HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 01-22-2015 - 6aSUBJECT: MINUTES
DEPARTMENT:
ATTACHMENT(S):
Draft Minutes
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: January 22, 2015
Action Agenda
Item No. 6 -a
PUBLIC HEARING: (Y /N) No
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donna Baker, 245 -2130
I
PURPOSE: To correct and /or approve the minutes as submitted by the Clerk to the Board as
listed below:
November 6, 2014
November 11, 2014
November 18, 2014
November 19, 2014
December 1, 2014
December 9, 2014
BOCC Regular Meeting
BOCC Work Session
BOCC Regular Meeting
AOG Meeting
BOCC Regular Meeting
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.
2
3 DRAFT
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Attachment 1
MINUTES
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
November 6, 2014
7:00 p.m.
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Thursday,
November 6, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Building, in Hillsborough, N.C.
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: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, 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 7:02 p.m.
24
25 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
26 Chair Jacobs reviewed the following list of items at the Commissioner's places:
27 - Pink Sheet - Revision for Item 11 a - Advisory Board on Aging Appointments
28 - PowerPoint Slides for Item 5a - 2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Amendment
29 - PowerPoint Slides for Item 5b - Zoning Atlas Amendment — Related to Town of Hillsborough
30 Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) Relinquishment
31 - Monthly Report from the Planning Division
32
33 Chair Jacobs recognized Bonnie Hammersley, who introduced Elections Director Tracy
34 Reams.
35 Tracy Reams gave a brief presentation and update on the 2014 election night. She said
36 everything went well for Orange County, and early voting had a record turnout of 23,195 voters.
37 She said the County offered 303 hours of voting, and there was also record turnout on Election
38 Day with 52,663 ballots cast and a turnout of 48.24 percent. She said results came in quickly on
39 election night, and Orange County was one of the first large counties to report. She said the
40 County was able to recruit and train over 200 volunteers, and she commended her staff
41 members.
42 Commissioner Rich asked if there were any specific problems her staff had to address
43 with voters, such as questions about polling sites or identification requirements.
44 Tracy Reams said they had both visual and printed materials available during early and
45 regular voting.
46 Tracy Reams said there were very detailed instructions given to workers, and there were
47 signs made to communicate requirements. She said there were 155 provisional ballots cast.
48
49 PUBLIC CHARGE
50 The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
W
2. Public Comments
a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
NONE
b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
(These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda
below.)
3. Petitions by Board Members
Commissioner Price said her first item is a joint petition with Chair Jacobs regarding the
safety and shared use of bicycles and cars on the roads. She said residents have expressed
increased frustration with this issue, and there have been several reports in the media
regarding incidents of road rage. She said people are increasingly using a variety of modes of
transportation, and in many areas of the County there are minimal to no road shoulders. She
requested that staff consult with Chapel Hill and Carrboro regarding polices related to
pedestrian and bicycle access, and engage bicycle advocates, community representatives, law
enforcement and DOT staff to work toward developing a culture and approach to sharing the
roads throughout Orange County.
Chair Jacobs expressed his support for this petition.
Commissioner Price petitioned the Board regarding the policy on naming of buildings.
She petitioned that the interior of buildings be permitted to be named after living persons.
Commissioner Gordon asked for an update on her previous petition to have the
agendas posted on the County website with links for viewing individual items.
Bonnie Hammersley said she directed that petition to Jim Northup, and she will follow up
with him.
Commissioner Pelissier said once a year the Board recognizes individual staff members
for longevity. She petitioned the Board to develop a system of recognizing staff for superior
accomplishments. She suggested that a committee might be formed to look at individuals and
determines candidates for this.
Commissioner Dorosin arrived at 7:13 p.m.
4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations NONE
5. Public Hearings
a. 2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Amendment — Related to Town of
Hillsborough Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) Relinquishment (No Additional
Comment Accepted)
The Board received the Planning Board's recommendation, closed the public hearing,
and made a decision on a County initiated amendment to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Future
Land Use Map (FLUM) affecting approximately 500 -acres located generally near the Eno River
between US 70 W and 1- 85/1 -40 in Cheeks and Hillsborough Townships. This amendment
assigns County future land use classifications to properties that are to be removed from the
Town of Hillsborough Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ), which is to become effective October 1,
2014.
Tom Altieri reviewed a map of the area, as well as the following PowerPoint slides:
2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Amendment — Related to Town of
Hillsborough Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) Relinquishment
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Purpose
• To receive the Planning Board's recommendation, close the public hearing, and make a
decision on a County initiated amendment to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land
Use Map
• Amendment assigns County land use classifications to properties that were removed
(Oct. 1) from the Town of Hillsborough Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ).
• Affects approximately 500 -acres (22- parcels) located generally near the Eno River
between US 70 W and 1- 85/1 -40 in Cheeks and Hillsborough Townships
• This item is companion to Action Agenda Item No. 5b, "Zoning Atlas Amendment."
September 8th Public Hearing
• No members of the public spoke.
• The BOCC had primarily one question -- "Why is staff recommending Agricultural
Residential versus Rural Residential ?"
• For consistency with the FLUM classifications applied in general area (Attachment 2,
FLUM Hillsborough surrounds).
• Minor variation in Population Density Locational Criteria (Attachment 3, Table)
■ For consistency with existing land uses (Attachment 4, Aerial Photos and Table).
In response to BOCC, the noted attachments were provided to the Planning Board and are
included in tonight's agenda packet.
Planning Board Recommendation
• Considered at is October 8, 2014 meeting.
• Reviewed the differences between Rural Residential and Agricultural Residential, as
well as existing land uses and character of the amendment area.
• Recommended unanimously that the BOCC approve the amendment as presented at
public hearing (Attachment 5, Draft PB Minutes).
Manager's Recommendation
Receive the Planning Board's recommendation of approval.
Close the public hearing.
Adopt the Resolution (Attachment 6, pp. 19 -20), which approves the amendment.
Commissioner Dorosin asked if there is a reason all of these areas are recommended to
be zoned exactly the same way. He said some of the areas appear to have different uses on
one side versus the other.
Tom Altieri said these will be future land use map classifications, and there are primarily
two land use classifications that apply to rural areas without public water and sewer. He said
the choice is limited to agricultural residential or rural residential, and the reasons for
recommending agricultural residential have been provided.
Commissioner Dorosin questioned whether the entire northern piece or the entire
southern piece has to be the same classification.
Tom Altieri said it does not all have to be classified the same, but this is what the team
has recommended.
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
close the public hearing; and adopt the Resolution contained in Attachment 6, which approves
the amendment.
il
1 Commissioner Dorosin said he will vote against this amendment. He said, in looking at
2 the maps, it is clear that there are areas immediate adjacent to these parcels that are
3 residential neighborhoods that could not be described as agricultural residential. He said it
4 seems to him that there is an opportunity to be more precise and adopt a more gradual
5 approach that encourages more residential use in some of those areas, while encouraging
6 agricultural use in others.
7
8 VOTE: 6-1 (Commissioner Dorosin)
9
10 b. Zoning Atlas Amendment — Related to Town of Hillsborough Extraterritorial
11 Jurisdiction (ETJ) Relinquishment (No Additional Comment Accepted)
12 The Board considered a decision on a County initiated amendment to the Zoning Atlas
13 affecting approximately 500 -acres located generally near the Eno River between US 70 W and
14 1- 85/1 -40 in Cheeks and Hillsborough Townships. This amendment assigns County zoning to
15 properties that are to be removed from the Town of Hillsborough Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
16 (ETJ), which is to become effective October 1, 2014.
17 Tom Altieri presented a map of the area, as well as the following PowerPoint slides:
18 Purpose
19 • To make a recommendation on a County initiated amendment to the Zoning Atlas.
20 • This item is companion to the previous Action Agenda Item, "2030 Comprehensive Plan
21 Future Land Use Map Amendment."
22 • This amendment assigns County zoning districts to properties that have been removed
23 from the Town of Hillsborough Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ).
24 • Affects approximately 500 -acres (22- parcels) located generally near the Eno River
25 between US 70 W and 1- 85/1 -40 in Cheeks and Hillsborough Townships.
26
27 September 8th Public Hearing
28 • No members of the public spoke.
29 • The BOCC had primarily two questions:
30 1) Why is staff recommending Agricultural Residential (AR) versus Rural Residential (R-
31 1)?
32 ■ For consistency with the zoning districts applied in general area (Attachment 2,
33 Zoning Map Hillsborough surrounds).
34 ■ The permitted Agricultural Uses and minimum lot width standard (150 -ft) associated
35 with AR are more compatible with existing land uses and character of the area
36 (Attachment 3, Tables).
37 2) What would happen if a development application was submitted between effective date
38 of ETJ relinquishment (Oct. 1) and application of County zoning /future land use (Nov.
39 6)?
40 Per State law, the Town's regulations remain in effect for 60 -days (Dec. 1) or until
41 County action.
42
43 Planning Board Recommendation
44 • Considered at is October 8, 2014 meeting.
45 • Reviewed the differences between Rural Residential (R -1) and Agricultural Residential
46 (AR) and consistency with County plans.
47 • Recommended unanimously that the BOCC approve the amendment as presented at
48 public hearing (Attachment 4, Draft PB Minutes).
49
50 Consistency Statement
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
In response to a new opinion issued by the N.C. Court of Appeals in July 2014, the
• Planning Board has provided a written recommendation to the BOCC addressing plan
consistency (Attachment 5, pp. 24 -25); and
• The BOCC must also approve a consistency statement (Attachment 6, pp. 26 -27).
Manager's Recommendation
• Receive the Planning Board Statement of Consistency and recommendation of
approval.
• Close the public hearing.
• Adopt the BOCC Statement of Consistency (Attachment 6, pp. 26 -27).
• Adopt the ordinance (Attachment 7, pp. 28 -29) approving the zoning atlas amendment.
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Price to:
1. Receive the Planning Board Statement of Consistency and recommendation of approval;
2. Close the public hearing;
3. Adopt the BOCC Statement of Consistency (Attachment 6); and
4. Adopt the ordinance (Attachment 7) approving the zoning atlas amendment.
Commissioner Dorosin said he will vote against this for same reasons stated in the
previous motion.
VOTE: 6 -1 (Commissioner Dorosin)
c. Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment — Public Hearing Process
Changes — Interim Report and Closure of Hearing
The Board opened the public hearing, received the information contained in this abstract
and attachments, and closed the public hearing on a Unified Development Ordinance (UDO)
text amendment that proposed changes to the public hearing process (presented at the
September 8, 2014 Quarterly Public Hearing).
Perdita Holtz said this item was heard at the September 8th quarterly public hearing and
was referred to the Planning Board. She said this has been discussed extensively, and the
flowchart in attachment 2 outlines a new process for legislative items. She said this process
captures what the Planning Board discussed in October.
Perdita Holtz said last night the Planning Board discussed a potential new process for
quasi - judicial items, and although there is no flowchart, this would generally follow the cadence
of the attachment 2 flowchart.
She said the reason for the recommended closure of the public hearing is because the
proposed public hearing is likely to change enough to necessitate re- advertising it for a new
presentation at a future public hearing date.
Commissioner Rich asked if any members of the public were in attendance while the
Planning Board discussed this.
Perdita Holtz said no.
Commissioner Rich said she does not feel that there has been enough outreach to the
public regarding this process.
Chair Jacobs noted that the discussion is not ending, just being deferred to another
date.
Commissioner Rich asked for an explanation on the reason for deferring it.
M
1 Chair Jacobs said the Board would advertise the public hearing, and if significant
2 changes are being made, there would be extraordinary efforts to make sure the public is aware
3 of what is being proposed.
4 Commissioner Rich said that is her point - that there may need to be more effort made
5 to put the information out there about these changes.
6 Commissioner Gordon said if this is changed, it is important to make sure the public has
7 as much opportunity to comment as possible. She recommends that no conclusion should be
8 made at the end of a regular public hearing, because this was often the first time that issues
9 are articulated.
10 She said that to her it does not seem helpful to distinguish between quasi - judicial
11 special use permit hearings and the legislative hearings if that means re- zonings do not have
12 enough time. She agrees that it takes longer for a special use permit if you are going to try to
13 get expert testimony. She would like to make sure that there will be plenty of time for re-
14 zonings, especially for hearings involving conditional zoning districts since they involve a
15 relatively new process.
16 Commissioner Gordon said she was interested to see that there was no
17 recommendation to increase the number of hearings, and If there were to be an increase, she
18 thinks seven meetings would work.
19 Commissioner Gordon said the main point is that the public needs more time to
20 comment than just a few days. She likes the idea of posting information when an application
21 comes in that meets the ordinance requirements.
22 She said she wonders about the issue of not requiring the Planning Board to attend the
23 public hearings. She values the input of the Planning Board, and they offer public perspective
24 as well as expertise.
25 Commissioner Gordon said this is a process that can be tweaked, as long as the basics,
26 such as making sure the public has sufficient time for providing input, are in place. She said
27 the public hearing is when the information needs to come out, and this needs to be followed by
28 some time to think about the issues before voting.
29 Commissioner Price said she is a little confused on this process. She said this will not
30 be resolved until sometime in 2015, and there is no mechanism right now to assure when and
31 how the public will be involved.
32 Bonnie Hammersley said she has attended the last two Planning Board meetings, and
33 she intends to be involved in this process. She said when this comes forward she will make
34 sure everyone is informed about this process. She said if it is the will of the Board, this will be
35 well advertised if it goes forward. She said this hearing is being closed because of the
36 anticipation of significant changes that will require future public input.
37 Commissioner Price echoed what Commissioner Gordon said. She feels the Planning
38 Board should be a part of the public hearings.
39 Commissioner Dorosin said he had some questions about the flow chart. He said the
40 current process is that a public hearing is held, and the public speaks; then the Planning Board
41 is sent away and instructed to come back with a recommendation; then the public does not
42 have an opportunity to comment on the Planning Board's comments; then there is possibly
43 another meeting for this to come back to the Board of County Commissioners. He said this
44 seems problematic, and this was the concern he originally expressed.
45 Commissioner Dorosin said it appears that the flow chart has addressed his concerns
46 about this structure for legislative items.
47 He read through the flow chart as shown on page 18 of the abstract. He said the idea of
48 this is not to eliminate the public input at all, but it is to make the process more equitable and
49 streamlined. He said one of the changes is that as soon as an application comes in, there will
50 be some sort of public notification or report.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
7
Perdita Holtz said that is correct.
Commissioner Dorosin said the next substantive change he sees is that there will be a
round of mail notifications to direct neighbors about Planning Board meetings for map
amendments. He said the people attending will have opportunity to make comments and
suggestions, and it is almost like a mini public hearing at the Planning Board.
Perdita Holtz said that is correct.
Commissioner Dorosin said someone could come to the Planning Board meetings now,
but what is different is the provision of first class mail notification to nearby property owners.
Perdita Holtz said currently the Planning Board does not discuss applications before the
public hearing, and this would be a new change to increase public participation at this level.
She said this moves the discussion up in the process, so that the Planning Board discussion
occurs before the public hearing.
Commissioner Dorosin asked if the notification was previously an agenda item voted on
by the Board.
Perdita Holtz said the legal ad was an agenda item.
Commissioner Dorosin said the notification will not be on the agenda, assuming this is
acceptable to the Board.
Commissioner Dorosin asked if there is any legal requirement that the Board has to vote
on this.
John Roberts said no.
Commissioner Dorosin said the proposal does not say that the Planning Board cannot
participate in the public hearing; it just states that a quorum will not be required.
Perdita Holtz said this is correct.
Commissioner Dorosin said the public hearing, as laid out it in the proposal, would be
the last step before a decision is made, whenever that may occur. He asked if there will be any
reference back to the Planning Board.
Perdita Holtz said it could be the Board of County Commissioners' purview to send
something back to Planning Board if something new comes forward at the public hearing. She
said the public hearing would be closed, and then the item sent back to the Planning Board.
Commissioner Dorosin asked if the Board could also have the option to send something
back to the Planning Board while still keeping the public hearing open. He does not want to
have public hearings where the public cannot speak.
Perdita Holtz said for legislative items, it is required that a public hearing is held, and it is
not precluded that that the public cannot comment before or after the public hearing. She said
it is the County's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) that specifies written comments only
being allowed after a public hearing.
Commissioner Dorosin said it seems like this is getting close to a resolution. He agrees
that the critical aspect is public participation, and he is in favor of the streamlining with targeted
outreach early in the process. He said he not as wedded to the suggestion of not making a
decision on the same night that it is presented at the public hearing. He can see both sides of
this issue, and he is not sure it needs to be a matter of policy. He said there will be times when
an issue is fully vetted by the time of the public hearing.
Perdita Holtz said if the concern is to get rid of the non - speaking public hearing, then the
way to do this is to remove the requirement for only having written comments after a public
hearing.
Commissioner Dorosin asked what the basis was for this rule.
Perdita Holtz said she believed that this was set up in the 1980's so that the Board of
County Commissioners would be informed about anything that went on after the public hearing.
Craig Benedict said the reason for this rule was to insure that their legislative and quasi -
judicial procedures were the same. He said the goal was to have some point in time where the
I testimony coming in could be stopped to allow for a decision based on a finite amount of
2 information. He said the new suggestion is to have a legislative procedure that can be wide
3 open the whole time. He said for the quasi - judicial items, there will probably be some point in
4 time where that testimony has to stop.
5 Commissioner Pelissier said overall there are a lot of good things in the proposed new
6 process, but she is confused about the lack of increase in the frequency of the quarterly public
7 hearings. She said this would not accomplish the goal of speeding the process for applications
8 that are "no brainers."
9 Perdita Holtz said there were concerns expressed by the Board of County
10 Commissioners about the possibility of putting quarterly public hearings on regular agendas.
11 She said the current suggestion is to try this new process prior to taking that next step.
12 Commissioner Pelissier asked if the UDO would have to be changed in order to change
13 the process.
14 Perdita Holtz said yes.
15 Commissioner Pelissier said the recommendation to close the public hearing tonight
16 does not preclude the Board from taking some action based on what has already been heard
17 and discussed; but it is an iterative process, and there would need to be another public hearing
18 in order to make changes other than what has been discussed.
19 Perdita Holtz said one of the more substantive changes that would require a second
20 public hearing was removing the proposed language about having up to 8 public hearings per
21 year. She said if the Commissioners still want to pursue this, then perhaps there would not be
22 a need for a second public hearing.
23 Commissioner Rich asked if an additional meeting is being added after the notifications
24 go out and the Planning Board meeting is held.
25 Perdita Holtz said it is just another opportunity for the public to comment to the Planning
26 Board.
27 Perdita Holtz said one of the items in the 5th box on the flowchart talks about the fact
28 that the Planning Board action could be to make a recommendation or to make a preliminary
29 recommendation and ask the Board of Commissioners to send it back to the Planning Board if
30 anything significant happens.
31 Commissioner Rich said she wonders if that is actually speeding things up, or if it is just
32 adding another repetitive step.
33 Perdita Holtz said it could add a step to more controversial items where it may be sent
34 back to the Planning Board. She said it is really just flipping when the Planning Board meeting
35 occurs. She said, with this proposal there would be no Planning Board meeting after the public
36 hearing for many legislative items. She said for more complicated issues, this would add
37 another opportunity for the public to comment.
38 Commissioner Rich said if this process is adopted, it is important to make these
39 changes clear to the public in order to have as much involvement as possible.
40 Commissioner Gordon said she wanted to add a historical note about the legal
41 advertisement. She there was a case where the Board was sued over a deficient legal
42 advertisement. She said this may be why the Board of County Commissioners reviews the ad,
43 and she likes the way this process is done now.
44 Commissioner Gordon said she wanted to make sure that all property is being posted,
45 and people are being notified by certified mail.
46 Perdita Holtz said this is not going away. She said the requirement for certified mail is
47 only for developer initiated applications.
48 Commissioner Gordon said there used to be more development applications. The
49 economy may be the reason there are currently not as many development applications and
50 therefore relatively fewer quasi- judicial public hearings.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
I
Commissioner Gordon said her suggestion about waiting to vote is in reference to the
first time a major public hearing is held. She said it is okay to decide something tonight for this
item.
She said the Board needs to be careful about having too many categories of hearings,
each with a different process, because it might be confusing to the public.
Commissioner Price said the flow chart states that the public can come to the Planning
Board prior to the public hearing. She asked if these comments will then be entered into the
record of the public hearing.
Perdita Holtz said the record only relates to the quasi - judicial process, but not the
legislative process. She said the flow chart in the packet is related to the legislative process.
Commissioner Price asked if this flow chart would be the same for both.
Perdita Holtz said there would be a slightly different flowchart for quasi - judicial, but it
would follow the same general cadence.
Commissioner Price asked if the public would be invited to speak at the Planning Board
meeting.
Perdita Holtz said the public would not be invited to speak, but there would possibly be
an opportunity for comment. She said all of this has not been worked out.
Commissioner Price said she is just concerned with the Board having an opportunity to
see these comments.
Perdita Holtz said there is not really a record of comments at public hearings for
legislative items. She said the comments show up in the minutes, just as comments show up in
the Planning Board minutes.
Commissioner Price referred to item 1 in the bottom blue section of the flowchart on
page 18. She asked when the public would be making comments if the item is not to be listed
in the meeting agenda.
Perdita Holtz said it would be listed as a regular item or a consent agenda item, but it
would not be listed under the public hearing section.
Commissioner Price said if it is on the consent agenda, the Commissioners may not
know that there is someone in the audience who wants to speak.
Perdita Holtz said the public can sign up, or the Chair can ask if anyone wishes to speak
before the consent agenda.
Chair Jacobs said he has never seen a planning item on the consent agenda.
Commissioner Pelissier said the recommendation is to stick with the quarterly public
hearings. She said this proposal solves the public input issue but not the timing issue. She
sees that the roadblock is that you have to provide information 10 days before a quarterly public
hearing, whereas you only have 4 days if a public hearing is added to a regular meeting. She
questioned whether it might be possible, for legislative public hearings, to provide information
on the website 10 days before, and then incorporate it in the agenda 4 days before.
Perdita Holtz said there is no actual requirement to have it available 10 days in advance,
but that is the practice that Orange County has had for 20 years.
Commissioner Pelissier said she would like to find a way to do this. She would like to
find a way to have the legislative public hearing items be more frequent than just quarterly.
Perdita Holtz said it would be possible to have a section of the website that would allow
for complete items to be listed ahead of the agenda.
Commissioner Pelissier said she would like to try the new process with the 8 public
hearings and see how it goes.
Commissioner Gordon said it seems to her that Commissioner Pelissier's comments
about the notices for public hearings are well taken. She said it is important with legislative
items, like re- zonings, to give 10 days of notice for the public hearings.
10
1 Commissioner Rich agreed with Commissioner Pelissier. She said there are some
2 public hearings that can be added to agenda items. She would like to leave this option open.
3 Chair Jacobs summarized that there had been comments and concerns regarding the
4 following items:
5 - Timing of public hearings
6 - Provision of advanced notice of public hearings
7 - Capturing public comments
8 - Number of public hearings
9 - Rendering of decisions subsequent to public hearings
10 - Advertisement comments from Board of County Commissioners
11
12 Chair Jacobs said Commissioner Gordon made good points about giving notice and
13 having a deliberate process. He said there needs to be more discussion about time between
14 public hearings and rendering a decision.
15 Chair Jacobs said Commissioner Dorosin made some good points about the public
16 engagement and the improvement in this. He referred to the final blue box in the flow chart and
17 said this reminds him of the concept plans that are sent to the Planning Board for preliminary
18 analysis and report. He said the Planning Board sends this report back to the Commissioners,
19 and then if it is straightforward there is no need to send it back to the Planning Board. He said
20 there are some items that are just very clear, and those could be on the regular Commissioner
21 agenda.
22 Chair Jacobs said Commissioner Rich and Commissioner Price were both talking about
23 thinking through what we hear as part of the public hearing process, and whether people have
24 had an adequate opportunity to address the Board. He said the flip side is that we don't want to
25 ask people to come more times than necessary. He said this needs to be combed out a little
26 more.
27 He said his recollection is that staff reported that Orange County's review process is not
28 any slower than neighboring jurisdictions. He said this process would potentially allow the
29 Planning Board to take itself out of this process, but there is nothing that precludes that.
30 Chair Jacobs said this proposal is generally an improvement but there have been some
31 points raised that the Board may want to isolate more.
32 Chair Jacobs said he is most concerned about there being more public access to the
33 decision making process as well as the Board receiving that information in order to know what
34 people are thinking.
35 Commissioner Rich referred to Chair Jacobs comment about the option for putting a
36 public hearing on the agenda. She asked if this has ever happened, where it has come from
37 the Planning Board.
38 Chair Jacobs said none have come from the Planning Board. He said he is saying that
39 box 5 on the flowchart would accommodate a way to do this.
40 Commissioner Gordon said she is not sure Chair Jacobs got all of the major points. She
41 said she wants to make sure to look through the minutes to capture all of these.
42 Chair Jacobs asked if there were any members of the public who would like to speak.
43
44 PUBLIC COMMENT: NONE
45
46 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Rich to:
47 Receive the information contained in this abstract and attachments; and
48 Close the public hearing. (This is being recommended because the proposed text amendments
49 are expected to be heard again at a future Quarterly Public Hearing, so there is no need to
50 adjourn the public hearing to a date /time certain. Closure of the hearing is necessary to ensure
11
1 the text amendment is not considered a withdrawal, which requires a yearlong waiting period
2 before amendments on the same topic can be considered again.)
3
4 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
5
6 d. North Carolina Community Transportation Program Administrative and Capital
7 Grant Applications for FY 2016
8 The Board conducted an annual public hearing on the North Carolina Community
9 Transportation Program (CTP) grant application by Orange Public Transportation (OPT) for FY
10 2016 and considered approving the grant application that includes adopting a resolution
11 authorizing the applicant to enter into an agreement with the North Carolina Department of
12 Transportation ( NCDOT), authorized the County Attorney to review and complete the necessary
13 certifications and assurances, and authorized the Chair to sign.
14 Peter Murphy reviewed the following background information from the abstract:
15
16 BACKGROUND: Each year, the NCDOT Public Transportation Division accepts requests for
17 administrative and capital needs for county- operated community transportation programs. OPT
18 is eligible to make application for both administrative and capital funding.
19 The current year FY 2015 - approved application includes $185,604 in administrative funding and
20 $482,489 in capital funding for replacement vehicles with total expenses equaling $668,093.
21
22 The total CTP funding request for FY 2016 is $166,765 for community transportation
23 administrative expenses and an additional $232,286 for capital expenses. This draft grant
24 application is made for expenses totaling $399,051.
25
26 Grant funds for administrative purposes will continue to be used to support overall transit
27 systems management and operations and will continue to promote general ridership. Grant
28 funds for capital items include the replacement of three (3) buses exceeding their useful life
29 mileage thresholds in OPT's fleet. A public hearing (Attachment 3) is requested with the
30 opportunity for public discussion and comment before the Board takes action on the resolution
31 (Attachment 1). The acceptance of these grant funds requires compliance with the annual
32 certifications and assurances, for which the signature pages are attached (Attachment 2). The
33 attached signature pages are for the certifications and assurances for FY 2014. The FY 2016
34 certifications and assurances signature pages are very similar to those for FY 2014; however,
35 the County has not yet received them from NCDOT. When received, they will be forwarded to
36 the County Attorney and Chair for review and signatures.
37
38 FINANCIAL IMPACT: The NCDOT CTP grant requires a 15% local match ($25,015) for
39 administrative expenses and a 10% local match ($23,229) for capital expenses for a total of
40 $48,244. As a comparison, the total CTP grant amount requested for FY 2015 was $185,604
41 for administrative expenses ($27,841 local match) and $482,489 for capital expenses ($48,250
42 local match), a reduction of $269,042 in total expenses ($27,847 local match) from FY 2015 to
43 FY 2016. The indicated local match amounts will be requested in the upcoming FY 2016 budget
44 cycle and must be committed from Orange County's budget for the performance period of July
45 1, 2015, through June 30, 2016 (FY 2016), as indicated in the attached Local Share
46 Certification for Funding form (Attachment 4). This will require Orange County to obligate
47 funding in its next budget cycle for these expenses. A total of $48,244 would come from the
48 County's general operating budget.
49 This has been published for public comment.
50
12
1 Peter Murphy said the capital costs are primarily to replace older vehicles or vehicles
2 with well over 200,000 miles.
3 Commissioner Pelissier asked for an explanation of why the capital request is lower than
4 it has been in the past.
5 Peter Murphy said this is because the County is getting 5 new vehicles and 2 expansion
6 vehicles. He said, based on the rules, at least 3 vehicles need to be replaced for year. He said
7 the recommended vehicles meet the criteria. He said there are others that could also be
8 replaced, but if that were to be done now, it would create a predicament with vehicles used in
9 both the urban and the rural setting. He said these vehicles can only be purchased for the rural
10 setting. He said there will be another source at a different time for the urban setting.
