Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 05-15-2014 APPROVED 10/7/2014 MINUTES BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WORK SESSION May 15, 2014 7:00 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Work Session on Thursday, May 15, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, N.C. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jacobs and Commissioners Mark Dorosin, Alice M. Gordon, Earl McKee, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: Interim County Manager Michael Talbert, Assistant County Managers Cheryl Young and Clarence Grier and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other staff inembers will be identified appropriately below) Chair Jacobs called the meeting to order. He said the following two items were to be added to the agenda tonight: Closed Session A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Rich to add a closed session at the end of the meeting for the purpose of: To discuss matters relating to the location or expansion of industries or other businesses in the area served by the public body, including agreement on a tentative list of economic development incentives that may be offered by the public body in negotiations. The action approving the signing of an economic development contract or commitment, or the action authorizing the payment of economic development expenditures, shall be taken in an open session. § 143-318.11(a)(4). VOTE: UNANIMOUS Televising the additional budget public hearing Clerk to the Board Donna Baker said this item is being brought forth because the Board decided last week to televise the May 22nd Budget Public Hearing ( at DSS) in order to introduce to the public the new County Manager. She noted that at the Board of County Commissioners meeting on May 13th a Commissioner requested that the May 29th Budget Public Hearing at Southern Human Services Center also be televised to make this equitable. Chair Jacobs said the cost would be a total of$2110, and the funding would come from the Clerk's budget or the Board of County Commissioners contingency fund. A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Price to authorize the Clerk to move forward with televising the May 29th Budget Public Hearing at Southern Human Services Center, as well as the May 22nd public hearing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 1. Presentation on The Chapel Hill Report— The Dollars and $ense of Development Patterns Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Aaron Nelson said this analysis was completed in March 2014. He reviewed a series of PowerPoint maps, photos, and graphs. He said 92 percent of the land is in unincorporated Orange County. He said the assessed value of the County is $14.9 billion. He said 43 percent of this value is in Chapel Hill, 13 percent is in Carrboro, and 5 percent is in Hillsborough. Aaron Nelson said the purpose of this analysis was to determine what types of development deliver the most amount of assessed value and produce the most taxes collected. He reviewed the slides of individual sites and their assessed value. He noted that the East 54 Retail site is the highest assessed property in the County and produces $9.3 million an acre in assessed value. He said the theme is that the type and kind of development produces dramatically different results, particularly as properties get denser. He said the most expensive acre in Orange County is Greenbridge at $52 million. He noted that the higher value properties have a low number of public school children. Aaron Nelson reviewed the tax yield per acre and noted that the Greenbridge property and 140 West Franklin generate about $500,000 in property tax on an annual basis. He reviewed three dimensional maps of County value per acre. He said the County gets a higher return for denser property. He said the ratio of revenue for the highest density mixed use spaces (6 story mixed use) is 400:1. Aaron Nelson noted that the County invested $4,000 in this study, and he expressed his appreciation to for their support. Chair Jacobs said this is a good prelude to the discussion of the next item and the thinking about building up rather than out. . Commissioner Price asked what is being done with this report now that it is complete. Aaron Nelson said this has transformed their thinking. He said when choosing between a two or three story building, this shows that you can generate 40 percent more revenue by adding the third story. He said this has changed their view about the kind of development that is needed to generate the revenue to fund their schools and their government properly. 2. Ephesus Church Road-Fordham Boulevard Public Improvements Michael Talbert introduced Clarence Grier and said this item is a response to questions that came about after Chapel Hill's presentation on this project. Clarence Grier reviewed the following background information from the abstract: The Town of Chapel Hill at the March 27, 2014 Joint Meeting with the Board of County Commissioners presented an improvement project for the Ephesus Church Road — Fordham Boulevard area within the Town of Chapel Hill. In order to support the renewal of the Ephesus Fordham area, the Town of Chapel Hill must make investments in much needed traffic and stormwater capital improvements. The project would be financed with the use of Tax Increment Financing or Project Development Financing. Under this method of financing, economic development projects move forward by pledging the anticipated growth in tax base as a source of repayment. The theory is that the project being financed is enabling the tax growth and therefore the project is and will be self-financing because, if not for the project, the tax growth would not have occurred. The Town of Chapel Hill would like the County to participate in the Ephesus Fordham Renewal Project by pledging the lesser of 50% of the actual increment property tax revenues received or 50% of the actual annual debt service cost. The County could potentially benefit from participating with the Town of Chapel Hill from increased property and sales tax revenues. The budget impacts for the County would be committing an average of$385,612 over 18 years for a total of$6,941,017 for the project (Attachment C). This also takes in account the possible impact of adding approximately 450 new students in the Ephesus Fordham area of the Chapel Hill — Carrboro City Schools District (CHCCS) over an 18-year period that could increase the need for a new elementary and/or move up the timeline for Elementary #12 and Middle School #5 for CHCCS. Additionally, if a new high school and/or major additions have to be made to one of the existing CHCCS high schools to accommodate the projected increase in students, the additional debt service would reduce the net amount of property taxes received as result of the planned project improvements. Clarence Grier noted that the County has two school systems that are funded at 48.1 percent of the general fund revenue, and these were not taken into account. He noted that additional information has been included in attachment A, which shows the total cost of these improvements is $10.0 million ($8.8 million for traffic improvements and $1.2 million for stormwater). Michael Talbert said Chapel Hill has approved the re-zoning of these parcels. Chair Jacobs asked for more explanation of what is being asked of them and the time frame in which it is asked. Ken Pennoyer, Business Management Director for the Town of Chapel Hill, discussed the following financing and Repayment plan, as outlined in attachment A: Financing Plan The Town is planning on financing the Town Hall Renovation project and other CIP projects with debt. By combining the financing of these projects using two common forms of debt that the Town has used numerous times, the total cost of financing all of these projects will be reduced and can be completed on the timetable established for the Ephesus Fordham Project. The Projects Town Hall Repair & Renovation $ 900,000 High Priority CIP Projects 800,000 Ephesus Fordham: Traffic Improvements 8,800,000 Stormwater Capital 1,200,000 Total Ef Project 10,000,000 Total All Projects $ 11,700,000 The Debt Two-thirds General Obligation Bonds $ 1,700,000 Installment Financing 10,000,000 Total Planned Debt issuance $ 11,700,000 Repayment Plan Debt Management Fund: The portion of debt used for Town Hall and CIP will be repaid through the Debt Management Fund. The Debt Fund was established in 2009 with a dedicated property tax to provide a source of funds to pay off Town debt obligations. "Synthetic Tax Increment Financing (TIF)": The portion of the debt used for the Ephesus Fordham public improvements will be repaid by the incremental increase in tax revenues resulting from redevelopment. In other words, the redevelopment we are hoping to generate through the Ephesus Fordham Renewal Project will increase property tax receipts from the area. Those tax receipts, over