district map that shows incorporation of the existing 13,750 residents as well as
38 an extension of service to 1,650 more residents. He noted the upcoming availability of roll carts
39 in the fall of 2014. He said, if the service district is adopted, the estimated tax rate will be 1.5
40 cents per $100 assessed value. He said the Board has also discussed the possibility of an
41 "opt-out" or "fee for service" program. He said the rate for this is difficult to assess, without
42 knowledge of the participation.
43 Chair Jacobs noted that the public is welcome to discuss any proposed options or
44 funding alternatives.
45
46 PUBLIC HEARING:
47 Loren Hintz is Vice Chair of the Commission for the Environment (CfE), and he said the
48 CfE sent the Board a resolution last month in support of the service tax district. He encouraged
49 the Board members to review this document, as well as an attached commentary. He asked
50 the Board to create a solid waste service tax district to support recycling in the County. He
4
1 said recycling reduces solid waste, removes roadside litter, reduces energy use, and eliminates
2 sources of air pollution. He said the cost is relatively low compared to the benefit.
3 Barry Katz said he is a resident of Falls of New Hope. He said the curbside pickup
4 service has been very popular in his neighborhood. He referred to a list of 120 product
5 categories made from recycled material. He said this product list is from a staunchly
6 conservative county with an award winning solid waste and recycling program. He read from
7 the provided list of recycled products. He said recycling does not have to be viewed as a
8 partisan political issue. He said everyone benefits from the re-use of home and business
9 recovery material, and it is impossible to opt-out of the use of such items. He questioned why
10 people should opt out of paying for them. He said regular neighborhood recycling pickup
11 service is the best way to create and sustain this practice. He urged the County to create the
12 solid waste district.
13 Steve Hopper said he is from Efland, and he is opposed to the solid waste tax district.
14 He said the provided document states that the district would be improving this service but that is
15 a false statement. He said the County is only picking and choosing some areas. He said the
16 method of funding is offensive to him because it is a progressive tax. He said the cost to each
17 household should be the same, but it is not. He said it does not cost more to provide recycling
18 for a $200,000 house than a $100,000 house. He said this does not meet the common sense
19 test, and it sounds to him like income re-distribution. He said their local government should not
20 be doing this. He said it costs the County the same amount to pick up his recycling as it costs
21 to pick up his neighbors, but he has never used this service. He said he takes his recycling
22 when he takes his garbage, as this just makes sense. He questioned whether this tax is to be
23 made for the improvements alone or for unimproved land as well.
24 Larry Snipes said the Board is discriminating against the residents of Orange County, as
25 the Board is only charging this tax to part of the County.
26 Bonnie Hauser said she is strongly committed to waste reduction. She said that
27 Catawba County ranks first in the state for recycling, and that program is funded with fees that
28 reward good recycling behavior with discounts and other incentives. She said the towns in
29 Catawba control all of the curbside trash and recycling programs, and the unincorporated areas
30 have a waste and recycling franchise that charges $25 per month for trash collection and
31 discounts this to $19 per month for residents who also recycle. She said RFID chips are placed
32 on recycling bins, and residents who don't use the bins once a month are charged the higher
33 fee. She said the program is outsourced to a vendor who has no difficulty with the uncertainty
34 of allowing residents to opt out. She said Catawba County's solution to the issue of long
35 driveways was to ask permission from the community to use a small truck to pick up trash and
36 recyclables from individual homes. She said this county also offers a pay as you throw system
37 at the convenience centers, and the charge is $1.75 per bag for a 32 gallon bag of trash, while
38 recycling is free. She said there are no other fees charged to residents for these services. She
39 noted that Catawba County's solid waste website includes a link to the franchise agreement,
40 which exposes all services and fees.
41 She said there are countless examples throughout the state where counties provide
42 curbside recycling to unincorporated areas, in some cases at no charge. She said she cannot
43 find any county that forces its citizens to pay for convenience centers and curbside services.
44 She believes the discussion of a service tax district is premature, and it would be more
45 productive to begin planning for a future service with a fair and equitable fee system covering
46 all recycling services. She encouraged the Board to levy a subscription service with an opt-out
47 policy to fund curbside service in the short term.
48 Jeanne Brown said she would like to discuss the following four points:
49 1. We can do better than a one-size-fits-all roll cart solution that meets the needs of only 57
50 percent of area property owners. She said County data shows the affected area has two large
5
1 and disparate groups. She said 57 percent of property owners use curbside recycling at least
2 once a month, and 43 percent find curbside recycling impractical and many of these use the
3 convenience centers. She believes a solution can be found that is more equitable and meets
4 the needs of more residents.
5 2. Changing conditions such as the new funding laws, lost revenue from the landfill and the
6 need for new equipment offer the opportunity to re-evaluate how we do business —to benefit
7 from economies of scale and create more tightly integrated and cost effective programs.
8 She said this is supported by the Commission for the Environment, but it is not built into this
9 solution. She said the County should be working more closely with the towns, which would
10 allow this issue to be approached based on use patterns rather than jurisdiction.
11 3. Changing conditions also offer us a chance to look at new technologies — including the
12 opportunities to have trash and recycling picked up at the same time.
13 4. More complete data and information, presented in a user-friendly way is necessary to make
14 this a transparent process and inform members of the community about the costs, benefits and
15 trade-offs of these decisions.
16 Ken Robinson said he does recycle everything, and because of this he only makes one
17 trip a month to the convenience center to take trash. He said he is hearing that the funding
18 source is lost, and that needs to be fixed; however the focus needs to be on improving recycling
19 and not just working to get some more money. He said he has tried curbside, and it didn't
20 work. He does not think this is the way to go. He said help should be given to those who need
21 it and have no alternative. He said the Board should look at ways to improve recycling and not
22 just collect funds. He suggested a fee-for-service system, and he said he would like to see the
23 County restore more days at the convenience center. He said if funding is needed, then a small
24 tax should be done for all, not just for some.
25 Jeanette O' Conner said she is in favor of the service tax district, and the successful
26 counties use a tax such as this. She said an opt-out system tends to decrease the amount of
27 material being recycled. She said successful counties have some sort of tax.
28 Tracy Noonan said she is in support of recycling; however she is not in support of either
29 of these options. She understands the subscription service has its limitations and a tax district
30 based on tax value seems very unfair. She said a home value does not determine how much a
31 person recycles. She would be interested in knowing the average home value in the proposed
32 district. She said she is fine with paying a fee for a service but not a fee that is much higher
33 than what she is paying now, with no new improvements. She feels there is a hidden increase
34 for a lot of the residents, and she does not think this is fair. She suggested the use of a straight
35 fee or a tiered tax system.
36 Ed Sirkee said he believes the Board has already made up their minds to raise taxes.
37 He said the original literature stated that the manager and attorney had concerns in 2012 that
38 the fee was illegal. He asked why the Orange County waste control center fee is allowed, and
39 not the 3-r fee. He asked what would be required to change the statutory requirements. He
40 does not feel that Orange County can justify a recycling collection with a tax increase. He said
41 a retired couple on a fixed income living in a house with a value of$280,000 would pay more
42 than a family of 4 living in a house with a tax value of$200,000. He said this does not make
43 any sense, and it is unjust.
44 Teresa Edwards lives on White Cross Road, and she said this proposed system does
45 not make sense. She said she speaks for 5 of the 6 homes in her community, and all of the
46 residents are avid recyclers. She said it does not make sense to pay for a service that will
47 never be used. She said the residents live on a private gravel road, and her house, which is the
48 closest to the road, is still four-tenths of a mile from the curb. She said if she is going to put the
49 materials in her car, she is going to take it on to the convenience center. She asked for a
6
1 restoration of hours at the convenience centers. She supports recycling in Orange County, but
2 she asked the Board not to charge those residents that will never use this service.
3 Anita (Sue) Kinzer said there are a lot of residents who are retired and appreciate the
4 curbside service, but the potential cost is a concern.
5 Marsha Efland said she lives on Brookhollow Road in Elfand, and she is supportive of
6 recycling but not of this proposed program. She said she is opposed to this tax because it taxes
7 each parcel of land, regardless of whether there is a residence on the parcel or not. She said
8 this is not similar to the fire tax, as the fire service can be utilized on each parcel of land that a
9 person owns, but the recycling cannot be used. She strongly urged the Board to consider other
10 options rather than the district tax.
11 Ralph Teal said he lives on Stoneridge Drive in Chapel Hill. He said he recycles, and he
12 is opposed to a one-size-fits-all tax. He said the previous fee was fine and the system should
13 go back to something like this, or a tiered system that allows residents to pay based on what
14 residents use. He agreed with the points made about vacant land, and he said this is just
15 another form of tax increase.
16 James Lea lives on Mill Creek Road and is a member of the Orange County Planning
17 Board. He is here to oppose this proposed tax. He said he supports recycling and waste
18 reduction, but it should not be done on the backs of citizens. He said he is less than a mile
19 from his solid waste convenience center. He said this is a great center, and he sees no need to
20 add a curbside service in addition to what the residents already have in the rural part of the
21 County. He said he sees no reason to tax residents for something that is already being offered.
22 He asked the Board of Commissioners to offer an opt-out option for residents in the northern
23 part of rural Orange County.
