HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 11-14-1995 - V-A k
OR AN G E C O U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 14, 1995
Action Agenda
Item # Y-A
SUBJECT: WATER AND SEWER SERVICE BOUNDARY TASK FORCE
a DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING: YES _X_N0
ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT:
- Draft Resolution David Stancil, Ext. 2590
(Please see October 17
agenda item for previous
attachments)
- OWASA Staff Update TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough - 732-8181
Chapel Hill - 967-9251
Durham - 688-7331
Mebane - 227-2031
PURPOSE: To consider a resolution providing comment to
the Water and Sewer Boundary Task Force on
preliminary utility service area boundaries
and implementation objectives contained in the
Task Force report.
BACKGROUND: The Water and Sewer Service Boundary Task
Force report was completed in December 1994.
The report includes preliminary utility
service area boundaries and related
implementation objectives.
OWASA, Hillsborough, and Chapel Hill have
adopted resolutions responding to the report.
The Town of Hillsborough has raised questions
about the scope of the Town's responsibility
for failed systems within its service area.
OWASA has called for legislation to make the
boundaries legally binding, and agreement to
incorporate the objectives into the
legislation. The Chapel Hill Town Council has
called for an interim Memorandum of
Understanding; the inclusion of Mebane, Durham
and Orange-Alamance; and further discussion of
outlined issues.
This item was presented at the quarterly
public hearing on August 28, 1995. No public
comments were received, but Board comments
2
F
included expanding the County Interest Area to
include the I-85/US 70 Economic Development
District (EDD) and the area southwest of the
Buckhorn EDD.
At their September 18 meeting, the Planning
Board did not make a formal recommendation.
Board members expressed concerns with the
delineation of the boundary map, financial
equity aspects raised by OWASA, and the
potential term of any service area agreement.
The Board of Commissioners considered this
item on October 17. The Board instructed staff
to draft a resolution based on the
Administration recommendations, including
additional items discussed by the Board on
October 17.
These items included redesignating portions of
the OWASA Long-Term Interest Area to Orange
County Interest Area, to be consistent with
the planning and water and sewer jurisdiction
of the County in this area; the inclusion of
Person County and Chatham County in future
discussions; and future discussion of
secondary urban service areas and other issues
as identified in Attachment B of the task
force report.
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends adoption of the
attached resolution, which incorporates the
Administration recommendation of October 17
with Board discussion items described above.
3
RESOLUTION RESPONDING TO THE WATER AND SEWER SERVICE BOUNDARY TASK
FORCE REPORT OF DECEMBER 1994
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has been asked to
provide comment on the report of the Water and Sewer Service
Boundary Task Force, dated December 14, 1994; and
WHEREAS, the Board held a public hearing on August 28, 1995 to
solicit public comment on the report; and
WHEREAS, further discussions among all water and sewer service
providers will be a necessary step to adoption of a boundary
agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Orange County Board of
Commissioners that the Board hereby submits the following comments
to the Water and Sewer Service Boundary Task Force regarding their
report of December 14, 1994 for long-term boundaries among water
and sewer utilities in the County of Orange:
1. The Board endorses the "straw line" long-term boundary for
service, as shown in Attachment A of the report.
�A
C 2 . The Board proposes that the Orange Water and Sewer Authority
(OWASA) "Long-Term Interest Area" as shown on Attachment A be
amended to redesignate the areas located outside of the
current OWASA service area as an Orange County Interest Area,
to reflect the fact that this area is within Orange County
k planning jurisdiction and that the County Water and Sewer
Policy governs water and sewer service in the area.
2 . The Board proposes that Orange County governments and
utilities enter into an Interim Memorandum of Understanding to
abide by the proposed utility boundaries pending a permanent
agreement; and that such an Interim Memorandum of
Understanding be drafted by the aforementioned Task Force for
consideration by the local governments and utilities.
t
3. The Board proposes that representatives from Orange County,
Hillsborough, Chapel Hill, Carrboro and OWASA meet with
representatives from the Orange-Alamance Water System, Inc.
d (OAWS) , the Town of Mebane, the City of Durham, and the
Counties of Chatham and Person to determine whether those
Jurisdictions or utilities would be willing to enter into a
Water and Sewer Service boundary agreement on an interim basis
such as five years and a long-term basis such as twenty years.