and above the base level of tax receipts that existed prior to the project, will be dedicated to pay off the debt for the public improvements. Although this method of financing economic development projects is fairly common in North Carolina, it is the first time that the Town has used incremental tax receipts as a primary source of debt repayment. Synthetic versus "traditional" TIF: In 2004 the State Legislature approved Tax Increment Financing (aka: Project Development Financing) legislation that enabled local governments to finance economic development projects with a pledge of future additional (incremental) tax revenues from an established TIF district. Because of the cost, complexity and length of the process for approval there have only been two traditional TIFs approved in North Carolina in the last 10 years. Part of the reason for the unpopularity of traditional TIFs in North Carolina is the availability of an easier, faster and less expensive alternative. Many local governments in North Carolina have opted for installment financing that uses a physical asset as collateral and repayment from a tax increment to finance economic development projects. This accomplishes the same thing as the traditional TIF, but is less expensive (lower interest rate) and takes less time to issue. The Ephesus Fordham project does not have an asset that can be used as collateral for an installment financing and therefore we have planned to combine the financing with the Town Hall Renovation Project. By combining the projects in one financing the Town Hall property can be used as collateral for both projects. This practice of sharing collateral among projects is a common way of reducing the cost of borrowing for municipalities by providing the best possible security for installment debt. Backstop: There will be a time gap between when we issue the debt and when the redevelopment will begin to generate a tax increment sufficient to pay debt service. To the extent possible, we will structure the debt for the Ephesus Fordham Public Improvements to defer debt payments to match the anticipated timing of incremental tax revenues. However, it may be impossible to avoid a gap between the tax increment and the debt service payments in the early years of the project. The Debt Management Fund has sufficient balance to cover the mismatch in the timing of available tax increment and we plan on using the Debt Management Fund to backstop debt service on the Ephesus Fordham Public Improvements portion of the debt. Any amounts used would be restored to the Debt Fund once the tax increment surpasses what is needed for debt service. One of the possible consequences of using the debt fund for this purpose is the delay of planned capital expenditures such as the Public Safety Facility and the Transfer Station. Stormwater Management Costs In addition to the $1.2 million of initial investment in stormwater facilities to serve the Ephesus Fordham Area, the Town is planning to establish a Municipal Service District to finance additional improvements and ongoing stormwater management costs. The planned Municipal Service District will impose an annual property tax of 4 cents. Ken Pennoyer said with public improvements in this area they are looking to finance through installment financing which will be paid back in the incremental pay back of property taxes. He said in order to make this financing more solid, they are requesting that Orange County give back some of the incremental taxes. He said the County would pay no more than half of the increment and no more than half of the debt service ($800,000 /year which would be $400,000/year for the cost to Orange County). Ken Pennoyer said the town has passed the first hurdle of approving the zoning, and this will help begin the actual development project. He said the town is looking to put together the debt funding package and the repayment plan, to include both the Town and the County pledging those tax increments. He said the Town is taking the risk of a shortfall in the tax increments should the projects be delayed or the tax increments not come in on the predicted timeframe. He said the Town will pay for the debt service through its debt management fund. Chair Jacobs said based on this model the Town is not asking Orange County to lay out any funding up front, and the County would only be responsible for a portion of moneys that would potentially be generated. Ken Pennoyer said the maximum would be 50 percent of any additional incremental tax revenue that comes in. He said a current baseline would be set, and anything after the re- zoning would constitute an increment for the purposes of calculating the tax increment. Michael Talbert said he has discussed this with Roger Stancil. He said the County does have a re-evaluation in 2017 but that would have no impact. He asked for information about the type of document that would need to be approved, and how this would impact the County. Bob Jessup said the County may only have a resolution of intent to consider this appropriation of incremental taxes annually; the nature of the obligation would not change if there was an actual paper contract. He said the commitment would be expressed as a renewing annual commitment that would occur during the budget season. He said it is very easy to describe the nature of the commitment. He said the other benefit with the County's participation, is that it may allow the overall financing term to be squeezed down a bit. Michael Talbert asked for a breakdown of the anticipated bond schedule and whether this would count against the County's debt limit or credit rating. Bob Jessup said this would not count as outstanding County debt; but there would be some sort of note disclosure of the commitment, and the parties would all know. Chair Jacobs noted that this project has been approved by the town and at this point the County is being asked for support of the proposal through a partnership. He said before this reaches a decision point, it would be brought before the public. He said there may be differences of opinion regarding the merits of how this was re-zoned, but that is not the issue before the Board. Chair Jacobs said the town wants the County to be on board as quickly as possible, but they also need to be comfortable before moving forward on this as a decision item. He would like to make sure there is time for due consideration. Commissioner Rich asked about the type of financing, which has been called tax increment financing and project development financing. Ken Pennoyer said this is referred to as synthetic tax increment financing; the development financing refers to financing done through state statutory tax increment financing. He said this is a different model that is based on an installment financing that is secured by an asset. He said this is being combined with the financing for the newly renovated Town Hall, which will act as collateral for the asset. He said the synthetic tax increment financing is preferred over the state statutory because it uses a standard method, which looks more solid because it is backed by an asset. Commissioner Rich said the way the tax base is being projected is based on how the Town sees the project growing, and then the Town Hall is being used as a backup asset. She asked if this is correct. Ken Pennoyer said based on re-zoning, staff has come up with a likely development scenario with two phases. He said the first phase is based on actual development plans, and the future phase is based on what the Town believes the zoning will enable and what can happen based on current knowledge of the market. He said the financing plan utilizes the installment financing combined with Town Hall to provide collateral. Commissioner Rich referred to a similar project in Bloomington that was very successful. She asked Dwight Bassett to comment on this. Dwight Bassett said Bloomington, Indiana, as well as Asheville and Carrboro, N.C. all have synthetic Tax Increment Financing (TIF) projects that are very successful. He said in Bloomington, the base value of the land was estimated at $1 million, and after development it was $10 million. He said the taxes on the $9 million difference were pledged back in to pay for roads, lighting and improvements. He said they got back more than the amount spent, and a TIF was put over the entirety of the downtown and it generates new revenue to be put back into infrastructure. He said there were similar projects in Asheville and in Carrboro with the development of 300 East Main. Commissioner Pelissier asked for clarification on the number of new residential units there will be. She would also like to know about the phasing of the commercial portion. Dwight Bassett said there are two developments that will happen in the first four years of the development. He said 235 residential units and 15,000 square feet of retail space will be built on the former movie theater site on Elliott Road. He said the former