24 Hillel Koren said he would like to withdraw his comment.
25 Peter Thorn said he lives on Butler Road, and he is generally in favor of government
26 doing things for others that they cannot do for themselves; however he cannot support this
27 proposed plan. He said he and his neighbors are avid recyclers, and they are better off without
28 this new tax. He said this will only increase cost, and it will not comprehensively gather all trash
29 and recycling together. He does not know how many households in the proposed district pay
30 for a private solid waste collection service. He agreed with the other speakers who said the
31 best way to improve recycling services is to open up the convenience centers for more days
32 and hours.
33 Rob Taylor said he is surprised that Orange County is in this place. He said there are
34 several counties in North Carolina that are less progressive, less interested in recycling and
35 less thoughtful about public service, and these counties somehow manage to offer a
36 countywide curbside recycling program. He listed several of these counties. He said if the goal
37 is to divert material from disposal, then the opt-out service has proven to be a barrier to
38 participation. He said the most successful programs in the state make the service available
39 automatically and provide service to every household with a bin or cart. He said he
40 understands that the idea of a new fee is unpleasant, and many people are feeling the pinch.
41 He said the taxpayers are paying to send waste away for disposal, and this cost will be higher if
42 less people use curbside recycling. He said if the tax service cannot be created, he would like
43 the Board to explore ways to make the subscription service more likely to be used, such as pay
44 as you throw and incentivized rates. He asked the Board not to take any action that would roll
45 back recycling in Orange County.
46 Lynne Jaffe said she has been recycling for years and all of the residents are here
47 tonight in service to Orange County. She said it is sad that there is a divide in the room tonight.
48 She is a widow living on a fixed income, and she is grateful for the curbside service, but she
49 only uses it every 6 weeks. She said this new proposal would charge her multiple times more
50 than what she is being charged now, because she owns a lot of undeveloped land. She said
7
1 this is not just. She said most people here tonight are not in favor of a tax. She wants to
2 support recycling but not with a new tax.
3 Ms. Samulski agreed that residents will be taxed unfairly for owning a lot of land. She
4 does not understand the fairness of this.
5 Doug Longman lives in the ETJ. He said many have spoken in opposition to this
6 proposal, and he agrees with that sentiment. He said property tax values have no relationship
7 to the usage characteristics. He does not like that it is based on home values and not on the
8 amount of recycling you generate. He said this also bears no relation to the objective of
9 increased recycling. He questioned why the County has not looked at fixing the legislation.
10 James Self said he is representing Joseph Fearrington, who owns several properties in
11 the County. He asked if information was available on the formula being proposed based on
12 property size and value. He asked if there was any information available to explain how the
13 Board reached that decision.
14 John Roberts referred to the reference about legislation. He said the County did submit
15 a bill to the local legislative delegation to attempt to obtain the appropriate authority for the fee,
16 but the bill died in committee. He said that is why the legislation has not been fixed.
17 Gayle Wilson said, unless the Board has specific questions, he would rather study and
18 wait to answer the residents' questions in a systematic way.
19 Commissioner McKee referred to the numbers Gayle Wilson gave out for the parcels
20 and the old 3-r fee. He said the information stated did not seem to match what was on the
21 map.
22 Gayle Wilson said the map has the number of parcels that fall within the district, and the
23 other numbers are service points. He said the larger number includes vacant property and
24 unimproved land.
25 Commissioner McKee asked if these parcels will be taxed.
26 Gayle Wilson said yes.
27 Commissioner McKee said one of the previous maps listed over 600 properties that
28 were exempt from the tax under this district concept but were previously paying the 3-r fee. He
29 asked if this is correct.
30 Gayle Wilson said some of the 600 fall within the additional area included in the district;
31 however half of that number are currently receiving the service and did pay the fee.
32 Commissioner McKee asked if, under the service district, these residents will continue to
33 get the service and will pay no tax.
34 Gayle Wilson said the County is obligated to provide the service; however these
35 residents are tax exempt and will not pay the tax.
36 Commissioner McKee said this hardly seems fair, given there are some very low income
37 residents who will be paying for the service.
38 Commissioner Rich said there are a lot of assumptions tonight and she is unsure
39 whether many of these are backed up by Orange County facts. She said she hopes that Gayle
40 Wilson will be able to review the notes on this and clear up these issues before the next public
41 hearing.
42 Gayle Wilson asked the Commissioners to identify specific issues for response.
43 Chair Jacobs said the public raised the question of average property value in the district.
44 He also asked for a response regarding the cost to the County of having the convenience
45 centers open 7 days per week.
46 Commissioner Gordon requested that all of the questions raised by the public be
47 answered with specifics and in a systematic format.
48 Chair Jacobs said the last citizen asked how staff came up with the actual tax rate. He
49 suggested the Gayle Wilson consult with the attorney or the tax administrator to find this
50 answer.
8
1 Commissioner Rich said the last gentleman was specifically asking how the city came
2 up with the tax amount versus the rural tax amount.
3 Gayle Wilson said he had nothing to do with any of the taxes within Chapel Hill, and the
4 tax district only represents the unincorporated areas.
5 Chair Jacobs said this information could still be gathered by speaking to Chapel Hill.
6 Commissioner Price said part of the argument in favor of the tax district is that it will
7 encourage people to recycle more, and she has some issues with this. She asked if Gayle
8 Wilson could cite some of the research behind this statement. She feels that much of the
9 success of the recycling program has been due to education and the conscientiousness of the
10 residents.
11 Gayle Wilson said staff has indicated that, between the two options of opt out versus the
12 district tax, subscription option performs more poorly. He said there is considerable data within
13 the state that supports this.
14 Commissioner Price asked if the subscription programs also have an educational
15 component.
16 Gayle Wilson said the programs vary widely from zero education outreach to moderate
17 amount of education. He said all of them are likely doing less than what Orange County does.
18 Commissioner Price said she had a procedural question about the closure of the public
19 hearing.
20 John Roberts said this public hearing is independent from the one that is being held in
21 Hillsborough on April 1St. He said this public hearing will be adjourned and an announcement
22 will be made informing the public of the next public hearing on the same subject.
23 Commissioner Price asked if residents can continue to submit written testimony.
24 John Roberts said yes, and these will be considered at the second public hearing.
25 Commissioner Dorosin said he has not made up his mind yet, but he has a procedural
26 question. He asked if every parcel on the map was given notice about this public hearing.
27 Michael Talbert said yes.
28 Commissioner Dorosin said he has heard the critiques of a one-size-fits-all model, and
29 he asked if the Board could do anything they wanted with solid waste service district tax map,
30 including making it smaller and doing subscription service in the other parts. He asked if this
31 could be done with no new notice, as long as the area was made smaller and not bigger.
32 John Roberts said the Board can reduce the size; however it has to be a contiguous
33 district. He said there cannot be separate pieces and modules.
34 Commissioner Dorosin asked if it would be acceptable if the Board determined that it
35 made more sense to do it in certain areas of the County and less sense in other areas as long
36 as there was still a contiguous district.
37 John Roberts said the statute does not address this, but in his opinion the Board can
38 reduce the outlined district to any size or shape that is contiguous, as long as the residents
39 have received their notices.
40 Commissioner Pelissier asked if there could be additions to the list of frequently asked
41 questions (FAQ) for the next public hearing. She said she would like to add the verbiage from
42 John Roberts about the legislation.
43 John Roberts clarified that he is not saying the County does not have the authority to do
44 a fee. He said there is a question as to whether the County has the authority to levy a fee,
45 given recent court cases.
46 Commissioner Pelissier said she would at least like to say that there was an attempt
47 made to get the legislation to explicitly authorize the County to charge a fee. She said she has
48 heard a lot of concerns about property tax on land that is not developed; and she feels it is
49 important to note that the convenience centers are also paid out of property tax on both
50 developed and undeveloped lands.
9
1 Commissioner McKee asked for information to be brought back on the valuation on the
2 600 plus exempt properties and how much the County is losing by these properties becoming
3 exempt.
4 Chair Jacobs referred to questions 17 and 18 on the FAQ list.
5 Members of the public noted that their copy of the FAA's did not include these last two
6 questions.
7 Gayle Wilson said the public does not have the copy with updated questions, but the
8 next public hearing will have the updated version.
9 Chair Jacobs said question number 17 on the FAQ list was asked by several citizens
10 and questioned whether a $250,000 home and a $500,000 home would pay the same property
11 tax and whether there was a cap. He reviewed question 18, which asked for the percentage of
12 the County's total recycling recovered by roadside pickup.
13 Chair Jacobs said the essential answer to question 17 is no, and the answer to question
14 18 is 13 percent of the total recycling.
15 A Citizen asked why some properties are tax exempt.
16 Chair Jacobs said churches, and other 501 c3 non-profits are tax exempt and do not pay
17 taxes anywhere in North Carolina. He said this is the main category.
18 Chair Jacobs noted that the next public hearing would be held at 6:00 on April 1 st in
19 Hillsborough. He said there would be more answers provided at this meeting, and he said not
20 all of the Commissioners have made up their minds. He said the public input is valuable in
21 making these decisions.
22
23 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner McKee to
24 adjourn the public hearing.
25
26 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
27
28 6. Consent Agenda
29 • Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
30
31 • Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
32 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
33 approve items 6a, 6b, 6c, 6d, and 6e on the consent agenda including the materials that go with
34 items 6a, 6d and 6e.
35
36 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
37 Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
38
39 a. Minutes
40 The Board approved the minutes, including corrections, from February 18, 2014, as submitted
41 by the Clerk to the Board.