11
12 PUBLIC COMMENT - NONE
13
14 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Price to:
15 1. Close the public hearing;
16 2. Approve the Community Transportation Program Grant application for FY 2016 in the total
17 amount of $399,051 with a local match total of $48,244 to be provided when necessary;
18 3. Approve and authorize the Chair to sign the Community Transportation Program
19 Resolution and the Local Share Certification for Funding form; and
20 4. Authorize the Chair and the County Attorney to review and sign the annual certified
21 statements of participation.
22
23 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
24
25 6. Consent Agenda
26• Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
27 Commissioner Rich removed item 6e for discussion.
28• Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
29 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to
30 approve the remaining items on the consent agenda.
31
32 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
33
34 a. Minutes
35 The Board approved the minutes from September 30 and October 2, 2014 as submitted by the
36 Clerk to the Board.
37 b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases /Refunds
38 The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release motor vehicle
39 property tax values for fifteen (15) taxpayers with a total of fifteen (15) bills that will result in a
40 reduction of revenue in accordance with NCGS.
41 c. Property Tax Releases /Refunds
42 The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release property tax
43 values for six (6) taxpayers with a total of (8) eight bills that will result in a reduction of revenue
44 in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 105 -381.
45 d. Applications for Property Tax Exemption /Exclusion
46 The Board approved five (5) untimely applications for exemption /exclusion from ad valorem
47 taxation for five (5) bills for the 2014 tax year.
48 f. Change in BOCC Regular Meeting Schedule for 2014
49 The Board approved one change to the County Commissioners' regular meeting calendar for
50 2014, to add a closed session meeting for Thursday, December 11, 2014 at 6:00 pm at the Link
13
1 Government Services Center, 200 South Cameron Street in Hillsborough for the purpose : "To
2 consider the qualifications, competence, performance, character, fitness, condition of
3 appointment, or condition of initial employment of an individual public officer or employee; or to
4 hear or investigate a complaint, charge or grievance by or against an individual public officer or
5 employee." NCGS 143- 318.11(a) (6)
6
7• Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
8•
9 e. Resolution for the Naming of the Rogers Road Community Center
10 The Board considered approving and authorizing the Chair to sign a resolution on behalf
11 of the Board for the official name of the facility to be the "Rogers Road Community Center"
12 consistent with the County Property Naming Policy.
13 Commissioner Rich said the Board has discussed the plaques placed on new buildings,
14 and she would like to make sure the architect of this building is recognized on the plaque.
15 Commissioner Rich said it came out at one of the original Rogers Road meetings that
16 the towns were interested in supporting the community center by paying a portion of the final
17 cost. She asked what the process would be to get the funding, since the towns wanted to be a
18 part of this. She said if this funding is provided, she would also like to know if the towns will be
19 named on the plaque.
20 Jeff Thompson said the Board adopted a policy that states that the architect will be
21 named on the plaque, and that the plaque would come back to the Commissioners for approval
22 of design and layout. He said this will be brought forward in the coming weeks.
23 Bonnie Hammersley said she did have a conversation with the Chapel Hill manager,
24 who said that since the town could not contribute to the provision of sewer, they would be willing
25 to put some money toward the community center. She said that is the only context in which she
26 heard about this. She has not heard anything from Carrboro.
27 John Roberts said Chapel Hill had indicated, since at that time it could not contribute to
28 the sewer, it would increase the amount of contribution to the community center. He said the
29 town has now extended their extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ), and indicated that if this
30 happened they would also contribute to the sewer. He said, at the manager's recommendation,
31 he was holding up the inter -local agreement until after the ETJ vote.
32 Bonnie Hammersley said she would contact the town managers about this. .
33 Commissioner Rich said she feels there are two separate issues. She said the sewer
34 may take more time, and she does not want to wait on getting the funding for the community
35 center from the towns. She recommended that these two issues be separate. She said these
36 are not a combined project.
37 Commissioner McKee said if Chapel Hill and Carrboro would like to participate in the
38 funding then he feels the County should invite their participation. He said he agrees with the
39 idea of making sure the architect is on the plaque, and a second plaque could be added later
40 for the town.
41 Commissioner Gordon said she could find no plaque at the Aquatics Center, and that
42 was a partnership between Chapel Hill and Orange County. She suggested looking into this.
43 Chair Jacobs said it would be nice if the towns want to participate, but Orange County
44 decided to move forward with this project no matter what. He noted that Chapel Hill had waived
45 some fees and made some adjustments in its development process to accommodate expediting
46 the construction of the community center. He said it would be good to have a conversation
47 about this with the town managers and mayors.
48
49 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to
50 approve and authorize the Chair to sign a resolution on behalf of the Board for the official name
14
1 of the facility to be the "Rogers Road Community Center" consistent with the County Property
2 Naming Policy.
3
4 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
5
6 7. Regular Agenda
7
8 a. Preliminary Information and Approval to Finance Various Capital Investment Plan
9 Projects and County Equipment
10 The Board received a preliminary finding and considered approving financing for capital
11 investment projects and equipment for the year.
12 Clarence Grier reviewed the following information, as outlined in the abstract:
13
14 BACKGROUND: As part of the FY2014 -19 Capital Investment Plan, several projects were
15 approved for equipment financing. Those projects included the following (see Attachment 1 for
16 additional information):
17 Projects Requiring Financing Needed in FY 2014 -15
18
Efland Sewer to Mebane
Project Amount
19
County Projects:
4,581,400
20
Cedar Grove Community Center
$ 2,822,226
21
Southern Orange Campus
400,000
22
HVAC
150,000
23
HVAC Projects (FY2012 -13)
205,999
24
Roofing
179,010
25
Information Technologies
450,000
26
Emergency Services Radio Systems
500,000
27
Communication Systems Improvements
122,000
28
Soccer.com Soccer Center
125,000
29
Lands Legacy
2,400,000
30
31
Total County Projects
7,354,235
32
33 Water & Sewer Projects: (Paid w/ Article 46 Sales Tax Proceeds)
34
Efland Sewer to Mebane
4,581,400
35
Total Water & Sewer Projects
4,581,400
36
37
Sportsplex Projects:
38
Phase II - Pool Mezzanine
950,000
39
Total Sportsplex Projects
950,000
40
Solid Waste Projects:
41
Eubanks Road Solid Waste Convenience Center
640,483
42
Total Solid Waste Projects
640,483
c'
44 Equipment/Vehicle Purchases:
45 Vehicle Replacement Fund 775,119
46 In -Car Cameras Replacements - Sheriff 517,798
47 Board of Elections - Voting Equipment 437,385
48 Board of Elections - Electronic Poll Books 242,485
49 Total Equipment/Vehicle Purchases 1,972,787
50
15
1 Grand Total FY 2014 -15 Financing $ 15,498,905
2
3 Additionally, there are some previous year capital projects, although approved in the budget, for
4 which the financing was not issued due to the project schedule and decisions. The preliminary
5 schedule for the financing is attached to the abstract. County staff will be receiving bids from
6 financial institutions to secure the financing. Staff anticipates receiving $15.5 million in financing
7 for an average of 10 years at an interest rate of 2.30 percent, which will result in an average
8 annual debt service cost of $1,752,650.
9
10 FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact related to this action. However, there will be
11 a financial impact in proceeding with the financing. A preliminary estimate of debt service
12 applicable to the financing would be $1,752,650. The tax rate equivalent for the annual debt
13 service payment is approximately 1.07 cents of the current property tax rate.
14
15 Clarence Grier said there was one additional project that may need to be added to the
16 list. He said staff is looking at a central permitting function solution, and preliminary estimates
17 were higher than expected. He said this would cost an additional $750,000, and more
18 information will be provided for this. He said this would not increase the debt service more than
19 $100,000 and there are more than enough savings to accommodate this.
20 Clarence Grier reviewed the calendar on the last page of the abstract. He said this
21 would potentially be brought back for a public hearing on December the 9th. He noted that a
22 letter must be sent to the joint legislative committee for review.
23 Commissioner McKee asked about the in -car camera replacements.
24 Clarence Grier said the warranty for these goes out of service in December, and they
25 need to be replaced.
26 Commissioner McKee asked for clarification on the amount for Information Technology.
27 Clarence Grier said this may go up by as much as $750,000. He said some of the bids
28 for the central permitting solution are a bit higher than anticipated.
29 Commissioner Gordon said the motion should move forward as written, with the
30 exception of the Information Technologies item, which could increase up to $750,000.
31
32 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner McKee to
33 approve moving forward with the financing of the stated capital project and equipment
34 financing, as outlined in the agenda materials, except that the Information Technologies item
35 MAY increase by as much as $750,000.
36
37 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
38
39 8. Reports -NONE
40
41 9. County Manager's Report
42 Bonnie Hammersley reviewed the following list:
43 Projected November 11, 2014 Regular Work Session Items
44 Status of Urban Roll Cart Implementation
45 Ephesus Fordham
46 Child Care Update
47 Proposed ETJ Approval Process
48
49 Bonnie Hammersley said there will also be a closed session on the November 11 th
50 agenda for an economic development item.
2
4
6
7
8
9
10•
11
12•
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22•
23
24
16
10. County Attorney's Report -NONE
11. Appointments
a. Advisory Board on Aging —Appointments
The Board considered making appointments to the Advisory Board on Aging.
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
appoint the following to the Advisory Board on Aging:
Appointment of Ms. Mary Altpeter to a first full term (Position #7) At -Large with a term
ending 06/30/2017.
Appointment of Mr. Winston Liao to a partial term (Position #8) At -Large with a term
ending 06/30/2015.
POSITION
NO.
NAME
SPECIAL
REPRESENTATIVE
EXPIRATION
DATE
7
Ms. Mary Alt peter
At-Large
06/30/2017
8
Mr. Winston Liao
At-Large
06/30/2015
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
b. Agricultural Preservation Board —Appointment
The Board considered making an appointment to the Agricultural Preservation Board.
A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
appoint:
Mr. Gordon Neville to a first full term (Position #7) White Cross Volunteer Ag. District
with a term ending 09/30/2017.
POSITION
NAME
SPECIAL
EXPIRATION
NO.
REPRESENTATIVE
DATE
7
Mr. Gordon Neville
White Cross Volunteer Ag.
09/30/2017
District
25
26 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
27•
28
29
30
31
32•
33
34
35
36•
37•
38
39
c. Animal Services Advisory Board — Appointments
The Board considered making appointments to the Animal Services Advisory Board.
A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to
appoint to the Animal Services Advisory Board:
Ms. Nicole Roth to a second full term (Position #1) Animal Welfare /Animal Advocacy
with a term ending 06/30/2017. (ACCORDING TO POLICIES AND PROCEDURES THREE OF
THE POSITIONS WILL CONSIST OF COUNTY RESIDENTS WHOSE EXPERIENCE
DEMONSTRATES A COMMITMENT TO ANIMAL WELFARE AND /OR ADVOCACY)
Dr. Susan Elmore to a first full term (Position #11) Veterinarian from Health Board with a
term ending 06/30/2017.
POSITION
NAME
SPECIAL
EXPIRATION
NO.
REPRESENTATIVE
DATE
1
2
3
4
5
6
17
1
Dr. Susan Elmore
Veterinarian from Health
06/30/2017
NO.
Board
DATE
11
Ms. Nicole Roth
Animal Welfare /Animal
06/30/2017
Advocacy
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
d. Chapel Hill Orange County Visitors Bureau — Appointments
The Board considered making appointments to the Chapel Hill Orange County Visitors
Bureau.
7 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to
8 appoint the following to the Chapel Hill Orange County Visitor's Bureau:
90 Ms. Libbie Hough to a first full term (Position #10) Alliance /Historic Hillsborough with a
10 term ending 12/31/2017.
110 Mr. Nitin Khanna to a partial term (Position #11) At -Large O/C Lodging Association with
12 a term ending 12/31/2015.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25•
26
27•
28
29•
30
31•
32
33•
34
35
POSITION
NAME
SPECIAL
EXPIRATION
NO.
REPRESENTATIVE
DATE
10
Ms. Libbie Hough
Alliance /Historic
12/31/2017
Hillsborough
11
Nitin Khanna
At -Large O/C Lodging
12/31/2015
Association
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
e. Commission for the Environment —Appointments
The Board considered making appointments to the Commission for the Environment.
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Price to
appoint the following to the Commission for the Environment:
Dr. May Becker to a second full term (Position #1) At -Large Chapel Hill Township
representative with a term ending 12/31/2017.
Ms. Lydia Wegman to a first full term (Position #3) At -Large Land Resources
representative for with a term ending 12/31/2017.
Ms. Sheila Thomas -Ambat ending a first full term (Position #8) At -Large representative
with a term ending 12/31/2016.
Ms. Jeanette O'Connor ending to a first full term (Position #9 At -Large Chapel Hill
Township representative with a term ending 12/31/2017.
Mr. Peter Cada to a second full term (Position #10) At -Large Eno Township
representative with a term ending 12/31/2017.
Mr. David Welch to a second full term (Position #11) At -Large Chapel Hill Township
representative with a term ending 12/31/2017.
POSITION
NAME
SPECIAL
EXPIRATION
NO.
REPRESENTATIVE
DATE
1
Dr. May Becker
At -Large Chapel Hill
12/31/2017
Township
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8•
9
10•
11
12
IN
3
Ms. Lydia We man
At-Large Land Resources
12/31/2017
8
Ms. Sheila Thomas-
Am bat
At -Large
12/31/2016
9
Ms. Jeanette O'Connor
At -Large Chapel Hill
Township
12/31/2017
10
Mr. Peter Cada
At-Large Eno Township
12/31/2017
11
Mr. David Welch
At -Large Chapel Hill
Township
12/31/2017
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
f. Human Relations Commission —Appointments
The Board considered making appointments to the Human Relations Commission.
A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to
appoint the following to the Human Relations Commission:
Mr. Alan Jefferies a first full term (Position #4) Town of Chapel Hill representative with a
term ending 06/30/2017.
Ms. Jilan Li a partial term (Position #9) Town of Chapel Hill representative with a term
ending 09/30/2016.
13
14 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
15
16 12. Board Comments
17 Commissioner Pelissier noted that the Family Success Alliance had its first two forums
18 this week.
19 Commissioner Gordon congratulated the people who were elected to the Board of
20 County Commissioners in the recent election.
21 Commissioner McKee said at the meeting of the Fire Chiefs Council, Durham Technical
22 Community College made the offer to increase fire training classes. He said there was some
23 discussion of getting better minute notes for these meetings. He said he will forward the
24 minutes to the Board of County Commissioners as soon as he receives them.
25 Commissioner Rich said at the Triangle JCOG meeting last week, Orange County was
26 awarded the 2014 Marvin Collins award for joint planning related to the Jordan Lake
27 partnership.
28 Commissioner Rich said the solar panels have been installed at McDougle School, and
29 these will be used as an educational tool. She said she has contacted Chair Halkiotis about
30 starting the discussion of getting solar panels in one of the Orange County Schools.
31 Commissioner Rich said she attended a Carrboro Elementary 3 d grade class during
32 their unit on government, and they asked some intuitive questions.
33 Commissioner Rich said the numbers being discussed at the Solid Waste Advisory
34 Group meetings show that roll carts are clearly working. She said these numbers will be
35 discussed at the Assembly of Governments (AOG) meeting.
36 Commissioner Price said she was invited to Glenwood Elementary, and she was very
37 impressed. She said the principal at that school had just been named principal of the year for
38 the district.
POSITION
NO.
NAME
SPECIAL
REPRESENTATIVE
EXPIRATION
DATE
4
Mr. Alan Jefferies
Town of Chapel Hill
06/30/2017
9
Ms. Jilan Li
Town of Chapel Hill
09/30/2016
13
14 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
15
16 12. Board Comments
17 Commissioner Pelissier noted that the Family Success Alliance had its first two forums
18 this week.
19 Commissioner Gordon congratulated the people who were elected to the Board of
20 County Commissioners in the recent election.
21 Commissioner McKee said at the meeting of the Fire Chiefs Council, Durham Technical
22 Community College made the offer to increase fire training classes. He said there was some
23 discussion of getting better minute notes for these meetings. He said he will forward the
24 minutes to the Board of County Commissioners as soon as he receives them.
25 Commissioner Rich said at the Triangle JCOG meeting last week, Orange County was
26 awarded the 2014 Marvin Collins award for joint planning related to the Jordan Lake
27 partnership.
28 Commissioner Rich said the solar panels have been installed at McDougle School, and
29 these will be used as an educational tool. She said she has contacted Chair Halkiotis about
30 starting the discussion of getting solar panels in one of the Orange County Schools.
31 Commissioner Rich said she attended a Carrboro Elementary 3 d grade class during
32 their unit on government, and they asked some intuitive questions.
33 Commissioner Rich said the numbers being discussed at the Solid Waste Advisory
34 Group meetings show that roll carts are clearly working. She said these numbers will be
35 discussed at the Assembly of Governments (AOG) meeting.
36 Commissioner Price said she was invited to Glenwood Elementary, and she was very
37 impressed. She said the principal at that school had just been named principal of the year for
38 the district.
19
1 Chair Jacobs said the award the County just won was named after Marvin Collins, a
2 Mebane native and former Orange County planning director.
3 Chair Jacobs said the ribbon cutting for the Rogers Road Community Center will be held
4 on November 15th at 9 a.m.
5 Chair Jacobs said he wanted to congratulate their state representatives, newly elected
6 and re- elected in the last election. He expressed pleasure at the changes in the Wake County
7 Board of Commissioners to become part of the Triangle again.
8 Chair Jacobs said he was at the Sportsplex recently, and he noted that some signs say
9 "Orange County Sportsplex", and some say "Triangle Sportsplex."
10 Clarence Grier said the center has been named the Orange County Sportsplex, but this
11 has not been changed everywhere. He said he will talk with Jeff Thompson about this.
12 Chair Jacobs mentioned the passing of Ann Johnson, who was a leader and activist for
13 senior's rights.
14 Commissioner Price expressed her congratulations to the new Sheriff and the new
15 Register of Deeds.
16
17 13. Information Items
180 BOCC Meeting Follow -up Actions List
190 Tax Collector's Report - Numerical Analysis
20• Tax Collector's Report - Measure of Enforced Collections
21 • Tax Assessor's Report - Releases and Refunds under $100
22• Major Fund Financial Statement for the Year Ended June 30, 2014
23• BOCC Chair Letter Regarding Petitions from October 21, 2014 Regular Board Meeting
24
25 14. Closed Session - NONE
26
27 15. Adjournment
28 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Price to
29 adjourn the meeting at 9:02 p.m.
30
31 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
32
33 Barry Jacobs, Chair
34
35
36 Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board
37
I Attachment 2
2
3 DRAFT MINUTES
4 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
5 Work Session
6 November 11, 2014
7 7:00 p.m.
8
9 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a work session on Tuesday,
10 November 11, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Building in Hillsborough, N.C.
11
12 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jacobs and Commissioners Mark Dorosin,
13 Alice M. Gordon, Earl McKee, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price Penny Rich
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Assistant County Manager
17 Clarence Grier, Cheryl Young and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other staff members will
18 be identified appropriately below)
19 Steve Brantley distributed handouts for Item 2
20
21 Chair Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. He noted the following two items
22 at the Commissioner's places:
23 - Handout — Synthetic Tax Increment Financing
24 - Handout — County Insurance Benefit Plan
25
26 1. Update on Urban Roll Cart Implementation
27 Gayle Wilson reported that the roll cart implementation program is going very well in all
28 three of the towns. He said initially there were concerns about the size and color of the carts,
29 but there have been no complaints recently. He said there had been reports of broken carts,
30 and staff has determined that this is caused by improper placement of the carts at the curb. He
31 said staff is working on an education and outreach program to demonstrate how to properly set
32 these containers out at the curb for automatic collection. He said there has been an increase in
33 the handicapped customer requests, which have increased from 119 to 224. He said it has
34 been suggested that the County should have a more formal policy for handicapped collection,
35 and staff is proposing a more systematic application process.
36 Gayle Wilson said in the first quarter of this fiscal year the tonnage is up 29 percent
37 since the implementation of the roll out carts. He said this exceeds expectations, and the
38 benefit of the roll carts has been proven. He said the monthly participation rate is between 85
39 and 90 percent, and this is an increase from previous months.
40 Commissioner Rich asked if the issue with the damaged carts is specific to certain
41 neighborhoods or if it is consistent throughout the towns.
42 Eric Gerringer said the issue is random at this point, and it is hard to determine certain
43 areas. He said it is primarily due to placement of the carts.
44 Commissioner McKee said he was looking at the special service request form, and age
45 is a consideration. He noted that there are questions for handicaps on that same form, and he
46 asked if applicants will receive special service if they have an age issue but are not
47 handicapped.
48 Gayle Wilson said there is no particular age designated, and there is no formal policy.
49 He said anyone with a handicapped driving sticker will be accommodated, and the program is
50 set up for the medically impaired, regardless of age.
2
1 Commissioner Price asked if the people collecting the garbage are instructed not to get
2 out of the truck or move the bins.
3 Gayle Wilson said the program is supposed to be fully automated, and workers are
4 instructed to minimize the amount of time in and out of the truck.
5 Commissioner Price asked if the County workers are allowed to get out and straighten
6 the bins.
7 Gayle Wilson said yes. He said 45 damaged bins out of 18,200 bins is not a major
8 problem, but workers will straighten them out as needed.
9 Commissioner Gordon said she is happy to hear about the increased tonnage. She
10 asked when an update will be given on the rural areas, regarding keeping bins or moving to the
11 roll carts.
12 Gayle Wilson said two surveys were sent out to residents in the rural service areas, and
13 7,500 responses have been returned. He said 6,841 of these respondents wanted the roll carts,
14 and about 700 did not. He expects to see the positive number grow. He said this is an opt -in
15 program.
16 Chair Jacobs asked what happens if people decorate their carts.
17 Gayle Wilson said staff would prefer that residents not make any permanent alterations
18 to the carts.
19 Commissioner Dorosin asked for clarification on the proper placement of carts.
20 Gayle Wilson said the preference is that the carts are not in the street, but that they are
21 placed on the sidewalk or grass curb area.
22
23 2. Update on the Ephesus Church Road / Fordham Boulevard Public Improvements
24 and Request for County Investment in the Project
25 Ken Pennoyer said it has been six months since the Town asked Chapel Hill for
26 assistance, and this is an update as well as a suggestion of a somewhat different approach. He
27 said the Town Council approved the right of way and easement acquisition, or phase 1 of the
28 roadway improvements. He said the Town has also received its first development application,
29 for Village Plaza apartments.
30 He reviewed the following PowerPoint slides:
31
32 Ephesus Fordham Renewal Financing Plan
33
34 Redevelopment will enable self - financing of public improvements by using a "Synthetic"
35 Tax Increment Financing.
36
37 The Town is planning an installment financing to pay for $10 million of Ephesus Fordham
38 public improvements by combining financing with the Town Hall Renovation Project
39
40 Synthetic Tax Increment Financing
41 Funds for repayment of the debt will come from the additional (incremental) taxes generated
42 from the redeveloped properties
43 Total Annual Payments would be about $800,000 (20 years)
44
45 Expected Development (Bar Graph)
46 2.2 Million Sq. Ft. & $260 Million Value
47
48 20 Year Cost Benefit Comparison (Graph)
49 Cumulative Debt Service & Town Property Tax Increment
50
51 Major Revenues Schools & County (Chart)
1
2 Proposed County Participation
3 Lesser of 50% of the actual tax increment or 50% of the actual Debt Service on the $10 million
4 of public Improvements
5 Subject to annual appropriation based on Town progress report on project performance
6 Maximum Annual Payment would be about $400, 000
7
8 Annual Reporting
9 The Town will provide the County with an annual project performance report during the
10 budget cycle that will include:
11 ■ Additions to Tax Base
12 ■ Public improvement status
13 ■ Private improvement status
14 ■ Economic impact analysis
15
16 Projected County Tax Increment (Bar Graph)
17
18 20 Year Cost Benefit Comparison (Graph)
19 Cumulative Debt Service & Town Property Tax Increment plus County Contribution
20
21 School Generation Numbers
22 Difference Between Town and County Student Growth numbers:
23 ■ Based on available (2007) Student Generation factors for CHCCS for multi - family
24 Housing units Town calculated 105 new students for 1,495 units
25 ■ County estimated 450 new students based on over -all student generation rates (all
26 housing types)
27 2007 Student Generation Numbers (Bar Graph)
28
29 2014 Student Generation Numbers*
30 New Student Generation Rates
31 ■ Broken out by Sub -Areas (Chapel Hill & ETJ)
32 ■ Separate factors for number of bedrooms
33 - Multifamily: 0 -2 bedrooms, 3+ Bedrooms & Average)
34 ■ Based on market demand we believe that student generation for Ephesus Fordham
35 Development will be mostly 1 -2 bedroom multi - family units
36
37 2014 Student Generation Numbers* (Graph)
38 (Chapel Hill and ETJ)
39
40 Village Plaza Apartments
41 1st Ephesus Fordham Development Application
42 ■ 266 Multi - Family Housing Units (1 -2 bedrooms)
43 ■ 15,600 Square Feet of new retail
44 ■ Population Estimate: 505 new residents
45 Village Plaza Apartments
46 Preliminary Revenues Estimates
Revenue
Town
County
Schools
Property Tax
$354,900
$594,675
$141,200
Sales Tax
31,100
75,381
0
Impact Fees (one -time)
0
0
342,076
M
1
2 Village Plaza Apartments* (Bar Graph) Student Generation Numbers (2014)
3 Ken Pennoyer said the Town originally looked at a tax increment financing (TIF);
4 however the structure of the law in N.C. makes this too expensive and somewhat less
5 efficient. He said the local government commission staff dissuaded the town from using this
6 and instead encouraged them to use an installment purchase model. He said there was also an
7 opportunity to combine projects. He said the problem with the improvements for the Ephesus
8 Fordham area is that they are roadway and storm water projects, which offer no asset to use as
9 collateral. He said in order to make this work it had to be combined with a project that has
10 collateral. He said the needed update of the Town Hall provided an opportunity to combine
11 projects and use the Town Hall as a security for the $10 million.
12 Ken Pennoyer said by using the synthetic tax increment financing, the idea is that the
13 majority of the funds to repay the debt would come from the increase in the value of the
14 development that happens in the tax increment area. He said the Ephesus Fordham project
15 would create increased property tax values and tax revenue that would help pay for the debt for
16 the project.
17 Ken Pennoyer reviewed the expected development graph and said the development is
18 planned to have 3 separate phases, and the cash flow has been projected out 20 years in order
19 to match the debt service. He said the expectation is that the actual development will be
20 completely built out within 15 years.
21 He said the goal was for the cumulative debt service to be paid for by the cumulative
22 property tax increment achieved by the town extending services to the new development. He
23 said the "Cost Benefit" graph shows where these cost and tax increment lines cross. He said in
24 formal tax increment financing, the process would be to come to the County Commissioners to
25 have the tax increment approved in a vote. He said the County would then have the opportunity
26 to decide whether or not to participate.
27 Ken Pennoyer said the projection based on the current tax rate is that the total property
28 tax generated after a 15 year period would be approximately $2.3 million, and the school impact
29 fees would be $1.9 million (based on the estimate of 1,495 new family housing units).
30 He reviewed the slide regarding proposed County participation, and he said based on
31 the anticipated debt service of $80,000 per year, the maximum the County would pay is
32 $400,000. He said if the increment ends up being $100,000 in the early years, the maximum
33 request of the County would be 50 percent of that, or $50,000.
34 Ken Pennoyer said the Town has been working with this for years and has a comfort
35 level that allows them to make the leap. He said it is different from the County's perspective; so
36 in order to help the County make a decision without committing to it for 20 years, the town will
37 provide annual reporting as outlined on the slide. He said the decision to allocate money could
38 be an annual budgetary decision based on whether the project is meeting expectations. He said
39 this is a departure from the original presentation.
40 Ken Pennoyer reviewed the slide regarding Projected County Tax Increment, and he
41 said the green bar represents the maximum amount of debt service the County would have to
42 pay in the given year. He said the cumulative net tax increment, after taking this amount off,
43 would be $25 million. He said the green line in the next slide shows how the County
I contribution impacts the 20 Year Cost Benefit Comparison.
2 Ken Pennoyer said, in looking back at the last presentation, he noticed that the numbers
3 used for student generation were wildly different than the numbers being used by County
4 staff. He said the Town was estimating 105 students based on the 2007 student generation
5 numbers for multifamily housing. He said the County estimate was 450 new students, and this
6 is significantly higher. He said this was based on the housing generation for all different types
7 of housing. He said a new, preliminary set of numbers have just been received for 2014. He
8 reviewed the slides on these numbers and said the figures are broken down by areas and
9 house size. He said the estimate, based on these new numbers, is a range of 179 to 284 new
10 students.