Colony apartments, which currently has 109 units, is projected to grow to 175 units. He said the residential is coming first because the market plays a tremendous role in development, and multifamily housing is the easiest of all commercial tax based projects to finance. He believes the retail and office space will likely happen faster than projected. He said the projections have been conservative because there are some issues with existing leases. Commissioner Price asked who the Town is expecting to attract to this new re- development. She is thinking about the school projections. Dwight Bassett said based on other projects, they would be looking at about 100 students. He said there is a strong population of residents in their 20's who come for school and then leave after graduation because the Town does not meet their lifestyle choices. He said many of these residents do not want to be homeowners, but the desire is to be in a place where they can live, work and play. He believes that half of the residential units would be for that demographic of residents aged 20-40, and the goal would be to create a live, work and play district. He said the hope is that this will stop some of the brain drain of folks leaving to seek employment elsewhere. Commissioner Price asked how the flooding issues will be mitigated when adding the additional development. Dwight Bassett said there needs to be a higher level of standard to manage the quality of the impervious services. He said $1 million has been set aside and the town has applied for a $15 million grant to look at the overall storm water master plan and the flood basin. Bob Jessup said the stormwater staff from Chapel Hill has pointed out that almost the entire district is already impervious, and this will not increase the amount of impervious surface by more than 1-2 percent. He said the goal will be to improve on what is already there. Commissioner Price asked if there will be any increase to the greenspace. Dwight Bassett said zoning code requires that 20 percent of each new development be set aside for public amenity space. He said staff plans to connect to the greenway trail system. He said there is an area behind Whole Foods that cannot be developed and staff has asked for this space to allow for creation of additional greenspace. Commissioner McKee asked how staff arrived at the figure of$1.2 million for stormwater capital. He said this will not build a lot of infrastructure. Dwight Bassett said this original budget was for design cost and the building of two retention ponds. He said the approach changed, and the on-site stormwater retention was prioritized over the public amenity side. He said the allocated money is intended for site by site future improvements. Commissioner McKee said that does not address the problem of that area being flooded today. He said this project may not increase the flooding, but it will not decrease it. He questioned whether there might be access to additional money or grants to mitigate the problems in that area. Dwight Bassett said this was part of the reason for the grant applications. He said the Chapel Hill Stormwater Master plan is the most important thing that can be done in implementing new infrastructure in the flood basin that feeds the district. He said this is more important than anything that can be done inside the district. He said staff will be looking at measures that can be taken upstream to reduce the water coming in to the area. He said the build out estimates show only a 6-8 percent impervious increase in 15 years, and with the new systems being put in place, he feels this will be balanced out. Commissioner McKee said his concern centers around the idea that a greater likelihood of continuing flooding problems will adversely affect the viability of additional commercial development. He asked if this has been considered. Dwight Bassett said Eastgate Shopping Center is in the floodplain and anything built there must be flood proof according to town code. He said beyond that, the desire is to improve the condition of the basin where the water is coming from. He said once the stormwater management plan is adopted, it will counterbalance the negative impacts on the district and downstream. Commissioner Gordon referred to page 9 in their abstract materials. She asked about the operating costs. She asked about the services that would be financed by the County, other than education, such as social services and Emergency Services. She said there will be 1450 residential units, but she would like to know the resident population, and the cost of the services. Clarence Grier said this was not factored in to the original analysis, but it can be factored in now, and an update can be provided. Commissioner Gordon said Orange County has to fund the schools. She said impact fees will be coming in and there will be costs, so money will be going out. She said the fiscal year 2014-2018 lists 300 students, and this is the approximate cost of half of an elementary school, which is about $17 million. She said there are another 45 students listed in 2019- 2023. She said elementary school #12 is listed in 2021 for $34 million. She said you can look at this according to incremental costs, or when the new school will have to be built. She is trying to figure out what kind of costs have to be applied against the total of$5 million coming in, in terms of services. Clarence Grier said $5 million would be the operational costs of the increased enrollment. He said staff would anticipate that the increase in enrollment would move elementary 12 up, and would potentially mean a new middle or high school. He said this would move the capital plan forward as a current expense. He said, as it stands right now, construction of Elementary 12 would need to begin in 2018. Commissioner Gordon said by 2024 if the CIP and SAPFO were followed, there would be a new elementary school for $34 million, a high school addition for $23 million, and a middle school. She said these are high costs and she is trying to figure out from a business perspective what the number would be at the end of 2033 if it is not $5 million. Clarence Grier noted that the new middle school would cost $46 million. Commissioner Gordon would like to see an analysis of these costs, and an answer to which is higher - revenue or expenditures. Commissioner porosin referred to page 7 of attachment b. He said fiscal year one shows that there would be no increment, and Orange County would have no payment. Clarence Grier said yes. Commissioner porosin asked if this would carry forward if any of the projected numbers in year 2 or 3 were not reached. Clarence Grier said yes. Commissioner porosin referred to page 9 and asked if the increased funding for education is based exclusively on the per-pupil cost for 300 students. Clarence Grier said yes Commissioner porosin asked about Clarence Grier's earlier point about 48 percent of the budget going to schools. He asked if that increase is part of the $980,000. Clarence Grier it is part of this analysis too. Commissioner porosin asked what the $980,000 represents. Clarence Grier said this number represents the 48.1 percent, plus the increase in school enrollment. Commissioner porosin said he would like to see that broken out. Chair Jacobs asked why the bottom of the face page lists 450 new students Clarence Grier said 300 was the initial allotment of students anticipated to be added to the Chapel Hill Carrboro City School System (CHCCS), and then the number goes up incrementally, ending with 450 students. Chair Jacobs said he has great difficulty with projections, and all of this based on projections. He said they are talking about 20 percent amenity space, and he asked if part of this space can used for a new school site, such as an elementary school. He said a site is needed and the project is much more feasible if the County already has one. Dwight Bassett said most of the site has been purchased and is owned for re- development. He said there is adjacent property on Legion Road that may be sold. He said the majority of the parcels are small. He said the student generation rates from the study are much lower than what the County is projecting. He said if this development is similar to 140 West and East 54 developments, the rates will be much lower. He said the projection is 100 children for the 1,500 units. Chair Jacobs said the County is reviewing the student generation rates. He feels there is a misunderstanding about the site size needed that could accommodate an urban school, and a couple of acres are sufficient. Chair Jacobs said he has concerns about committing to participation in an area that has physical problems such as the upstream water management system. He asked if there had been any conversation about dedicating incremental revenues to this issue in case the grants are not approved. He would like to see the Board could see the Stormwater Management Master Plan, and he feels that