42 b. Fiscal Year 2013-14 Budget Amendment#6
43 The Board will consider approving budget and grant project ordinance amendments for fiscal
44 year 2013-14 for Housing, Human Rights and Community Development; Department on Aging;
45 Health Department; and Animal Services.
46 c. Local Bill to Amend the Method of Appointing Members of the Durham Technical
47 Community College Board of Trustees
48 The Board approved the submitting of a local bill amending the language in North Carolina
49 General Statute (NCGS) 115D-12(a) and authorized the County Attorney to submit.
10
1 d. Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (SAPFO) — Receipt and Transmittal of
2 2014 Annual Technical Advisory Committee Report
3 The Board received the 2014 Annual Report of the SAPFO Technical Advisory Committee
4 (SAPFOTAC) and transmitted it to the SAPFO partners for comments before certification in
5 May and authorized the Chair to sign the submittal letter.
6 e. Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization Member Agencies
7 Memorandum of Understanding Revisions
8 The Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign a final draft of an updated/revised
9 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) among the member agencies of the Durham-Chapel
10 Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization (DCHC MPO).
11 f. Commemorative Plaque Proof for Recently Commissioned Facilities
12 The Board was to consider approving a general commemorative plaque proof in order that the
13 commemorative plaques can be manufactured and installed for recently commissioned County
14 facilities.
15
16 7. Agenda
17 a. Enterprise Scanning Project
18 The Board considered implementing an automated solution whereby existing paper
19 records in Emergency Services, Human Resources and Environmental Health would be
20 scanned and indexed, allowing said images to be viewed, stored, and managed electronically
21 and authorizing the Manager to sign.
22 Information Technology staff person Keith Chupna said the purpose of the scanning
23 project is to implement an automated solution whereby existing paper records in Emergency
24 Services, Environmental Health, and Human Resources will be scanned and indexed, allowing
25 the images to be viewed, stored, and managed electronically.
26 He said once the documents are converted the images will be placed in a virtual filing
27 cabinet and will be searchable by up to three different values. He said staff will be able to
28 quickly research record based on addresses, employee number or whatever makes sense for
29 the department. He said, unless otherwise specified, original documents, boxes, and filing
30 cabinets will be removed from the office space and placed into storage space. He said these
31 will be maintained per record retention statutes. He said this is also aligned with the space
32 study recommendations outlined at the March meeting.
33 Keith Chupna said this is a back scanning solution for active and historical records only,
34 and it should not be considered a document management system. He said a similar system
35 was implemented with Child Support Enforcement in 2013 using the same concept and vendor.
36 He said the funds have been budgeted for in the information technologies capital projects, and
37 authorization to expend those funds is being requested this evening.
38 Commissioner Rich asked if the purpose is to scan information that has been lying
39 around for a while in an attempt to get rid of paperwork and put it into useable files by staff.
40 Keith Chupna said yes. He said a vendor will come in to pick up, scan and index the
41 records, and then staff will have access to the electronic version.
42 Commissioner Rich asked if this is just for internal staff, or if the public will be able to
43 look at some of these records as well.
44 Keith Chupna said these will continue to be internal documents, but requests for
45 information will be much easier to provide. He said existing records will simply be digitized and
46 made available to staff.
47 Commissioner Pelissier asked if there were any plans in the future to be part of open
48 source data.
49 Keith Chupna said this does not fall into that.
11
1 Commissioner Pelissier noted that part of the purpose of this is to free up more office
2 space, and she would like to know how much square footage is being saved, as well as the
3 value of the building space and utilities being saved.
4 Commissioner Price asked if all of this would be done under HIPPA guidelines.
5 Keith Chupna said yes.
6 Commissioner Price asked for clarification on the timeline.
7 Keith Chupna said each department will take about 7-8 weeks to finish their project and
8 fully deploy. He said the contract is set for a two year period.
9 Commissioner Price asked what takes the two years.
10 Keith Chupna said the two years is to provide for any additional needs once the original
11 project is complete.
12 Commissioner Price asked if payment is done once the work is completed. She asked if
13 this is how this is usually done.
14 John Roberts said all contracts are paid upon submission of invoices by vendors.
15 Commissioner Price asked if this funding be paid out in the first year, or if it will be
16 spread out over the two years.
17 John Roberts said he cannot answer this directly. He said whatever the invoice
18 amounts reach within a year is what will be paid.
19 Commissioner Price clarified that most of the work will be done in the first six months,
20 and this will be followed by monitoring.
21 Commissioner McKee said he was under the assumption that some paper copies need
22 to be kept permanently.
23 Michael Talbert said a number of paper copies will have to be kept, but these will be
24 moved to a less expensive offsite storage site, and the digitized copy will be available.
25 Commissioner Gordon said she would like to know the total square feet of storage
26 space in existence right now. She questioned whether there is a department that needs more
27 storage space. She said this would help illustrate how the reduction fits into the big picture.
28 Commissioner Dorosin asked for clarification on the timeline for this. He said the
29 abstract says 6 months, and the contract refers to section 3, which refers to a timeline in the
30 proposal. He said the Board did not have this proposal.
31 John Roberts said the proposal is not in their packets because it is proprietary
32 information, and disclosure is prohibited by statute. He said he could possibly provide a
33 summary of the proposal. He said there are follow up steps by the vendor after the completion
34 in each department.
35 Commissioner Dorosin said he would like to see the proposal's summarization.
36 Commissioner Price said the effective date listed for the agreement was last week. She
37 asked if this will be adjusted or signed retroactively.
38 John Roberts said no work has been done or will be done until this is approved by the
39 Board of County Commissioners. He said that date can be adjusted.
40 Commissioner Gordon summarized that time is of the essence; the contract will take 2
41 months per department, or approximately 6 months total for the 3 different departments; and
42 the reason this lasts 2 years is because new departments might be added. She asked if this
43 summary was correct.
44 John Roberts said if other departments were added and the cost exceeds what is in this
45 contract, it would require an amendment.
46 Commissioner Gordon asked if it is anticipated that the cost for this service for three
47 departments will cost $100,000; and the reason for the extension to 2 years is to allow for the
48 addition of departments, which would only require an amendment of this amount.
49 John Roberts said this is correct. He said the proposal could also call for follow up
50 services.
12
1 Commissioner Gordon said the timeframe is challenging to figure out, and she would
2 like to see the summary requested by Commissioner Dorosin.
3 Chair Jacobs noted that these are departments with privileged information, and their
4 records should not be subject to public consumption.
5 John Roberts said former manager Frank Clifton suggested in the past that the County
6 have some sort of record dump where the public could come in and peruse all of the County's
7 records. John Roberts said he was opposed to this, as it would require the review of millions of
8 documents and emails to select and exclude confidential and privileged information.
9 Chair Jacobs said he sent an article to Board of County Commissioners about the
10 increased resistance of local and state governments to provide information to the public. He
11 said he accepts that these are largely records that statutorily should not be available to the
12 public; however, he would like to err on the side of openness moving forward.
13 Commissioner Rich said she agrees. She said there are other states involved in open
14 data processes, and she would like to see the County think of some sort of open source
15 system.
16 Commissioner Pelissier suggested the flagging of items that could be open to the public.
17 Commissioner Dorosin said even if records are subject to confidentiality standards, he
18 did not see that in the contract with the vendor.
19 John Roberts said the vendors are covered by the general laws.
20
21 A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Price to
22 approve and authorize the Manager to sign the attached contract and any amendments as
23 necessary.
24
25 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
26
27 Chair Jacobs said, for those on the Strategic Communications Work Group, he heard 3
28 Commissioners express the desire for a proactive plan to work toward an open data plan to
29 strategize documents and make them available. He said the Board will defer conversations
30 about this until hearing the recommendations of the group that is working on strategic
31 communications.
32 Commissioner Gordon said she would like to make it clear that the Commissioners have
33 asked for information, and she would like consensus that staff will provide that information.
34 Commissioner Rich said the strategic communications group was the retreat group.
35 She asked if this group needs to be made official, and she said there was discussion about staff
36 members from different departments joining this group.
37 Michael Talbert said this process has begun internally with the team members outlined
38 by the example. He said all of the departments are doing their own information distribution, and
39 the team is working on a presentation for the Board on April 8th. He said this is being moved
40 forward as a staff initiative.
41 Commissioner Rich said she feels the Board needs to designate a specific committee at
42 some point.
43 Chair Jacobs said this can be incorporated into the process.
44
45 8. Reports
46 NONE
47
48 9. County Manager's Report
49 NONE
50
13
1 10. County Attorney's Report
2 NONE
3
4 11. Appointments
5
6 a. Arts Commission —Appointments
7 The Board considered making appointments to the Arts Commission.
8
9 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
10 appoint the following to the Arts Commission:
11
12 • Appointment to a first full term (Position #3) for Mr. Brian Finch
13 • Appointment to a second full term (Position #4) for Mr. Geoffrey Hathaway
14 • Appointment to a first full term (Position #10) for Ms. Devra Thomas
15 • Appointment to a first full term (Position #11) for Mrs. Ashley Nissler
16
POSITION NAME SPECIAL EXPIRATION
NO. REPRESENTATIVE DATE
3 Mr. Brian Finch At-Large 03/31/2017
4 Mr. Geoffrey Hathaway At-Large 03/31/2017
10 Ms. Devra Thomas At-Large 03/31/2017
11 Mrs. Ashley Nissler At-Large 03/31/2017
17
18 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
19
20 A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Price to
21 nominate Allison Reavis to position 14 ( At-Large)
22
23 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
24
25 Commissioner McKee noted that he opposes the process of nominations being made
26 from the floor rather than allowing time to look over the nominees.