11 Ken Pennoyer said the difference from the initial presentation is a suggested approach
12 where the town provides an annual project report that will form the basis of the County's budget
13 decision making with regard to funding.
14 Commissioner Pelissier said there is a project being submitted by Chapel Hill tomorrow
15 at the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) meeting. She said is a project for over $2
16 million for the intersection of Ephesus Church and Fordham Boulevard. She would like to know
17 what other transportation projects might come from DOT money. She would also like to know
18 how this project being looked at by the MPO plays into the Ephesus Fordham project.
19 Ken Pennoyer said there is a $2.1 million project being submitted to the DOT, and this
20 would actually reduce the $8.8 million in costs associated with roadway projects. He said this
21 would come in the form of a reimbursement in 2018, so the full amount would still be borrowed
22 initially, and then the $2 million would be an early redemption to reduce the overall cost.
23 Commissioner Pelissier asked if there are any other projects in the MPO plan that relate
24 to road improvements in this area.
25 Dwight Bassett said there is an additional request related to studying a bridge that
26 connects over the wetlands between Eastgate and Whole Foods, but there are no other
27 requests related to roads.
28 Commissioner Pelissier referred to the slide on cost benefit comparisons. She asked if
29 staff had calculated how much of a property tax increase would be needed to close the gap
30 Ken Pennoyer said it would be in the range of a 1 to 2 cent increase. He said this would
31 have to happen in the early part of the project, as it would take awhile for enough development
32 to happen to create the revenue; however, he said the plan was to use fund balance in the debt
33 management fund in order to fill any initial gap.
34 Commissioner Gordon acknowledged Commissioner Elect Mia Burroughs, two members
35 of the Chapel Hill Town Council, George Cianciolo and Maria Palmer, and Chapel Hill Mayor
36 Mark Kleinschmidt. She asked about the economic impact analysis that was mentioned as part
37 of the annual report.
38 Ken Pennoyer said staff would look at what was being built and the impact with regard to
39 retail sales, employment, and basic increases in value and property tax.
40 Commissioner Gordon asked if an analysis like this is available now based on the
41 figures that are known.
42 Ken Pennoyer said a large cost benefit analysis has been done for the overall
43 project. He said this is a fairly large undertaking, and once you get beyond 10 years it is pretty
I
1 speculative as far as returns. He said this is available on their website.
2 Commissioner Gordon said it would be helpful to share this with the Board of County
3 Commissioners and the staff.
4 Commissioner Gordon asked Craig Benedict if the County's fiscal impact analysis might
5 be helpful to use here.
6 Craig Benedict said the County's fiscal impact analysis is focused more on residential
7 development, so it is not an appropriate model for non - residential developments. He said there
8 are new models out there to look at the multiplier effect.
9 Commissioner Gordon said that would be helpful.
10 Commissioner McKee referred to page 11, and he asked for more explanation of the
11 public and private improvement status and how this would be measured.
12 Ken Pennoyer said the public improvement status would be an update on the progress
13 toward roadway and storm water improvements.
14 Commissioner McKee said he understands that the improvements to the road make the
15 redevelopment more likely, but the improvements to the road do not factor into an increase in
16 tax revenue for the County. He asked how this is factored in with the performance report.
17 Ken Pennoyer said the performance report is more an update on the milestones the
18 Town has set for making progress on the project, and it will provide a snapshot of where road
19 development is and how this affects the potential for other development in the area.
20 Commissioner McKee asked if the Town is preparing an exit strategy in the event that
21 the County decides that the project is not meeting expectations.
22 Ken Pennoyer said he is proposing that this decision be made on an annual basis during
23 budget deliberations. He said part of this is based on the realization that money from new taxes
24 has a lot of demands. He said the purpose of the performance report is to illustrate the fact that
25 the project is creating value with regard to what was expected. He said the exit strategy would
26 only be needed if the County decides it has a higher use of those funds.
27 Commissioner McKee said this does not seem to align with the 20 year build out of this
28 project. He said he would think that there would be some expectation of the County to see this
29 through to the end.
30 Ken Pennoyer said the town would like to see a 20 year commitment, but they
31 understand that in order for that to make sense the project would need to perform and meet the
32 needs of Orange County in terms of economic development. He said staff obviously feels that
33 the project is going to meet the milestones in the development scenario, but they want to
34 structure it in a way that gives the County a choice.
35 Commissioner Dorosin said he wants to be clear. He said if these student projections
36 are way off and there are actually more students coming in, the County could choose not to give
37 the $400,000 to the project, and could allocate to the schools instead. He asked if this is an
38 accurate assessment.
39 Ken Pennoyer said that is the County's prerogative.
40 Commissioner Dorosin asked about slide 12 and said it looks like the payment would
41 only be less than the $400,000 in the first year. He said every other year it looks like the green
42 block is the same size.
43 Ken Pennoyer said this slide is based on a likely development scenario. He said the
7
1 portion of the increment would be less than 50 percent of the debt service, and the town would
2 make up the difference.
3 Commissioner Dorosin said Ken Pennoyer referred to another format this funding path
4 could have taken. He said he feels like this has come to the Board much later than it should
5 have, and that is the one troubling aspect. He asked for clarification on this timing.
6 Ken Pennoyer said the financing of this public project lagged behind some of the other
7 elements, and by the time staff began trying to figure out financing, there were not a lot of
8 options. He said they finally arrived at the tax increment financing (TIF) with the statutory
9 method. He said until the flood at Town Hall last year, there was no project to be combined to
10 provide collateral. He said the formal TIF has a lot more formal requirements, including a vote
11 from the Board, so staff held out on this and did not get the ball rolling until later when they
12 realized the town hall could be used as collateral. He said staff also had to get through several
13 other loopholes before spending time on financing. He said, in hindsight, this should have been
14 done sooner.
15 Commissioner Price said this project is exciting; however she wants to consider the
16 worst case scenario. She said years from now there will be a different Board in place, and she
17 wonders what plan B will be if that Board did not want to fund this project.
18 Ken Pennoyer said the Town is committed to the project, and the backup plan would be
19 to use future debt capacity to fill in the gaps. He said the numbers used to determine the
20 revenue numbers are very conservative, so he feels there is a greater upside to the project.
21 Commissioner Price asked who would be renting these properties. She asked if this
22 would put any new pressure or weight on social services or the health department if there is an
23 influx of new people.
24 Ken Pennoyer said the town did get information from the developer on the targeted
25 market for these units. He said this information can be provided to the Board.
26 Commissioner Rich asked for more information on other economic development in this
27 area.
28 Dwight Bassett said this process was started back in the spring, and the projections
29 were very conservative based on what he sees happening now.
30 Commissioner Rich asked if the future projections include more retail, office and
31 commercial space.
32 Dwight Bassett said yes. He said staff knew there would be an initial wave of housing,
33 which is a traditional growth pattern in supporting retail. He said Village Plaza's announcement
34 to proceed with their project has sent a signal to other developers to begin exploring office and
35 retail. He said there is a much broader mix of development being discussed now that there was
36 in the spring.
37 Chair Jacobs said the opportunity to have annual reports is an improvement. He said
38 County staff may want to request that specific information be built into these reports.
39 Chair Jacobs said the Town is requesting that the Board address the entire
40 infrastructure, but Orange County can choose whatever portion of the project they would like to
41 support.
42 Ken Pennoyer said that is correct, although the town would like for the County to
43 participate to the greatest extent that is comfortable for them.
I Chair Jacobs said the Board will likely have a conversation about this at the work
2 session on January 27th. He said Orange County has never been in the business of funding
3 roads, but there is a possibility of pulling out the part that is storm water management.
4 He asked if there will be any metrics regarding decreasing storm water flow, or is this
5 just a stasis type of plan.
6 Ken Pennoyer said he is out of his depth with that question. He said he would refer that
7 question back to their engineers. He believes there have been some significant changes to this
8 in the past few months.
9 Steve Brantley said there has been a lot of subjective information about this project in
10 the media and through public opinion; however, he has chosen to seek objective areas to
11 consider this from an economic development perspective.
12 Steve Brantley presented the following PowerPoint slides:
13
14 Ephesus Fordham Renewal Potential Economic Development for Orange County
15 The proposed redevelopment of Chapel Hill's Ephesus Church — Fordham Boulevard
16 district offers several realistic economic development benefits:
17 • Significantly greater property tax valuation is created, per acre, due to the higher density
18 allowed by the proposed redevelopment.
19 • Retail sales tax potential will reduce our local sales tax leakage, and help retain wealth
20 currently flowing out of Orange County and into our neighboring counties. Although
21 Orange County ranks #1 in N.C. for highest per capita income, we rank 81 st among all
22 100 N.C. counties in retail sales tax collected per capita.
23 • The inventory of available commercial office locations will grow, thereby making Orange
24 County & Chapel Hill more competitive to recruit new and expanding corporate
25 headquarters site search projects. Currently, larger office headquarters projects are
26 able to find suitable commercial space in Durham County & Wake County that is not
27 available in Orange County.
28
29 Ephesus Fordham Renewal Potential Economic Development for Orange County
30 • Promotes a new and exciting destination for tourism.
31 • Generates opportunity to attract more affordable housing options.
32 • Creates more shopping, dining & employment opportunities here at home, which reduces
33 transportation & out - migration to adjacent counties.
34 • Identifies and improves critical infrastructure needs such as road improvements, mass transit
35 and storm water systems.
36 • Synthetic Tax Increment Financing (TIF) is a commonly used & successful financial tool
37 that regularly assists other North Carolina communities in promoting local economic
38 development and land use goals.
0
1 Economic development offices with the Town and County should collaborate on the
2 recruitment of active investment clients and prospects.
3
4 Ephesus Fordham Renewal Potential Economic Development for Orange County
5 • The Ephesus Fordham Renewal Planning incorporates consultant recommendations made in
6 2013 by Urban3, LLC which created a 3 -D visualization map showing property tax
7 revenue per acre throughout Orange County. The report's visualization tool showed
8 where the County's property tax revenues are derived, where property values are
9 highest, the link between higher density development and increased property tax
10 generation, and the positive economic potential of redevelopment of mixed use
11 projects. Higher density generally yields higher real estate market values and property
12 taxes.
13 • Urban3 LLC's study was jointly funded in a partnership between the Town of Chapel Hill,
14 Orange County (Economic Development), the Chapel Hill /Carrboro Chamber of
15 Commerce, area developers (East West Partners) and local real estate firms.
16
17 Per Capita Income in North Carolina Orange County & Adjacent Counties — 2012 (bar
18 graph)
19
20 Annual Retail Sales Tax Per Capita Orange County & Adjacent Counties — 2012 (bar
21 graph)
22
23 Retail Sales Taxes Per Capita Orange County vs. Durham County — 2012 (bar graph)
24
25 Retail Sales Tax Leakage - 2012 Orange County vs. Alamance & Chatham Counties (bar
26 graph)
27
28 Steve Brantley noted the significant leakage of retail sales tax. He said any retail
29 development that occurs within Orange County, especially this close to Durham County's
30 Patterson Place and New Hope Commons, is a plus in both job creation and retail sales tax. He
31 said Orange County is highest in terms of per- capita income, but it is 81St in retail sales tax per
32 capita.
33 He said the inventory of properties for commercial use in the County is very low. He
34 said companies are not willing to wait for a property to be built for them in 2 or 3 years, so this
35 business usually goes to Cary, Durham or Raleigh. He said any commercial buildings that go
36 up in Orange County will provide the benefit of being able to pursue projects that cannot
37 currently be pursued.
38 Steve Brantley said new restaurants become a new destination that draws people in and
39 generates other business. He said this project will also generate new housing and affordable
40 housing, and it will also create hundreds of long term construction jobs, which would be a
41 benefit for residents.
10
1 Steve Brantley said he has asked Dwight Basset and the other associates with the town
2 to find ways to work more closely to collaborate on recruitment for projects. He said that way
3 the County has a more immediate and confidential insight into the prospects of projects on the
4 horizon.
5 He reviewed the bar graph slides on per capita income, and retail sales tax. He noted
6 that Alamance County does not experience the same retail sales tax leakage as Orange
7 County.
8 Steve Brantley read through the information on the yellow handout titled "Synthetic Tax
9 Increment Financing Program (TIF) Program — City of Charlotte & Mecklenburg County."
10 Clarence Grier said they would like to bring back a financial analysis at a later work
11 session. He said tonight was for receiving information.
12 Steve Brantley said this opportunity would allow the County to partner with Chapel Hill in
13 a significant way. He said he has looked at Chapel Hill's plan, and the numbers are not
14 guaranteed; however, the town's more recent developments have shown that these projects do
15 very well. He said the use of form based code facilitates more demand coming in.
16 He said there is a quite a bit of residential there, whereas his preference would be to see
17 mostly commercial and retail. However, he said he has been reminded that it is the residential
18 piece that helps make the retail piece work.
19 Clarence Grier said he would like to bring back a financial analysis at a later work
20 session that details the County's perspective. He said tonight was just an opportunity for the
21 County to receive information.
22 Craig Benedict said he agreed with Clarence Grier. He outlined the following items that
23 will be brought back as part of the analysis:
24 - School Impacts (capital impact and operating expenses)
25 - Storm water facilities
26 - NCDOT and MPO projects that might reduce overall cost
27
28 Commissioner Gordon asked for more information on the new student generation rate
29 study and when this will be presented for approval.
30 Craig Benedict said this report was received about two weeks ago. He said some large
31 differences do show up when looking specifically at multi - family properties. He said staff
32 intends to look at the findings and present this at a work session in the New Year, as part of the
33 School Adequate Public Facilities Report. He said this will be used in the short term for the
34 Certificate of Adequate Public Schools (CAPS). He said in the long term this may be used to
35 modify the actual impact fees.
36 Commissioner Gordon said it would be helpful if County staff could work with the town to
37 try and agree on the parameters of an economic development analysis. She said there is no
38 information on the cost of County services.
39 Clarence Grier said this collaboration has been discussed with the representatives from
40 the town.
41 Commissioner Price asked if Orange Water and Sewer Authority ( OWASA) had signed
42 off on this project.
43 Dwight Basset said there have been meetings with OWASA and they have expressed
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
11
interest in additional facilities in the Elliot Road extension in order to create a loop system.
Chair Jacobs said he has heard requests for more information on the following items:
- Targeting for the rental housing
- Economic Development analysis
- Further analysis of the storm water management planning
Chair Jacobs said to Bonnie Hammersley that the County has had this information since
April, and the Board is disappointed in the lack of a thorough presentation from staff tonight. He
hopes that this will be available in January.
Maria Palmer thanked Steve Brantley for mentioning the word partnership. She said
where Orange County goes, Chapel Hill goes and vice versa. She said Commissioner Dorosin
mentioned that this is coming to the County a little late; however, she said none of this would be
happening without form based code, and that was not a sure thing. She said the cost of doing
nothing is a lost opportunity for both the County and the town. She said the County is bleeding
people and the hole needs to be fixed.
She said a $2 million piece of land has been put into affordable housing, and many
residents have been waiting for years to live in decent housing. She said this is an exciting
investment, and Chapel Hill believes in this project.
Mayor Kleinschmidt said right now this district is failing economically. He said there are
bright spots, but there are also failing strip malls, abandoned car dealerships, and roads that
make no sense. He said took this project to a mayors conference in 2010, and that is when this
began. He said there was a struggle to develop a vision and a small area plan, but nothing
happened. He said two special use permits (SUP) for the vacant lot on Elliot Road, but it is still
vacant. He said there is no infrastructure in place to support the economic development. He
said analysis has shown that if you provide infrastructure, economic development will follow.
Mayor Kleinschmidt said Rams Plaza has not filled space because no one can tell their
customers how to get there, and developers cannot afford to make the necessary road changes
and improvements. He said this is why the town began discussing ways to provide these
improvements. He said storm water improvements are also necessary because there are no
developers to make this happen.
Mayor Kleinschmidt said two months after the re- zoning was approved, the first project
came in, and it will provide tens of millions of dollars of investment. He said now that one
project is on board others are following. He said the revenue is going to come to the County
and the town; and in the worst case, if it does not create revenue, the County will not have to
participate. He said long ago the town developed a debt management fund that produces more
money than is owed in debt, and this is the plan B that Commissioner Price asked about.
Mayor Kleinschmidt said there are some myths out there that he would like to take off of
the table. He said this district is going to have the highest standards for storm water in the
state, because the code requires it.
He said the flooding issues are being addressed. He said staff has pulled back and
looked at the entire storm water basin. He said investments are being made in the whole
upstream to manage the water as it comes downhill.
Mayor Kleinschmidt said there is an unmatched commitment to affordable housing in this
district, and 300 of the 1400 units will be affordable housing. He said an incentive program is
also being created for private developers to provide affordable housing.
Mayor Kleinschmidt said the County and the towns are in a new place when it comes to
economic development, and all of the government entities are working together to share the
goals of the economic development. He said this tide has the potential to raise their boats pretty
high.
12
1 Mayor Kleinschmidt said when the Orange County staff brings back the answers to the
2 Board of County Commissioners' questions, he hopes that the Board will decide to participate.
3 He said what is good for Orange County is good for Chapel Hill.
4 Chair Jacobs expressed his appreciation for the town being here and including the
5 County in this discussion. He said the town and the County are inextricably intertwined and
6 have the same goals and aspirations. He hopes that they can make this work.
7 Commissioner Gordon expressed her thanks to the Mayor and two members of the
8 Chapel Hill Town Council for coming here to share their vision. She said it has been a new day
9 in Orange County for collaboration in many areas.
10 Mayor Kleinschmidt thanked the Board members, as well as some retired
11 Commissioners for their efforts to work together.
12 Commissioner Gordon said she feels that we are all in a good place and the
13 partnerships are all strong.
14 Commissioner McKee said this project has some definite benefits, and it can be a tool to
15 help move Orange County out of the 81St position for retail sales. He said the County cannot
16 remain in that low position and expect not to continue increasing tax on residential properties,
17 which is not sustainable.
18 Commissioner McKee said he questions a few of the numbers, and he had hoped to
19 have some financial information tonight to help clarify some issues for him. He said he would
20 like to see information from staff on the potential with regard to the commercial and retail
21 development when this comes back in January. He said there needs to be some sort of
22 business that will generate a significant amount of retail sales.
23 Commissioner McKee said he would like to see all of the costs associated with the
24 residential development, including the impact of additional housing, additional retail, and how it
25 impacts our social services. He would like to know the pros and cons on whether this will create
26 a cascading effect of other projects coming to them.
27 Commissioner McKee said no county in this state is in the road business. He said this
28 project involves a considerable amount of expenditure for road improvements. He questioned
29 whether involvement in the project would put the County in the road business. He would to see
30 some strong financial analysis from the Orange County staff.
31 Commissioner Dorosin said this project is focusing analytically on the idea that
32 development of any kind has to not only pay for itself, but also be a net gain. He said this is a
33 dangerous way to look at the future of the County, as it will effectively eliminate projects like
34 meaningful affordable housing. He said this comment is not aimed at this project in particular,
35 but it is a comment about the way the Board needs to think about growth and whether the tax
36 revenue always has to offset the cost.
37 Commissioner Pelissier she would like to see a breakdown of the different values for
38 residential and commercial developments.
39
40 3. Update on Employment and Child Care Programs Operating at Social Services
41 Nancy Coston said this is a discussion of employment and childcare. She said she
42 would like to start by sharing some successes.
43 Sharron Hinton reviewed the following new and successful employment programs at the
44 Department of Social Services:
45
46 -- NC Food and Nutrition Services Employment and Training program. - This is a volunteer
47 program for low income residents who recently began receiving food stamps, and it provides
48 job support and employment training services.
49 -- Job Club — This has provided help to 92 individuals who have received employment through
50 this program in the past 12 months.
13
1 -- Youth Employment and Training Program (Building Futures Program) — This is targeted to
2 residents aged 16 -21, and it provides various means of educational support. 113 individuals
3 have been served with this program.
4 -- Job Fairs — Program provides job fairs to individual in the Work First program, as well as any
5 unemployed or underemployed individuals in the County. This has served over 600
6 individuals.
7 -- Partnerships with local employment agencies
8 -- Partnership with Access Wireless - This agency provides federal cell phones for low income
9 individuals. 1500 phones have been distributed.
10
11 Chair Jacobs said Southern Season has worked Work First clients in the past. He asked if this
12 is still in place.
13 Sharron Hinton said that is not in place at this time.
14
15 Nancy Coston she also comes tonight to get feedback on the childcare situation. She
16 said this is a very complicated picture with moving parts. She said one thing staff did not know
17 about was that the rebasing from the census was going to cause an enormous cut. She said
18 the County gave them $500,000 to help with the waiting list for working families, and this was
19 exciting. She said the cut from the rebasing was $700,000, which was very discouraging. She
20 said some of the rules and regulations affect the families very negatively. She said the updates
21 on this are listed in the charts she has provided.
22 Nancy Coston said, with what is proposed and considering the cut, they will be about
23 $100,000 short without taking anyone off of the waiting list. She said the department would be
24 able to continue to serve the target groups, which includes Work First, adolescent parents,
25 homeless children, and some of the welfare cases. She said these are not subjected to the
26 waiting list. She said, after this list, you begin to look at where the funds can be used. She said
27 one group that was hurt significantly were the families with children aged 6 -18, who lost their
28 eligibility. She said County money was used to give these residents 3 month notice until this
29 could come before the Board. She said she has put the amount in to show what it would cost to
30 keep doing the rolling 3 months.
31 Nancy Coston said the market rate increase for providers is a requirement, and it will
32 cost $150,000 - $200,000.
33 She said staff is very concerned about the relative child care and what affect that might
34 have on the child welfare program. She said when a child's relative is asked to consider taking
35 care of a child in lieu of placing a child in foster care DSS pays the childcare with no fee to
36 them. She said the new law counts their income starting in January.
37 Nancy Coston said the bottom line is that the department may be able to make it to May
38 with the money the County has already provided, but this is dependent on what is gotten in
39 reallocation. She said she is looking for direction on where the County money should be spent,
40 and it seems impractical to think that they can pick up everything that has been dropped.
41 Commissioner Gordon said the chart was helpful. She asked for clarification on the
42 issue with relative childcare. She asked if a relative's income is included when they receive
43 childcare money.
44 Nancy Coston said the statute affects step parents and other relatives, including aunts,
45 uncles, and grandparents. She said everyone pays the same rates now, and it is a percentage
46 of your gross income. She said if a relative were asked to take care of a child, 10 percent of
47 their income must go toward childcare, regardless of the actual cost of the childcare. She said
48 the concern is that relatives are going to be unable to afford to pay the childcare to keep the
49 child in the home.
50 Commissioner Dorosin asked about the 3 month rolling cost being paid to families of
51 children aged 6 -18. He asked where this money goes.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
14
Nancy Coston said this is being paid to the provider, the same as with the state dollars.
Commissioner Dorosin asked if this is paying for after school care.
Nancy Coston said yes.
Commissioner Dorosin said he appreciated the frank analysis, but he does not want to
see this as a no win situation. He would like to see them go beyond plugging the holes. He
would like to prioritize what the next step after the holes are plugged. He would like for there not
to be a waiting list. He thinks there should be a discussion of universal pre -k. He said the most
successful tool for eliminating the racial achievement gap in schools than the availability of pre -
k. He would like to know what the fantasy situation would be for going beyond plugging the
holes.
Nancy Coston said the situation is very discouraging, and these low income parents will
never get off the waiting list without additional resources. She said it will take everything in the
budget just to do this. She said there will be 300 kids on the waiting list by the end of the
month. She said a price tag can be put on all of this. She said it costs about $6,000 per year
per child and there are 300 kids, so that is $1.8 million. She said there are also a lot of needy
children not on the waitlist, because the family has abandoned it.
Commissioner McKee asked how much is left in the social safety net fund.
Clarence Grier said the County put $350,000 into the fund this past year.
Commissioner McKee said part of this could be used to work on this list.
Nancy Coston said people come and go with child care, and much of it is an estimate.
She said some people may get served because someone else drops out.
Commissioner McKee said he agrees that these children represent the most critical
need.
Chair Jacobs said he would like to see a list of things that are considered essential. He
said this is similar to the situation with Section 8, and it is impossible to do it all. He said he
would like to see staff come back with a list of what is reasonable to take on, what would be nice
to take on, and what might be dangerous but desirable to take on. He said once this information
is provided, the Board can make an informed decision about how far they want to push it.
Nancy Coston said there are choices about whether you try to make up the 133 — 200
percent, or whether it is more important to get everybody below 133 percent who is on the
waiting list.
Chair Jacobs said part of this consideration will be looking at the analysis of the
professionals in the department as to which is regarded as the most effective or imperative.
Nancy Coston asked if the 3 month rolling plan should continue in the meantime.
Chair Jacobs said the Board needs to confer on whether this can wait until May or
whether the $350,000 needs to be moved over to their budget right away.
Nancy Coston said she does not want to turn these people away until she knows the
Board's interest, so she will come back with information as quickly as possible.
4. Proposed Parameters for Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) Approval
Craig Benedict reviewed the following information from the abstract.
42 BACKGROUND: ETJs are afforded to cities in accordance with North Carolina General Statute
43 160A -360. These are areas where the county relinquishes its zoning, subdivision, and building
44 code regulations to the adjacent city. These areas are outside the city corporate limits, but are
45 likely urban growth areas and would develop more compatibly with nearby city /town regulations
46 because of the proximity of existing or planned urban form.
47
48 Counties have to review and act upon these request using General Statutes. The majority of the
49 procedures and processing is done by the municipality. However, counties can develop their
15
1 own review policies to assist in an orderly transition from rural to urban environments whether
2 the area is annexed or not into the adjacent city.
3
4 Since these areas are not part of a city and therefore no city voting rights, before potential
5 annexation, general statutes recognize the need for ETJ representation on city planning & board
6 of adjustment boards. The county makes such appointments.
7
8 Orange County does not have a specific policy on ETJ requests since the County and cities
9 have formed other planning mechanisms to ensure orderly development in these adjacent city
10 zones. The joint planning agreements have promoted this planning and growth collaboration.
11 However, since ETJ areas do and can provide additional supplemental powers to a city beyond
12 a joint planning area authority, ETJ expansion is still viable and preferred in some instances.
13 Therein, a draft review policy is attached to evaluate ETJ requests. This policy can be
14 augmented over time.
15
16 Craig Benedict said Orange County does not have an ETJ approval policy, because over
17 the years, the County has dealt with planning in and around cities in a different manner. He
18 said tonight he is providing an overview of the minimums that are mandated by statutes, and
19 Orange County's interest may go a little bit beyond that. He said there has been a variety of
20 small area planning groups as part of the Rogers Road and Chapel Hill project. He said all of
21 this can be used as a good example for the future if there are other ETJ expansion requests.
22 He asked the Board to take a look at the draft policy. He noted that this could be
23 augmented over time, and he said some counties go beyond the minimum. He briefly read
24 through some of the points in the draft policy on pages 2 and 3 of the abstract.
25 Commissioner Price said that there is a note that residents and property owners can
26 comment, and she would like to include businesses here. She would also like to change the
27 wording that says comments "may" be included, to say that comments "shall" be included in the
28 consideration. She said it is important that anyone living in the affected area has a chance to
29 speak and have their comments considered.
30 Commissioner Price referred to page 3 and said she would like to have the statement
31 about provision of municipal services be clearer. She said there may need to be a policy that if
32 residents are to be part of a municipal district, they will have the services. She said she is open
33 to discussion on this, but it should be specified.
34 Commissioner Price asked if the reference to growth management areas and the
35 location requirement that "its" closest point be within 2 miles of the jurisdiction. She asked what
36 "it" refers to.
37 Craig Benedict said that refers to a border. He said she has touched on a point where
38 there has been some change in legislative thought about annexations and ETJ. He said
39 annexations are more difficult now, and the requirement for public services in annexed areas
40 has changed. He will try to analyze this.
41 Commissioner Gordon asked if the ETJ rules have also changed.
42 Craig Benedict said not as much, but they are more specific on representation. He said
43 this was a harbinger of the possible removal of ETJs. He said there will likely be a more
16
1 elaborate process for the appointment of ETJ representatives.
2 Commissioner Gordon referred to page 3 on pre - submittal. She said it states that the
3 idea goes from the elected board of the municipality to the County via the clerk and /or the
4 manager. She said it seems better to her to be very definite about what needs to be done, and
5 take out the "and /or." She said the syntax here was not clear.