having revenue dedicated to this public safety issue is a pre-requisite for County participation. Dwight Bassett said stormwater staff could come speak to the Board. He knows that the basin is a priority in the master plan. Commissioner Pelissier echoed Commissioner Gordon's earlier comments regarding the need for a full accounting of all increased costs. She questioned what the effect will be on debt capacity if schools need to be moved up in the Capital Investment Plan (CIP). Commissioner Pelissier asked if the County portion of the debt would be higher if the road improvements cost more than projected Ken Pennoyer said at this point public improvements are being limited to $10 million. Commissioner Pelissier asked if Chapel Hill would absorb the difference if the amount is higher. Ken Pennoyer said the Town would either scale back the project or find a different source of revenue. Dwight Bassett said these costs are projected based on road projects that have actually occurred in this region. He said the projects have a 15 percent contingency in place for engineering and cost overruns, so staff is comfortable with the numbers. Commissioner Pelissier asked what the town's contingency plan would be if the County funds less than 50 percent. Ken said the town would use their debt management fund if the commitment fell short. Commissioner Pelissier asked if staff is familiar with any similar projects like this across the state. Michael Talbert said he is not that he is aware of, other than a large theater in Granville County that failed. Commissioner Pelissier clarified that she is asking about interlocal agreements, not the Synthetic TIF. Bob Jessup said he is not aware of any projects that are based on the tax increment but there are examples where a County agrees to make money available to a local government. He said he can work to come up with something more concrete on this. Commissioner Pelissier said she is talking about a project specifically like this one. Michael Talbert said is not aware of any examples for road improvements and stormwater projects. Commissioner Price asked about the anticipated impact on existing housing in this area. Dwight Bassett said many homes in this area are being rented, and staff believes that increasing the supply of multi-family housing will create new opportunities for home ownership in those adjacent neighborhoods. He said staff thinks the value of these neighborhoods will grow dramatically, and the development will make it a desirable area to live. Commissioner Price said her concern is affordability. She said if the value of current property goes up, rent and costs would increase, and many people may be displaced. Dwight Bassett said urban areas are beginning to realize that in order to meet market demand, they need to look at micro units. He said staff has had that conversation with the developers about including smaller, market rate, affordable units for those residents under that median income category. Commissioner Price asked if he is admitting that some people will be displaced. Dwight Bassett said the Colony units are actually substandard, and staff believed they can provide a better product at a similar market rate that will meet that need. Commissioner Price said she is fine with making the housing decent and safe, but she is concerned with the affordability. Dwight Bassett said this is a long term issue that needs to be looked at, but staff believes that increasing the housing supply in Chapel Hill will do more longer term to stabilize the housing rate. He said the growth has not risen to meet the demand in Chapel Hill. Commissioner Prices asked if there will be affordable units. Dwight Bassett said the BCBS site will meet the 15 percent standard for affordable housing. He said four sections of the district on the South side of Elliott Road have been withheld for rezoning and staff is considering options for giving density bonuses for including 10 percent affordable housing for new buildings. He said staff will be meeting with property owners to look at market conditions and whether that land is buildable. Commissioner Rich said Chapel Hill can only do what Greenbridge has done if the apartments are being purchased not rented. She said the development of Glen Lennox is not far away and the developer is very dedicated to affordable housing. Commissioner Rich said the Board should always keep in mind that if there is going to be 450 students they will need more schools, and those projections should be included in the CIP. She is concerned with the fact that there are different numbers coming from different places regarding student projections. She asked where the numbers come from. Clarence Grier said the information was provided by the schools based on Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (SAPFO). Commissioner Rich said won't there already be students in the school district that might be moving into one of these apartments. She would like to have this information in the packet. Michael Talbert said the extra information can be brought. He said the figure is .3 students per household in a multi-family setting. Craig Benedict said the SAPFO numbers are broken into elementary, middle, and high school. He said all of them together would equal something in the .2 range. He said it is important to know that these numbers were based on multi-family units in Chapel Hill back 20 years ago, and the new study looks at new buildings over the past 10 years. He said if new numbers come from this study, then those figures may be more realistic. He said the current projections were done by consultants based on information available now. Commissioner McKee said Chapel Hill approved the plan on Monday night. He asked for clarification on where this project stands now. Dwight Bassett said the Town approved the form based zoning to allow the re- development to occur. He said there had been previous steps and resolutions regarding financing. Ken Pennoyer said the council has passed a reimbursement resolution allowing the town to reimburse itself from the proceeds of debt issued in the future, so that the Town Hall and the Ephesus improvement projects can be funded. Commissioner McKee said the abstract notes that there is funding available to cover the gap for the first fiscal year; and he heard the earlier comment that if costs come in higher there is funding to cover that. He understands that the County's participation is not required to make this project possible. He asked if this is correct. Ken Pennoyer said if the County does not participate it would be make the town's financing weaker, but they would still move forward. He said without County participation, the town's coverage would be marginal and break even. Commissioner McKee clarified that the development will be moving forward regardless of County participation in the financing and Ken Pennoyer said that was correct. Commissioner McKee said that answers his thought that the increased expenses and revenue will be there regardless of County participation. Commissioner porosin said this proposal has a 20 year term. He asked if any agreement that is adopted would have some sort of provision or relief valve built in to allow for renegotiation if the project has to be scaled back. Bob Jessup said this is based on whatever the parties want to put into the contract. He said the County's obligation will be put in terms of a lesser portion of A or B, and it would not strike him that there would be a need to pull out. He said if the County were to say that participation is based on a requirement that the project include certain things, then a schedule of payments could be included. Commissioner porosin said collaboration is important, and this is economic development for the County. However, he feels that there are some competing interests, and the County is not getting clear answers. He would like to know how this housing is being marketed. He said it sounds as if this will be marketed to a demographic that does not have children, and while this dissolves the school question, it raises a host of issue about socio- economic diversity and affordability. He said the answers to these questions are important. He said one of the biggest draws for this area is the school system, and he thinks that their general skepticism about these student projections is real. He would like more answers to these concerns. Commissioner Gordon said after the financial analysis comes in, the Board can look at partnering with the towns. She said she would be interested in building a partnership. She said she had read that the town was considering forming a districted and she was unclear whether this was for stormwater, maintenance or utilities. She asked about this. Ken Pennoyer said the proposal is to create a stormwater taxing district and to charge 4 cents for all of the occupants in that district in order for that money to go toward maintenance of stormwater facilities