27
28 b. Board of Health —Appointments
29 The Board considered making appointments to the Board of Health.
30
31 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
32 appoint the following to the Board of Health:
33
34 • Appointment to a first partial term (position #8) for Mr. Nick Galvez.
35 • Appointment to a first full term (Position #9) for Dr. Sam Lasris.
36
POSITION NAME SPECIAL EXPIRATION
NO. REPRESENTATIVE DATE
8 Mr. Nick Galvez At-Large 06/30/2015
9 Dr. Sam Lasris Dentist 06/30/2016
37
38 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
39
14
1 c. Carrboro Northern Transition Area Advisory Committee—Appointment
2 The Board considered an appointment to the Carrboro Northern Transition Area
3 Advisory Committee.
4
5 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner McKee to
6 appoint the following to the Carrboro Northern Transition Area Advisory Committee:
7
8 Appointment to a second full term (Position #1) for Ms. Jeroloman.
9
POSITION NAME SPECIAL EXPIRATION
NO. REPRESENTATIVE DATE
1 Ms. Amy Jeroloman Northern Transition Area 01/30/2017
10
11 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
12
13 Commissioner Dorosin noted that there are only 3 people on this board, and he read
14 that this board was supposed to have 5 people. He said he would like to see a full listing of
15 board members in the packets for these other governmental bodies as they go forward.
16 Chair Jacobs said he agrees, and he feels this board itself needs to be examined at
17 some point, in relation to the possibility of the Hillsborough ETJ area going forward.
18 Commissioner Gordon said it is a good idea going forward, when a subset is appointed,
19 that separate sheets be provided with lists of the subset, as well as a list for whole board.
20
21 d. Carrboro Planning Board —Appointment
22 The Board considered making an appointment to the Carrboro Planning Board.
23
24 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner McKee to
25 appoint the following to the Carrboro Planning Board:
26
27 Appointment to an additional full term (Position #2) for Ms. Susan Poulton.
28
POSITION NAME SPECIAL EXPIRATION
NO. REPRESENTATIVE DATE
2 Ms. Susan Poulton Carrboro Planning Board 02/28/2017
29
30 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
31
32 e. Commission for the Environment—Appointments
33 The Board was to consider making appointments to the Commission for the
34 Environment.
35 DEFERRED
36
37 f. Orange County Planning Board —Appointments
38 The Board was to consider making appointments to the Orange County Planning Board.
39 DEFERRED
40
41 12. Board Comments
42 Commissioner Price said she participated in a Meals-on-Wheels event, and it was a
43 wonderful experience.
15
1 Commissioner Dorosin said he was at the Healthy Carolinians meeting this week. He
2 said he learned about two interesting issues. He said he learned that accidental poisoning is
3 the second leading cause of death in North Carolina and in Orange County. He said there is a
4 lot of work being done by the Health Department related to this. He said he also learned that
5 there are some pretty grim statistics about the children in Orange County who are without
6 health insurance. He said he will be bringing this information to the Board.
7 Commissioner McKee— none
8 Commissioner Pelissier said she and Dr. Bridger are going to visit the early head start
9 health care sites in the area tomorrow morning. She said the jail alternatives workgroup met
10 this morning and reviewed a partial draft of the report. She said headway is being made, but
11 there is more to do.
12 Commissioner Gordon said at the Durham Chapel Hill Carrboro Metropolitan Planning
13 Organization Transportation Advisory Committee Meeting, work was done to finish the
14 memorandum of understanding (MOU). She said the chair and vice chair reported on a
15 meeting with Chatham County. She said Chatham County had concerns, but had agreed to
16 sign the agreement.
17 Commissioner Rich said she is also going to work with Meals-on-Wheels this week.
18 She said tomorrow morning is the Visitors Bureau meeting. She said tourism is picking up in
19 Orange County, and she will provide numbers soon. She said much of this is due to both high
20 school and college sports.
21 Commissioner Price said she attended the NCACC meeting and it was mentioned that
22 they may be entering into some hard times with N.0 Fast and Medicaid. She said the state is
23 blaming the counties for the problems.
24 Chair Jacobs said he and Commissioner Pelissier attended the Project EngAGE event
25 yesterday and gave them an overview of the Board of County Commissioners. He said
26 information was shared at the jail alternatives meeting showing that the number of mentally ill
27 people imprisoned in 2014 is at almost the same level as in the 1800s.
28
29 13. Information Items
30 e March 6, 2014 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List
31 e Description of Meetings with Waste Zero and Green Stream
32 e Waste Reduction Rate for FY 12-13
33 e Follow up to BOCC Questions on Emergency Services Strategic Plan
34
35 14. Closed Session NONE
36
37 15. Adjournment
38
39 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
40 adjourn the meeting at 8:09 p.m.
41
42 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
43
44 Barry Jacobs, Chair
45
46 Donna Baker
47 Clerk to the Board
48
49
50
1
I Attachment 3
2
3 DRAFT
4 MINUTES
5 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
6 REGULAR MEETING
7 April 1, 2014
8 6:00 p.m.
9
10 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, April
11 1, 2014 at 6:00 p.m. at the DSS offices, in Hillsborough, N.C.
12
13 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jacobs and Commissioners Mark Dorosin,
14 Alice M. Gordon, Earl McKee, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price, Penny Rich
15 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
16 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
17 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: Interim County Manager Michael Talbert, Assistant County
18 Managers Clarence Grier, Cheryl Young and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other staff
19 members will be identified appropriately below)
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 called the meeting to order at 6:03 pm.
24
25 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
26 PUBLIC CHARGE
27 The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge.
28
29 2. Public Comments
30
31 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
32
33 Commissioner Dorosin arrived at 6:07 pm
34 Beverly Hester Stephens read the following written comments:
35 Good evening, Commissioners, and thank you for this opportunity to make a special request on
36 behalf of Mothers Against Drunk Driving of North Carolina, Orange Partnership for Alcohol &
37 Drug Free Youth, parents and community members.
38
39 We are collaborating with Mothers Against Drunk Driving to increase awareness among parents
40 and caregivers that their voice IS heard by their children. Power Talk 21 is a national day set
41 aside to recognize the important role parents and caregivers have in keeping their children safe,
42 and encourages adults to have open, honest conversations.
43
44 We will be hosting a town hall and workshop on April 21St, and providing tools to empower
45 parents and caregivers to have conversations throughout the month of April.
46
47 Understanding that this will be reviewed by the Chair, Vice Chair and County Manager, we
48 humbly request the Board proclaim April 21 St as PowerTalk 21 Day in Orange County, at their
49 next County Commissioner meeting on April 151H
50
2
1 Gayanne Chambliss said she echoed Beverly Stephens' sentiments.
2
3 Janet Kagan read the following written comments:
4 1 have been an arts patron and arts professional for almost four decades and a resident of
5 Orange County for almost half of that. I am here tonight to ask you to facilitate your
6 commitment to make Orange County as artist-centric as your website promotion claims, which
7 states: Our cultural environment is a big part of why Orange County is special. Our "cultural
8 environment" is not just a recognition of our shared physical, social, and economic history but
9 also the footprint of the future legacy that follows us.
10
11 In June 2012, Americans for the Arts- a national research, policy, and advocacy organization-
12 issued their report "Arts Impact in Orange County." This is one of the most comprehensive
13 economic impact studies of the arts ever conducted in the US. Their research revealed that the
14 County's nonprofit arts and culture enterprises generate $85.4 million in economic activity,
15 support 3,352 jobs, and return $8 million in revenue to local and state government. Specifically,
16 artists arts organizations, and allied design-production businesses spent $63.9 million in the
17 County during fiscal year 2010, which was enhanced by another $21.5 million in related
18 spending by their patrons. This type of arts spending evokes a significant multiplier effect:
19 organizations pay employees, purchase supplies, contract for services, and acquire assets
20 within their community. Furthermore, cultural residents and visitors do not hesitate to spend
21 money on the arts. All of us benefit from this!
22
23 Let's not forget that artists are entrepreneurs and business owners. On Monday, the National
24 Endowment for the Arts released new data on Arts Employment. 61 percent of artists are
25 considered "self-employed" compared to 10 percent of all American workers. They note that
26 artists are also better educated than the overall labor force; their research found that 65 percent
27 of professional artists held a bachelors degree or higher, compared to 32 percent of all US
28 workers.
29
30 These types of consumptions and contributions cannot be sustained or grown by the annual
31 Orange County Open Studio tours, backyard artist workshops, street festivals, and weekend
32 cultural events. And creative entrepreneurs- especially those in their 20's and 30's — have
33 ambition and mobility. They are not satisfied with a garden studio; they seek camaraderie,
34 innovation, and community. Although I am hardly 25 years old (though I often feel like it) 1
35 would jump at the opportunity to build an artisan center in rural Orange County. Current zoning
36 prohibits this initiative, so I may need to look elsewhere. The Federal government and private
37 philanthropy are working in sync and poised to invest in these types of projects. But not for
38 long. They follow demographic and when projects such as mine- or others —elect to located in
39 distressed urban areas, Orange County loses these resources.
40
41 1 hope you will instruct your planning staff to explore how creative artist and designers can work
42 in rural Orange County thereby truly making it a culturally vibrant hub.
43
44 Commissioner McKee arrived at 6:09 PM
45
46 Chair Jacobs said there have been efforts recently to help artists work together as a
47 home occupation in Orange County or as cooperatives.