6 Commissioner Gordon said she would edit number 2 in the pre - submittal process to
7 include the term "in accordance with state statute."
8 Commissioner Gordon said Item D, number 1 should specify "Orange County" Planning
9 Board.
10 Commissioner Gordon said she is glad to see this policy being considered.
11 Commissioner Dorosin said the Rogers Road proposal is related but separate from this
12 issue. He said it would be in the best interest to expedite the Rogers Road process even if this
13 is not finalized.
14 He said one thing that is important moving forward is to have language suggesting that
15 ETJs should not remain ETJs forever. He said this is not fair to the residents.
16 Commissioner Pelissier said she would like to have a copy of the comments that were
17 made to the Chapel Hill Town Council regarding this particular case.
18 Craig Benedict said he will include as much information as staff can get. He said, by
19 December 1 st they should have the Chapel Hill ETJ expansion request.
20 Chair Jacobs said he had asked staff in March to come back with an analysis of the way
21 rules have changed for ETJs. He would like to have this.
22 Chair Jacobs said he thought that joint planning appointments were to be changed to
23 ETJ appointments. He asked for clarification on this.
24 Craig Benedict said there are joint planning area representatives on the Chapel Hill
25 Planning Board. He said there will be a process to have ETJ representatives voted on by
26 Orange County to sit on the Chapel Hill Planning Board.
27 Chair Jacobs said the joint planning area and this ETJ are not synonymous.
28 Craig Benedict said a thousand acres of Chapel Hill's joint area will possibly be
29 converted to ETJ, and there will be one small joint planning area (JPA) left over. He said
30 representation for both of these is based on population. He said there is currently one JPA seat
31 left.
32 Commissioner Rich asked how many ETJs are currently in Chapel Hill
33 Craig Benedict said there are a few general areas outside of corporate town limits — the
34 southern triangle rural buffer area; Rogers Road and Northwoods; the Triangle north of
35 interstate 40 near Sunrise Road; and a small area north of Interstate 40 behind New Hope
36 Commons and the Wal -Mart complex.
37 Commissioner Rich said it seems like there are a lot of different areas that might not
38 have representation on a board.
39 Chair Jacobs said it would be helpful to bring a map that shows the areas with the
40 acreage.
41 John Roberts said the statute provides for ETJ representation based on a mathematical
42 calculation, so until a certain threshold is reached, there is no obligation to add anyone. He said
43 the County could request an addition.
17
1 Chair Jacobs said the question is whether this should be requested, and it would be
2 good to have some date and maps to consider.
3 Commissioner McKee asked if there is any representation for areas outside of those ETJ
4 areas or anywhere else that is somewhat controlled by Chapel Hill.
5 Craig Benedict said presently there are either ETJ representatives for those limited
6 areas or JPA/Transition area representatives.
7 Craig Benedict said he has met with participants and representatives of ETJ and joint
8 planning areas so that they can get the perspective of what their role is.
9 He agreed that a map would be good.
10 Chair Jacobs said he appreciates Craig Benedict's willingness to help train and orient
11 people. He said an area like Northwoods can feel very isolated and unrepresented. He said the
12 residents do not know where to turn, but they are being impacted by a government in which they
13 have a limited voting stake. He said this was a key issue in joint planning, and the
14 Commissioners wanted to make sure to be a voice for those people who would eventually be
15 annexed.
16 Commissioner Gordon said she remembered the passionate way the people in the ETJ
17 had reacted to their status in the past, and the fact that this negative reaction provided a lot of
18 the impetus for the cooperative joint planning. She said, in general, perhaps the language
19 should be strengthened in favor of joint planning as opposed to ETJ. She said a joint planning
20 agreement solves a lot of issues.
21 Craig Benedict said this will be fine tuned and brought back in February. He asked if the
22 Board would be interested in having a joint process with the municipality.
23 Chair Jacobs answered yes.
24
25 5. Closed Session
26 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner McKee to go
27 into closed session at 9:58 p.m. for the purpose below:
28
29 "To discuss matters related to the location or expansion of industries or other businesses in the
30 area served by the public body, including agreement on a tentative list of economic
31 development incentives that may be offered by the public body in negotiations," NCGS § 143-
32 318.11(a)(4).
33
34 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
35
36 RECONVENE INTO REGULAR SESSION
37
38 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Price to
39 reconvene into regular session at 10:35pm.
40
41 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
42
43 ADJOURNMENT
44 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to
45 adjourn the meeting at 10:35pm.
1
2 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
3
4 Barry Jacobs, Chair
5
6
7 Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
I Attachment 3
2
3 DRAFT MINUTES
4 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
5 REGULAR MEETING
6 November 18, 2014
7 7:00 p.m.
8
9 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday,
10 November 18, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center, in Chapel Hill, N.C.
11
12 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jacobs and Commissioners Alice M. Gordon,
13 Earl McKee, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Mark Dorosin
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, 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 NOTE: ALL DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE PERMANENT
20 AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE.
21
22 Chair Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.
23 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
24 Chair Jacobs noted that the following proposed addition to the agenda:
25 - Pink Sheet - Addition to the Agenda - Item 4 -c - Proposed Proclamation Recognizing the
26 Twenty Five Year Anniversary of Orange County's Curbside Recycling
27
28 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
29 add this item to the agenda as item 4 -c.
30
31 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
32
33 Chair Jacobs reviewed the following list of items at the Commissioner's places:
34 - Proposed Revisions for item 4 -b - Resolution of Declaration on Climate Change
35 - Revised attachment 7 for item 5 -b - Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment
36 Requiring Neighborhood Information Meetings for Special Use Permit Applications
37 - Memo regarding item 7a - Proposed Orange County Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2030
38 - Orange County Facility Report for November 2014
39
40 Chair Jacobs recognized Bonnie Hammersley, who deferred to Jeff Thompson.
41 Introduction of new Sustainability Coordinator: Brennan Bouma
42 Jeff Thompson introduced Brennan Bouma as the new Sustainability Coordinator for
43 Orange County. He said Brennan Bouma comes from the Triangle J Council of Governments
44 (TJCOG), where he served as a regional energy and environmental planner. He said Mr.
45 Bouma will collaborate with the departments and assist the staff of the council of the
46 environment.
47 Brennan Bouma said he wanted to recognize Orange County's leadership and vision of
48 sustainability. He said he looks forward to working with the Board of County Commissioners
49 and the Orange County residents.
50
51 Chair Jacobs welcomed him, on behalf of the Board.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
2
Commissioner Gordon welcomed him and said the Board has looked forward to having
this position. She noted the resolution on climate change as proof of their concern with
sustainability.
• Acknowledgement of AMS receipt of the 2014 Smart Fleet Award
Jeff Thompson recognized staff from Fleet Management Services for their receipt of the
2014 Smart Fleet Award.
PUBLIC CHARGE
The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge.
2. Public Comments
a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
NO PUBLIC COMMENT
b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
(These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda
below.)
3. Petitions by Board Members
Commissioner Rich said the Rogers Road ribbon cutting occurred this past weekend,
and she petitioned the Chair to send a letter of recognition and thanks to Blythe Thompson for
her assistance with the setup.
Commissioner Rich asked a question regarding the procedure for discussing an item
listed in the information items.
Chair Jacobs said this would occur after the completion of the regular agenda.
Commissioner Rich said she has been reading about the concept of tiny house villages
popping up across the country, which are being used to help take homeless vets off of the
street. She petitioned that Orange County look at a private public partnership with
Empowerment for the creation of something like this.
Chair Jacobs said the Board needs a primer for the public regarding planning items. He
said people do not really understand what is expected of them, and it would be nice to post or
send something that is simple, to the point, and written in layman's language.
Chair Jacobs asked about the status of the environmental assessment for the
Hillsborough train station.
Chair Jacobs said a resident told him about a possible airstrip in Efland. He asked for
information regarding the process and any regulations for having an airstrip.
4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
a. Proclamation Recognizing November 2014 as Orange Congregations in Mission
(OCIM) Month
The Board considered proclaiming November 2014 as Orange Congregations in Mission
(OCIM) Month in Orange County and authorizing the Chair to sign.
Chair of OCIM Leo Allison accepted the proclamation.
Commissioner Price read the proclamation:
Orange County Board of Commissioners
Proclamation
ORANGE CONGREGATIONS IN MISSIONS MONTH (OCIM)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
November 2014
Whereas, Orange Congregations in Mission (OCIM) is a private non - profit ministry composed
of almost 50 congregations in northern Orange County; and
Whereas, OCIM is committed to providing a helping hand to those in our community who are in
need of assistance; and
Whereas, OCIM strives to meet the emergency needs of those who find themselves in a crisis
situation; and
Whereas, the OCIM mission is fulfilled by ministering to the needs of people who populate the
small communities and rural areas of Orange County since 1981; and
Whereas, OCIM is committed to feeding the hungry, providing clothing and other essentials
through its Meals on Wheels and Food Pantry Ministries and Thrift Shop Ministry; and
Whereas, other needs are met through its Samaritan Relief Ministry; and
Whereas, OCIM volunteers, staff, town and county governments contribute greatly to the
success of its programs.
NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Orange County Board of Commissioners do proclaim November
2014 to be OCIM Month and urge all community members to engage with those
in need through cheerful giving.
This, the 18th day of November 2014.
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Rich for the
Board to approve and to authorize the Chair to sign the proclamation.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
OCIM Board President Leo Allison thanked the Board of County Commissioners for their
continued contributions.
b. Resolution of Declaration on Climate Change
The Board considered approving a resolution regarding climate change, based on a petition
from Commissioner Alice Gordon, and authorizing the Chair to sign.
David Stancil said staff had provided a draft resolution, but there have been revisions
and improvements that are included in the resolution at their places. He said Commissioner
Gordon also caught some grammatical issues and made some suggested changes. He
referred to the attachment to the resolution, which includes a list of things that residents and
government can do, and he noted the following:
- Item 11- change this to read "continue to employ"
- Item 16 — replace the word "gold" with the word "identified"
Commissioner Gordon said she had asked for this resolution to be brought forward
because she believes global climate change is one of the most pressing issues of our time.
Revised resolution:
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
RESOLUTION OF DECLARATION ON CLIMATE CHANGE
M
1 WHEREAS, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, representing over
2 2,500 climate scientists and twenty years of research, has concluded that global warming
3 caused by human emission of greenhouse gases is among the most significant problems facing
4 the world today; and
5
6 WHEREAS, projected impacts of global warming will likely include changing patterns of habitats
7 for disease - carrying insects; changes in rain and snowfall patterns, affecting water supplies,
8 agriculture, and the frequency of flooding; changes in natural habitats that will eliminate some
9 species and introduce new ones; and
10
11 WHEREAS, state, regional and local governments throughout the United States are adopting
12 emission reduction targets and programs and that this leadership is bipartisan and coming from
13 governors, county officials, and mayors alike; and
14
15 WHEREAS, many counties throughout the nation, large and small, are reducing the production
16 of global warming pollutants through programs that provide economic and quality of life benefits,
17 such as reduced energy bills, green space preservation, air quality improvements, reduced
18 traffic congestion, improved transportation choices, and economic development and job creation
19 through energy conservation /new energy technologies; and
20
21 WHEREAS, Orange County is undertaking policies, programs and activities to save energy and
22 reduce greenhouse gas emissions; and
23
24 WHEREAS, these policies, programs and activities save energy and money, conserve natural
25 resources, and promote sustainable land use and transportation planning in the community; and
26
27 WHEREAS, Orange County government will serve as a model for the community by taking
28 appropriate actions, including those listed in the attachment to this resolution; and
29
30 WHEREAS, cities and counties statewide are leading by example by adopting innovative
31 sustainability programs and policies, including working with community residents, business
32 groups and others; and
33
34 WHEREAS, Orange County will recommend actions that Orange County residents and
35 businesses can take, including the ten actions listed in the attachment to this resolution; and
36
37 WHEREAS, Orange County wishes to expand these activities, share its experiences with other
38 communities, and be recognized for its accomplishments;
39
40 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Orange County Board of Commissioners does
41 hereby recognize the critical nature of global warming and climate change, and cognizant of the
42 actions being taken by local, state, and federal governments and other organizations around the
43 globe, pledges to take steps for climate stabilization, and strongly encourages Orange County
44 residents and businesses to reduce their carbon footprints.
2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution be sent to the mayors of Carrboro, Chapel
3 Hill, and Hillsborough with the request that the towns adopt similar resolutions, and that it also
4 be sent to the members of our state and federal legislative delegations.
5
6 This, the 18th day of November, 2014.
7
8 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Price for the
9 Board to approve the revised resolution and to authorize the Chair to sign the resolution.
10 The attachment to the resolution is in the permanent agenda file and is hereby
11 incorporated into these minutes by reference.
12
13 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
14
15 ** *ADDITION- NCACC PRESENTATION TO COMMISSIONER GORDON FOR 24 YEARS OF
16 SERVICE
17 Neil Emory of the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners ( NCACC),
18 Outreach Associate, said he brings greetings from their new director, and he thanked the Board
19 of County Commissioners for their commitment.
20 He said his purpose this evening is to honor Commissioner Gordon for her exemplary
21 service. He said she has served her fellow citizens as a County Commissioner for 24 years,
22 being first elected in 1990. He recognized her achievements and presented her with the NCACC
23 Exemplary Service Award.
24 Commissioner Gordon expressed her thanks for this award and said she has enjoyed
25 being on the Board of County Commissioners for all of these years.
26
27 c. Proclamation Recognizing the Twenty -Five Year Anniversary of Orange County's
28 Curbside Recycling
29
30 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
31 Proclamation Recognizing the
32 Twenty -Five Year Anniversary of Orange County's Curbside Recycling
33
34 WHEREAS, Orange County, North Carolina and its municipalities have achieved the highest
35 waste reduction rate in North Carolina for the past four years including a rate of 58% last year;
36 and
37 WHEREAS, Orange County and its municipalities have set the highest waste reduction goal in
38 the state at 61 % per capita; and
39 WHEREAS, Orange County is recognized internationally for its recycling and waste reduction
40 programs; and
41 WHEREAS, Orange County has the highest electronics recycling rate per person in North
42 Carolina; and
43 WHEREAS, Orange County and its municipalities have consistently and strongly supported
44 waste reduction and recycling since 1987; and
45 WHEREAS, the Towns of Carrboro, Chapel Hill and Hillsborough were among the first in North
46 Carolina to have comprehensive curbside recycling for all residences; and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
I
WHEREAS, all multifamily units and two - thirds of rural households now have on -site access to
recycling; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Carrboro, Town of Chapel Hill, Town of Hillsborough and Orange
County have worked cooperatively for more than twenty -five years to achieve superior recycling
and waste reduction program success;
NOW THEREFORE be it proclaimed that in recognition of America Recycles Day (November
15, 2014), Orange County celebrates twenty -five years since beginning its comprehensive
urban curbside recycling programs and initiation of the many other programs that now constitute
its successful and renowned recycling and waste reduction efforts.
This the 18th of November, 2014.
A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
adopt the proclamation Recognizing the Twenty Five Year Anniversary of Orange County's
Curbside Recycling.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
5. Public Hearings
a. Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendments for
Agricultural Support Enterprises Within the Rural Buffer Land Use Classification —
Defer Public Hearing Process to March 3, 2015
The Board considered deferring the public hearing process on the Comprehensive Plan
and Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) zoning text amendments pertaining to Agricultural
Support Enterprises within the Rural Buffer land use classification to March 3, 2015.
Perdita Holtz said the purpose tonight is to once again defer this item until March 3,
2015. She said the necessary amendments to the joint planning area documents have not yet
been adopted by the three local governments, and the County cannot consider adoption of the
comprehensive plan and UDO until after those documents are amended.
Commissioner Gordon noted that the fact that this will be discussed at the Assembly of
Governments meeting tomorrow night. She said the clerk sent out an email today with the
resolution adopted by the Town of Carrboro, and this included the attachments. She said the
joint planning land use plan and the joint planning agreement changes are needed in order to
enable the agricultural support enterprises. She said it is important to understand any changes
made by Carrboro.
A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Price to open
the hearing and to defer the hearing by adjourning it to March 3, 2015 in order to allow time for
the necessary JPA land use amendments to be further considered.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
b. Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment Requiring Neighborhood
Information Meetings for Special Use Permit Applications
The Board received the Planning Board recommendation, closed the public hearing, and
considered a decision on a Planning Director initiated text amendment to the Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO) requiring a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) for all
Special Use Permit (SUP) applications.
Michael Harvey said there is a revised attachment 7 at the Commissioners' places. He
said this is an item heard at the September 8th Quarterly Public Hearing, due to concerns that
there was not adequate notice to the public when a project involved special use permits.
He said the thought was that additional education was necessary in order to insure that
individuals interested in a project understood what the project entailed, as well as their
7
1 obligations when offering support or arguing against a project. He said if this is adopted, a
2 neighborhood information meeting will be required to occur 45 days before the public hearing.
3 He said the staff and the applicant will be sending notices 14 days prior to the neighborhood
4 meeting, and signs would be posted on the property 10 days prior to the meeting. He said this
5 is addition to the already existing public hearing notice requirements.
6 Michael Harvey said there are several attachments that include minutes from the public
7 hearing and the planning board meeting, as well as the ordinance amendment outline form. He
8 said upon receiving an email from Commissioner Gordon yesterday, staff did incorporate some
9 of her suggested changes, and these are included in the revised document on page 34.
10
11 A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to:
12 1. Receive the Planning Board's recommendation;
13 2. Close the public hearing; and
14 3. Take action on the request by:
15 a. Approving the Resolution Concerning Statement of Consistency contained within
16 Attachment 6, and
17 b. Approving the Ordinance amending the UDO, contained within revised Attachment 7,
18 as recommended by the Planning Board and staff.
19
20 Commissioner Rich referred to page 9 in the section on fiscal impact for the applicant.
21 She feels that this information should be available when permit applications are submitted.
22 Michael Harvey said part of that cost would be unique to each individual applicant,
23 depending on how many people have to be notified. He said there will be no amendments to
24 the fee schedule until this is adopted. He said the ordinance also requires a pre - application
25 meeting for all special use permits, and applications costs are reviewed with the applicant at this
26 meeting.
27 Commissioner Gordon thanked staff for their work and for incorporating the language
28 she requested. She said she will ask at some point that staff consider extending the notice for
29 conditional zoning so that it is more in concert with conditional uses. She said this is important
30 because it is a new process, and it is negotiated. She said 45 days notice would be fine.
31
32 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
33
34 6. Consent Agenda
35
36 • Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
37 Commissioner Price removed item 6b for discussion.
38 Commissioner Gordon removed item 6g for discussion.
39
40 • Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
41 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
42 approve the remaining items on the consent agenda.
43 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
44
45 a. Minutes
46 The Board approved the minutes from October 7 and October 14 (5:30 and 7:00 p.m.
47 meetings), 2014 as submitted by the Clerk to the Board.
48 c. Housing Rehabilitation Program — N.C. Housing Finance Agency
49 The Board adopted the amended Procurement Policy for the 2014 Single Family Housing
50 Rehabilitation Program funded by the N.C. Housing Finance Agency (NCHFA).
51 d. Proposed Donation of Stage Risers
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
The Board accepted the donation of six (6) stage /performance risers by Michael Malone and
Maureen Quilligan for use at the Whitted Meeting facility.
e. Fiscal Year 2014 -15 Budget Amendment #3
The Board approved budget ordinance amendments for fiscal year 2014 -15 for: Department of
Social Services; Sportsplex; Library Services; Planning and Inspections; Information
Technology Capital Project — Technical Amendment; and Health Department.
f. Inter -Faith Council Lease Estoppel Certificate and Standstill Agreement
The Board approved an Estoppel Certificate and Standstill Agreement authorizing the North
Carolina Housing Finance Agency ( "NCHFA ") to be notified prior to any changes or
modifications within the current Lease and to be recognized as the Tenant within the Inter -Faith
Council for Social Service, Inc. ( "IFC ") Lease in case of a default on an existing loan agreement
between NCHFA and IFC, and authorized the Chair to sign.
• Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
b. Proposed Amendment to the Orange County Code of Ordinances to Delete
Section 28 -32 (b) (2) from Article IV Regarding Hazardous Weather Plan —
Administrative Leave
The Board considered approving a resolution regarding an amendment for the deletion
of Section 28 -32 (b) (2) from Article IV of the Orange County Code of Ordinances regarding
Hazardous Weather Plan — Administrative Leave policy, specifically omitting the make -up leave
language.
Commissioner Price noted that weather conditions can vary across the County during a
weather emergency, and some parts may be less safe than others. She asked how this will be
addressed for the employees.
Brenda Bartholomew said if an employee chose to stay home when the manager has
not declared administrative leave, they would have to use their own accrual time.
Commissioner Price said there may be isolated places that take longer to thaw out, and
it is not a choice for the employee. She said this may need to be an item for further discussion.
Brenda Bartholomew said the intent was to remove the makeup language that has
existed.
Commissioner Price said she realizes this is not directly related to the resolution, but she
has a question about this issue.
A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner McKee to
approve the resolution regarding the amendment deleting Section 28 -32 (b) (2) from Article IV of
the Orange County Code of Ordinances to reflect the change of not allowing employees to use
make -up leave when they elect not to report for work, report late or leave early when
Administrative Leave has not been declared by the Manager.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
a- Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Amendment
Outline and Schedule for the February 2015 Quarterly Public Hearing
The Board considered approval of process components and schedule for a government
initiated Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) text amendment for the February 2015
Quarterly Public Hearing regarding temporary health care structures.
Commissioner Gordon said she wanted some indication from the Board on whether they
are interested in asking the staff to increase the time for public hearing notices for conditional
zoning, at the February hearing or another hearing.
Commissioner McKee said he is good with it being 45 days.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
0
Commissioner Gordon said she wants to make it 45 days.
Chair Jacobs suggested that this be referred to staff for clarity's sake, with a request for
them to outline the options and bring it back to the Board. He said a decision can then be made
on whether it needs to go to a public hearing.
Commissioner Gordon said she would like to see the pros and cons and the possibilities.
A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Price to
approve process components and schedule for a government initiated Unified Development
Ordinance (UDO) text amendment for the February 2015 Quarterly Public Hearing regarding
temporary health care structures, and to refer to staff a request for recommendations, pros and
cons for discussion at a future time.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
7. Regular Agenda
a. Proposed Orange County Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2030 (8:55 -9:30)
The Board considered adoption of the Orange County Parks and Recreation Master
Plan 2030.
David Stancil introduced Neal Bench, who is chair of the Parks and Recreation Council.
Neal Bench thanked the Commissioners for all of their appointments to the Parks and
Recreation Council. He said the council is happy to work with staff and has provided input into
this plan. He said the members of the council have voted unanimously for the Board of County
Commissioners to approve the document as presented.
David Stancil, director of the Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks and
Recreation (DEAPR), reviewed the following PowerPoint slides and several maps of the area:
Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2030
Brief Review - June 3 Master Plan
• County -run recreation programs since 1970's
• 1988 Master Plan - Opened 1st park 1998
• 1990's Reports 4 1997 & 2001 Bonds
• New Master Plan Needed for Several Reasons
• Inventory of Facilities and Programs /Athletics
• Updated Demographics and Service Area Data
• Community Needs Assessment Surveys +
• Economic, Health and Environmental Impacts
Overview of System - 2014
Facilities and Locations
• Five County Parks
• One Soccer Center
• Two Recreation/ Community Centers
• One Greenway (pt.)
Planned Future Facilities
• 4 Future Parks (land- banked)
• 2 Nature Preserves (with trails and access areas)
• 1 New Community Center
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
10
Community Needs Assessments
• Public view of current facilities /programs and future needs?
• Several components (youth, statistical random - sample, online, targeted groups)
• 835 surveys received; over 140 additional persons via outreach.
• Seven focus groups and six open houses held
Needs Assessment Results
Main Takeaways
• High marks for facilities, safety, customer service
• Strong interest in programs (soccer, basketball, others) & special events (such as
Fishing Rodeo)
• Trails, pool and outdoor programs most desired
• Expand outdoor recreation options, connect parks and open spaces
• More opportunities to be out "in nature"
Funding Strategy Responses
• Donations and Grants (95% agree)
• Use Existing Local Taxes (73% agree)
• Voter- approved Bonds (70% agree)
• Existing Property Taxes (70% agree)
• User Fees (68% agree)
• Increase New Local Taxes (34% agree)
Demographics — Quick Summary
• Orange County = 140,352 persons (7/1/2013)
• Top 10 Nationally in Education Level ... but
• Above -avg income masks 17% below poverty
• By 2030, County could have 173,000 persons
• Around 75,000 in County service area?
Important Themes and Topics
• Link to the Goals /Objectives in Comp Plan
• Synchronizing and coordinating with Town plans
• State Parks, OWASA, Schools, Others
• Economic benefits of parks, rec and open space
• Important linkages to public health, opportunities
• Parks and conserving our natural resources
Standards and Findings
• A number of changed conditions since 1988
• Park Classifications:
School Park
Community Park (usually 40 -75 acres)
District Park (usually 75 -125 acres)
Regional Park (usually 150 acres +)
Nature Preserve Access Areas
• Standards: Best Approach - use community needs
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
11
Goals and Objectives
Previously- created in Comprehensive Plan
5 Goals with objectives for each
Plan strategies attempt to address these
Master Plan Recommendations
• Weighing All the Data and Findings
• Basis of Park Planning in Place (districts, 1988 plan, CIP)
• Proactive Acquiring of Sites = Few "new" Parks Needed
Recommendations
1. Protect Investment in Parks and Open Space
a. Multi - Million $ Investment
b. Facility Renovation and Repairs
c. Operating and Maintenance
2. Build Planned Future Parks (pg 10 -12)
a. CIP and Lands Legacy Have "Set the Table"
b. 4 New Parks
c. 5 Future Phases at Existing Parks
d. 2 (3) Nature Preserves with Publicly - Accessible Areas
3. Complete Nature Preserves, Provide Access
4. Structure for Multi- Partner Capital Facilities
5. Master Plan for Orange County MST Segment
6. Build More Trails, Connections
7. Improve Access, Promote Healthy Lifestyles
8. Recreation Program Needs, Partnerships
9. Examine Role of Community Centers
a. Types of programs, offerings
b. Hours and usage expectations
c. Facilities and amenities
Supplemental Report
Based on Board and Public Hearing Feedback
1. Prioritize Planned Parks / Facilities
Done Using CIP, Degree of Facility Planning, Other
2. How to Address Recommendations /Issues
Proposed Actions and Timeframe Identified
3. Additional Community Outreach
Meetings Ongoing with Under - represented Groups
4. Future Park Concept Plans
Four Planned for 2014 through end 2015
5. Greene Tract — Orange County 60 Acres
6. Coordination with Hillsborough
Discussions Underway
7. Expansion of Trail Network /Connectivity
Commissioner Pelissier asked about the plans to address issues for further study and
whether there would be an annual report or mechanism for providing status updates on these
issues.
12
1 David Stancil said yes, that would be an easy thing to produce.
2 Chair Jacobs asked if the Lands Legacy update is done annually or every two years.
3 David Stancil said this is done every two to three years.
4 Commissioner Gordon thanked staff for this report. She referred to the table in the
5 report as compared to table 10 -1 on page 4 of the report and asked about the relationship
6 between these.
7 David Stancil said this shows the prioritization and some minor refinements. He said
8 staff was able to take a closer look at the projects, and there may have been one case in which
9 there was a cost adjustment. He noted that the projected total cost is a ball park estimate, and
10 it errs on the high side.
11 Commissioner Gordon asked if the Board would be adopting what is in the actual text.
12 David Stancil said the Board would be adopting the master plan itself, and the
13 supplemental report is just information for the Commissioners. He said this will be manifested
14 through the capital investment plan, which is looked at every year.
15 Commissioner McKee said he is curious about the metrics used to determine some of
16 the numbers, especially the number of 35,000 to 40,000 visitors for Cedar Grove Park.
17 David Stancil said Cedar Grove Park does not have the capability of counting heads
18 because residents can walk into that park, even when it is closed. He said this number is an
19 estimate based on activity, and it is probably driven by the fact that Hillsborough Youth Athletic
20 Association (HYAA) uses that facility from April to October.
21
22 PUBLIC COMMENT:
23 Allan Green is a member of the Parks and Recreation Council, as well as a user of
24 Orange County parks and a resident. He said the master plan specifically mentions more trails,
25 greenways, and connectivity between parks. He said these plans provide benefits for Orange
26 County residents and are low cost. He urged the Board to consider those particular benefits
27 and to adopt this plan.
28 Commissioner Gordon said the last master plan was done in 1988. She said the County
29 needs a new master plan in order to get matching grant funds. She said the plan can be
30 updated as things move forward.