Commissioner Gordon asked what the $1.2 million is for, versus the 4 cents. Ken said the $1.2 million would be for major capital improvements in the area, and then the district tax would be an annual charge for ongoing maintenance. Commissioner Gordon asked when the stormwater plan is going to be approved. Dwight Bassett said some regulations are already part of the zoning that was passed on Monday night, but there is additional information to be presented in the coming meetings. Chair Jacobs said he has not heard any objection from the Board regarding the idea of participation. He reviewed the following list of items that the Board would like to see: 1) An update of the full cost of County services, including the speed up in school facilities 2) Stormwater Management Master Plan 3) Comparable arrangements/projects between other governments 4) Updated student generation rates 5) Detailed copy of the plan Chair Jacobs said there were also questions about proportionality as it relates to the cost and the County's expected funding. He said there were also questions about the marketing plan for the housing. He said the Board needs at least one or two more discussions before entertaining public comments. He said the Board is not here to judge the project, as it has been approved by the government with the authority to do so. He said the Board is just going to try and address its concerns. Michael Talbert asked for an explanation of the timeline. Ken Pennoyer said the Town will be working on the calendar next week, and the debt issuance will happen in the early fall. Dwight Bassett said staff anticipates the first four roads could be out to bid by October and construction could begin by late fall, early winter. He said the next design phase would immediately follow this. He said the goal would be to complete the road projects inside of two years. Commissioner Gordon said she hopes the plans will include an explanation of form based code and how it involves the County. Chair Jacobs said he would like Steve Brantley to look at the 4 cent stormwater tax and how it would affect affordability. 3. Proposed Satellite Tax Office in Chapel Hill Michael Talbert said this project started about one year ago and staff was looking at ways to create a satellite tax office in Chapel Hill to provide a better level of service to those citizens. He said as the process progressed staff had an opportunity to talk with the Town since they were renovating their town hall anyway due to the flood. He said if this moves forward, he would anticipate the possibility of a long term lease of space in town hall. Dwane Brinson reviewed the following information, as contained in the abstract: The Orange County Tax Office (hereinafter "tax office") has a single location in Hillsborough, NC, in the County's Gateway Center above Weaver Street Market. The Town of Chapel Hill, in its Town Hall, currently serves as an additional collection point for residents. However, no property tax assessment services are provided at the Chapel Hill location, a demand that has continued to grow over the years. This memorandum explains the proposal and scope of services to be provided as part of a proposed co-location agreement at Town Hall between Orange County and the Town of Chapel Hill. BACKGROUND In early 2013 Ken Pennoyer, Business Management Director for the Town of Chapel Hill, and I began conversations about offering property tax assessment services as a joint effort between the two local governments. At the time these conversations began, the Town had just been displaced from Town Hall and was considering an immediate short-term alternative for its first- floor services, including tax collections. Sites were visited and a rental survey was completed by staff to try and determine the best, suitable location for a full-service tax office in Chapel Hill. This process began with Mr. Frank Clifton, former Orange County Manager, and it eventually expanded to include all appropriate staff and managers once information had been gathered. As an end result, the Town and County agreed that the best option would be to co-locate at Town Hall in Chapel Hill. At the time this recommendation was made, Town staff was working with an architect to redesign the first floor of Town Hall. The timing presented an opportunity for the Town and County to provide a proposal that conveniently adds another set of services to the Chapel Hill, Carrboro and surrounding population at little additional cost. PROPOSAL With Town Hall having accepted property tax payments for years, we feel that adding property tax assessment services to the same location will create a synergistic affect. Departments to be located within the first floor of Town Hall, such as stormwater management, permitting, etc., already work very closely with the tax office. Co-locating with this core group of departments will only strengthen the accuracy of shared data, reduce transmittal errors and improve efficiency of operations for both organizations. One of the most important aspects of this proposal is that the tax office, being located at town hall in Chapel Hill, would be conveniently located to assist walk-in and call-in taxpayers with questions and forms. Following are a few examples. We currently do not have a Chapel Hill presence to assist with tax assistance applications. Granted, we typically perform timely presentations at the Seymour Center, but having someone conveniently located in Chapel Hill to assist with filling out and explaining the requirements for tax assistance applications would have a tremendous impact. Another aspect of our business practice that exists only is Hillsborough is in-person property tax assessment explanations and appeals. This includes business property, individual personal property, motor vehicles and real estate. Often taxpayers wish to sit down face to face and discuss the valuation, and a Chapel Hill location would make these services more accessible. Lastly, taxpayers currently can turn in their annual property tax listing form only in Hillsborough. With a Chapel Hill location, staff would be available not only to receive listing forms, but to explain and ensure all needed information is present. With our impending 2017 countywide revaluation, having real estate appraisers located in Chapel Hill will be incredibly useful. Considering this is a full list and measure revaluation, and that staff is leaving information postcards at each residence, having staff conveniently located to assist is crucial. Staffing Providing property tax assessment services in Chapel Hill will require reorganization of responsibilities and positions. Staffing for the Chapel Hill location, tentatively, will include: • One tax listing clerk—to support tax listing, personal property appraisal and tax assistance questions from residents. • One real property appraiser—to support real estate questions/appeals, and to save on transportation costs for an appraiser working the southern Orange County area. • One motor vehicle appraiser—to support vehicle tax appeals and questions. • One floating management position —to support difficult questions/situations and provide overall management for resident staff; rotating management positions will include: Tax Administrator, Deputy Tax Assessor, Personal Property Appraisal Manager, Chief Appraiser and Administrative Officer, each rotating one day per week. Office Space Four work stations at Town Hall would be needed for this arrangement. The four work stations would be occupied at all times unless one were to be out sick or on vacation. It also is recommended that the property tax assessment staff at Town Hall have access to a conference room as needed. Meetings occur often, and taxpayers sometimes request a private setting to discuss details of their situation confidentially. Such occurrences could be, and often are, impromptu in nature. As the tax office will be allocating only property tax assessment staff, and since the Town already carries out the property tax collection function, this proposal suggests that collection functions continue exclusively under the Town's direction at Town Hall. Only property tax assessment staff will be present at Town Hall and will not be able to assist in collection functions, i.e. receiving property tax payments. Of course, property tax assessment staff will be present to answer questions of taxpayers coming into the office, but these positions will be unable to assist in directly collecting revenue. SUMMARY Supplementing the current practice of property tax collection in Chapel Hill with property tax assessment services, we feel, will have a positive effect on intergovernmental relations. It co- locates departments that routinely work closely together and creates an environment that should improve accuracy in data transmittal and tax records. Additionally, it affords southern Orange County residents a convenient option of not only paying taxes, but to ask questions of the tax