48
49 Judith Ernst said she is a ceramic artist who lives in Chapel Hill. She read the following:
3
1 The most recent economic development plan for Orange County names the arts as one of the
2 focuses for development in the County. How can Orange County in fact be an arts-friendly
3 community, specifically for the visual arts? An arts-friendly environment has to be an artist-
4 friendly environment. For visual artists to thrive they need two things: places to show and sell
5 their work; and places to make their work, or studio space. This second need is the one less
6 understood and most often overlooked.
7
8 Right now Orange County is reviewing its zoning laws. Under current rules, artists can
9 realistically only build studios on land where they occupy a primary residence, under the "home
10 business" designation. This assumes that all artists can afford their own homes: and all artists
11 can afford to build a studio for their own exclusive use. If two or more people decide to
12 collaboratively build a studio not at a primary residence, it must be done on land zoned for
13 commercial use. While there are small parcels in the County that were not grand-fathered in as
14 commercially zoned in the early 1990's, most plots designated commercial at that time were the
15 so-called economic development zones that are best for big-box stores and mixed retail/food
16 businesses that thrive in strip malls. These areas are not compatible with art studios, nor are
17 they affordable for artist use.
18
19 Artists have often favored shared studio space because of its affordability, but currently Orange
20 County makes that almost impossible. I urge you to consider some alternative to these zoning
21 rules, perhaps in rural areas, that would allow for low-impact collective studio use by artists, and
22 perhaps for other creative, non-fine art designers, architects, etc. For example, imagine a
23 group of painters deciding to buy a small piece of rural property with an old barn that can be
24 rehabilitated for shared work space. Or a small group of potters purchasing an older affordable
25 farm house to be used as a studio. Or a group of artists purchasing a plot of land and then
26 constructing a relatively low-cost building suitable for studio space but not for residential use.
27 Could the Commission staff investigate how other counties in North Carolina and throughout
28 the country may help provide affordable work space for artists?
29
30 Our area already has a strong arts community, but the County is not particularly friendly to
31 younger artists, those who don't have the resources to create a home/studio combination. We
32 will never be a dynamic arts destination unless we can attract young artists as well as nurturing
33 those who are more well-established. With the redevelopment of the large warehouse
34 structures in Durham that now serve as shared studio space, like Golden Belt and Liberty Arts
35 Sculpture Studio, our larger area is starting to attract younger artists. While Orange County
36 doesn't have much of that kind of infrastructure for redevelopment, there are things that a rural
37 county can do to make it more affordable and possible for artists to live and work in the County.
38 Reconsidering these zoning issues that relegate shared space to commercially zoned areas,
39 and making the rules friendlier to shared studio space for artists, is an initiative that could make
40 a huge difference in the economic development of the County.
41
42 Jackie Stone Huerner said she is a resident of Hillsborough, and she is following up on
43 discussion regarding the proposed bus routes. She said there is concern that one of the
44 proposed bus routes was going to go along Highway 86 North from Hillsborough. She said
45 there is a much more suburban lifestyle in that area, and most of the residents have cars and
46 are unlikely to use the bus. She said there is a great need for bus service in the mobile home
47 parks, rent subsidized apartments, and low income housing areas within Hillsborough. She
48 encouraged the Board use the scarce resources to serve those who really need and will use the
49 bus.
50
4
1 b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
2 (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda
3 below.)
4
5 3. Petitions by Board Members
6 Commissioner Gordon referred to the Intergovernmental Parks Work Group's resolution
7 that had been circulated to the various governmental entities. She said this resolution
8 describes how the two school systems, the county and the towns will cooperate on the use of
9 school facilities for recreation. She petitioned the Board to add this resolution to one of the
10 regular Board of County Commissioners' agendas in May for discussion and consideration.
11
12 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
13
14 a. Fair Housing Month
15 The Board considered approving a proclamation designating April as Fair Housing
16 Month in Orange County and authorized the Chair to sign.
17
18 Human Relations Commission's Chair Rollin Russell read the following proclamation:
19
20 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
21
22 PROCLAMATION
23
24 FAIR HOUSING MONTH
25
26 WHEREAS, April 2014 marks the 46th anniversary of the Fair Housing Act of 1968 and the
27 31St anniversary of the North Carolina Fair Housing Act prohibiting discrimination
28 in housing on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, handicap and
29 familial status; and
30
31 WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners enacted the Orange County Civil
32 Rights Ordinance on June 6, 1994, which affords to the residents of Orange
33 County the protections guaranteed by Title VIII and additionally encompasses
34 the protected classes of veteran status and age; and
35
36 WHEREAS, Orange County and the United States Department of Housing and Urban
37 Development as well as concerned residents and the housing industry are
38 working to make fair housing opportunities possible for everyone by encouraging
39 others to abide by the letter and the spirit of fair housing laws; and
40
41 WHEREAS, despite the protection afforded by the Orange County Civil Rights Ordinance and
42 Title VIII as amended, illegal housing discrimination still occurs in our nation and
43 in our County; and
44
45 WHEREAS, by supporting and promoting fair housing and equal opportunity, we are
46 contributing to the health of our County, State and Nation;
47
48 NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Board of County Commissioners of Orange County, North
49 Carolina, do proclaim April 2014 as FAIR HOUSING MONTH and commend this observance to
50 all Orange County residents.
5
1
2 This, the 1 st day of April 2014.
3
4 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
5 approve the proclamation designating April as Fair Housing Month in Orange County and
6 authorize the Chair to sign.
7
8 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
9
10 Rollin Russell reminded everyone that there would be a reception on April 10th to
11 present information to realtors and housing providers, and this event is open to the public. He
12 said the commission will also make fair housing presentations throughout the year.
13 Commissioner Dorosin said the Fair Housing Act was one of the most innovative acts of
14 the civil rights movement. He said this act doesn't just prohibit discrimination, but it also states
15 that all of us have the right to live in a racially diverse housing community. He said Orange
16 County has a burden to further fair housing.
17
18 b. Sexual Assault Awareness Month
19 The Board considered approving a proclamation recognizing April as Sexual Assault
20 Awareness Month in Orange County and authorizing the Chair to sign.
21 Rape Crisis Center Executive Director Bryant Colson said, on behalf of the Orange
22 County Rape Crisis Center, he wanted to thank the Board of County Commissioners. He noted
23 that the Center is celebrating its 40th anniversary, and he said this begins a month long event
24 and program to increase awareness with residents. He said this culminates in an event on April
25 29th from 6-8 p.m. at Extraordinary Ventures in Chapel Hill.
26
27 Commissioner Rich read the proclamation:
28
29 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
30
31 Proclamation
32 "Sexual Assault Awareness Month"
33
34 WHEREAS, the Orange County Rape Crisis Center assisted over 600 survivors of sexual
35 violence, their loved ones, and community professionals during 2013; and
36
37 WHEREAS, the Orange County Rape Crisis Center works with the County's two school
38 systems and other groups to provide students with age-appropriate information about violence
39 prevention, reaching over 12,000 youth and adults each year; and
40
41 WHEREAS, the coordination of the Orange County Sexual Assault Response Team (SART) is
42 bringing together members of law enforcement, the medical community, the legal system, and
43 other community advocates to improve services for survivors of sexual assault who come
44 forward; and
45
46 WHEREAS, 1 in 5 American women have been sexually assaulted at some point in their lives
47 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2010); and
48
6
1 WHEREAS, in the United States rape is the most costly crime to its survivors, totaling $127
2 billion a year considering factors such as medical cost, lost earnings, pain, suffering, and lost
3 quality of life (U.S. Department of Justice, 1996); and
4
5 WHEREAS, in the United States 1 in 3 women and 1 in 4 men have experienced some form of
6 sexual or physical violence committed by an intimate partner (Centers for Disease Control and
7 Prevention, 2010); and
8
9 WHEREAS, there are more than 15,000 sex offenders registered as living in North Carolina
10 (Department of Justice, 2014); and
11
12 WHEREAS, victim-blaming continues to be an enormous problem in instances of rape and
13 sexual assault; and
14
15 WHEREAS, the Orange County Rape Crisis Center, a non-profit agency that has served this
16 community since 1974, is working to stop sexual violence and its impact through support,
17 education, and advocacy;
18
19 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that we, the Orange County Board of Commissioners,
20 do hereby proclaim the month of April 2014 as "SEXUAL ASSAULT AWARENESS MONTH"
21 and encourage all residents to speak out against sexual violence and to support their local
22 community's efforts to prevent and respond to these appalling crimes.
23
24 This, the 1 st day of April 2014.
25
26 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
27 approve the proclamation recognizing April as Sexual Assault Awareness Month in Orange
28 County and authorize the Chair to sign.
29
30 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
31
32 5. Public Hearings
33
34 a. Solid Waste Service Tax District— Public Hearing
35 The Board conducted the second of two public hearings, pursuant to North Carolina
36 General Statutes 153A-302, to receive comments with regard to the proposed establishment of
37 a Solid Waste Service Tax District in unincorporated Orange County.
38
39 Gayle Wilson presented the background information outlined in the abstract. He said in
40 2004 the Board of Commissioners approved a new method of funding for the every other week
41 curbside/roadside recycling collection program for about 13,000 residences in unincorporated
42 Orange County. At that time the Board adopted a fee to fund the program, called a rural 3-R
43 Fee, that all eligible residences were billed annually on their tax bills. The fee was assessed to
44 all eligible for the service, regardless of whether or how often a resident used the service.