31 She is interested in Twin Creeks Park, and she noted priority number 7 is Twin Creeks
32 Park — Phase 2. This Phase 2 actually contains some projects that were contemplated in a past
33 bond referendum, and therefore should have priority for completion. She would like to see this
34 park moved up on the priority list, and she asked the Board to remember Twin Creeks Park -
35 Phase 2 when considering which park projects should be completed first.
36 She noted that this approval is only for the table listing all of the projects, and there
37 should be an understanding that this list will updated as things move forward.
38 Commissioner Gordon referred to the OUTBOARD comments on the master plan, and
39 asked if this board had some part in the continuing updating of the plan.
40 David Stancil said the OUTBOARD made some good points, several of which are
41 incorporated into the document. He said these are all items that are valid points but many are
42 sub -plan level and can be incorporated at an operational level.
43 Commissioner Gordon said she thinks it is very important to go ahead with this master
44 plan to give an overall set of guidelines. She said parts of it can be changed during the CIP
45 process if priorities change.
46 David Stancil recognized the staff members who helped with this plan.
13
1 Commissioner Rich asked for more details on how the surveys were done, and she
2 referred specifically to number 7 on the sheet. She asked for information on how future
3 outreach will be done.
4 David Stancil said residents were asked to respond to what they enjoy doing, and the
5 next section asked what they want to see, so both of these were used. He said staff chose to
6 do a comprehensive County -wide survey even though many of the town residents might not be
7 very familiar with Orange County Parks. He said there were a number of "don't know" answers,
8 as many residents choose to patronize parks in their own town.
9 He said the plan is to do another community needs assessment in 5 years. He said
10 there are outreach events happening in the meantime with church and civic groups, as well as
11 the school system.
12 Commissioner Price asked if the other name for Twin Creeks can be used.
13 David Stancil said yes. He said this will not be lost in the signage.
14 Commissioner Price said it is important in naming parks meant to honor ethnic
15 populations, that the name actually be used.
16 Commissioner McKee said this is a living document and it is good not to set every detail
17 in concrete. He said one concern of his is the overall ballpark figure being $40 million. He said
18 he has to compare that with other needs such as schools, transportation, and affordable
19 housing. He said it is good to acknowledge this document as a living thing that can be worked
20 toward. He said he supports it, and he will vote for it, but he will look at each individual project
21 with a very hard eye in comparing it to other priorities.
22 Chair Jacobs said he thinks this is beautiful document, and it is comprehensive and
23 thoughtful.
24 Chair Jacobs said the document refers to appendices, but these are not included. He
25 assumes these will be included in the future.
26 Dave Stancil said the appendices are 150 pages long, and staff will try and get it back up
27 on the web by Thursday.
28 Chair Jacobs noted that adverbs ending in "ly" should not be hyphenated and should be
29 taken out of the verbiage.
30 Chair Jacobs said the County cannot update their payment in lieu plan until a plan is in
31 place. He hopes that when this is done, there can be a conversation with Mebane about
32 incorporating a different way of looking at open space in the subdivisions being built in Orange
33 County.
34 Chair Jacobs said page 10 -6 has a statement that Orange County has been very
35 prescient in its approach to planning, and he wants to comment staff for that.
36 Chair Jacobs noted the following list of suggested changes:
37 - Page 3.7- Fairview Park - Part of this park cannot be developed because of the landfill area.
38 This caveat should be added.
39 - Page 3.22 - Future north east park plans mention the possibility of a Solid Waste Convenience
40 Center. A possible fire training center was also discussed and this should be flagged.
41 - Millhouse Road — This should mention that this is a prime site for a partnership with the towns.
42 - Map on page 4.4 — The gray is not visible, and a circle could be added to note the municipal
43 boundaries.
44 - Page 5.1 — There are asterisks but no footnotes
45 - Page 10.5 — This should note that non - profit funds have also been leveraged.
46 - Page 10.6 — The first column discusses a multiplicity of amenities. The parenthetical note is
47 not consistent with what the County set out to do with regard to low and high impact uses.
48 - Page 10.8 — He requested an update on the Smith Middle School soccer field. (David Stancil
49 noted that this field exists and is in use and programmed by the Town of Carrboro.) Chair
50 Jacobs said this should be listed as a resource.
51 - Page 10.9 — Mountains to Sea Trail master plan is listed as a 2014 project. This has been
14
1 overtaken by the state. (David Stancil said this can be deleted.)
2 - Page 10.10 — Contrary to the notes here, there has been no mention of transportation stops at
3 future and current parks, other than Cedar Grove.
4 - Page 10.12 — Blackwood Park's funding information is confusing and needs more explanation.
5
6 David Stancil said the Blackwood Farm project is being completed with pre -dated funds
7 Chair Jacobs said the issue of a swimming pool is something that should be talked about
8 before discussing a bond package that includes recreation facilities. He said this is an
9 expensive item, and it seems like it is a high priority item in the surveys. He said perhaps a
10 group advocating for recreation can drive that discussion. He said it would be nice to get some
11 ballpark figures before the discussion gets too far down the road.
12 Chair Jacobs said there is a lot of discussion about bicycling. He feels that bike and
13 pedestrian trails are incompatible, and he thinks this should be made clear in the documents.
14 He suggested asking OWASA about interest in a bike trail near Cane Creek. He said this could
15 mirror what has been done in Little River, which has been very successful.
16 Chair Jacobs said the County needs to be sensitive and careful about what is invested in
17 parks, because operating expenses come with it; however, many projects that used to be
18 controversial are now embraced by the residents, and he heartily endorses this plan.
19 Commissioner McKee thanked DEAPR for working with the school systems, and he
20 encouraged them to continue to work with the schools and HYAA.
21 Commissioner Price asked if staff could provide an update on the parking at Fairview.
22 David Stancil said yes.
23 Commissioner Gordon asked what staff is going to do with the various comments and
24 revisions that have been made.
25 David Stancil said the comments will be reviewed and sorted. He said some of these
26 are administrative or language changes that can be made. He said other items would need
27 further updates, subsequent information, or addendums. He said any substantive change would
28 come back to the Board of County Commissioners as a possible addendum or amendment.
29
30 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Price to
31 adopt the Orange County Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2030, with future actions
32 consistent with the plan to be brought back to the Board for action according to funding and park
33 planning timetables; and that staff take comments and make administrative changes; and for
34 any other substantive changes, that staff bring it back to the Board of County Commissioners as
35 expeditiously as possible.
36
37 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
38
39 b. Buckhorn- Mebane Phase 2 Utilities — Transfer of Ownership to City of Mebane
40 The Board considered transferring ownership of the recently built Buckhorn- Mebane
41 Phase 2 water and sewer utility infrastructure to the City of Mebane and authorizing the Chair to
42 sign.
43 Kevin Lindley showed a map of the project, which has been completed. He said Orange
44 County has an inter -local agreement with Mebane, wherein Mebane has agreed to serve the
45 areas noted on the map with water and sewer utilities; and it states that any utilities built by the
46 County in these areas will be turned over to Mebane for ownership and operation. He said
47 Mebane is already operating this, and the purpose of tonight is to turn over the ownership.
48
49 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to:
50 1. Approve the transfer of ownership of the utility infrastructure and easements to the City
51 of Mebane and authorize the Chair to sign the Dedication Form (Attachment 2); and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
15
2. Authorize staff to pursue any further action necessary to complete the transfer of
ownership to the City of Mebane, per the 2012 Mebane - Orange County Utility Service
Agreement.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Chair Jacobs said he read that Mebane has agreed to take over the parcel owned by
Morinaga in order for it to escape Orange County's regulations.
Craig Benedict said that is not correct. He said part of the Mebane Efland Small Area
Plan was to match regulations side by side.
Chair Jacobs said what he read was full of inaccuracies.
8. Reports - NONE
9. County Manager's Report
Bonnie Hammersley thanked Commissioner Gordon from all of the employees for her
service to Orange County and for allowing her story to be published in the newsletter. She
presented a copy of this newsletter story to Commissioner Gordon.
10. County Attorney's Report
John Roberts said there is some movement in Raleigh to re -draft all of the land use
statutes out of the 153 -a chapter — which is the chapter dealing with Counties — to create a new
chapter for all of the land uses. He said this may trigger changes in the Unified Development
Ordinance. He will keep the Board updated as this moves forward.
Chair Jacobs asked if this would extend to the counties some of the powers of the
municipalities.
John Roberts said he does not know yet but he did see one recommendation to remove
conditional use districts. He is not sure if this will continue.
W
12.
Appointments - NONE
Board Comments
Commissioner Rich said she and Commissioner Price were at the Black Alumni Reunion
(BAR) dinner this past weekend, and it was a lovely event. She said the Visitors Bureau is
working hard to keep that event in Orange County.
Commissioner Rich said she and Laurie Paolicelli went to the SECU house. She said
the house is very nice, and visitors are given a cap when they come to stay.
Commissioner Gordon said the Durham - Chapel Hill - Carrboro Metropolitan Planning
Organization Board (MPO Board) held a meeting recently and discussed the strategic
transportation corridors.
Commissioner Gordon said the Town of Chapel Hill has requested Ephesus Church
Road / Fordham Boulevard road improvements. This project was on the MPO Board meeting
agenda and is moving forward. It will be discussed at future DOT and MPO meetings. She said
this is of interest since the project is one the transportation projects in the Ephesus Fordham
area.
Commissioner Gordon said there are some things that have been completed during the
past few years while she has been on the Board, like the parks plan, and some things that have
been progressing but have not yet been completed. She said there are several things that she
16
1 hopes will be accomplished in 2015, including: the strategic communications plan; a method to
2 provide links to individual items in the online agendas; and revisions to the public hearing
3 process.
4 Commissioner Gordon said this is her last full board meeting as a Commissioner. She
5 said she has appreciated working with all of the people, the Board of County Commissioners
6 and the staff. She will miss the collegial relationships, but said she is not going away and will
7 still remain active in the community. She said it has been an honor and a privilege to serve for
8 six terms.
9 Commissioner Price said she had spoken with the Insurance Commissioner, and she
10 thanked him for helping to reduce our fire insurance rates. She said he expressed his
11 willingness to continue working with the Board.
12 Commissioner Price said she was at a Durham Technical Community College board
13 meeting, and they just adopted a 5 year strategic plan. She said things look good for the
14 college, and their mission is to be a first choice for people seeking a higher education. She said
15 the Durham Tech president will be sending out a report that highlights the strategic plan.
16 Commissioner Price said she attended the opening for an affordable rental property in
17 Chapel Hill, along with Chair Jacobs, and she is glad that Orange County is part of the process.
18 Commissioner Price said it has been a privilege to serve for two years with
19 Commissioner Gordon.
20 Commissioner McKee said he has attended many community events lately, including the
21 Veteran's Breakfast, where Sam Boylan was honored for his service in World War II.
22 Commissioner McKee said he attended the Chapel Hill - Carrboro Chamber of
23 Commerce's Hall of Fame Induction for five members of the community, including Bob Nutter,
24 who owns Maple View Farms. He said the Hillsborough Chamber of Commerce had an event
25 last night to introduce their new executive director, Sara Stephens.
26 Commissioner McKee noted the information included in tonight's packet regarding the
27 space study. He said there is a lot of discussion to be held on possible future expansions and
28 co- locations.
29 Commissioner Pelissier said earlier today she attended the Durham — Orange Light Rail
30 Transit public session. She said she was pleased to see the public engagement.
31 Chair Jacobs said he attended the Rogers Road Community Center ribbon cutting, and
32 this was truly a success. He said it was good to be part of an event where people enjoyed
33 themselves.
34 Chair Jacobs said there was a library meeting yesterday, which included elected officials
35 and staff from Orange County and the Town of Chapel Hill about the library inter -local
36 agreement, and it was a spirited but productive meeting. He said the goal is to come back with
37 some interim strategies for addressing some of the library issues.
38 Chair Jacobs said there have been two planning meetings for the Agricultural Summit,
39 and the goal is to have this event in mid - February.
40 Chair Jacobs said there have been two meetings of the 2015 retreat planning
41 committee, and this should be a fairly seamless transition.
42 Chair Jacobs said the Manager has been doing an excellent job of being out in the
43 community.
17
1
2 13. Information Items
3
4 • November 6, 2014 BOCC Regular Meeting Follow -up Actions List
5 • Space Study Work Group Progress Information Item
6 • Memorandum Regarding Update on "The Edge" Project
7 • BOCC Chair Letter Regarding Petitions from November 6, 2014 Regular Board Meeting
8
9 14. Closed Session
10 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Rich to go
11 into closed session at 9:13 p.m. for the purposes of:
12
13 ADDED: [N.C.G.S. 143- 318.11(a)(4)]
14 To discuss matters relating to the location or expansion of business in the area served by this
15 body.
16
17 "To discuss the County's position and to instruct the County Manager and County Attorney on
18 the negotiating position regarding the terms of a contract to purchase real property," NCGS §
19 143- 318.11(a)(5).
20
21 Approval of Closed Session Minutes
22
23 Commissioner Rich said she had a question before going into closed session.
24 She asked about the item, Memorandum Regarding Update on "The Edge" Project
25 under Information items. She said the Edge property developer is now proposing more
26 residential units than retail. She said this is becoming a common problem, and it affects the
27 schools systems when a development proposes 40 percent residential units and then changes it
28 to 70 percent. She would like to make sure the Board follows this project.
29 Bonnie Hammersley said staff will come to the board in early 2015 to talk more about
30 this development.
31 Commissioner Rich said the schools just released a report about student projections,
32 and she wondered what this might do to those projections.
33 Commissioner Gordon echoed what Commissioner Rich said. She said Orange County
34 has about 85 percent residential development and 15 percent retail development. She said
35 some of these developments might be as much as 95 percent, and it is important to work with
36 our partners while being mindful of the impact of this.
37
38 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
39
40 RECONVENE INTO REGULAR SESSION
41 A motion was made by Commissioner Price seconded by Commissioner Rich to
42 reconvene into regular session at 11:40 p.m.
43
44 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
45
46 15. Adjournment
47 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner McKee to adjourn
48 the meeting at 11:40pm.
49
50 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Illm
2 Barry Jacobs, Chair
4 Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board
2
3 DRAFT
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Attachment 4
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL
HILLSBOROUGH BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
CARRBORO BOARD OF ALDERMEN
November 19, 2014
ASSEMBLY OF GOVERNMENTS
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met with the Towns of Chapel Hill,
Carrboro and Hillsborough for an Assembly of Governments meeting on Wednesday,
November 19, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. at Whitted Building in Hillsborough, N.C.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Barry Jacobs and Commissioners Alice M.
Gordon, Earl McKee, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price, and Penny Rich.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Mark Dorosin
COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Assistant County
Managers Cheryl Young and Clarence Grier, and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other
staff members will be identified appropriately below)
CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS /STAFF PRESENT: Mayor Mark Kleinschmidt, Ed
Harrison, Jim Ward, Lee Storrow, Matt Czajkowski, George Cianciolo, Maria Palmer and
Deputy Town Manager Flo Miller
CHAPEL HILLTOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Donna Bell, Sally Greene
CARRBORO BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEMBERS PRESENT /STAFF: Mayor Lydia Lavelle,
Aldermen Damien Seils, Michelle Johnson, Randee Haven O'Donnell, Sammy Slade, Bethany
Chaney and Town Manager David Andrews.
CARRBORO BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEMBERS ABSENT: Jacquelyn Gist
TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH COMMISSIONERS /STAFF: Mayor Tom Stevens, Town
Commissioners Eric Hallman, Brian Lowen, Evelyn Lloyd, Kathleen Ferguson, Jenn Weaver,
and Town Manager Eric Peterson
TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
Welcome, Call To Order and Opening Comments
Chair Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m., and welcomed everyone to the
Whitted Building.
38 Mayor Lavelle expressed thanks for the opportunity to come together.
39 Mayor Kleinschmidt said Council Member Greene and Donna Council Member Bell will
40 be unable to attend, as well as Town Manager Roger Stancil.
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
facility.
Mayor Stevens welcomed everyone to Hillsborough and to Orange County's beautiful
Introductions were made. It was noted that this is Commissioner Alice Gordon's last
Assembly of Governments meeting.
1. Article 46 — One Quarter Cent Sales Tax Collection and Use; Funds Available and
Main Uses for Economic Development in Orange County
W
1 Chair Jacobs said this was first brought up at their joint meeting with Carrboro.
2 Steve Brantley said he will focus on the economic development portion of article 46. He
3 reviewed the following background information, as outlined in the abstract:
4
5 Background: Orange County voters successfully passed a referendum in November
6 2011 to levy a one - quarter quarter (1/4) cent sales tax that generates additional annual funding
7 for education and economic development purposes. Now called "Article 46 ", the funding
8 program was forecast to generate $2.5 million annually in new local sales tax proceeds which
9 would be split equally between education and economic development, each receiving $1.25
10 million. The 50/50 share of Article 46 funds for economic development was initially set for 10
11 years. The Orange County Board of Commissioners adopted a Resolution in December 2011
12 authorizing the new one - quarter cent sales tax, and actual proceeds began to accrue at the
13 State level and distributed to Orange County in early 2012.
14 There is no set protocol for Article 46 funding requests for economic development projects,
15 such as proposed by the municipalities, to be considered by the County. Previous requests
16 have been tied to specific project needs, and presented directly to the Board of Commissioners,
17 the County Manager, and on occasion, by the towns' economic development staff to the
18 Orange County Economic Development office. Proposed changes regarding how Article 46 is
19 administered, such as defining the primary expenditure categories or overall objective may
20 require the Board Commissioners to modify the existing Resolution.
21 Attachments A and C provide a summary table, pie chart and current balances of the key
22 sectors where Article 46 funds are used for economic development in Orange County.
23 Assuming an annual $1.25 million receipt in sales tax proceeds, the Article 46 program and the
24 Orange County Board of Commissioners' adopted Resolution identify seven (7) main economic
25 development expenditures, as follows:
26
27 Key Sector % of Total $ Annually
28 • Debt service on water, sewer & associated 60% $750,000
29 Infrastructure made in Orange County's three
30 (3) Economic Development Districts
31 (Eno, Hillsborough and Buckhorn)
32 • Orange County's Small Business Loan Fund 16% $200,000
33 • Entrepreneurial & Incubator Support 8% $100,000
34 • Business Investment Grants 8% $100,000
35 • Agriculture Investment Grants 5% $60,000
36 • Marketing & Collaborative Outreach 1.5% $20,000
37 • Advertising, Publishing & Collateral Materials 1.5% $20,000
38 100% $1,250,000
39
40 Debt
41 Debt Service on Utilities - 60% of annual expenditures ($750,000)
42 Funding to cover debt service on utilities, as currently being installed in the Buckhorn Economic
43 Development District, was immediately put to use, and has already yielded a significant
44 economic development "win" for Orange County. This $4 million project, initiated in late 2012,
45 created a `backbone' sewer and water system to service or augment over 1,000 acres of
46 economic development lands, stretching from the Cheeks and Efland areas westward toward
47 the City of Mebane. This project included 2 miles of gravity sewer (18" gravity in western zone
48 and 12" gravity in eastern zone) and 3 miles of 16" water system. Besides adding to the
49 inventory of additional utility serviceable acres, the 16 "water system created a large loop to
50 increase pressures, water capacity and fire flow to many existing industrial businesses in
I Orange County's western economic development zone. Other Capital Investment Plan (CIP)
2 projects are underway to improve the availability and reach of present utilities in designated
3 economic development land use areas.
4 The ability to have the County's western sewer system under construction enabled the
5 Morinaga project to consider its present location and select an area in Orange County for the
6 firm's new North America operation. In September 2013 the company announced the creation
7 of nearly 100 new manufacturing jobs, and an initial investment of $48 million. A future plant
8 expansion of similar size is anticipated in future years. With this new, clean industry, Morinaga
9 America Foods, Inc. became Orange County largest corporate taxpayer (not counting the
10 electric power utilities), and the County and City of Mebane formed an even closer relationship.
11
12 Additional utility- served sites, along with appropriate zoning, road access and related power
13 infrastructure, have since opened up in the County and are being marketed to other high quality
14 business investment prospects.
15
16 A second illustration of Article 46 funds from this category aiding local collaboration is the
17 County /Town of Carrboro Interlocal Agreement related to the repair of a failing sewer line on
18 Roberson Street, which would have negatively impacted over 20 downtown businesses
19 employing more than 100 people. The sewer line has since been repaired with State funding
20 from a Community Development Block Grant, and a 50/50 sharing of a required co -pay cost.
21 The resolution and obligation for the Article 46 Sales Tax runs for 10 years, while the debt
22 service on infrastructure projects runs for 20 years. Without renewal of the resolution at the end
23 of 10 years, the General Fund would be obligated to pay the debt service.
24
25 Small Business Loan Fund — 16% of annual expenditures ($200,000)
26 The Orange County Economic Development office maintains a loan program that assists small
27 (and start -up) businesses to obtain necessary capital, especially for firms that are otherwise
28 unable to receive normal bank financing due to marginal credit history or short operating
29 experience. Article 46 funds are available, when needed, to replenish the loan program's
30 lending capabilities. Typical loans can be made for as much as $50,000 with a 5 -year
31 repayment term. With the slow recovery of the national, state and local economy, capital
32 demand by local firms should continue to increase, and the County's loan program should find
33 even more demand. The Economic Development office is working diligently to market the
34 program, identify potential borrowers, and make additional loans to local businesses.
35 To date, a total of twelve (12) loans have been made to eleven (11) small businesses, and
36 there is one (1) pending loan application. All loans are current with no delinquent history or
37 negative write -offs.
38
39 Entrepreneurial & Incubator Support - 8% of annual expenditures ($100,000)
40 There is an ongoing and successful effort to retain entrepreneurial start -up talent that originates
41 in the County, such as from UNC Chapel Hill, by supporting an affordable and creative work
42 environment that keeps such talent from leaving the County. Article 46 funds back an Interlocal
43 Agreement between Orange County and the Town of Chapel Hill to support the monthly lease
44 requirements of the "LaUNCh Chapel Hill" innovation center, located on Rosemary Street. Over
45 the initial 3 1 /2 year lease period, the County will provide a total of $140,000 in economic
46 development funding to support "LaUNCh Chapel Hill ". This new incubator, with over 20 full -
47 time promising firms, also has support and financial backing from the University and key private
48 donors.
49
il
1 Steve Brantley said there are two other programs that have not been tapped at all -
2 Business Investment Grants, designated to receive 8 percent of the annual expenditures; and
3 the Agricultural Investment Grant, designated to receive 5 percent of these funds. He said the
4 funds for these have accrued, but there has been no protocol for how to administer these
5 grants. He said, through this year, the economic development advisory board has worked on
6 developing these guidelines, policies and procedures, and the goal is to present this to the
7 Board in December for review.
8 Steve Brantley said the final category is Marketing and Collaborative Outreach
9 Advertising, Publishing & Collateral Materials, which is a combined 3 percent of annual
10 expenditures.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Clarence Grier reviewed the following revenue and expense information, as gathered
since the inception of this tax:
Article 46 Sales Tax Collection - October 2014 Report
Orange County, NC
Revenues
Sales Tax Month/Year Month Distributed
Amount
19
Total FY 2011 -12
$ 709,663
20
Total FY 2012 -13
$ 2,732,718
21
Total FY 2013 -14
$ 2,859,675
22
July 2014
October 2014
257,744
23
Total FY 2014 -15
$ 257,744
24
Grand Total - Revenues:
$ 6,559,800
25
26
Expenses
27
Fiscal Month/Year
Department of Economic
Chapel Hill - Carrboro Orange County
28
Development
City Schools
Schools
29
Total FY 2011 -12
$ 20,000
-
-
30
Total FY 2012 -13
$ 78,730
$ 51,242
$ 490,000
31
Total FY 2013 -14
$ 1,126,944
$ 1,023,273
$ 513,055
32
July 2014
1,500
-
-
33
August 2014
446
181,245
-
34
September 2014
426,480
12,767
-
35
October 2014
23,876
279,092
-
36
Total FY 2014 -15
$ 452,302
$ 473,104
$ -
37
38 Grand Total - Expenses: $ 4,228,650
39
40 Clarence Grier said Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools have spent about $1.3 million;
41 Orange County Schools have spent about $1 million; and Economic Development initiatives
42 have totaled $1.65 million. He said half of the revenues are allocated to education ($3.3
43 million), which leaves $3.3 million for economic development initiatives.
44 He said the expenditures, as of October 31, 2014 are $1.7 million, and total committed
45 funds and expenditures are $2.4 million. He said there is $890,000 in available funds as of
46 today.
47 Chair Jacobs recognized state representative Graig Meyer. He also noted the
48 information at the Commissioners' places.
49 Commissioner Rich noted that this meeting and all meetings are being televised.
I Alderman Slade asked to what degree the 60 percent has been allocated for the
2 economic development zones. He is interested in other ways to allocate the resources to
3 potential infrastructure improvements within the towns. He said some of these funds might be
4 used to incentivize the towns to think creatively about light manufacturing, zoning, and working
5 collaboratively with the County.
6 Alderman Slade encouraged everyone to look at economic development as an
7 opportunity to address major issues such as climate change. He said the federal and state
8 governments are not doing anything about this, and studies have shown that economic
9 development can align nicely with addressing this issue.
10 Alderman Slade said he wants to consider supporting and giving grants to locally owned
11 businesses. He said this provides benefit to the community by circulating money locally and
12 providing jobs. He said he has a list of reasons of why it is important to support these locally
13 owned businesses, and he will distribute.
14 Steve Brantley said Orange County was eager to work with Carrboro on the repair of the
15 privately owned failing sewer line on Roberson Street. He said there was a partnership on this
16 project, and it has almost been successfully put into place. He said the County cost for this
17 came from the quarter cent sales tax.
18 Craig Benedict addressed the issue of projects in the Economic Development District
19 (EDD). He said the Eno EDD has 500 acres that are underdeveloped or undeveloped. He said
20 part of the capital improvement program over the next ten years is to invest about a $1.5 million
21 in that zone.
22 He said the Hillsborough EDD is in and around Waterstone, in the unincorporated
23 portion of Orange County. He said there has been a master plan of uses in this area through
24 joint planning with Hillsborough, and there is $1.5 million earmarked for economic development.
25 Craig Benedict said the larger zone is a 2000 acre area in the Buckhorn EDD, which is
26 an area bordered roughly by the railroad tracks. He said $4.5 million in infrastructure has
27 already been completed here. He said this was already in process when Morinaga came
28 looking in Orange County, and further infrastructure was extended to serve that project. He
29 said there is another $4 million project that is in the 95 percent designed stage, and this will
30 open up additional lands along the interstate. He said this total of $8 million in the Buckhorn
31 area includes some water systems to serve existing economic development zones and to
32 improve pressure, fire flow, and capacity.
33 Craig Benedict said their program for debt service of $10 to $11 million will be $750,000
34 per year, over 20 years, with 10 years of funding through this quarter cent sales tax. He said
35 one positive element is the $250,000 in additional sales tax revenue that comes to the County
36 each year. He said if this keeps increasing, there can be investment in other areas.
37 Commissioner McKee addressed Alderman Slade's comments and said small
38 businesses are an integral part of the Small Business Loan program. He encourages anyone
39 starting a new small business or an existing program to apply.
40 Alderman Chaney said Carrboro also has a small business loan fund, and she asked if
41 Chapel Hill or Hillsborough has a program.
42 Mayor Kleinschmidt said Chapel Hill has a fund targeted at small business arts startup
43 groups. He said this has been used twice so far.
44 Mayor Stevens said Hillsborough does not have a fund, although many of their
45 businesses use the Orange County fund.
46 Alderman Chaney said she is concerned about having a lot of liquidity across multiple
47 funds, and she suggested efficiency might be gained by collaborating, pooling funds and
48 making policies together regarding how funding is done.
49 Commissioner Price referred to the pie chart in attachment C, and asked what this
50 represents.
I Clarence Grier said these are funds that have been expended, year to date.
2 Commissioner Price asked about the reason why the economic development portion
3 has not been fully used.
4 Steve Brantley said once they begin to market the grant program, there will no longer be
5 unallocated money in those categories. He hopes the towns will help market this.
6 Chair Jacobs said Steve Brantley is in the process of hiring a business retention person
7 who will be able to provide outreach to existing businesses and be available to meet with people
8 to try and bring them into these programs. He said, once adopted, the policies can be
9 distributed to the towns.
10 Steve Brantley said the County Manager met with the economic advisory board and
11 charged them to have their report ready by Dec. 1. He said the department has also recently
12 hired an agricultural economic development specialist who will be a resource for the County and
13 the towns.
14 Alderman Slade asked if there is a plan to weigh the economic impact of these different
15 investments and their return on investment.