assessment process, annual forms to be filed and property tax assistance programs. This proposal would co-locate this service and would use existing staff. He said they would have three positions and one floating supervisor. The town would continue the tax collection service and the county would provide the rest Michael Talbert said staff would work with the town to negotiate a market rate lease for a minimum of 5 years with renewable options. He said the town manager is aware of this, and it would need to be vetted with both units of government. Commissioner porosin asked for information on the market rate. Michael Talbert said this would be somewhere in the $15 - $17 range, but the square footage has not been determined yet Ken Pennoyer said this would be an open office layout with four 6 x 6 work stations, and five smaller conference rooms. He said the common area would be split based on the square footage of the actual work stations. He said the meeting rooms would be on a first come first serve basis. Chair Jacobs asked if the County would be paying rent for access to all five meeting rooms or just one. Ken Pennoyer said they would have to agree on a formula for the use of the common area. He said there would also be a large lobby with computers and kiosks for customers, as well as a reception area. He said a formula would be created based on the actual work station area the rest of the common area. Commissioner Pelissier asked how many staff will be left in Hillsborough. Dwane Brinson said there are 39 full time employees in the tax office, so that would leave about 35 in Hillsborough and 4 in Chapel Hill. Commissioner Gordon referred to the 3 employees, plus one floater supervisor in Chapel Hill and asked if this meant there will be no new employees. Dwane Brinson said yes. He said the only bottleneck in the Hillsborough tax office is the collections areas. He said the ability to explain things in person will make things much more efficient. Commissioner Gordon asked for more of a ballpark cost on the rental. Dwane Brinson said they do not know the dimensions yet. Chair Jacobs said this will all be included in the decision item. Commissioner Gordon asked if there is room in Town Hall for this. Dwane Brinson said yes. He said there was not space in the old building, but there is room in the newly renovated area of Town Hall. Commissioner Price said this is a great idea but she has concern about the parking. Ken Pennoyer said parking has been problematic at Town Hall, but more spaces have now been designated for customers. He said staff may have to come up with alternative options for employees, such as parking at the Wallace Deck. He said the parking for customers is free now, and it will continue to be in the future. Dwane Brinson said this office is located on the bus route, and this is great for customers. Commissioner Rich said this is a great idea. She asked if the equipment in Hillsborough will be moved or if it will need to be duplicated. Dwane Brinson said since these positions will be transferring from Chapel Hill, he assumes there may be some potential to move resources. Commissioner Rich said the idea of having a tax office where you live is a great one. Chair Jacobs is supportive of this idea, but he knows there have been problems in the past with adequate supervision of satellite offices. He hopes the supervisor will keep this in mind. Chair Jacobs said a value can't really be placed on convenience, but it may be useful to have some way to track the increased in efficiency in tax collections. He said this would show that there is sufficient return on the investment. Dwane Brinson said staff will come up with some measures to show progress. He said this could be tracking the increase in listing forms and tax assistance applications. Michael Talbert said customer service is the main benefit. He is not sure there will be any increase in revenue, as there is already a very high collection rate, and there is no new collection service being added. Michael Talbert said they will proceed. 4. Continuation of Review and Discussion of the Manaqer's Recommended FY 2014- 19 Capital Investment Plan (CIP) Paul Laughton said tonight's item is to provide follow up information from the April 10tn CIP meeting. He went through the hand outs included in the packets. He said Attachment A is a discussion of the Blackwood Farm Park. He said the original CIP included an agricultural center and a parks operations base for a total of$6 million. He noted that all changes in the documents are shown in yellow. He said this attachment shows the agricultural center was taken out, and only a permanent parks operation base is included, for a new total of$1.2 million. He referred to a site plan that is also included and he reviewed the different components of the layout. Paul Laughton said staff is just asking for comments. He said attachment B also shows a scenario for an environment and agriculture building on Revere Road, since this has been taken out of Blackwood Farm. He said staff is happy to prepare other options if the Board has any suggestions. Commissioner porosin asked for an explanation of the $147,000 listed in year one. Paul Laughton said this includes trail constructions, restrooms, parking issues, equipment, and activities as part of a limited opening. Dave Stancil said staff is looking at trying to get this facility open on a limited basis by transferring some existing parks capital funds from other projects. He said this would include building trails, improving and adding to the parking area, improving the existing driveway, and possibly creating a picnic shelter, as well as signage throughout the site. He said the vision is to have this open 2-3 days per week. Paul Laughton said the next project is outlined in Attachment B with the deconstruction and reconstruction of an environment and agricultural center. He said this shows the estimated project budget for a 15,000 square foot main building, as well as 2,000 square feet of covered storage and yard area. He said this shows the intent of having a building there where the operations and work at the current building can continue undisturbed during the construction process. He said deconstruction of the old building would happen after the new structure was built. He said the original estimates for this location looked only at keeping the existing structure as it is now, and doing repairs on the roof, HVAC and parking area to extend the life expectancy. The cost for this was listed as $1.4 million in year 4. He said this new construction project was also put in year 4 to show a comparison, and it comes to $3.38 million. Commissioner McKee said the use of the term "life expectancy" bothers him when used for a building. He feels the focus should be on the condition of the building and the necessary repairs to keep it going. He said there is a danger to assigning a life expectancy on a building because you are setting up an expectation that it will be replaced. Chair Jacobs asked about the size of the Revere Road parcel. Jeff Thompson said it is 4 acres and there are 3 structures on the property: Revere Road Center, Station One, and a storage facility. Chair Jacobs said he would like to see a full analysis of what the agricultural center could be on this site. He said there were recommendations and ideas that have not been incorporated in this plan. He would like to see if this could be more than just a building, and he would like to do a more comprehensive look at this property and the potential interface between interior and exterior areas. He feels that this is an opportunity that should be taken advantage of. He said the best use of the old carwash area would be to have it open for other agricultural related uses, instead of storage. Commissioner Gordon said she would like to hear from David Stancil what he feels would be appropriate for this building. David Stancil said this location has proven to be a good location for the agricultural community. He said the building has the capability to continue to serve in that capacity, but it is intriguing to look at whether the site could be built on without taking down the original structure. He thinks the idea of keeping the agricultural agencies together is a good idea. Commissioner Gordon said there are also all of the offices, in addition to the agricultural space. She asked if the building built for $3.38 million would be intended to have the same functions. Jeff Thompson said staff has met extensively with the all of the agricultural center occupants. He said the space is inefficient and redundant, with County storage right in the middle of it. He said there was discussion of the convenience of shared customer service areas, individual partition areas, secured uses, and built in growth, and this came out to be about a 17,000 square foot building. He referred to page 8 of the abstract, and said 15,000 square feet of the center would be interior space, and 