45 In 2012 the County Manager and the County Attorney advised the Board that they had
46 concerns regarding the statutory justification for assessing this fee and recommended that the
47 Board eliminate the fee and consider other ways to fund that program. The 2012 tax bill was the
48 last time the fee was assessed. The fee was $38/year. In 2013 the Board provided an interim
49 funding for the program from landfill reserves.
7
1 Over the next several months the Board discussed various options on how to address
2 this funding problem. Elimination of the program was even considered, but unanimously
3 abandoned due to measured participation of the rural community of about 57%. Some residents
4 eligible for this service chose not to recycle, others delivered their recycling to convenience
5 centers and a very few employed private haulers. It was also considered that the service was
6 important in order to meet the County's aggressive waste reduction goal of 61%.
7 Gayle Wilson said after considering and rejecting numerous funding alternatives, in
8 December 2013, the Board indicated intent to implement a solid waste service district tax as the
9 means to replace the funding lost when the fee was eliminated. One of the services discussed
10 in March 2013 was a proposal to franchise waste and recyclables collection in unincorporated
11 Orange County. The Board, following vigorous public opposition, eliminated this option from
12 further consideration.
13 He said the Board also recently discussed a subscription service option, whereby those
14 residents who wanted to retain the service could pay, and those who wished not to pay could
15 voluntarily opt-out. He said State statutes require a public hearing to be held prior to a Board
16 adopting a service district, and the property owners of all parcels to be included in the district
17 must be notified by letter of the hearing.
18 He noted that the Solid Waste Convenience Centers (SWCC) are paid for by all
19 residents of the County, though many residents do not use them. He said it is likely that any
20 proposal the Board decides on may not necessarily be the long term solution to rural recycling
21 program funding.
22
23 Gayle Wilson addressed several of the questions from the hand out— Frequently Asked
24 Questions (FAQ):
25
26 ➢ I have been paying the Solid Waste Convenience Center Fee for three years and
27 it has increased to $40/year in that period. Included among the tax bill
28 explanations for this fee is "The cost of expanding the hours of operation for the
29 solid waste convenience centers". Why has there not been any expansion of
30 hours in that three year period?
31 The hours of operation at the Eubanks Road and Walnut Grove Church
32 Road Centers were increased by opening on Thursdays from 7 am to 6
33 pm effective September 5, 2013.
34
35 ➢ How many exempt properties are there in the proposed district?
36 There are a total of 694 tax exempt properties in the proposed service
37 district.
38
39 ➢ How many vacant properties (no homes or other structures) are in the proposed
40 district?
41 The total number of vacant properties within the district is approximately
42 5,469.
43
44 ➢ What are the average home value and the average assessment throughout the
45 county?
46 Average total property value throughout the county is $290,545.
47
48 ➢ If a homeowner does land/house improvements, will this change the cost of the
49 tax on the property?
8
1 Anything that changes the property tax assessment would change their
2 property tax bill.
3
4 PUBLIC COMMENT:
5
6 Anne Garabay said she is a lifetime resident of Orange County, and she is an interior
7 designer. She said her work property and her home are in Orange County. She read an email
8 that she had written to Commissioner McKee. She said she feels suffocated with Orange
9 County taxes as it is now. She said she cannot benefit from this new tax at all, as her
10 commercial business requires that she haul her debris and pay to dump it at the landfill, and
11 she also hauls her home recycling materials. She said her company has suffered since 2001,
12 and she has to borrow money to pay taxes now. She loves Hillsborough, but she wants to take
13 her home and work elsewhere, because she is overtaxed, and she reaps no benefits. She said
14 every day is a struggle, and she feels that no one is interested in small businesses. She votes
15 no further taxes on solid waste.
16
17 Don O'Leary said, with all due respect, government is like a two year old shouting "mine,
18 mine, mine." He said the population is no longer ignorant, and residents are not going to sit by
19 and be taxed. He said he does not need the recycling trucks, as he already has to go to the
20 dump to take his trash. He said right now it is recyclables, and he questioned how the Board
21 of County Commissioners can ask residents to pay for a service they do not want. He said
22 many residents already take their own recyclables to a convenience center, so why would
23 residents want to pay for a service they are already doing.
24
25 Dr. Jon Arvick questioned whether this tax will be deductible on state or federal returns.
26 He questioned if residents shouldn't be allowed to vote on this if it is a new tax. He asked if
27 people with only a few materials can opt for monthly pick up. He asked if this tax is really
28 necessary or if it is just a way to raise revenues. He questioned whether this will really increase
29 service and whether he will get twice the service for paying twice the price. He asked if the 61
30 percent goal is the goal for participation or known waste reduction.
31
32 Terri Buckner said she lives in Chapel Hill, in the ETJ for Carrboro. She said her area of
33 the County does not have access to the Solid Waste Convenience Centers (SWCC). She said
34 hauling to these centers is very inconvenient for her, though she is still paying for it. She said
35 she has been to most of these meetings, and she has heard there is support for recycling, but
36 the controversy is how to pay for it. She said she is in favor of the tax service district since she
37 lives in the unincorporated southern part of Orange County. She said many of her neighbors
38 lack understanding about the County services that they receive. She asked the Board not to
39 commit to any option that will have a negative impact on the recycling rate or allow more waste
40 to leave the County to go to a landfill in a low wealth county. She asked the Board to commit
41 to a final solution that will allow the solid waste staff to maintain or exceed the current recycling
42 rate.
43
44 Dave Laudicina said he lives in Bingham Township and he would like to discuss three
45 points:
46 1) Fairness and Equity - He said this proposal has been marketed as a small amount of money
47 equal to the current rate for the average house. He said this is not dealing in averages, and
48 some people will pay much more than average, and some will pay less. He said he has heard
49 about other increases, and the additive effect of all of these increases grows to an astronomical
50 rate. He said he does not understand why the Board is trying to implement a tax scheme with a
9
1 monopoly that has no constraints on future increases. He said the rates should be all flat or all
2 progressive.
3 2) Recycling Participation — He said Orange County has been a leader in recycling for many
4 years, before and during recycling pickup; and it will continue to be a leader in the future, no
5 matter what plan is elected. He said the County would not have been able to achieve this
6 without aggressive rural resident participation.
7 3) No Choice — He said he took his trash and recycling on the same trip and this is the practice
8 most of the time. He said it makes no sense that he would be forced to pay for something he
9 doesn't need. He said the roll cart would not be suitable for him.
10
11 Mark Marcoplos said he lives in Bingham Township. He said this proposal has been
12 under consideration with the Board of County Commissioners for more than a year now, and it
13 is no closer to a clear resolution. He said the lack of clear information has resulted in testimony
14 and letters being submitted from people who are not even in the proposed district. He said the
15 County has not checked the addresses of citizens who have spoken at their meetings to see if
16 these residents live in the proposed district. He said the end result is that neither the public nor
17 the media really know the extent of support or criticism for this proposal. He said there are
18 people living in dense areas that would like the service and support the modest tax. He said
19 there are also people in the district that live down long driveways and would not use the service.
20 He said these residents generally support recycling and haul it to the centers, along with
21 household trash. He said the state policy has forced the creation of a district that has clusters
22 of density separated by areas of scattered households. He said the connecting zones have a
23 practical reason to not use the service. He said none of this investment of time and money to
24 explore the tax option would have been necessary if the Board of County Commissioners had
25 kept the 3-R fee. He said it is unclear that the attorney's opinion on the possibility of a legal
26 challenge merited the scrapping of the 3-R fee. He would like to re-instate the fee and
27 concentrate efforts on the adoption of a comprehensive plan. He feels it is essential that
28 Orange County have its own transfer and recycling station at the same location. He said this
29 will end the increasing cost of trucking waste to transfer stations; reduce pollution; and allow for
30 future collection of both household waste and recyclables. He said the most cost effective
31 location is near 1-40 and the Chapel Hill/Carrboro urban zone, which generates most of the solid
32 waste. He referred to available land near the Chapel Hill Town Operations Center.
33
34 Stan Cheran lives in rural Orange County and said he would like to join with many of his
35 rural neighbors in expressing opposition to a fee for a service that he does not use and will
36 never use. He lives on an unpaved road and hauls his recyclables and trash to the
37 convenience centers. He said if he chose to put out his recyclables he would still have to haul
38 trash. He finds the proposed mandatory fee objectionable and not appropriate for a County as
39 progressive and enlightened as this. He said it is not a matter of cost, but it is a matter of
40 principle.
41
42 Steve Hopper lives in Efland. He is opposed to the tax, and he has been doing research
43 on the issue. He said most people he has spoken with did not realize that this will be a
44 progressive and variable tax. He said this is a strange way to fund this service. He
45 congratulated the County on doing a good job with recycling so far, but he feels the Board does
46 not see that the rural people get it. He cited a 7 percent difference in the rates of recycling
47 between rural residents with and without the curbside service. He said the economics don't add
48 up. He said the residents of this County are enlightened and are going to continue to recycle.
49 Steve Hopper asked the Board not to do this, and he requested that residents be allowed to
50 vote on the issue.
10
1
2 Jerry Snipes said he is a resident of Efland Cheeks Township. He said he has over 500
3 signatures against this tax, and many people he has talked to do not want this tax. He
4 questioned why the County would want to send their trash to a neighbor's county.