16 Steve Brantley said when the County was successful with Morinaga, their initial $48
17 million propelled that company to the number one corporate taxpayer. He said when utilities
18 are put in the EDD it maximizes the ability to attract such companies, and this creates the
19 biggest hit or success for the County. He said many of the impoverished residents of the
20 County can benefit immediately by working for these new businesses.
21 Alderman Slade said this gives a sense of the impact, but he would like to know if there
22 are plans of measuring it compared to the other pieces of the pie.
23 Steve Brantley said the incentives would not be paid by the community unless the
24 company shows that it actually created jobs or made the capital investment. He said the
25 County might also have a good idea of the expansion capabilities. He said a company in
26 Mebane might be using Carrboro companies that do web design, or attorneys or banks. He
27 said there need to be more quantitative opportunities to show this.
28 Steve Brantley said the Wal -Mart in Hillsborough generates 12 percent of the retail sales
29 tax, and you can see the measures for this retail tax. He said there are measures to show the
30 net value of soccer tournaments to the community. He said there are various ways to see what
31 is generated in terms of job base and sales tax, and staff will do their best to quantify that
32 information.
33
34 2. Affordable Housing
35 a. Community Home Trust Charter Status Report
36 Commissioner Rich reviewed some of the following information from the abstract:
37 The Community Home Trust (CHT) is an affordable housing provider whose clientele includes
38 first -time homebuyers earning less than 80 percent of the area median income. CHT was
39 created by the local governments in 1990 to further the County -wide affordable housing
40 priorities and has served as an essential vehicle for implementing inclusionary housing policies
41 in Chapel Hill and Carrboro. As such, several families have realized the dream of purchasing a
42 home through CHT's land trust model.
43
44 CHT has determined that the current funding arrangement with the County and Town
45 governments is not sustainable. CHT currently receives the following financial support from the
46 local governments:
47 Chapel Hill: $200,000
48 Orange County: $149,000
49 Carrboro: $35,000
50 Hillsborough: $2,500
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
7
Including an allocation of $11,000 of operational support from the FY 2014 -15 HOME
Partnership Program, the total of local financial support is about $397,500. In March 2014,
Robert Dowling with CHT presented a draft Charter to the four local governments for input and
feedback. The stated purpose of the Charter is to "establish a shared set of expectations as to
what affordable housing functions CHT will provide to County and Towns ". The Charter further
includes renewal contract terms with regard to the governments' continued funding and CHT's
responsibility to its beneficiaries.
The Town of Carrboro Board of Aldermen discussed the draft Charter (Attachment 2 —A) on
June 3, 2014 and issued a resolution providing the following comments:
1. CHT should explore increasing the financial role of UNC and UNC Healthcare System.
2. The Town should explore the possibility of guaranteeing a line of credit for the Community
Home Trust.
3. CHT should provide budget requests to the Town of Carrboro early in the budget preparation
cycle.
After multiple discussions with the County and Towns' leadership, it was determined that a
"charter" was not the appropriate reference to the proposed agreement, and it was thereafter
referenced as an Inter -local Agreement (Agreement). The Agreement would reconfirm support
for the countywide affordable goals for homeownership and establish a formula to determine
funding of CHT's operational budget. According to Mr. Dowling's forecasted budget, CHT will
experience a net operating loss of about $209,000 if the proposed funding is not received by
the local governments. The funding formula for the governments' respective financial
contribution would be adjusted annually on a pro -rata basis in accordance with the number of
CHT homes located within each respective municipality.
Commissioner Rich said, in 2014, there are 230 homes in the $40 million portfolio. She
said 83 percent of these homes are in Chapel Hill, and 17 percent are in Carrboro. She said 17
percent are single family homes; 38 percent are condominiums; and 45 percent are
townhomes.
Commissioner Rich said this was discussed at the Orange County retreat last year, and
this proposed charter has been through a thorough review process by staff and attorneys. She
said the goal is to take this new funding method back to their respective boards to discuss and
approve. She said this has been a year in the making, and if nothing is done, the CHT will find
itself in debt for $209,000. She said it is important to take action on this, and she encouraged
conversations to happen soon so this can be included in the respective budgets.
Alderman Johnson said this is part of the sustainability model, and the work of the CHT
supports the goals of affordable housing. She said the sooner the better for moving this
forward.
Council Member Ward said the Town of Chapel Hill has not kept up with a funding
model that is sustainable, and he feels confident that the CHT is wisely spending their money
and is completing the task set before them. He said there have been years where development
comes through the town's approval process, and CHT is asked to take care of these homes;
however, as homes have been added, funding has not been added equally. He said this
charter will formalize a fair share to be put into the CHT.
Town Commissioner Ferguson said the work that is being done by the CHT could not be
matched. She said the CHT is leading the way in affordable housing, and it has been provided
mandates by government, but not the funding to carry it through. She encouraged the
government bodies to support this new funding model.
I Mayor Kleinschmidt said the representatives have described their commitment to the
2 CHT and an appreciation for the ways in which it advances affordable housing goals. He said
3 the question now is to ask staff where we are and whether we are ready to move forward.
4 Bonnie Hammersley said the managers have all met, along with staff and the executive
5 director of the CHT, and there is a plan to meet again to discuss a unified recommendation to
6 their governing boards. She would say that this could come back to the governing boards by
7 the end of January. She said staff has worked with Robert Dowling to understand the
8 challenges that CHT is facing.
9 Mayor Kleinschmidt said the community has wondered about the timeline. He said
10 support has always been very strong for this.
11 Town Council Member Palmer said the model is good for getting people into home
12 ownership. She would like to do more than just maintaining what is already here. She said 200
13 units is a drop in the bucket for what our County needs. She said affordable housing is
14 economic development too, and she would like some information on what can be done to
15 extend this model of ownership to other types of housing units. She said many older adults,
16 especially in Chapel Hill, cannot afford to pay their taxes or maintain their homes. She asked
17 what might happen if someone were willing to sell their home to CHT and then only pay taxes
18 on the portion they own.
19 Town Commissioner Ferguson said until there is a viable funding source the CHT
20 cannot expand. She said rehab is always more expensive, and this is a very cash hungry
21 business. She said the Home Trust itself is looking at how it can best serve the community,
22 but the hard reality is that you need cash in order to expand.
23 Council Member Matt Czajkowski asked what parts of Orange County are being defined
24 when looking at affordable housing. He said Chapel Hill defines affordable housing by how
25 much exists in the actual community of Chapel Hill. He said the CHT started out primarily
26 providing single family residences and townhomes, being built by developers already working
27 on these projects. He said there are now virtually no single family residence applications
28 coming through, and the town is seeing rentals almost exclusively. He said this provides a
29 whole host of other challenges. He said the land in Chapel Hill is prohibitively expensive for
30 affordable housing. He said land is less expensive in Orange County, and there are some
31 single family developments happening, and he questioned where we should look to expand
32 affordable housing and whether it needs to be defined by specific community.
33 He said questioned how success is defined in terms of affordable housing when there is
34 affordable housing in Orange County versus in Chapel Hill.
35 Alderman Johnson said they cannot rely on the CHT to meet all of their affordable
36 housing goals. She this is important, but some things are being mixed up. She said this was
37 really about the inter -local agreement, and it is connected to our goals, but it will not address all
38 of the affordable housing needs. She said there was interest from all of the municipalities, at
39 the last Assembly of Governments meeting, in having some sort of committee to work on
40 supporting their action plans related to affordable housing. She asked about the status of this
41 group. She said it is important to maintain their focus on the purpose of the inter -local
42 agreement.
43 Commissioner Pelissier said her comments are related to affordable housing around
44 transit, and she said people are now looking at housing plus transit when talking about
45 affordable housing. She when you think only about putting housing in cheaper areas, you
46 might have much higher transportation costs, which is not what anyone wants.
47 Council Member Matt Czajkowski said he disagreed with Alderman Johnson. He said
48 the direction this is moving toward is for all of the jurisdictions to provide funding for the CHT,
49 whereas it has historically only been Chapel Hill. He said the fundamental question is why
50 Orange County should fund this if most of it is happening in Chapel Hill.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
I
Mayor Kleinschmidt said the funding would be proportional to where the homes are, so
Chapel Hill would pay more.
Alderman Chaney said Carrboro has an affordable housing strategy, and there was a
meeting about the inter -local agreement. She said it would be nice to see in the agreement the
proportion of funds that CHT is raising itself.
Alderman Chaney said Robert Dowling is part of the Orange County affordable housing
coalition, which is a group of about a dozen providers with some sort of role in affordable
housing in Orange County. She said this coalition would be very interested in the question of
the County's combined goals. She suggested that everyone think about being better listeners
to that coalition.
Mayor Kleinschmidt said he hopes that everyone will state their commitments strongly
on the night when votes are taken to adopt these recommendations. He worries that future
board members approving homes for the CHT will become concerned with the increased
percentage of operational expenses that they are being required to pay, and this will be a
disincentive. He hopes that each of the individual boards can employ whatever processes they
might have to diminish that possibility.
b. Transit - Related Affordable Housing Opportunities
David Bonk said this is an update on efforts being made to try and incorporate issues of
affordable housing into the planning related to the light rail corridor between Durham and
Chapel Hill. He said there is a strong correlation between affordable housing, the cost of
transportation, and the ability of public transit to offset a major portion of that cost.
He said staff members in Chapel Hill have been in contact with Triangle Transit (TTA)
and with counterparts in Durham to coordinate efforts related to station area planning. He said
the stations that have been proposed in Chapel Hill are best characterized as a combination of
UNC owned and /or greenfield sites. He said Durham has an even mix of greenfield station
locations and inner city urban station areas, which carry a host of issues.
David Bonk said the federal government recently announced a grant program that would
be made available to support the development of station area plans around stations for projects
that have reached a certain level of maturity in the federal process. He said Chapel Hill
submitted a grant application and should hear back about this in March. He said this grant
would fund $2.3 million worth of efforts to support station area planning on both sides of the
corridor, and it will be a coordinated effort between Chapel Hill and Durham.
He said one lesson that has been learned is that it is important to start planning early;
however, this is an evolving situation, and the grant that has been submitted has several key
work tasks. He said one of these is a market survey at each of the proposed stations to
determine the usage. He said there is another work task that flows from this that would focus
specifically on developing strategies and plans for affordable housing that is consistent with the
overall goals of both Durham and Chapel Hill.
David Bonk said staff is very hopeful about the possibility of getting this funding, which
has $20 million available nationally to fund at least 10 projects.
He said staff from various agencies in Orange County have also been in discussion with
the non - profit, The Enterprise Community Partnership, about becoming involved in this process.
David Bonk said there is a need for the NC Housing Finance Agency to adapt some of
their rules regarding low income housing assistance to better reflect the benefits of being
10
1 located within access to public transit and light rail station area. He said TTA and the Triangle J
2 Council of Governments did submit some comments regarding changes to these criteria, and
3 they were partially successful in getting some criteria changed. He encouraged the local
4 governments to weigh in with the housing authority to make more changes.
5 Alderman Seils asked if the award to fund station area planning is referring to formal
6 small area planning or something less than that.
7 David Bonk said the work plan submitted does include a provision for small area plans
8 around those stations, where it is necessary. He said Durham has already initiated an
9 extensive process of identifying infrastructure improvements in most of their urban
10 neighborhoods. He said some infrastructure will be identified in the greenfield sites.
11 Alderman Seils said the stations in Chapel Hill will involve UNC, and he asked if UNC
12 will be part of the conversations with TTA and Durham.
13 David Bonk said UNC has been part of these discussions, and staff has reached out to
14 let the university know about the grant application.
15 Alderman Seils asked for more information on other local jurisdictions giving input
16 regarding potential revisions to the criteria for affordable housing.
17 David Bonk said he can provide this.
18 Commissioner McKee said a short section of this line lies in Orange County, and this
19 section is directly adjacent to Chapel Hill. He asked if there are any thoughts on how to work
20 out the issue of these escalating land prices and how that affects the possibility of affordable
21 housing.
22 David Bonk said that is the purpose of getting started early and getting assistance from
23 the federal government to do the planning. He said it is early enough in the curve that the
24 escalation of land prices has not occurred yet. He said even if the grant is not approved, the
25 process of going through the application allowed staff to really flesh out a work program that
26 identifies the key issues moving forward.
27 Commissioner McKee said his concern is that once this project gets to a certain point,
28 market forces will take effect with a vengeance, and businesses and high end apartments will
29 be drawn to this line. He sees a market influence that will impact the cost of this land, and he
30 does not feel there are any legal means in place for holding the land prices.
31 David Bonk said this will be a good topic for the upcoming meeting with the non - profit
32 organization.
33 Commissioner Gordon said it is important to consider transportation when talking about
34 affordability. She said the federal grant process includes a requirement of a certain percentage
35 of affordable housing around station sites. She said early planning should allow for this.
36 Commissioner Gordon referred to the portfolio management information on page 4. She
37 would like to see staff provide information on the root cause for why this flexibility is needed.
38 She said it is important to figure out what made this work when it started and what changed, so
39 that you have a good idea of the problem in order to come up with a solution that avoids the
40 need for this flexibility. She said the goal was to have affordable homes, and if the trust has to
41 sell the homes then this goal is not being accomplished.
42
43
11
1
2
3 3. Solid Waste Advisory Group (SWAG) Update
4 Mayor Kleinschmidt said the purpose tonight is to receive an update from the advisory
5 group and to take action to extend the SWAG's work. He said there is no recommendation, but
6 they would like to keep working. He said the timeline is designed to be respectful of the four
7 budget processes.
8 Mayor Lavelle said she is one of the representatives from Carrboro. She said there
9 have been 4 meetings to date, and she provided the following list of accomplishments:
10 1. There has been agreement regarding the need for co- ordination of funding and cost
11 decisions and the timing has been identified to allow costs to be included in municipal
12 budgets.
13 2. The group has determined that issues related to Recycling and Construction and
14 Demolition should be dealt with first, and issues regarding Municipal Solid Waste and a
15 transfer station will be dealt with subsequently
16 3. UNC and UNC - Hospital have been integrated into the discussions and the potential for
17 partnering has been discussed, with recognition that this is a longer term project to be
18 undertaken after an agreement on recycling has been reached.
19 4. The fiscal assumptions underlying the Solid Waste Enterprise fund have been explored.
20 5. A markup of the Inter -local Agreement has begun, and the group is working on the third
21 iteration of this.
22 6. The group has agreed to keep meeting over the next several months with a plan to
23 report back to the respective boards in the early spring.
24
25 Town Commissioner Lowen said the group's work is not complete, and they are
26 requesting reauthorization, with the intent of making a recommendation on recycling funding
27 and the Inter -local agreement by the end of March, 2015.
28 Mayor Kleinschmidt said the funding mechanism is the challenge, and this is the core of
29 the conversations. He said the County has been carrying the recycling program, but another
30 solution is needed by June 30th. He said several funding options have been presented to the
31 SWAG and subsequently to the staff of the various jurisdictions for analysis, critique and
32 recommendation.
33 Commissioner Rich said the first quarter of monitoring since the roll carts has been
34 phenomenal. She said the overall single stream tonnage has increased by 324 tons since the
35 first quarter of last fiscal year. She reviewed the following monitoring information:
36
37 e High Performing Programs
38 o Urban Curbside Collection — 29% increase
39 o Government Building Collections — 15% increase
40 o Recycling Collection from Convenience Centers — 19% increase
41 e Other Programs of Interest
42 o Multi - Family — 5% decrease
43 o Rural Curbside— 3% decrease
44 e Shred -a -Thou Success — Two Fall Events (University Mall and Hampton Pointe)
45 o Over 880 participants
46 o 19 tons shredded and recycled
47
48 Chair Jacobs said the group knows there is a charge for short and long term goals, and
49 they will try and get through as much as possible before coming back to the boards in the
12
1 spring. He said there were a lot of knots that needed to be taken care of first, and things may
2 start to pick up speed moving forward.
3 Mayor Kleinschmidt said SWAG needs authorization from the four bodies in order to
4 continue its work.
5
6 A motion was made by Council Member Matt Czajkowski seconded by Mayor Stevens to
7 extend the time line for the Solid Waste Advisory Group (SWAG).
8
9 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
10
11 Alderman Slade asked, given the amazing numbers on the new containers, how this
12 affects the goals for reducing trash and whether this goal needs to be updated.
13 Blair Pollock, Solid Waste Planner, said the County has a 61 percent waste reduction
14 goal, which applies to more than just recycling. He said his staff does not know the answer to
15 the question yet. He said there is dependence on the state, because there is a statutory
16 requirement that each County must set a goal, and the number is then calculated for them. He
17 said the numbers for 2013 -14 will come out in January. He said some of this is tied to the
18 economy, and as consumption goes up, so do recycling and garbage. He said the solid waste
19 staff would like to see the County reach the goal before setting a new one, although he can see
20 the advantage of striving higher.
21 Alderman Slade said he would like to see SWAG thinking in those terms. He would like
22 to encourage them to think more strongly about zero waste.
23 Council Member Harrison gave a personal testimony about his efforts to increase
24 recycling and get rid of paper.
25 Jenn Weaver asked Blair Pollock about emissions reductions, and whether the public
26 has gotten the message that the public does not have to put bins out every week if they are not
27 full.
28 Blair Pollock said residents are encouraged to place full bins out at the curb, but they
29 seem to feel an obligation to put them out weekly. He said it is worthwhile to encourage people
30 to only place the full bins.
31 Town Council Member Palmer asked about educational outreach. She said a local
32 neighborhood mover left a lot of boxes at a nearby house, and she wonders if there might be an
33 ordinance that requires moving companies to remove the cardboard. She also suggested
34 leaving notes on the carts to educate residents. She asked if there is a budget for education.
35 Blair Pollock said there is a recycling outreach and education budget. He said, in
36 general, the education is reactive to specific situations. He likes the idea of outreach to moving
37 companies, and he will look into this. He said there is a compactor at the landfill for cardboard.
38 Commissioner Price said she would like to monitor and reduce the amount of tonnage
39 and track where it is coming from. She would also like to know if everything being collected in
40 recycling is actually able to be recycled.
41 Blair Pollock said the switch to single stream is more economical, but there is more
42 residue. He said residents assume that more stuff can be recycled, and the sorting process is
43 less than perfect; however the increase in the net amount being recycled is still far greater than
44 the increase in residuals.
45
46 4. Potential 2016 Bond Referendum
47 Chair Jacobs referred to the white sheet outlining the 2001 bonds. He said there was
48 unified request from Chapel Hill and Carrboro, specifically for the parks bond, regarding an
49 aquatics center in 2001. He said now the municipalities can start to think about a coordinated
13
1 approach for 2016. He said it is important to use this opportunity to sit down with their
2 neighbors to determine what should be funded.
3 Clarence Grier said the Board is in discussion about a general obligation bond
4 referendum to be held in 2016. He read through the following information from the abstract:
5
6 BACKGROUND: In recent meetings over the past fiscal year, the Board of County
7 Commissioners has discussed the need for a future bond referendum to fund some County and
8 School long -range capital needs. Due to recent changes enacted by the North Carolina General
9 Assembly related to the dates in which a general obligation bond referendum can be held, a
10 general obligation bond referendum can only occur during even numbered years. Therefore,
11 there are only two possible dates for the Board of County Commissioners conduct a voter
12 approved general obligation bond referendum — May 2016 and November 2016. If not held at
13 one of these 2016 dates, a potential general obligation bond referendum would be delayed until
14 May 2018 or November 2018. Bob Jessup, Orange County Bond Counsel, and Orange County
15 staff has provided a schedule provided the Board with a brief timeline comparison related to
16 both dates (Attachment A).
17 The most recent time that Orange County held a general obligation bond referendum was in
18 November 2001. That bond referendum totaled $75 million and the items included on the
19 referendum were as follows:
20 • School related projects totaling $47 million.
21 • Parks and Recreation projects totaling $20 million
22 • Senior Center projects totaling $4 million
23 • Low and moderate income projects (Affordable Housing) totaling $4 million
24
25 He said all of the individual items on the bond referendum passed on the November 2001 bond
26 referendum. The total bond referendum passed with an average approval rate of approximately
27 55 percent. Additionally, some of the steps included in the process to prepare for the general
28 obligation bonds referendum were as follows:
29
30 1. The Board of County Commissioners decided to proceed with a general obligation bond
31 referendum.
32 2. The Board of County Commissioners formed and appointed members to a Capital Needs
33 Advisory Task Force to make a recommendation as to the needs and components of the bond
34 referendum (See Attachment B).
35 3. Once the components of the general obligation bond referendum were decided, the
36 Board of County Commissioners appointed a Bond Education Committee to inform the public of
37 the purpose of and the components of the general obligation bond referendum (Attachment C).
38 Currently, the County and both School Districts (Chapel — Carrboro City Schools and Orange
39 County Schools) have capital projects that are proposed for inclusion as part of the general
40 obligation bond referendum. Moreover, both school districts have older facility needs totaling
41 approximately $330 million that could potentially be addressed in part with a general obligation
42 bond referendum.
43
44 At the September 11, 2014 Board of County Commissioners Work Session, the recommended
45 sizing of the potential general obligation bond referendum was discussed at a range between
46 $100 and $125 million over a period of 20 years. At current AAA municipal bond interest rates,
47 the total combined debt service for a $100 million general obligation bond issuance is estimated
48 to be $6.5 million annually. This would represent the property tax rate equivalent of 4.00 cents
49 on the current property tax rate. At current AAA municipal bond interest rates, the total
50 combined debt service for $125 million general obligation bond issuance is estimated to be $8.1
14
1 million annually. This would represent property tax rate equivalent of 4.89 cents on the current
2 property tax rate.
3 Future debt capacity for a potential general obligation bond referendum can increase or
4 decrease due to the following circumstances:
5
6 • Future increases or decreases in interest rates
7 • Future changes or modifications to the capital investment plans of the County and /or both
8 School Districts (individually or collectively)
9 • Future changes of a legislative or regulatory nature
10
11 Alderman Slade said there is a resolution at their places that the Carrboro Board of
12 Alderman passed regarding the energy efficient needs for renovating the schools. He said the
13 facility upgrades provide a huge opportunity to do some of the energy efficiency upgrades. He
14 said this can generate 25 to 30 percent cost savings. He said Carrboro's overall goal is to
15 reduce greenhouse gas emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, and schools in the
16 town represent 6 percent of emissions. He encouraged the boards to include comprehensive
17 energy efficiency improvement goals in this process.
18 Alderman Chaney left at 9:00pm.
19 Alderman Haven O'Donnell thanked Alderman Slade for bringing this resolution forward
20 to the Town of Carrboro and to this body. She looks forward to the opportunity to enact some
21 of these recommendations that have been worked on for so long.
22 Chair Jacobs said the County has green building standards, and the most recently built
23 schools incorporate this. He said the other schools will be brought up to these same standards
24 as retrofits are done.
25 Alderman Slade asked if other items could be considered for a bond referendum, such
26 as affordable housing.
27 Chair Jacobs said affordable housing is on the table, but the Board has not actually
28 decided what will be done. He said there are many groups outside of the schools and the
29 towns that have needs and interests, and the Board will see what other groups make sense in
30 coming to the table.
31 Alderman Slade said there has been interest from his Board to see affordable housing
32 represented, and he would like to add the suggestion of thinking about climate change.
33
34 5. Rural Buffer
35 a. Rural Buffer and Countywide Population Projections
36 Craig Benedict said the projections information presented tonight is a compilation of
37 input from all of the local governments during the Metropolitan Planning Organization process
38 to develop the long range transportation plan. He said these plans were loaded into a model
39 called "Imagine 2040." He said the numbers in the packet were designed to show the
40 conditions in 2010.
41 He said the information packet shows some striking numbers that need to be realized.
42 He said if these trends can be accommodated with current land use plans, then we move
43 forward; if these cannot be accommodated with current land use plans, then local governments
44 will need to make some adjustments.
45 Craig Benedict reviewed several maps and charts regarding population, dwelling, and
46 employment in the towns and County. He said the population growth in unincorporated Orange
47 County is projected to be 28,000 by 2040. He said the rural buffer projection looks at available
48 land and makes assumptions about single family and multi - family building and sprawl. He said
49 the population increase in the rural buffer is estimated to be 14,000. He reviewed the maps and
50 zoning.
15
1 He reviewed the map of the rural buffer uses and the following slide of Rural Buffer
2 statistics:
3
4 RURAL BUFFER SUMMARY STATISTICS
5 Established; 1987 per JPA
6 Total Area 36,958 acres
7
8 Zoning Rural Buffer (RB)
9 RB 1 DU / 5 AC* (University Lake) 15,400 acres
10 RB 1 DU / 2 AC (Jordan Lake) 21,558 acres
11
12 Use Value Area (Farm & Forest)
13 1990 — 11,800 acres±
14 2002 — 10,970 acres
15 2014 — 10,206 acres
16
17 Population (Rural Buffer approx.)
18 2010 Units — 4,712
19 Population- 11,106
20 (DCHC MPO MTP) 2040 Units — 10,183 Increase 116%
21 Population — 25,161 Increase 127%
22
23 Craig Benedict said it is difficult to put 5,000 projected new units in the rural buffer, even
24 if you converted the farm land. He said the total acres of farm land decreased in 2012, but total
25 farms increased. He said this was due to a decrease in farm sizes. He said the direct sale of
26 food from farms to consumers has gone up due to County and town policies.
27 He said there have been discussions for ten years about agricultural support
28 enterprises. He said there is high demand for new housing in Orange County, and the models
29 show a high degree of activity wanting to occur in the rural buffer, and agricultural support
30 enterprises could help stem the tide of conversion.
31 Craig Benedict said staff is in the process of developing the 2045 plan, and there is an
32 initiative that asks whether 65,000 people can really come to Orange County, and if so, what
33 housing will be used. He said staff is looking for input on how to develop this plan to make
34 sure it is achievable and sustainable.
35 Mayor Lavelle referred to attachment 3a and said it seems like the numbers are off for
36 Carrboro. She said her staff will look into this.
37 Alderman Slade said he would like to see a similar analysis applied to some of the
38 proposed added commercial uses to the rural buffer. He questioned what kind of cap would be
39 used for commercial development. He said his main concern is that commercial activity creates
40 competing pressure for farms. He said he understands some of the history of how we got to this
41 point, and Maple View Farms has been used as an example of why more of these uses should
42 be allowed. He said that type of augmentation for farm activities is already allowed, and the
43 more conditional use purposes are all that remains. He said the consideration is whether it is
44 appropriate for these to exist in the rural buffer versus in the towns.
45 Alderman Slade said he encourages everyone to proceed with caution in allowing more
46 competing uses that might make it harder for farms to exist in the rural buffer.
47 Craig Benedict noted that this will be discussed in item 5.
48 Town Council Member Palmer said her concern is regarding the population growth and
49 the rural buffer. She said in 2040 there will be "McMansions" in the rural buffer, and it is time to
50 re- negotiate what is put there. She said land needs to be set aside for parks and recreation
16
1 purposes. She said there also needs to be a farm land trust system to enable the small farmers
2 to buy in, and avoid land being sold to developers.
3 Chair Jacobs said Orange County has an agriculture trust fund and a conservation
4 easement program and both of these are in play to accomplish the things that Council Member
5 Palmer mentioned.
6
7 b. Accommodating Appropriate Agricultural Support Enterprises in the Rural Buffer
8 Perdita Holtz said the boards of Orange County, Carrboro and Chapel Hill already
9 discussed this item on several occasions earlier in the year. She said the Joint Planning Area
10 (JPA) documents need to be amended before the County can consider adopting the
11 implementing regulations to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) for Agricultural Support
12 Enterprises in the Rural Buffer.
13 She said the local governments need to adopt the same language in order for the joint
14 planning amendments to become effective. She said the town of Carrboro adopted a resolution
15 that includes a sunset clause for the amendments. She is hopeful that the discussion tonight
16 will lead to a solution where all three local governments will feel comfortable in supporting it.
17 Perdita Holtz said several options for consideration are listed on page 2 of the abstract,
18 and staff is also open to other considerations.
19 Commissioner Gordon said the staff members did a good job of providing some options.
20 She said the sunset provision from Carrboro would automatically have a cutoff where all three
21 boards have to agree to continue with the Agricultural Support Enterprises; and then staff came
22 up with another option where all three entities would have to agree to stop.
23 Commissioner Gordon said the three governments also have to agree to the
24 amendments to the Joint Planning Agreement and Land Use Plan, and Carrboro has also made
25 some changes there. She said it is important to consider these changes.
26 Mayor Lavelle said the sticking point for Carrboro was the sunset clause, and the six
27 suggestions given might provide a way for them to feel comfortable replacing the sunset clause.