2,000 would be outside demonstration area. Commissioner Gordon said this agricultural center Commissioner Jacobs was talking about was something different. Jeff Thompson said the interior space would remain the same, but the exterior space that interfaces with the larger acreage is different and makes a lot of sense. Commissioner Gordon said there are two different things being looked at here, one is the reconfigured office space for the agencies, and the other is the conception of an agricultural center. Dave Stancil said there is a lot of interest in this center due to the idea of a large meeting area. Commissioner Gordon said there are two different concepts being looked at and it may be good to talk about phasing or even two different buildings. She said it make sense to her to do a new building. Paul Laughton reviewed Attachment C regarding the new jail project. He said there is a total price of$30 million budgeted for design and construction. He said the major construction was to be in year 4 with a 250 bed capacity. He said there was discussion of breaking the project up into segments or pods. He said this is what is outlined on page 10. He said $500,000 was kept for design and professional services in year 2 and 3, and the year 4 construction was kept, looking at a revised plan. He said there is an expansion concept shown on pages 12 and 13. He said this contains 3 different segments or pods with a wide range of beds and capacity. He said the new amount of$23.76 million in construction is basically for a jail with a 216 bed capacity. He said this 216 bed concept could also be done in pods. Chair Jacobs asked Cheryl Young to come up to microphone since she is the support staff for the Jail Alternatives Work Group. He said there has been some discussion about the size of the pods. Cheryl Young said this is extremely preliminary, as it relates to the pod concept. She said there is still a lot of time to work on this. She said 221 is the topped out sum of 140 local inmates plus the current contracted 75 inmates. Chair Jacobs asked if Sheriff Pendergrass had any comments about the jail concept. Sherriff Pendergrass said this project will need to go forward. He said the daily capacity last year was 130 inmates per day, and there was an average of 65 federal inmates daily last year. He said there will need to be at least a 250 bed jail in the near future due to the impact from state decisions. Commissioner McKee said he hopes staff is working with the sheriff's department on the actual layout and design to make sure it works on a daily basis on the ground. John Sellew said the consultant has been working with them on the preliminary sketches. Commissioner Gordon said the state may be changing requirements and she asked if the prisoners will have to go to another County if there is not enough space. John Sellew said the only alternative if there were not capacity would be to farm these inmates out to other counties and pay whatever price is being charged. Commissioner Gordon asked about the advantages and disadvantages of taking federal inmates. She said her understanding is that the average net income to Orange County for this relationship is $268,000 in net revenue. She said the capital cost is $7.5 million. She said if you divide this out, it takes 28 years to reach $7.5 million. She asked for an explanation of the economy of taking federal prisoners. Sheriff said he does not know that this can be explained. He said over the last 30 years the County has probably raised about $60 million from the federal government that could have been put into an account to build two jails. He said there is a jail with plenty of room and people pay to stay there. He said the only thing the County has to pay for is the inmates being there. He said the federal government pays for the rest. He said the federal government has renovated the jail two times. Commissioner Gordon said she wanted to understand this as it relates to the discussion of increased capacity and whether to build more space. She said they may not have the full information here in terms of all of the benefits and burdens. Commissioner Gordon said this started out as a $30 million jail and then there was discussion of doing it in modules. She said the capacity is down to 216, but it still costs $26 million for the core facility, which doesn't save a lot. Cheryl Young said there have been periods of time where the jail is at full capacity with local inmates. She said the federal inmates are taken when there is space for them, and it is a way to pay for making certain there is enough space for local inmates. She said it basically pays for you to have additional capacity when you need it. Commissioner Gordon said when you modularize and reduce to 216 instead of the full number you don't save that much money, and she asked why. Cheryl Young said she try to find out that information and send it out. Chair Jacobs said this is being worked on by the consultant. He said the whole idea is that costs can be staged by doing the pods. He said the idea is that some of the cost of a full build out can be avoided at first, since full capacity won't be needed right away. John Sellew said the core facility has to be built to withstand expansion. He said to keep in mind that other counties will be affected by potential legislation as well and they may not be able to take Orange County inmates. Chair Jacobs said the core can be thought of like Carrboro High School. Commissioner Gordon referred to page 10 and the capital budget booklet. She said the 5 year total for the proposed jail is $30 million, and then the other document lists a total of $29.4 million. She does not understand these numbers when you are going down from 250 to 216. She would like to understand those costs. Paul Laughton said the $29.4 million includes $2.8 million in debt service. Commissioner Gordon said it would be helpful to get a break down. Commissioner Pelissier said asked about the length of the contracts for the federal inmates. John Sellew said this is a 5 year contract. Sheriff Pendergrass said the current contract is beginning its third year. Commissioner Pelissier said she cannot believe it would only cost $4 million to build two more pods. Jeff Thompson said the consultant's charge now is to look at this number and to outline the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) stipulations to help the County write that specification. He said once a designer is selected, the details on the programming and the cost will matriculate. He said that would be the focus of the next 12 months. Commissioner Rich asked if anything will be done in the building process with newer technology such as solar and thermal technology. Jeff Thompson said Orange County's principle of high performance building standards will be implemented. He said the site is flat and there is an ability to analyze several technologies in the jail construction and operations field. Commissioner Rich suggested looking at water re-use. Jeff Thompson said staff has had success with solar thermal hot water, and geothermal systems. He said all of these things will be considered. Chair Jacobs said one factor in the capacity discussion, is the jail alternatives group. He said the County can work with judges, district attorneys, public defenders, and the mental health community. He said there are a lot of alternatives to incarceration. He said he hopes that when this comes forward to the Commissioners it will have some positive impact on the jail population. Chair Jacobs said the Board will be getting more refined numbers, and that is part of what the consultant is hired to do. Commissioner Gordon thanked Sheriff Pendergrass for being creative financially over the years in defraying their expenses. She thanked him for his service over the years. Paul Laughton referred to said Attachment D, which shows the impact the scenarios of Attachment A, B, and C and how the debt service is affected. He said out to year 5, the County was at 14.42 percent debt service as a percent of general fund budget. He said these new scenarios decrease that slightly to 14.35 percent. He said staff will update the debt service for the June 10 meeting to reflect the items approved on May 8th related to the community center. He said there will also be an update to the debt service related to the article 46 sales tax. He said the manager's recommended operating budget has increased a bit, and this raises the debt capacity, which is 15 percent of the operating budget. Clarence Grier said the manager's recommended budget will increase substantially and the debt capacity will go up approximately $2.8 million. He said the total additional amount of debt that can be issued this year is approximately $18.4 million. He said the possible bond referendum would get them closer to the affordability mentioned at the Board retreat, without a tax increase. Paul Laughton said there were two other issues that came up