5
6 Doug Efland said he received 6 notices for the parcels he owns, and all but one of these
7 is farmland. He referred to item #30 on the FAQ sheet. He said he does not understand why
8 landowners that have vacant properties in the district are asked to pay for service and those
9 outside are not asked to pay for it, as neither of these residents receive any benefit from it. He
10 referred to the statement about suspension of fees and said he noticed that his tax bill for 2012
11 and 2013 showed that, even though the $37 fee was suspended, he was asked to pay a $30
12 increase in other fees for solid waste.
13
14 Paul Rockwell said he lives on the east side of Orange Grove Road. He expressed his
15 gratitude to the Board for allowing him to express his opinion. He said he likes the services
16 offered by the County at the convenience centers, and he feels the taxes he pays for this are
17 well invested. He said curbside recycling is not something he would use, and he does not want
18 to pay for a service, he does not need or want. He likes the idea of a subscription service
19 option, as it allows residents to get the level of service they would like. He said incentivizing
20 recycling might also help reach the goal faster than irritating the public with additional taxes. He
21 said incentivizing has been proven effective in other areas.
22 Thomas Linden said he lives in the Stoneridge neighborhood, which contains about 243
23 houses in unincorporated Orange County. He said his neighborhood and the neighborhood
24 next to his really need recycling. He said about 80 percent or more of the homes in his area
25 have recycling bins in front of them. He said people cannot selectively choose the taxes that
26 benefit them. He said if this was the case, there would be no functioning society. He said
27 Orange County is a recycling leader in the state and there needs to be more recycling, not less.
28 He said he would likely have to double the amount he pays for the service, but he feels it would
29 be well worth it. He thinks it would be useful for the County to pursue a pay-as-you-throw
30 model for private hauling. He said he puts out very little trash, but he pays for a big bin. He is
31 in favor of the tax district.
32 Lynne Jaffe said that many people seem to be against the taxing of this service. She
33 said she has paid for many services that she does not use, including schools and other
34 services; however she does not see the justice in paying taxes for someone else's trash. She
35 does not see how this tax supports recycling. She said this is a rural County and many people
36 have inherited their land and own a lot of land. She said many of these people are on a fixed
37 income and are unable to pay more taxes. She said County residents are increasingly
38 penalized and asked to support so many services that provide them no benefit.
39 Jane Gaede lives in Orange County, in Hillsborough Township. She said she has
40 received 7 first class individual mailings from the solid waste office in reference to this district
41 tax public hearing. She said there is a need to consolidate this. She said there is curbside
42 recycling in her area, and she does not want, or need the service. She does not have trash
43 pick-up, so she takes trash and recyclables to the convenience center at the same time. She
44 said she is perfectly happy to pay a fair share of cost to maintain the convenience centers. She
45 said it makes no sense to have curbside recycling in these rural areas, and it only tears up the
46 roads and generates air pollution. She said she is in favor of recycling, but she does not need it
47 picked up.
48 Norma White said she has four parcels and she is in the tax district; but the people at
49 the end of her road are not in the district and are taxed at a different rate. She thinks that a
50 consensus has been formed around recycling in Orange County. She said the towns, the
11
1 developments outside towns, and the rural areas all recycle, though they do recycling
2 differently. She said the towns and the County are poised to sign an agreement for curbside
3 recycling, and this is a result of conversations between staff, town managers, councils and
4 officials. She said this is a good fit for the town and the County, and the agreement appears to
5 be made in good faith. She said the public hearings have affirmed the importance of recycling
6 outside of the towns. She said curbside recycling is good for suburban developments that sit
7 just outside of towns. She asked, rather than funding this with a tax district, why the County
8 does not work with haulers already providing service to the towns, to include the suburban
9 communities for a fee. She said this would not require a special district. She said the County
10 has not respected the way rural households address recycling. She said only a third of those in
11 the rural area use curbside service. She said the curbside with a tax district should be rejected.
12 She said the Commissioners are the only voice that the rural residents have, and she asked
13 that the Board reject this district and re-visit the issue with the rural stakeholders.
14 Quentin Phillips said he lives on Orange Grove Road. He asked for clarification on the
15 revenue generated by the sale of recyclables. He asked why that cannot be self supporting.
16 He asked how this tax can be legal if the residents have not voted on it. He said he pays more
17 taxes in Orange County than he does in Alamance County.
18 David Neal is a member of the Commission for the Environment. He said the
19 commission's interest in this issue is environmental. He said there is benefit in the reduced
20 energy use created through recycling. He said, given the two options, the commission
21 identified the service district as the option that is least disruptive to the existing successful
22 program. He said a subscription service would be inefficient, difficult to manage, and
23 expensive. He agrees that in a real world, curbside recycling would be best in denser areas;
24 but because of the constraints requiring a contiguous district, this does not work.
25
26 Joe Phelps said he is a lifelong resident of Orange County. He said he would also like
27 to see the amount of revenue generated from the sale of recyclables. He said the opt-out
28 service should be an option, and if there is a fee, it should be a flat fee for all participants. He
29 feels the Board is incorrect in thinking that an opt-out program would reduce recycling
30 participation. He questioned why only part of the County was included in the program and why
31 the service was not offered to everyone. He does not believe this should be based upon tax
32 value.
33 Bonnie Hauser said she lives across the street from the proposed district, but she cares
34 about this issue. She said it is apparent that everyone involved cares about waste reduction,
35 but everyone does not do it the same way. She said there are many options that provide choice
36 and good service that have not been explored. She said the service district tax is not a fair or
37 equitable solution for the County. She said she has been supportive of the subscription fee, but
38 it seems there may be an issue of viability with this option. She said there needs to be more
39 time allowed to review the options, and a short term solution needs to be found, while options
40 for a long time solution can be sorted out. She asked the Board to delay all capital expenses,
41 including convenience center upgrades and roll carts until a decision is made on how to handle
42 this service in the long term.
43 Ben Lloyd said he is an Efland resident. He said he understands that this proposed tax
44 would apply to residents and open land, regardless if you create waste or not. He owns several
45 hundred acres of open land that produces no waste, and he feels it is unfair to make him pay a
46 tax for this land. He said the current convenience centers are the best and fairest options. He
47 does not mind paying for his sins and his service, but he resents paying for the sins and
48 services of other people. He said he was taught not to mess with something that is working,
49 and the convenience centers are working.
12
1 Gene Williams said he lives in White Cross community, and he feels the County is doing
2 a great job with recycling now. He said he and his wife are dedicated to recycling, and he has
3 talked to a lot of people about this issue. He said expecting residents to pay an additional tax
4 for recycling is not right. He said a friend of his said if the County taxes her, she will throw her
5 recycling in with her trash. He said this tax will alienate people who are trying to do a good job.
6 He said residents are paying a high property tax now, as well as a fire district tax. He said
7 adding a district tax will only add more, and this is too many taxes. He said he spends his
8 money in Alamance County because there is no industry or retail in Orange County. He said
9 this lack of industry is why residents have to pay more tax. He said this district tax is just one
10 more tax that residents don't need.
11
12 Chair Jacobs said the answers to the questions will be posted to the website.
13 Gayle Wilson said this is correct. He also noted that the state legislature requires the
14 County to mail each parcel letter separately.
15 Chair Jacobs said all of the comments will be considered and a decision is scheduled to
16 be made at the April 15th meeting. He suggested a 5 minute break.
17
18 6. Consent Agenda
19 • Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
20 NONE
21
22 • Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
23 A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
24 approve the remaining items on the consent agenda.
25 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
26
27 Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
28
29 a. Minutes
30 The Board approved the minutes from January 23 and February 4, 2014 as submitted by the
31 Clerk to the Board.
32 b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds
33 The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release motor vehicle
34 property tax values for thirty-four (34) taxpayers with a total of thirty-six (36) bills that will result
35 in a reduction of revenue in accordance with NCGS.
36 c. Property Tax Releases/Refunds
37 The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release property tax
38 values for seventeen (17) taxpayers with a total of (29) twenty-nine bills that will result in a
39 reduction of revenue in accordance with North
40 Carolina General Statute 105-381.
41 d. Notice of Public Hearing on Orange County's 2014 Legislative Agenda
42 The Board approved a notice of the Board of County Commissioners' plans to hold a public
43 hearing on April 15, 2014 on potential items for inclusion in Orange County's legislative agenda
44 package for the 2014 North Carolina General Assembly Session.
45 e. Approval of Budget Amendment #6-A Reallocating Current Available County
46 Capital Funds to Proposed New County Capital Project
47 The Board approved Budget Amendment#6-A reallocating $55,000 in current available County
48 Capital funds to a newly created County Capital Project to fund repairs and renovations
49 needed for the current fiscal year 2013-14.
13
1 f. Application for North Carolina Education Lottery Proceeds for Chapel Hill —
2 Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS) and Contingent Approval of Budget Amendment# 6-
3 B Related to CHCCS Capital Project Ordinances
4 The Board approved an application to the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction
5 (NCDPI) to release funds from the NC Education Lottery account related to FY 2013-14 debt
6 service payments for Chapel Hill — Carrboro City Schools, and to approve Budget Amendment
7 #6-B (amended School Capital Project Ordinances), contingent on the State's approval of the
8 application and authorize the Chair to sign.
9 g. Delegation of Property Tax Release/Refund Authority Based on North Carolina
10 General Statute (NCGS) NCGS 105-381
11 The Board considered delegation of authority as authorized under North Carolina General
12 Statute (NCGS) 105-381(b) and approved a resolution, which is incorporated by reference,
13 thereby allowing the Finance Officer to approve requests for release or refund of property taxes
14 less than one hundred dollars ($100.00).