28 She suggested that Carrboro needs to talk about this, and then come back to staff and the
29 County to let everyone know their decision.
30 Mayor Kleinschmidt said the Chapel Hill Town Council has discussed this only briefly,
31 but there was some general support for expanded farm uses. He said he believes the rural
32 buffer was set up in a way to help keep it rural, but farmers need tools to be successful, and
33 these have not been provided. He said the town just wants to make sure the farmers are being
34 helped.
35 Mayor Kleinschmidt said a sunset clause is not a good idea. He said creating a date at
36 which this could end would put farmers in much greater jeopardy, as this sets a point at which a
37 vested right must be attained or else value is lost. He said if you are a small farmer hoping to
38 provide value to a future generation, you are going to maximize it well ahead of time and sell to
39 a "McMansion" subdivision.
40 Mayor Kleinschmidt said an annual review and monitoring by staff would be valuable.
41 Alderman Slade said the point of a sunset date is that it would allow an opportunity for
42 review. He said the focus would be on reestablishing the rules that worked if it is found that
43 these current proposals do not work. He said the farmers would have a window to make use of
44 the land at a higher use value, and then this could be grandfathered in.
17
1 Mayor Kleinschmidt said before the sunset period, anyone with interest in enhancing the
2 value, would engage in a process to guarantee their rights. He said farmers would not know
3 what the government is going to do, and they would potentially sell to the highest bidder.
4 Alderman Slade asked why the farmers would choose to sell to a "McMansion" at that
5 point when this could be done at any point.
6 Town Commissioner Ferguson said businesses want certainty, and without certainty,
7 there will be no business. She said no one will invest commercially with a sunset clause that
8 may make them stop in five or six years. She said some of the other suggestions limit growth,
9 which caps out profits and what can be done to be successful. She said if a business cannot
10 make money, it will sell.
11 Mayor Lavelle said Chapel Hill has only talked about this briefly, but Carrboro has talked
12 about this on at least three occasions for over 7 hours and has come up with a set of really
13 good recommendations. She said their board was mixed on the sunset clause, but it was kept
14 in to present to the whole body out of deference to several of the board members.
15 She said she is hearing that no one supports the sunset clause, and this is why she is
16 suggesting the town of Carrboro take this back and look it over to see if there is another
17 mechanism to accomplish what they are looking for.
18 Commissioner Pelissier said the Agricultural Support Enterprises started some time ago,
19 and it was not just made up by elected officials and staff, but it was really made up by the
20 farming community. She said the big picture of the rural buffer shows that it is more than just a
21 ring; it is 37,000 acres that makes up a quarter of rural Orange County. She noted that over a
22 quarter of the 37,000 acres is farmers, and the Board has already approved Agricultural
23 Support Enterprises for the other three quarters. She does not want to give the message to
24 farmers in the rural buffer that they will be micromanaged. She said farmers are commercial
25 too, and she wants to support our farmers and the whole local food community.
26 Council Member Matt Czajkowski said he has questioned the Metropolitan Planning
27 Organization (MPO) growth projections for seven years, and his questions have never been
28 answered. He said to the extent that this issue has developed an immediacy driven by the
29 2040 planning process, he questions the degree at which we are actually facing an issue today.
30 He understands that we need to plan for tomorrow, but this feels like a hasty set of changes.
31 He said the issue of having a sunset clause should be the end of the discussion, but not the
32 beginning.
33 Council Member Matt Czajkowski asked planning staff how many applications are on the
34 table for the previously referred to "McMansions."
35 Craig Benedict said the majority of subdivisions over the last 10 years that are larger
36 than 10 lots have been in the rural buffer. He said the sheer number would not add up to the
37 projections. He said a lot of these are converted farms.
38 Council Member Matt Czajkowski asked how many development proposals are on the
39 table today to take current farms and turn them into large lots for large houses.
40 Craig Benedict said he can find and provide this information to the group.
41 Council Member Matt Czajkowski said this information should be before them. He said
42 the whole premise is based on 2040, and rather than the 5 year sunset provision, maybe this
43 should just go slowly. He questioned what farmers are saying about this.
IN
I Town Council Council Member Palmer said she supports the proposal wholeheartedly.
2 She left the last discussion feeling like this was a really good initiative, and she has been
3 learning more about what was presented. She does not want some of these enterprises within
4 the city limits of Chapel Hill. She believes these belong in the rural area and will make the
5 farming community more vibrant. She supports the local food movement and community
6 supported agriculture and farming.
7 Alderman Haven O'Donnell thanked Perdita Holtz for attending at least four meetings in
8 Carrboro, because the Aldermen really dissected this. She said this document is not perfect,
9 but it reflects a lot of time and effort. She encouraged Chapel Hill to take another look at it, as it
10 is very complex and requires digesting on multiple levels. She said their board was not unified
11 on the sunset clause, but they thought it was worth sharing at the next level.
12 Alderman Haven O'Donnell said it is important to have a rural center and to have things
13 that concretely support the efforts of local farming. She noted the earlier discussion about
14 transit nodes for affordable housing. She said if some of these events, like wineries and
15 breweries, are put out in the rural areas, it forces people into cars. She said there needs to be
16 consistency with their values.
17 Commissioner Price supported Commissioner Pelissier's earlier comments. She said
18 the attempt is to support farmers, protect urban areas, and reduce sprawl. She said one of her
19 concerns is that the list of six options may limit farmers from expanding their farm operation.
20 She feels there needs to be another type of threshold that is more equitable.
21 Commissioner Price referred to Alderman Haven O'Donnell's comment and said there
22 have been people who have wanted to have the events out at the farm in order to bring people
23 out.
24 Commissioner McKee said we may be looking at timelines in the wrong fashion. He
25 said today is not the problem because farming is a very long term proposition, and the short
26 term in farming is ten years. He said a five or six year sunset is still in the short term. He said
27 no one that is successful will limit their ability to move something forward. He said being
28 grandfathered in will just mean you cannot grow larger, and no business wants to be frozen in
29 time.
30 Commissioner McKee said he does not see any rush to get this settled right now, but it
31 needs to be settled in six months to a year. He said this should involve identifying the uses that
32 the different entities cannot abide. He said he is not interested in leaving the slaughterhouse in
33 the uses because there is not going to be a slaughterhouse in Orange County that is of a large
34 enough size to be noticeable. He said some of the other uses may grow to be a 300 person
35 event or a large complex, but Maple View is the exception and not the norm. He said most
36 farms are going in the opposite direction and growing smaller.
37 Commissioner McKee said he would urge everyone to move this forward, but it needs to
38 be without any discussion of a sunset clause. He said he would never support a sunset clause.
39 He suggested considering the alternatives to allowing these Agricultural Support Enterprises,
40 which will be 2 to 5 acre lots with million dollar homes, and more isolation of wealth in a small
41 area of the County. He said change is coming, and you will not be able to stop it.
42 Commissioner Gordon said she appreciates the comments that have been made. She
43 said the concept of the rural buffer was to have a definite edge around the municipalities so that
19
1 in the towns you could provide services and have infrastructure, and then have the more rural
2 area beyond that, where you do not have the infrastructure of water and sewer. She said this
3 meant you had to rely on the carrying capacity of the land in the rural buffer. She said the goal
4 is to keep farmers farming, and the question is how to do this without turning the rural buffer
5 into something that is urban or commercial and without putting uses in the rural buffer that need
6 water and sewer.
7 Town Commissioner Hallman left at 9:55
8 Commissioner Gordon said it makes sense to do something that is a little more
9 measured. She thinks Carrboro's intent with the sunset clause was to take things slowly to see
10 what happens. She said that was a good motivation, but there are reasons not to have the
11 sunset provision. She said you need to look at the uses allowed by right, by special use permit,
12 and by conditional zoning. She said the proposed uses allowed by right are fine in the rural
13 buffer, and the uses allowed by special use permits have special standards which is also fine.
14 She said the problematic uses are those allowed through conditional zoning.
15 Council Member Harrison left at 9:59pm.
16 Commissioner Gordon said the concern is with a use that goes into the rural buffer and
17 is so intense that it should not be served by a groundwater and septic system. She said
18 Carrboro has identified some of these more intense uses. She recommended leaving out the
19 more intense uses identified by Carrboro, any other intense uses that do not belong on a
20 groundwater and septic system, and those uses with no specific standards or definition. She
21 said the category of use called "agricultural services uses" is a catch -all category and she
22 believed that this use should also not be in the rural buffer. She said that even without these
23 uses, adding the other agricultural support enterprises would still give the farmers a lot of
24 opportunity to farm.
25 Commissioner Gordon recommended that Carrboro should to go back and re -visit this
26 issue, and Chapel Hill should have a more in -depth discussion as well. She said the boards
27 could go through and look carefully at all of the uses. She believes the uses allowed by right
28 and by special use permits in the general use zoning districts are probably fine. She said
29 Carrboro has added some language to the land use plan and the joint planning agreement that
30 should be considered. She said there is a way to allow some additional uses in the rural buffer
31 without allowing everything that has been proposed. She said there is a difference between
32 rural and urban, and land uses in the rural area should only need septic systems and
33 groundwater supplies.
34 Town Commissioner Lowen left at 10:00pm.
35 Chair Jacobs said Maple View Farms is really where this whole Agricultural Support
36 Enterprises started. He said the reason there are no tables in Maple View store is because
37 there was a state requirement for a commercial type septic system to support that business.
38 Town Commissioner Lloyd left at 10:05pm
39 Chair Jacobs explained more of the history of Maple View. He said this process has
40 lasted over a decade and staff has put in a lot of effort. He said Carrboro has identified only a
41 few things and we are getting hung up on these. He said everyone wants to be protective and
42 cautious. He said, respecting these concerns, there need to be some unified
43 recommendations from planning staff in order to move forward in the near future.
20
1 Council Member Matt Czajkowski asked Commissioner McKee if authorizing all of these
2 uses will really make agriculture profitable enough to create return that is equal or superior to
3 subdividing the property.
4 Commissioner McKee said it will not compare to sub - dividing, but it might make it
5 sustainable to allow the family to stay there. He said Orange County will never be able to equal
6 the profit potential of a subdivision. He said this is not the problem. He said you have farmers
7 in Orange County who need a supplemental income or an auxiliary enterprise just to help them
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
stay there.
6. Town Updates
Chair Jacobs said since it is late, the boards will forego the Town Updates at the request
of Mayor Lavelle. He asked Jeff Thompson to give a one minute history lesson of Whitted
Facility, and Jeff Thompson provided a brief summary.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:12 p.m.
Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board
Barry Jacobs, Chair
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
I
Attachment 5
DRAFT MINUTES
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
December 1, 2014
7:00 p.m.
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Monday,
December 1, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Building in Hillsborough, N.C.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Earl McKee and Commissioners Mark Dorosin,
Alice M. Gordon (retiring Commissioner), Barry Jacobs, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price,
Penny Rich, and Mia Burroughs (incoming Commissioner).
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Assistant County
Managers Clarence Grier, Cheryl Young and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other staff
members will be identified appropriately below)
NOTE: ALL DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE PERMANENT
AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE.
Chair Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. He welcomed everyone and
recognized the new Sheriff, Charles Blackwood, who was in attendance.
Resolution of Commendation for Commissioner Alice M. Gordon
Chair Jacobs read the following resolution:
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION FOR
COMMISSIONER ALICE M. GORDON
WHEREAS, the voters of Orange County elected Alice M. Gordon to the Board of County
Commissioners in 1990 and re- elected her in 1994, 1998, 2002, 2006 and 2010; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner Alice Gordon was elected Chair of the Board of Commissioners in
1999; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner Gordon has proven to be a dedicated and effective public servant
who, as she said on the campaign trail, "does her homework" including combing through every
agenda item with keen focus on detail, gaining the respect of all who have known her in both the
public and private sectors; and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
2
WHEREAS, during her tenure as an Orange County Commissioner, Alice M. Gordon has
shared her talent for leadership and public service through her work on numerous committees,
boards, and task forces focusing on public education, environmental protection, and regional
transportation; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner Gordon chaired the Schools and Land Use Council, the county -wide
group of elected officials that crafted the Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance to plan
ahead for future school needs; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner Gordon chaired the Durham - Chapel Hill - Carrboro Metropolitan
Planning Organization's Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC), and has also served as
Chair of the Triangle Transit Board of Trustees, the regional public transit agency; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner Gordon served as a member of the North Carolina Association of
County Commissioners' Environment Steering Committee and the National Association of
Counties' Environment, Energy and Land Use Steering Committee; and
WHEREAS, in 2006 Leadership Triangle honored Commissioner Gordon with the Goodmon
Award for Exemplary Regional Leadership by an Elected Official for her contributions in the
areas of environmental protection and regional transportation; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner Gordon was a key member of the Board when it launched the
County's nationally recognized "Lands Legacy Program" as the first comprehensive county land
acquisition program in North Carolina, an approach that won the Excellence in County Planning
Award from the National Association of County Planners; and
WHEREAS, as Chair of the Transportation Advisory Committee of the Durham - Chapel Hill -
Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization in 2007 and 2008, Commissioner Gordon helped
lead the effort to create the 2035 regional long range transportation plan, earning the MPO the
National Award for Outstanding Achievement in Metropolitan Transportation Planning, which
commended this collaborative effort for exemplary practice within the planning process; and
WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners desires, on behalf of County officials
and employees, and the residents of Orange County, to express to Commissioner Alice Gordon
their deep appreciation and gratitude for the services rendered by her to the County over the
past 24 years;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Orange County Board of Commissioners
offers Commissioner Alice Gordon our very best wishes for success, happiness, prosperity and
good health in her future endeavors.
This, the first day of December 2014.
A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner McKee to
I approve the Resolution of Commendation for Commissioner Alice M. Gordon.
2
3 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
4 Commissioner Gordon thanked everyone for the resolution of commendation and photo
5 of the Board of County Commissioners. She said the most significant thing that she wanted to
6 say is thank you to all of the people she has worked with over the past 24 years: the Board of
7 County Commissioners, the Orange County staff, her colleagues in government and public
8 education, the residents of Orange County who elected her, and her family who supported her
9 and encouraged her.
10 Commissioner Gordon said her contributions and passion have been in the areas of
11 education and the environment, which also includes transportation. In the area of education,
12 she said she has always had an interest in excellent schools, and her most enduring legacy will
13 be the new science wing at Culbreth Middle School and the Schools Adequate Public Facilities
14 Ordinance (SAPFO) to plan for growth and new schools. She hopes that the Board of County
15 Commissioners will fund a program to renovate all of the older schools in both school systems.
16 She said in the area of the environment, she has always had an interest in
17 environmental protection and environmental stewardship. She believes that environmental
18 protection is an important and separate function of county government. She said her most
19 enduring legacy will be the Lands Legacy Program and the Department of Environment,
20 Agriculture, Parks and Recreation (DEAPR). Through the Lands Legacy Program, the County
21 has protected more than 3000 acres of its most precious natural and cultural resources.
22 Generations of Orange County residents from all walks of life will be able to enjoy the parks and
23 open space. She hopes that the Lands Legacy Program will continue and that the parks and
24 other programs that are planned will be completed.
25 Commissioner Gordon said she is concerned about global climate change, and she
26 hopes the County will continue its efforts to do everything possible to address this challenge and
27 prepare for the future climate change events that are sure to come. She said that global climate
28 change is not only the greatest environmental issue, but also the greatest issue that is facing
29 Orange County, the United States, and the world. She said it is important to think globally and
30 act locally to address climate change.
31 Commissioner Gordon concluded by thanking the people of Orange County, including
32 the Board of County Commissioners, Orange County staff, the advisory boards and
33 commissions, all of her colleagues throughout the County, the residents of Orange County who
34 have elected her all these years, and her family. She thanked everyone for a marvelous 24
35 years.
36 Commissioner Gordon was given a standing ovation when she received the resolution of
37 commendation and also when she concluded her remarks.
38
39
40 Resolution Recoanizina Oranae Countv Reaister of Deeds Deborah Brooks
41 Commissioner McKee read the following resolution:
42
43 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
44 RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING ORANGE COUNTY
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
M
REGISTER OF DEEDS DEBORAH BROOKS
WHEREAS, Deborah Brooks has served the residents of Orange County as Register of Deeds
since her election to the office in 2010; and,
WHEREAS, Deborah Brooks started her career in the Register of Deeds Office in 1975; and,
WHEREAS, Ms. Brooks has served the residents of Orange County for 39 years in the Register
of Deeds Office in an efficient, effective, and welcoming manner; and,
WHEREAS, Register Brooks truly represents "starting at the bottom and working to the top ", as
her first job was during her high school years as a temporary employee and is now
retiring as the Register of Deeds; and,
WHEREAS, in addition to recording and maintaining property related documents as required by
law, she has also maintained vital records including marriage licenses, birth and
death certificates and military discharges; and,
WHEREAS, Register of Deeds Brooks has been instrumental in training and guiding a highly
competent staff, and has fostered a customer - service ethic that reflects well on all
of Orange County government;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Orange County Board of Commissioners does
hereby recognize Deborah Brooks for her 39 years of service to the people of
Orange County and wishes her well in the future endeavors she undertakes with
her customary determination, thoroughness and warmth.
This, the 1St day of December 2014.
A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to
approve a resolution recognizing Register of Deeds Deborah Brooks.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Resolution Recognizing Orange County Sheriff Lindy Pendergrass
Commissioner Price read the following resolution:
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING ORANGE COUNTY
SHERIFF LINDY PENDERGRASS
WHEREAS, Lindy Pendergrass has served the residents of Orange County as Sheriff for 32
years; and,
WHEREAS, the Sheriff was elected by the voters of Orange County in 1982, 1986, 1990, 1994,
1998, 2002, 2006, and 2010; and,
WHEREAS, Sheriff Pendergrass joined the Chapel Hill Police Department in 1957; and,
WHEREAS, Sheriff Pendergrass has served the people of Orange County in a law enforcement
capacity for 57 years; and,
1
2 WHEREAS, during Sheriff Pendergrass' tenure the number of sworn personnel in the
3 department has grown from 20 to 100 and the capacity of the jail has expanded
4 from 47 to 130 inmates; and,
5
6 WHEREAS, the Sheriff has promoted the importance of training by sending his staff to classes
7 conducted by the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, the DEA, as well as
8 other training and certifying agencies to prepare his staff for the challenges of law
9 enforcement; and,
10
11 WHEREAS, Sheriff Pendergrass has fostered a service - oriented approach to law enforcement
12 that inspires trust and confidence in the general public, as well as collaborative
13 relationships with other law enforcement entities;
14
15 NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Orange County Board of Commissioners does
16 hereby recognize Sheriff Lindy Pendergrass for his 32 years as Sheriff, serving the
17 people of Orange County and wishes him well as he embraces the benefits of life
18 outside public service.
19
20 This, the 1St day of December 2014.
21
22 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
23 approve a resolution recognizing Orange County Sheriff Lindy Pendergrass.
24
25 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
26
27 Oaths of Office for Board Members
28
29 Senator Valerie Foushee administered the oath to Commissioner -Elect Mia
30 Burroughs.
31 Commissioner Burroughs thanked the voters.
32
33 Judge Allan Baddour administered the oath to Commissioner Barry Jacobs
34 Chair Jacobs thanked the people of Orange County, County staff, and his wife for the
35 support.
36
37 Senator Valerie Foushee administered the oath to Commissioner Earl McKee
38 Commissioner McKee thanked his family members for their support, as well as the
39 Board members and staff of the County.
40
41 Board Organization
42
43 a. Election of Chair and Vice -Chair
44 The clerk distributed the ballots for Chair and Vice Chair.
45 - Election of Chair - Earl McKee - VOTE 7 -0
46 - Election of Vice Chair - Bernadette Pelissier - VOTE - 4 votes for Commissioner Pelissier; 3
47 votes for Commissioner Rich
48
49 b. Designation of Voting Delegate for all NCACC and NACo Meetings for Calendar
50 Year December 1, 2014 -2015
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
D
A motion was made by Commissioner Rich seconded by Commissioner Dorosin to
nominate Commissioner Price as the Voting Delegate for all NCACC and NACo Meetings for
Calendar Year December 1, 2014 -2015
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Appointments
a. Manager
A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Price to
appoint Bonnie Hammersley as Manager.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
b. Attorney
A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
appoint John Roberts as the County Attorney.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
c. Clerk to the Board
A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
appoint Donna Baker as Clerk to the Board.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
• Lavender sheet for item 6f - Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (Schools
SAPFO) - Approval of Membership and Capacity Numbers
• Substitute document for item 7a — Consideration of the Town of Chapel Hill's
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) Extension Request
• Additional sheet related to item 7a
• Monthly report from the Planning Division
PUBLIC CHARGE
Chair McKee dispensed with the reading of the public charge.
2. Public Comments
a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
Don O'Leary gave a warm welcome to Commissioner Burroughs. He showed the Board
members a book on fluoride, which he loaned to them. He said he has not heard anything from
the County about his concerns.
Cecilia Thompson said her husband died in 2009, and his death certificate was falsified
in Orange County. She said her family has been fighting for 6 years to get this government
document corrected. She said $3 million of her husband's assets were taken, and she has not
been allowed to access documents and property that she has requested. She said she has
been denied access at the tax office and the estates department. She said she has gotten an
order from a judge to have the death certificate corrected, but in the meantime, she was told
that there has been an annulment. She asked the Board to speak with Attorney John Roberts
to request his help with this matter.
b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
7
1
2 3. Petitions by Board Members
3 Commissioner Rich petitioned that Chair McKee talk with the Town Mayors to encourage
4 the towns to appoint their representatives to the County boards and commissions.
5 Commissioner Rich requested information from staff regarding where the County's
6 petitions funds are invested and how these are managed.
7 Commissioner Price said the Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee invited
8 her to their November meeting. She said the members of this group would like to inform the
9 Board of their work in assuring quality of life for older adults in Orange County. She petitioned
10 the Board to add this committee to an upcoming agenda in order to allow them to present a
11 report.
12 Commissioner Price said she heard that the Rogers Road Community Center is unable
13 to open at this time. She asked staff for a report explaining this delay and whether there is
14 anything Orange County can do to facilitate opening and use of the center.
15 Commissioner Pelissier asked Chair McKee to reach out to Chatham County to request
16 re- instatement of the Orange — Chatham Work Group.
17 Commissioner Dorosin referred to his earlier petition regarding a gun buy -back program.
18 He noted that the new sheriff is here tonight. He referred to an article that references a buy -
19 back program in Fayetteville where 250 guns were taken in 2 hours. He petitioned the new
20 Chair and Vice Chair to revisit this idea with the new sheriff.
21 Chair McKee referred to the petition regarding the Rogers Road Community Center, and
22 he asked Jeff Thompson to give a report.
23 Jeff Thompson said the facility has a temporary Certificate of Occupancy (CO), but there
24 are some issues that the Chapel Hill inspections staff is working through. He said the facility is
25 not being withheld from occupancy, but town staff has requested that major programming
26 activity be postponed until those issues are resolved. He said this should happen any day now.
27
28 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
29
30 a. Voluntary and Enhanced Agricultural District Designation — Multiple Farms —
31 Gledhill, McAdams, Anderson, McKnight/Hawley, and Scarlett
32 The Board considered applications from multiple landowners /farms of certified qualifying
33 farmland within the Cedar Grove, Schley /Eno, Efland /High Rock, and White Cross Voluntary
34 Agricultural Districts; and enroll the lands in the Orange County Voluntary Agricultural District
35 (VAD) and the Enhanced Voluntary Agricultural District (EVAD) programs.
36
37 Gail Hughes presented the following PowerPoint slides:
38
39 Orange County
40 Voluntary and Enhanced Voluntary
41 Agricultural District Program
42 Orange County Board of Commissioners Meeting
43 Dec. 1, 2014
44
45 Orange County VAD /EVAD Program
46 Benefits of Agricultural Districts
47 ➢ The Voluntary Agricultural Program is a locally led program, with review and oversight
48 from the Agriculture Preservation Board (appointed by the BOCC); endorsed and
49 supported by the North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
➢ Voluntary Agricultural District (VAD) is a 10 year commitment but the landowner can
withdraw from the VAD program at any time, for any reason, with a 30 day notification to
the Agriculture Preservation Board.
➢ Enhanced Voluntary Agricultural District (EVAD) is an irrevocable 10 year commitment,
therefore the "enhanced" level qualifies farm for 90% cost share rates - through State
programs- and a priority for Farmland Preservation grants funds.
Benefits include:
➢ Makes public more aware of the local agricultural and its vital role in the economics of
the county;
➢ Recorded notice of agricultural district is recorded at County Land Records office;
➢ Land search on all properties within a' /2 mile radius is notified of the agricultural status,
therefore, the landowner has increased protection from nuisance lawsuits.
➢ Public hearings for proposed condemnation of VAD land and utility assessments may be
suspended or waived on EVAD land if not connected to the utility.
➢ Farm may receive up to 25% of gross sales from the sale of non -farm products and still
maintain its zoning exemption as a bona fide farm. (EVAD only)
Geoffrey and Jane Gledhill
Cedar Grove Windy Hill Farm
Cedar Grove Agricultural District
Farm includes beef cattle, dairy goats, pasture, fruit trees, blueberries, shiitake
mushrooms, honeybees, and managed woodland.
EVAD = 38.88 acres
Howard and Karen McAdams
McAdams Farm
Efland /High Rock Agricultural District
Farm includes vegetables, strawberries, mushrooms, beef cattle, sheep, pasture and
hay crops and managed woodland.
VAD = 13.42 acres
(Farm in VAD program: 192 acres + additional acres= 205 ac.)
Stephen and Marsha Scarlett
Cedar Grove Agricultural District
Farm includes beef cattle, pasture and hay crops, and managed woodland.
VAD = 37.29 acres
Portia McKnight and Florence Hawley
Chapel Hill Creamery
White Cross Agricultural District
Farm includes dairy cattle and other small livestock, pasture and hay land.
Chapel Hill Creamery is known for their award winning cheeses.
(In a Conservation Easement program with OWASA to protect tributaries of Morgan
Creek.)
EVAD= 37.07 acres
Nels and Nancy Anderson
(Holden - Roberts Farm)
Schley /Eno Agricultural District
Farm includes hay crops and managed woodland /forestry.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
9
VAD= 95.95 acres
Farm on the National Register of Historic Places
Orange County Voluntary and Enhanced Voluntary Agricultural District Program
➢ All Farms have been reviewed by staff, meets or exceeds the minimum criteria, and
have been approved by the Agricultural Preservation Board for enrollment into the VAD
program
➢ Requesting final approval from Commissioners to accept five (5) farms into the Voluntary
Agricultural Program. Increase of:
➢ 146.6 acres in the VAD
➢ 75.9 acres in the EVAD.
➢ If approved, total of acres in both programs:
VAD = 6191 acres
EVAD = 953 acres
➢ Total Acres in Orange County Voluntary Agricultural Program = 7144 acres
• Overview Map
December 2014
• VAD = 6191 acres
• EVAD = 953 acres
Total Acres = 7144*
• indicates farm location of new VAD /EVAD applicants
* rounded acres
A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Rich for the
Board certify the five (5) farm properties noted above totaling 146.66 acres (VAD) and 75.95
acres (EVAD) as denoted in the attached documentation as qualifying farmland, and designate
them as Voluntary or Enhanced Voluntary Agricultural District farms within the Cedar Grove,
Efland /High Rock, Schley /Eno, and White Cross Voluntary Agricultural Districts; and enroll
the lands in the Orange County Voluntary Agricultural District (VAD) and the Enhanced
Voluntary Agricultural District (EVAD) programs.
With approval of these additional acres, the Orange County Voluntary Agricultural
District Program will have enrolled 56 farms; totaling 6,191 acres in the VAD and 953 acres in
the EVAD for a total of 7,144 acres (rounded).
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Commissioner Pelissier asked that the Chair send a letter of appreciation to all of the
people who enroll in the Voluntary Agricultural District. She said this is an important thing for
the County, and it warrants personal recognition.
Chair McKee said the staff also deserves recognition for their work in increasing the
acreage in this program.
:M�aFTii . trorllm:DT'ii. ,, :ZI171lytm- .111ng:ZI11 l 1WrArTir e1:Di'ii:Ti�Wel11TMTT[:n-7
The Board considered officially recognizing Human Rights Day, Bill of Rights Day and
Human Rights Week in Orange County during the month of December 2014 and authorizing the
Chair to sign.