4. The Board proposes that representatives of the above local
governments and utilities discuss, in parallel with the water
and sewer service boundary considerations, additional issues
# identified in Attachment B of the December 14, 1994 Task Force
report. These issues include:
4 ,.
t
o responsibilities for dealing with failure of private
community water and wastewater systems,
o financing issues of extending water and sewer, and
i o the consideration of proposed new community systems.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board authorizes the Chair to
transmit this resolution to the Mayors of the Towns of Chapel Hill,
Hillsborough and Carrboro, and to the Chair of the Orange Water and
s Sewer Authority Board of Directors, and other such parties as the
i Chair deems appropriate.
This the 14th day of November, 1995
Moses Carey, Jr. , Chairman
t
# ATTEST:
f
Beverly Blythe
Clerk to the Board of Commissioners
t
t
5
Orange Water and Sewer Authority
400 Jones Ferry Road
OWASA o. Box 366
Carrboro, NC 27510
(919) 968-4421
MEMORANDUM
TO: Everett Billingsley
FROM: Ed Holland
DATE: November 3, 1995
SUBJECT: Water and Sewer Boundary Task Force - Update of the Issues
This memorandum and attachments are an updated version of materials provided to you in a
memorandum on the same subject dated September 21, 1995.
Background and Current Status
On May 25, 1995 the Board responded via resolution to the December 14, 1994 report of the
Orange County Water and Sewer Service Area Boundaries Task Force. The County also
received responses from the Chapel Hill and Hillsborough Town Councils, but none from
Carrboro. The Orange County Board of Commissioners are tentatively scheduled to consider
action during their upcoming meeting on November 14.
County staff has recommended proceeding in accordance with the Chapel Hill resolution, which
proposes further Task Force discussions with Durham, Mebane, and Orange-Alamance Water
Company, Inc. to develop an interim(five-year)agreement for abiding by the proposed utility
area boundaries. Parallel discussions would focus on "correlative objectives" that the Authority
has continued to highlight, such as responsibility for failing community water and sewer systems.
None of the entities have responded to OWASA's provision that all parties agree to seek state
legislation that would make the boundary agreement more legally binding.
It appears likely that the Authority will be invited to participate in a new round of discussions
that may include Durham, Mebane,and Orange-Alamance Water System, Inc., as well as current
Task Force members, to determine if there is willingness to enter a utility boundary agreement
for an interim(five year) and a long term(20 year) basis.
A more detailed discussion of these issues is presented below, and relevant background
documents are attached as noted.
An Equal Opportunity Employer 12 . 1
i
6
Memorandum
Water and Sewer Boundaries
November 3, 1995
Page 2
Items Attached for Background Reference
(All pages numbered sequentially at top center)
Pages 1-7: December 14, 1994 Task Force Report, including attachments A, B, and C.
Pages 8-13: May 25, 1995 OWASA resolution, plus two Exhibits submitted with the
resolution. (OWASA Exhibit I referenced in the resolution is the Task Force
Report itself.)
Pages 14-15: May 15, 1995 resolution submitted to Orange County by the Hillsborough Town
Council.
Pages 16-22: June 26, 1995 staff report and resolution adopted by the Chapel Hill Town
Council.
Pages 23-24: Draft minutes of August 28, 1995 joint public hearing. Comments by members of
Orange County Commissioners and Planning Board.
Pages 25-26: October 17, 1995 staff summary and recommendations to Orange County Board
of Commissioners.
(The Carrboro Board of Aldermen did not submit a response to the Task Force Report.)
Discussion
OWASA's May 25 resolution(see pages 8 and 9, attached)endorsed the straw line boundaries
contingent on two provisions, which are reviewed and discussed below with respect to positions
of the Chapel Hill and Hillsborough Town Councils,and Orange County Planning Staff.
Agreement to Seek Binding.Legisla-- n
The Authority endorsed the straw line boundaries on the condition that Carrboro, Chapel Hill,
Hillsborough, Orange County, and OWASA all agree to seek state legislation during 1996 that
would make legally binding a water and sewer service boundary agreement among the signatory
parties.
No support for this proposal has been expressed by the other local governments. The
Hillsborough resolution, which was adopted before OWASA's, did not address the issue of
legislation. The Chapel Hill staff report (see page 20, attached) stated that legislation to clarify
local authority to enter into utility boundary agreements might be desirable, but not necessary,
12. 2
7
Memorandum
Water and Sewer Boundaries
November 3, 1995
Page 3
and that there was little likelihood of reaching local agreement in time for the 1996 legislative
session.