and they are included in the packet. He said Attachment E on page 17 shows the debt service on the Sportsplex, as requested by Commissioner Gordon. He said Attachment F provides information on County wireless access. Commissioner McKee asked if staff is factoring in the possible increase in interest rates on the debt service. Paul Laughton said yes. Clarence Grier said he is hopeful that the County's interest rates would stay the same or go lower over the next 5 or 6 years. Commissioner Gordon said the CHCCS sent out a memo on April 22nd to request $750,000 to start working on planning for renovation projects, in advance of the possible bond referendum. She said if this works out, it could delay building a new school. She would like to see a scenario to show how this could be incorporated. Commissioner Gordon said she would like to know what it would cost to allow people to access one agenda item at a time instead of downloading the entire agenda packet. Commissioner Gordon asked if roll carts have been purchased for rural areas. Michael Talbert said these have not been purchased, and they are in the proposed budget. He said these have been scaled down to 7000 roll carts instead of 13,000. Commissioner Gordon said the Eubanks Road Center is included in the Solid Waste Convenience Center (SWCC) cost, and she asked if this is capital cost or operating cost. Michael Talbert said it would be both. He said the renovation costs have gone up to $2.2 million and the debt service would be factored into the operating cost. Commissioner Gordon said if the County is talking with their partners about all of the solid waste issues, she wonders if they should they hold back on committing to renovations to the Eubanks SWCC until these conversations are done. Michael Talbert said the manager's recommendation is to go ahead and move forward. He said the improvements at Walnut Grove have made it much more popular and efficient. He said the Eubanks Road facility is small and outdated, and the closing of the landfill has made it necessary to fill this gap. Commissioner Gordon asked if there was any thought that the County might cooperate if Chapel Hill were to locate a transfer station at Millhouse. Michael Talbert said that is possible, but he does not know how likely it is. He said this is still in the early planning stages and he doesn't know the time frame. Commissioner Gordon suggested that this should be flagged for consideration. Commissioner porosin referred to the Wi-Fi access and said he would be interested in more information on which of the listed scenarios would give more bang for our buck. He said the goal is to provide the broadest access possible and he asked if there is a way to evaluate where you would get the most use. Jim Northup said he did ask the planning department to provide information on the number of access points, and he can provide those numbers at a later date. Commissioner porosin said that would be helpful. Chair Jacobs suggested this could be added to a work session. He said he would like to see an analysis of where the service already exists, and where it would not be used. Commissioner Rich asked if Jim Northup knows the locations of wireless points around the County. Jim Northup said staff does not keep track of private Wi-Fi access. Chair Jacobs said two County Commissioners have brought up accelerating the provision for handicap access to buildings in the CIP. Chair Jacobs said there has been past discussion of a needs assessment for the Efland Community Center, and he would like to see this somewhere in the CIP. Paul Laughton said three Life Safety/ADA projects were added this year on page 37 of the CIP. Chair Jacobs said there was some discussion accelerating the provision of these improvements. He said there was no discussion of specific projects, but more of a general sense of urgency. Chair Jacobs said if the Board is moving forward with talking about the Southern Branch Library, there will need to be a more detailed presentation of alternatives. He said the grand design presented earlier was over budget and it would be useful to see some alternatives to allow the Board to decide on the higher priority issues. Chair Jacobs said there was a discussion of the bond, regarding whether some of the construction projects might be accelerated. He said Clarence Grier was encouraged to think about whether the first $100 million would be sufficient, and to see if there was more capacity within the debt to go above this. Commissioner McKee said he would like to see a survey done in the rural areas to see how many roll carts are actually going to be needed. Michael Talbert said that survey will be done before the roll carts are ordered. Commissioner McKee said there were some leakage and flooding issues today in one of the schools. He is not sure how much sense it makes to spend $750,000 on planning for future schools when there are major issues with the existing schools. Paul Laughton said everything he presented were scenarios, and nothing has been replaced. He welcomes direction from the Board. Chair Jacobs said the default proposal and direction is based on what the Board said in the discussions tonight. 5. Next Steps - Strateqic Communications Plan Rod Visser thanked the Board of County Commissioners for their cooperation. He said there seems to be a lot of consensus on fleshing out a full blown strategic communications plan, and that the Commissioners see the importance of a role for the Board in the development and oversight of this plan. Chair Jacobs asked for an update on where things are in the process and where to go next. Rod Visser said the outline on April 8th discussed a three phase approach. He said the first phase occurred up to the April 8th work session and focused on public outreach. He said phase 2 has just been completed, which involved interviews with Commissioners, managers and staff inembers. He said he has provided a report on this and the degree to which there is consensus on specific issues. He said the third phase, as envisioned by the manager, would be to proceed with fleshing out a full strategic plan and a strategic communications team. He said this would include a role for the Board and the departments already involved in the process. He said there was consensus that the team should involve some additional departments that have related needs and capabilities. Rod Visser said this is at a point for the Board to consider whether it makes sense to proceed formally with a strategic communication plan, and exactly what role the Board of County Commissioners would play in this. He said there was discussion of having two Board of County Commissioners members involved in the team and with oversight. Michael Talbert said there was an abbreviated discussion at the last meeting too. He is not sure there has been adequate opportunity to discuss this issue to move forward. He said it would be hard to add this to the upcoming work sessions, but it should not be the last item. Commissioner Pelissier said she feels like the information provided from the interviews is enough to say this should go forward to develop a plan. She suggested appointing two Commissioners, together with the department heads to come up with a plan. She said there was a lot of agreement about the original goals. She is ready to move forward. Commissioner Price agreed with Commissioner Pelissier. Commissioner Gordon said she would like to move forward with a plan. She suggested the development of a charge. She suggested that they let staff start working on it to be presented in the fall. She said the Board needs to decide its role. Commissioner Gordon referred to her memo regarding language in County documents and asked the Commissioners to look it over. Chair Jacobs asked Michael Talbert to direct staff to come back with a proposed plan for the composition of a group that included two Commissioners to work on developing a strategic communications plan. He said this would presumably be done this fiscal year. CLOSED SESSION: A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to go into closed session at 10:39pm for the purpose of: To discuss matters relating to the location or expansion of industries or other businesses in the area served by the public body, including agreement on a tentative list of economic development incentives that may be offered by the public body in negotiations. The action approving the signing of an economic development contract or commitment, or the action authorizing the payment of economic development expenditures, shall be taken in an open session. § 143-318.11(a)(4). VOTE: UNANIMOUS RECONVENE INTO REGULAR SESSION A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to reconvene into regular session at 10:45 pm. VOTE: UNANIMOUS ADJOURNMENT A motion was made by Commissioner porosin, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to adjourn the meeting at 10:45 pm. Barry Jacobs, Chair Donna Baker Clerk to the Board