15 h. Change in BOCC Regular Meeting Schedule for 2014
16 The Board approved one change in the County Commissioners' regular meeting calendar for
17 2014, adding a dinner meeting with the Board of Social Services for Tuesday, April 29 2014,
18 starting at 5:30 pm (prior to the 7:00 joint meeting with the school boards) at the Southern
19 Human Services Center, 2501 Homestead Road in Chapel Hill.
20
21 7. Regular Agenda
22 a. Rogers-Eubanks Neighborhood Association Community Center Construction
23 Bid Award
24 The Board considered awarding a bid to Riggs-Harrod Builders, Inc. of Durham, North
25 Carolina in the amount of$552,488 for the construction of the Rogers Eubanks Neighborhood
26 Association Community Center; authorizing the Chair to sign the necessary paperwork upon
27 final approval of the County Attorney; and authorizing the County Manager to execute change
28 orders for the project up to the project budget.
29 Jeff Thompson said this bid reflects a major re-design of the facility, allowing the project
30 to be constructed within the Board approved project budget.
31 Jeff Thompson said Patric Lebeau was present to provide an overview of the design to
32 the Board and answer any questions.
33 Patric Lebeau reviewed several image slides outlining the re-design changes. He said
34 the building footprint has changed very little, and the square footage and interior spaces and
35 functions have been retained. He said the site plan has shrunk and the building has been
36 pulled to the East to avoid some site work. He showed the ADA parking and basketball court,
37 and he reviewed the detailed floor plan slide.
38 He said the height and elevations have changed slightly, and the clear story has been
39 taken out. He said a small portico has been retained on the east side for the main entry.
40 Jeff Thompson said competitive bids from ten (10) firms were opened on March 13,
41 2014. He said after a period of review of the bid documents by County staff and the project
42 designer, Riggs-Harrod Builders, Inc. of Durham, NC was determined to be the lowest
43 responsive, responsible bidder for this project. He said should the Board of County
44 Commissioners award the bid, the projected construction period is eight (8) months. He said,
45 depending upon construction progress, management of unforeseen conditions and the facility
46 commissioning process, the center may be available before the end of the 2014 calendar year.
47 Chair Jacobs said the Board was glad to see their friends from the Rogers Road
48 community in attendance.
49 Commissioner Dorosin noted that the bid came in at $550,000, and he thought there
50 might be extra money, since the Board allocated $650,000. He said the financial impact lists
14
1 $34,000 for owner, furniture, and site costs and $50,000 to OWASA. He asked if the bid had
2 come in at $650,000 where these additional funds would have come from. He asked if these
3 costs are just being included because the bid came in so low.
4 Jeff Thompson said the OWASA costs are fixed, and if the bid had come in higher or
5 lower, those costs would stay the same. He said if the bid had been higher, the Board would
6 have been asked to approve a budget amendment to complete the project.
7 Commissioner Dorosin said he does not feel that the information regarding the $50,000
8 cost was adequately presented to the Board of County Commissioners during their discussion
9 of this project. He asked if the $34,000 was another fixed cost or if it is being included because
10 the bid is so low.
11 Jeff Thompson said the kitchen equipment had been pulled out, with a plan to put it in
12 separate from the general contract.
13 Commissioner Dorosin questioned whether, if the lowest bid had been $600,000, and
14 the $50,000 was then added for OWASA, this $34,000 would have been added as well.
15 Jeff Thompson said this would have been added above that $650,000.
16 Michael Talbert said staff would have come back to ask for more funding. He said the
17 kitchen equipment was purposely taken out to know exactly what the bid was. He said the
18 OWASA costs are fixed costs for the owner, and these are not part of the bid, as it is not part of
19 what the construction crew has to pay.
20 Commissioner Dorosin said this just was not clear to him.
21 Michael Talbert said the project costs are for the whole project. He said he appreciated
22 the architect's pro bono services, and he feels it ended in a better product.
23 Commissioner Dorosin said this is very exciting, and he would support adding in
24 anything that would commit the Board up to the $650,000 that was committed.
25 Michael Talbert said that is the intent for the remaining $20,000 if it is not needed for
26 any contingencies.
27 Commissioner Gordon asked if staff could please review the figures since they seem to
28 add up to $660,000 instead of$650,000.
29 Jeff Thompson said he will look into this.
30 Commissioner Price asked about the start date.
31 Jeff Thompson said the goal would be to start in early May.
32 Commissioner McKee publicly thanked the architect and his firm for the work that has
33 been done, specifically to go back and do the re-design to make this project work. He said this
34 has been a long time coming. He said he is excited that the dirt is getting ready to be moved.
35 He supported Commissioner Dorosin's proposal that if this project comes in under $650,000 the
36 extra funds should be used to provide furnishings.
37
38 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Price to
39 award a bid to Riggs-Harrod Builders, Inc. of Durham, North Carolina in the amount of
40 $552,488 for the construction of the Rogers Eubanks Neighborhood Association Community
41 Center; authorize the Chair to sign the necessary paperwork upon final approval of the County
42 Attorney; and authorize the County Manager to execute change orders for the project up to the
43 project budget of$650,000.
44
45 Commissioner Rich asked for clarification about the figures for the project budget.
46 Commissioner Gordon said if the math is wrong, the extra $10,000 will come out of the
47 contingency, and the contingency amount would be $10,000 instead of$20,000. She noted that
48 it is okay to go up to the project budget of$650,000.
49 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
50
15
1 8. Reports
2 NONE
3
4 9. County Manager's Report
5 NONE
6
7 10. County Attorney's Report
8 John Roberts referred to an earlier question about the process if a tax service district
9 was implemented and then needed to be abolished. He said a public hearing would be
10 required, with a notice in the newspaper, and then the Board could decide to pass a resolution
11 to terminate the tax service district.
12
13 11. Appointments
14 NONE
15
16 12. Board Comments
17
18 Commissioner Pelissier said she and Chair Jacobs attended a public input meeting for
19 the proposed southwest library. She said the consultants told her that this was the largest
20 turnout ever. She said there was great enthusiasm and positive input regarding the site.
21 Commissioner Pelissier said she visited the 1789 Venture Lab in Chapel Hill last week,
22 and she encouraged her peers to visit.
23
24 Commissioner Rich said she and Commissioner Pelissier attended an event to welcome
25 Debbie Shultz to Orange County.
26
27 Commissioner McKee - none
28
29 Commissioner Price said she attended the strategic planning course at UNC. She said
30 a lot of the examples presented were located in Orange County.
31
32 Commissioner Gordon referred to the Intergovernmental Parks Work Group's resolution
33 regarding the Community Use of School Facilities for Recreation. She said the Orange County
34 school system has recently revised their facility use policy. She said that in the I Work Group,
35 the representatives of the two school boards and the representatives of all of the governing
36 boards for the towns and the county have worked together in a very cooperative way. In a
37 recent IP Work Group meeting, all of the representatives have agreed to this resolution, and
38 now it has to be agreed to by all of the boards.
39
40 Commissioner Dorosin said he attended the North Carolina hearings of the National
41 Commission on Voting Rights. He said it was a combination of voter rights and voter education
42 panels. He said Ellie Kinnaird was one of the panel members. He said all of the testimony will
43 be transcribed and will go to Washington D.C. to become part of the congressional record for
44 discussion of the new proposed voter rights act.
45 Commissioner Dorosin congratulated James Davis who was appointed as interim
46 director of the Housing Human Rights and Community Development Department.
47
48 Chair Jacobs said he had an opportunity to make a presentation to the Orange
49 County/Hillsborough Chamber of Commerce regarding economic development in Orange
50 County. He said there are a lot of things that are happening. He said the very next day one of
16
1 the incubators hosted a tour by the Wallace Center Food Hub. He said there were people from
2 as far away as Texas. He said the center is already making a profit.
3 Chair Jacobs said he attended a meeting of the Chapel Hill Downtown Partnership
4 where the director of DSI Comedy was introduced. He said the director talked about how his
5 company does outreach and team building. Chair Jacobs said he received an email with an
6 offer to do an outreach for the Board of County Commissioners.
7 Chair Jacobs asked Jeff Thompson about the status of the Whitted Building, because
8 many arts groups were interested.
9 Jeff Thompson said the project is slightly ahead of schedule by about 2 weeks. He said
10 site work will probably start in about 2 weeks. He said testing and A/V work will be done in
11 May/June, but it probably won't be ready for the Board's last meeting. He said final work will be
12 done over the summer to insure that t it will be ready for the first meeting in the fall. He said a
13 tour is planned in May.
14 Commissioner Price said she has had requests for tours of the facility.
15 Jeff Thompson said these can be set up.
16
17 13. Information Items
18
19 0 March 18, 2014 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List
20 e Tax Collector's Report— Numerical Analysis
21 e Tax Collector's Report— Measure of Enforced Collections
22 e BOCC Chair Letter Regarding Petitions from March 6, 2014 Regular Board Meeting
23 e BOCC Chair Letter Regarding Petitions from March 18, 2014 Regular Board Meeting
24
25 14. Closed Session - NONE
26
27 15. Adjournment
28
29 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Price to
30 adjourn the meeting at 8:14 p.m.
31
32 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
33
34 Barry Jacobs, Chair
35
36 Donna Baker
37 Clerk to the Board
38
39
40