OWASA's General Counsel agrees that clarifying legislation is not needed, but recommends
binding legislation to assure that any unilateral breach of a multi-party service area agreement
could be decisively blocked or overturned through legal injunction. By contrast, the breach of
(conventional)contractual boundary agreements,such as the ones already in place between
OWASA and Durham and Hillsborough and Durham, might not be remedied through injunction,
but simply through assessment of a fine that could leave in place the offending action, such as the
extension of a utility line into an area otherwise prohibited by the agreement. Given the
importance of maintaining the integrity of the Rural Buffer and other areas affected by the
proposed boundary agreement, the need for legislation to legally bind all parties to the terms of
an agreement remains important. The likelihood of achieving consensus in time for the 1996
General Assembly may indeed be low, but the willingness of local participants to attempt
consensus would represent a greater commitment to the joint process than simply agreeing to
lines on a map.
Local Commitment to Cla-rify, Define, and Seek Agreement on "Correlative Objectives" of the
Task Force Report
During the Task Force deliberations, OWASA representatives emphasized the importance of a
range of other issues related to service area boundaries. Most of these were incorporated into the
"correlative objectives" listed as Attachment B of the Task Force Report(see pages 4 and 5,
attached). An ongoing OWASA concern has been the need to link the Authority's endorsement
of the straw line boundaries to a process for achieving these objectives. OWASA has been
reluctant, if not unwilling, to endorse the boundaries without establishing a concurrent process
for clarifying these other issues, especially the responsibility for failing private water and sewer
systems that lie outside of existing service areas but within proposed "areas of interest." This
was the basis for the second condition of the Board's May 25 endorsement of the straw line
boundaries(see page 8, paragraph B,attached): "That those same local bodies agree to commit
the necessary resources to clarify,define,and seek agreement on the issues implicit and
unresolved in Attachment B of the December 14, 1994 Task Force Report ..."
Neither the resolutions of Hillsborough and Chapel Hill, nor the Orange County staff
recommendation are especially responsive to the Authority's condition of linkage between the
proposed boundaries and those other issues.
Hillsborough appears to reject such a linkage in Section 5 of its May 15 resolution(see pages 14
and 15, attached), recognizing its responsibility "to provide public water and sewer service
within the prescribed area where economically feasible"(emphasis added). Hillsborough's
resolution goes on to state that responsibility for failing on-site systems should remain with the
County Health Department or with-the State, as appropriate. By contrast, OWASA has
r
8 a
Memorandum
Water and Sewer Boundaries
November 3, 1995
Page 4
submitted that the provision of utility service within areas circumscribed by a boundary
agreement represents an exclusive privilege with concomitant responsibilities, such as the
technical, administrative, and financial capability of providing those services, as well as some
responsibility for failing private systems in the designated area of interest.
The Chapel Hill resolution(and Orange County staff recommendation) recommend "that Orange
County governments and utilities enter into,on an interim basis,a memorandum of
understanding to abide by the proposed utility boundaries pending a permanent agreement ..."
The Chapel Hill resolution also proposes that "representatives of the local governments and
utilities discuss, in parallel with the utility service area boundary considerations, additional issues
identified in the task force's December 14th report including responsibilities for dealing with
failure of private community water and wastewater systems and with the consideration of
proposed new community systems" (see pages 22 and 26, attached). This proposal for parallel
discussions of boundaries and other issues neither provides nor rules out the degree of linkage
that might be acceptable to OWASA.
Recommendations
If the Authority proceeds toward negotiation of an interim agreement as proposed by Chapel
Hill, I recommend that such an agreement include necessary commitments to the two basic
provisions of the Board's May 25 resolution; specifically, a willingness of all participants to
formalize a long term agreement through binding legislation; plus an appropriate commitment to
clarifying and resolving the "correlative objectives" of the December 14, 1994 Task Force
Report. Other issues noted by the Authority in Exhibits 2 and 3 (see pages 10-13, attached)
should be pursued as appropriate both through negotiations of the proposed interim agreement as
well as through the "parallel discussions" proposed to take place.
Please let me know if I can provide further information or commentary.
Edward A. Holland, AICP
Director of Planning and Development
encl.
PROVIDE TO BOARD OF DIRECTOR
AP T
/Z•