HRC member Rollin Russell said this is a timely recognition. He read the following
resolution:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
10
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS, on December 10, 1948, the member states of the United Nations signed the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights and countries of different political,
economic and social systems agreed on the fundamental rights that all people
share solely on the basis of their common humanity; and
WHEREAS, Human Rights Day and Human Rights Week were adopted by the United Nations
in connection with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; and
WHEREAS, Bill of Rights Day was first declared in 1941 by President Franklin Delano
Roosevelt to commemorate the 1791 Ratification of the Bill of Rights; and
WHEREAS, it was the North Carolina convention, held in Hillsborough, which was instrumental
regarding the inclusion of a Bill of Rights as part of ratifying the United States
Constitution; and
WHEREAS, the Bill of Rights guarantees, among other basic liberties, freedom of speech and
of the press as well as freedom of religion and association; and
WHEREAS, the Bill of Rights states that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property
without due process of law and establishes fundamental rules of fairness in
judicial proceedings, including the right to trial by jury; and
WHEREAS, the primary responsibility to promote respect for these rights and freedoms lies with
each individual in Orange County, and each of us can play a major role in
enhancing human rights; and
WHEREAS, the residents of Orange County support Human Rights and recognize that the
"inherent dignity and the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the
human family are the foundation of freedom, justice and peace;"
NOW, THEREFORE, We, The Board of County Commissioners of Orange County, North
Carolina, do hereby proclaim:
December 10, 2014 as Human Rights Day, and
December 15, 2014 as Bill of Rights Day, and
December 10 — 16, 2014 as Human Rights Week
in Orange County and challenge residents to study and promote the ideas contained in these
documents to the end that freedom, justice, and equality shall not perish but will flourish and be
made available to all.
This, the 1St day of December 2014.
A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Rich for the
Board to adopt the Proclamation regarding Human Rights Day, Bill of Rights Day and Human
Rights Week and authorize the Chair to sign the Proclamation.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
11
1 Rolin Russell said he is the chair of the sub - committee of HRC on diversity, and he
2 invited the Board members to attend the Human Relations Forum that will take place on
3 January 25, 2015, in celebration of the 95th anniversary of the passage of the 19th amendment.
4
5 b. Resolution in Support of Equal Access for Immigrant Children
6 The Board considered adopting a resolution declaring that Orange County, North
7 Carolina, is a welcoming community in support of equal access to the fundamental right of
8 public education, basic health care, and the protection of law enforcement for immigrant children
9 and authorizing the Chair to sign.
10 Human Relations Commission Chair Doris Brunson read the following resolution:
11
12 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
13 RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF EQUAL ACCESS FOR IMMIGRANT CHILDREN
14
15 WHEREAS, Orange County, North Carolina, is a compassionate and caring community that is
16 committed to creating a welcoming atmosphere that values equality and social justice; and
17 WHEREAS, the number of unaccompanied children and minors from Central American nations
18 seeking refuge in the United States has dramatically risen over the last three years; and
19 WHEREAS, the vast majority of the children seeking refuge in the United States are fleeing
20 extreme violence and poverty, including from Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras; and
21 WHEREAS, Honduras is the country with the world's highest murder rate, while El Salvador's
22 murder rate is the fourth highest in the world; and
23 WHEREAS, the majority of the children entering the United States are returning to parents or
24 other family members who are present in the United States, including those children coming to
25 North Carolina; and
26 WHEREAS, approximately 1,429 of these children have been placed in North Carolina since
27 January 2014; and
28 WHEREAS, those children arriving in our community have the right under the United States
29 Constitution to equal access to a public education, basic health care, and the protection of law
30 enforcement;
31 NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Orange County Board of Commissioners hereby:
32 • Affirms that Orange County is a welcoming community to children seeking refuge
33 from violence in their home countries and to the sponsors of these children;
34 • Affirms the rights of children to attend public schools and to access basic health
35 care in the county they reside, without regards to their immigration status;
36 • Urges our congressional representatives, the Obama Administration, the
37 Department of Homeland Security, and Governor Pat McCrory to ensure that the
38 thousands of minors seeking safety within our borders and being apprehended
39 by Border Patrol receive due process and legal representation in court hearings;
40 • Directs the County Manager and all county departments to make services and
41 resources available to help welcome children into our community who are
42 seeking refuge from violence in their home countries;
43 • Encourages continuing collaboration between Orange County and other local
44 governmental entities and advocacy organizations to support and protect these
45 children; and
46 • Directs the Chair of the Board and the Clerk to forward this Resolution to each of
47 the local governments in Orange County, including both Boards of Education,
48 and respectfully requests that each consider adopting similar resolutions, and
49 also forward this resolution to our state legislative delegation, and to the North
50 Carolina Association of Counties.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
12
Adopted this, the 1St day of December, 2014.
Doris Brunson said this is an important issue. She noted that many opponents state that
the children are not taxpayers, but she can affirm that no child pays taxes when they are in
school. She said the parents who have taken in these children pay taxes every day.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Sarah Preston is policy director of the ACLU of N.C. She thanked the Board for
considering this resolution and for supporting the children who come to this community fleeing
violence in their home countries. She said these children risk so much to be reunited with family
members or placed with caregivers, and we should protect them from the conditions they are
fleeing. She said these children should have legal representation and a hearing before an
immigration judge before they may be deported. She said the ACLU is part of a class action
lawsuit filed this summer to challenge the federal government's failure to provide legal
representation to these children at deportation hearings. She encouraged the Board to support
these children.
George Eppsteiner thanked Commissioner Dorosin and the Board for considering this
resolution. He said he is a staff attorney for the Southern Coalition for Social Justice, whose
mission is to support and enhance communities of color. He said this resolution is important
because it is part of a very important conversation regarding immigration. He said there have
been conversations in other counties that oppose this, and these children are being considered
a burden. He said these comments are troubling, and this is not a new issue. He said the
Supreme Court considered this issue 30 years ago and ruled that the state of Texas could not
deny undocumented students an education. He read some information from that ruling. He
urged the Board to pass this resolution upholding the constitutional right of students to attend
schools regardless of their immigration status.
Commissioner Dorosin said he appreciated the Human Rights Commission coming
forward and the ACLU and the Southern Coalition coming out. He said he and his colleagues
had first heard weeks ago that other counties were adopting anti - immigrant resolutions. He is
encouraged by tonight's resolution, and he said it is important to stake out a strong position on
this topic and to encourage others to do the same.
Commissioner Rich thanked Commissioner Dorosin for this resolution, and she said this
shows that the Board of County Commissioners is committed to this cause. She encouraged
the Board members to talk with adjoining counties about this resolution.
Commissioner Jacobs said he would send a copy of this resolution to each of the
counties on the clerk's listserve. He said it is important to fight those who would deny the rights
of others.
Chair McKee said it is discouraging to even need a resolution like this, as it should be
common sense to provide relief for these children.
A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Price for the
Board to adopt and authorize the Chair to sign the Resolution in Support of Equal Access for
Immigrant Children.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
5. Public Hearings
a. Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendments and
Zoning Atlas Amendments to Establish Two New Zoning Overlay Districts in the
Efland Area — Continue Public Hearing to April 7, 2015
13
1 The Board considered continuing the public hearing until April 7, 2015 on Planning
2 Director initiated amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, Unified Development Ordinance,
3 and Zoning Atlas to establish two new zoning overlay districts in the Efland area (The primary
4 purpose of the overlay districts is to provide for a more village and urban style of development in
5 an area of the county served, or intended to be served, by public water and sewer systems.).
6
7 Perdita Holtz said this extra time will allow staff time to attend neighborhood meetings in
8 order to gain more information on the proposed amendments.
9 Commissioner Jacobs said there was a group that was mentioned in the abstract that
10 would possibly be re- constituted. He asked who will decide this.
11 Perdita Holtz said the Efland- Mebane Small Area Plan Implementation Focus Group
12 may be called together again if changes are proposed to the text of the amendment. She said
13 at this time staff does not know if there will be changes or not.
14 Commissioner Jacobs asked if staff will let the Commissioners know the schedule of the
15 community meetings.
16 Perdita Holtz said the next meeting is December 17th, and the groups may decide to
17 meet more frequently after the holidays.
18 Commissioner Price said this process has been protracted. She asked if there is a
19 difference between the people organizing the community meetings and the small area planning
20 implementation focus group.
21 Perdita Holtz said yes, there is a difference. She said none of the people from the focus
22 group have been attending the community meetings.
23 Commissioner Price asked if the focus group is the same group that developed the small
24 area plan.
25 Perdita Holtz said some of the members are the same, and some are different. She
26 noted that the community meetings are not sponsored by the County, but if there are changes,
27 there will be a County sponsored meeting.
28 Commissioner Jacobs asked for a listing of the people in the groups.
29 Commissioner Price said she is curious who has been involved in this process, and she
30 wants to make sure there is a good cross section of people from the community participating.
31 Perdita Holtz noted that County staff has held a public information session where all
32 groups were invited to attend.
33
34 A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier seconded by Commissioner Jacobs for
35 the Board to:
36 1. Open the public hearing that was adjourned at the September 8, 2014 Quarterly Public
37 Hearing;
38 2. Accept any oral comments that are also submitted in writing (as required by Section 2.8.8
39 and 2.8.9 of the Unified Development Ordinance); and
40 3. Adjourn the public hearing until April 7, 2015.
41
42 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
43
44 6. Consent Agenda
45 e Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
46 Item 6 -f was pulled.
47
48 e Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
49 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Price to
50 approve the remaining items on the Consent Agenda.
14
1
2 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
3
4 a. Minutes
5 The Board approved the minutes from October 16, 2014 as submitted by the Clerk to the Board.
6 b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases /Refunds
7 The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release motor vehicle
8 property tax values for twelve (12) taxpayers with a total of fifteen (15) bills that will result in a
9 reduction of revenue in accordance with NCGS.
10 c. Property Tax Releases /Refunds
11 The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release property tax
12 values for six (6) taxpayers with a total of six (6) bills that will result in a reduction of revenue in
13 accordance with North Carolina General Statute 105 -381.
14 d. Applications for Property Tax Exemption /Exclusion
15 The Board approved five (5) untimely applications for exemption /exclusion from ad valorem
16 taxation for five (5) bills for the 2014 tax year.
17 e. Resolution Adjusting the Salaries of the Sheriff and Register of Deeds Positions
18 The Board will approved a resolution providing notice of adjustment of the salaries of the Sheriff
19 and Register of Deeds positions and approving the bonds for both positions.
20 g. Applications for Grants from the NC Agricultural Development and Farmland
21 Preservation Trust Fund and the Federal Agricultural Conservation Easement Program
22 for the Pope Farm Conservation Easement
23 The Board authorized staff to apply for grants from the NC Agricultural Development and
24 Farmland Preservation (ADFP) Trust Fund and the federal Agricultural Conservation Easement
25 Program (ACEP) for funds to purchase a conservation easement at the Pope Farm in Cedar
26 Grove Township.
27 h. Cedar Grove Community Center Roof Replacement Bid Award
28 The Board awarded a bid to Muter Construction of Zebulon, North Carolina, in the amount of
29 $445,660 for replacement of the roof on the Cedar Grove Community Center; authorized the
30 Chair to sign the necessary paperwork upon final approval of the County Attorney; and
31 authorized the County Manager to execute change orders for the project up to the project
32 budget.
33
34 Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
35 f. Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (Schools APFO) —Approval of
36 Membership and Capacity Numbers
37 Commissioner Price said the lavender sheet should be included, with the new numbers.
38
39 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
40 approve the November 14, 2014 membership and capacity numbers for both school districts
41 (Orange County and Chapel Hill - Carrboro City Schools) which will be used in developing 10-
42 year student membership projections and the 2015 SAPFO Technical Advisory Committee
43 (SAPFOTAC) Report.
44
45 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
46
47 7. Regular Agenda
48
49 a. Consideration of the Town of Chapel Hill's Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ)
50 Extension Request (9:20 -9:35)
15
1 The Board considered approving the extraterritorial jurisdiction request by the Town of
2 Chapel Hill and authorizing the County Manager to proceed with developing a long term plan for
3 the area.
4 Craig Benedict said there is an updated abstract for this item, which includes additional
5 background information. He said there is also additional information embedded in attachment 4.
6 Craig Benedict reviewed the following PowerPoint slides:
7 Chapel Hill Extraterritorial
8 Jurisdiction (ETJ)
9 Expansion Request
10 BOCC Regular Meeting
11 December 1, 2014
12 Item 7 -a
13
14 Outline of Agenda Item
15 1. ETJ Expansion Request — NCGS 160A 360 -364
16 2. Background: Joint Planning Area (JPA) — ETJ
17 3. Maps of Subject Area
18 4.1. Letter from Chapel Hill Mayor (10/15/2014)
19 4.2. Chapel Hill Staff Report
20 4.3. Municipal Public Hearing
21 5. County Review Process and Comment
22 6. Recommendations
23 7. Public Input
24
25 1. ETJ Expansion Request NCGS 160A 360 -364
26 Regulated by North Carolina General Statutes (NCGS)
27 Proposed by Cities; Reviewed & Approved by Counties
28 Chapel Hill City Limits 12,658 +- acres
29 Chapel Hill ETJ (existing) 2,657 +- acres
30 Chapel Hill JPA (existing) 1,307 +- acres *1
31 Chapel Hill ETJ Expansion Request — 1,033 acres
32 Note 1: 1307 acres — 1033 acres = 274 acres of JPA would remain
33
34 2. Background JPA — ETJ
35 JPA — Agreement (Review Procedures), Land Use, Subdivision, Zoning, Building Code and
36 Annexation Limits; 1987
37 ■ JPA Transition Areas (Urban) — Town
38 ■ JPA Rural Buffer — County
39 ETJ — Similar but more autonomous land and building development regulations for specific
40 urban areas
41 — `Supplemental Powers' could provide enhanced funding opportunities.
42 The JPAand annexation agreement remain in effect for areas outside of proposed ETJ
43 area.
44
45 3. Map of Area
46
47 4.1. Letter from Mayor
48 ■ Unanimous vote for ETJ expansion request from Town
49 ■ Accent on participating on sewer service funding for Historic Rogers Road Neighborhood
50 [Rogers Eubanks Neighborhood Association (RENA)]
51 ■ Outreach by the Jackson Center highlighted 80% of area low and moderate income
16
1
2 4.2 Chapel Hill Staff Report
3 ■ NCGS Municipal Application Criteria
4 ■ Next Steps
5 — Long Term Planning
6 — Utility Provision
7 — County & Jointly Owned Properties
8
9 4.3. Municipal Public Hearing
10 ■ October 21, 2013 Public Hearing
11 ■ Petitions and letters of ETJ expansion support.
12
13 5. County Review Process and Comment
14 NCGS 160A 360 -364
15 — Review - see Attachment 4 for specifics
16 — Population, Boundaries
17 — Zoning, Subdivision, Building Code
18 — Urban Planning
19 — Municipal Processes & Public Input
20
21 5. County Review Summary (con't)
22 ■ Joint Planning Agreement and Associated Land Use Planning has led to collaborative
23 planning in the area for over 27 years
24 ■ Multiple planning task forces in the Rogers Road / Eubanks Neighborhood Area have
25 more recently focused on current issues
26 ■ ETJ jurisdiction permits another financial partner opportunities to address
27 unincorporated areas
28 ■ Other cooperative efforts such as sidewalk installations may be easier to accomplish
29 ■ Ensure a continuing mechanism for long -term planning in the area and educate area
30 representatives about planning context
31 ■ JPA agreement remains as context for the larger area outside the ETJ request area
32
33 5. County Review Summary (con't)
34 ■ Request meets or is consistent with requirements (see pages 150 -158)
35 Remaining county actions if approved
36 ETJ representation by County with appointment reflecting population
37 proportionality
38 6. Recommendations
39 ■ Approve the Chapel Hill ETJ Expansion request
40 ■ Engage in long -term planning in the area
41 NOTE: Upcoming activity by BOCC; Proceed with OWASA
42 Re: Final Sewer Engineering
43
44 Craig Benedict noted that there are also 35,000 acres in the rural buffer, which is part of
45 the joint planning area under Orange County's jurisdiction.
46 He noted on the area map that the dotted line representing the Rogers Road
47 Neighborhood shows the primary reason for the proposed ETJ expansion.
48 Craig Benedict said that petitions and letters of support from the general public regarding
49 this expansion are included in the packet.
50 He said if this expansion is approved, the population numbers will need to be re-
51 calculated to insure proper ETJ representation, and staff is already working on this calculation.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
17
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Town Council Member Maria Palmer said the town council chambers were packed when
this item was discussed. She said Chapel Hill unanimously approved the expansion of the ETJ
to include the Rogers Road Neighborhood. She said this was done after much deliberation, and
this expansion is an attempt to try and right some historic wrongs. She said the council heard
from neighbors around the Rogers Road area, who endured years of environmental damage
and broken promises. She said these residents are ready to trust the town again, even under
the jurisdiction of a council that they did not elect. She said this is an important step in righting
some historic wrongs, and she hopes the Board will approve this request.
Hudson Vaughn works at the Jackson Center. He said the center worked with RENA
this past summer and did some extensive community engagement. He referenced several
slides that were shown at the Chapel Hill Town Council. He said there was a focus on the
demographic data to enable Chapel Hill to move forward with this ETJ. He said once this data
was determined, there were a series of intensive community engagement strategies to educate
the community on what an ETJ would mean and what it would enable. He said the community
members expressed support for moving forward with this.
Commissioner Rich thanked Hudson Vaughn for doing this and asked him to share this
report with all of the members of the Board.
Commissioner Price asked if the landfill would be given back to Chapel Hill.
Craig Benedict said it would be a part of the ETJ for planning purposes. He said the
landfill would still be under the purview of Orange County, and there would be no changes in
that area.
Commissioner Jacobs asked how much more ETJ area will be left after this.
Craig Benedict said if this acreage is converted, there will be 274 acres of joint planning
area left in Chapel Hill. He said Carrboro has 1200 to 1300 acres of joint planning area.
Commissioner Jacobs said Craig Benedict commented that the County would be looking
at the Greene Tract with the Town of Chapel Hill. He asked for clarification on this.
Craig Benedict said this would be discussed because this new ETJ area would include
the Greene Tract that is under joint ownership with Chapel Hill and Carrboro. He said planning
began ten years ago to talk about the acreages and usage of what can go on in the jointly
owned area. He said as the long term plans are considered, the County would like to know the
future plans for the 18 acres of the Greene Tract
Commissioner Price asked about the reasoning for including the landfill in this area.
Craig Benedict said it would be better to have a comprehensive area within a similar
planning jurisdiction rather than a piece meal JPA/ETJ.
Commissioner Price said this was on the edge of the northwest area.
Town Council Member Palmer said in order for Chapel Hill to spend money in this area,
the town is looking at using part of the right of way. She said this has to do with the
infrastructure that has to go in to that area.
Commissioner Dorosin said this is a very thorough analysis from the planning
department. He said it is to everyone's benefit to be candid about what is being done here, and
this is all part of completing the overdue reparations to the Rogers Road area. He said there
could be lots of discussion about the voting for council leadership and other issues, but the truth
is that Chapel Hill already has that control as part of the joint planning agreement. He said this
approval is a critical and important step, and he encouraged everyone to keep pushing this
process forward.
Commissioner Jacobs said this is a much better rendering of the agenda item than what
the Board previously received. He said it would have been nice to have had an ETJ transfer
process in place before the Chapel Hill approval, but this is no reason not to proceed. He said
one of the main issues in the past JPA discussions was having adequate representation for
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
IN
people in the ETJ areas. HE said this has been discussed thoroughly, and he wants to be sure
the residents are given every opportunity to speak.
Commissioner Pelissier said about a year ago the Board knew that Chapel Hill had to
vote on the ETJ. She is heartened that the Board can now make a positive vote, and she
thanked everyone that has been involved in this process. She said part of the recommendation
was to work on a long range plan for the community and she hopes that these will be built upon
the plans already developed by the town and the community.
Commissioner Rich referred to page 45 of the materials regarding representation on the
Chapel Hill Planning Board and the Board of Adjustments. She said there has not been
discussion about the Board of Adjustment, and she would suggest that this be part of the future
discussions with Chapel Hill.
Commissioner Burroughs said she is delighted to be able to support this historic
resolution.
Chair McKee called for a motion to approve the following resolution:
A RESOLUTION OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AGREEING TO
AN EXTENSION OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL'S EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION
WHEREAS, N.C.G.S. 160A -360 allows a municipality to exercise powers conferred by
Article 19 of Chapter 160A of the North Carolina General Statutes within a defined
extraterritorial jurisdiction;
WHEREAS, N.C.G.S. 160A- 360(c) requires a city and county to agree upon an
extension of a city's extraterritorial jurisdiction where a county enforces a zoning ordinance and
subdivision regulations and within which the county is enforcing the State Building Code
regulations;
WHEREAS, Orange county enforces a zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations
and enforces the State Building Code regulations within areas in the county which are outside
the Joint Planning Transition Areas, corporate limits and extraterritorial jurisdiction of cities;
WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill wishes to extend its extraterritorial jurisdiction to
include property as noted in Appendix A (including map) which is adjacent to the Town of
Chapel Hill's corporate limits and /or exterritorial jurisdiction;
WHEREAS, Town Council desires to extend its extraterritorial jurisdiction and, therefore,
seeks the agreement of the Orange County Board of Commissioners for the extension;
WHEREAS, this proposed area has been part of the Orange County /Chapel
Hill /Carrboro joint planning area since 1987; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners finds the request consistent with its
comprehensive plan goals, objectives and policies, including but not limited to the land use
program;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners hereby
agrees to, by a formally adopted resolution, beyond what is required by N.C.G.S. 160A -360, to
an extension of the Town of Chapel Hill's extraterritorial powers under Article 19 of Chapter
160A of the North Carolina General Statutes within the area identified in Appendix A.
This, the 1 day of December, 2014
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
19
A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Price for the
Board to:
Approve the extraterritorial jurisdiction request by the Town of Chapel Hill pursuant to the
Resolution in Attachment 5.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Craig Benedict said the Board has voted on the resolution and now needs to vote on the
second part of the manager's recommendation to develop a long term plan.
A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin seconded by Commissioner Rich to
authorize the County Manager to proceed with developing a long term plan for the area.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Chair McKee asked staff to prepare some background materials for Commissioner
Burroughs on the Greene Tract.
b. Establishment of a New Full Time Position for the Orange County Sheriff's Office
— Legal Advisor to the Sheriff
The Board considered approval of a new full time position, Legal Advisor to the Sheriff,
for the Orange County Sheriff's Office.
Brenda Bartholomew introduced this item.
Sheriff Blackwood congratulated everyone and said he was looking forward to working
with the Board of County Commissioners. He is submitted this request with one amendment to
the last sentence of paragraph 4, which states that the applicant must have a N.C. Driver's
License. He said this does not need to be in there, and he does not want to limit someone who
may be very thorough at the practice of law from being able to provide services to the sheriff.
Commissioner Price thanked him for this amendment.
Commissioner Dorosin asked if it was typical for sheriff's offices in N.C. to have their
own attorney.
John Roberts said it is not uncommon for sheriff's departments to have their own legal
advisor.
A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Price for the
Board to establish the new full time position of Legal Advisor to the Sheriff (Grade 24) (exempt).
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Commissioner Dorosin asked if this position will serve as a County employee or at
pleasure of the Sheriff.
Brenda Bartholomew said the employee will serve at the pleasure of the Sheriff but will
be treated with equally as an Orange County employee.
c. Orange County /City of Durham Utility Service Agreement Amendment
The Board considered amending an agreement to permit additional time (i.e. 2 years) for
water and /or sewer system construction initiation in the Eno Economic Development District
(EDD).
Craig Benedict reviewed the following background information and PowerPoint slides:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
20
In late 2011 and January 2012 Orange County and the City of Durham developed and approved
an interlocal agreement: "Interlocal Agreement between Orange County and the City of Durham
for Construction and Operation of Water and Sewer Facilities in the Eno Economic
Development Zone of Orange County"
The purpose was to develop a more formal utility service area within Orange County's Eno
Economic Development District area and within the City of Durham's urban service area (also
known as their suburban tier). Under normal circumstances, utility extensions would be solely
the responsibility of developers. The agreement set forth parameters of water and sewer
service, feasibility, design, construction and operation, when Orange County provided utility
investments. Future Capital Investment Plan (CIP) projects were programmed for investment in
the area.
This agreement was a necessary preamble to beginning Article 46 economic development
infrastructure investment in the area. The County wanted to ensure that investments would be
linked to capital returns and operational responsibilities by the City of Durham once facilities are
installed in this jointly designated Orange County and Durham City economic development area.
This area has been designated for this land use since the early 1980's.
A lengthy engineering feasibility analysis of what area could be served and at what cost was
conducted by a jointly approved outside firm (CDM Smith) starting in late 2012. The findings of
the study showed that the costs for a large EDD 796 acre district -wide solution were prohibitive
at this time due to high off -site (i.e. Durham area) infrastructure costs. This was noted in County
CIP work sessions in early 2014. The scope (Section 1) of the original study and conclusions
(Section 8) are in Attachment 3.
The full report is available on the Orange County website
at: tt : / /oran ecou ty c, ov/ lannin / ocu ents/ e ort ove er20l
However, a scaled -back program (see Focus Area in Attachment 4) could focus on prime land
with interstate visibility with willing property owners who are presently marketing their land. This
new study and sewer project will take additional time to accomplish beyond the original
timeframe to begin construction of January 2015, but because of a smaller scale, will be easier
to accomplish once designed and agreed to by Orange County and the City of Durham. A water
extension may also be possible.
Therein, this request is to amend the agreement for a new design and construction timeline as
noted in Section 12 (shown in Attachment 2). Only 2 additional years is necessary to initiate
construction since the design would likely not include a sewer lift station which is time
consuming and be designed as a simpler sewer gravity extension of existing Durham facilities
near the County border. This 100± acre area is in the far northeast corner of the Eno EDD
between 1 -85 and US 70. This is also the most distant part of the Eno EDD from where residents
had concerns in 2012. Attachment 2 also contains a "clean" version of the language
(e.g., changes are not tracked).
Joint staff discussions have found this option a reasonable alternative.
Pending Board approval, the amendment will be transmitted for City of Durham approval since
Orange County is the requesting party.
Orange County/
City of Durham
Utility Service Agreement Amendment
BOCC Regular Meeting
December 1, 2014
Item 7 -c
Purpose
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
21
To amend agreement to permit additional time (i.e. 2 years) for water and /or sewer system
construction initiation in the Eno Economic Development District (EDD)
Background
In late 2011 and January 2012 Orange County and the City of Durham-
• Interlocal Agreement
• "Interlocal Agreement between Orange County and the City of Durham
for Construction and Operation of Water and Sewer Facilities in the
Eno Economic Development Zone of Orange County"
• Formal utility service area; Orange County's Eno Economic Development District
area
• Similar land use since the early 1980's
Agreement
• Water and sewer service;
• Feasibility,
• Design, construction and
• Operation
• Development fees
Orange County Role
• Future CIP projects were programmed for investment in the area.
• Article 46 economic development infrastructure investment in the area.
Past Engineering Utility Findings
• Engineering feasibility analysis conducted by CDM Smith
• Examined a large EDD 796 acre district -wide solution
• High off -site (i.e. Durham area) infrastructure costs limited the funding of a master system
but outlined the likely service layout
• Full report
— http: / /orangecountync.gov /planning/ documents /ENOReportNovember20l3.pdf
Focus Area
• Examine 100 ± acre area is in the far northeast corner of the Eno EDD between 1 -85 and
US 70 adjacent to the City of Durham
• A scaled -back utility program is suggested
(see Focus Area in Attachment 4 on page 186)
Request Tonight
• Amend the agreement for a new design and construction timeline
• 2 additional years
Recommendation:
The Manager recommends that the Board
• Approve the amendment
• Transmit to the City of Durham
Craig Benedict said the original estimate to serve the entire area was approximately $5.8
million, which exceeds the County's financial wherewithal. He said this larger price tag was due
to the fact that a lift station would have to flow roughly 3 miles into Durham. He said for this
reason, the scaled back program and focus area are suggested.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
22
Craig Benedict said staff has met with property owners in the identified northeastern
area to determine interest in marketing their property. He said the goal would be to focus on
interested parties to find out the most efficient way to extend sewer to this area. He reviewed
the map.
Craig Benedict said the requested 2 year extension would be adequate to address the
abridged aspect of the sewer master plan and would allow for implementation. He said in this
case Orange County is asking Durham to extend the agreement, so that is why this will be
transmitted to them.
Commissioner Pelissier said given the dramatic decrease in the proposed size of land to
be serviced, she wonders if there has been discussion with economic development staff on
whether it is worthwhile just to do 100 acres.
Craig Benedict said yes, there have been discussions. He said as potential properties
are offered to interested parties, all three development zones have been considered. He said
some areas designated in the Eno have uses on them now. He said it is harder to show an
underdeveloped property and suggest to a potential new business that the process may be to
remove the underdeveloped area and develop it anew. He said staff is taking a look at the best
area to focus on initially.
Craig Benedict said he has spoken to Steve Brantley about the potential for this area,
and the goal is to focus as much as possible on the most prime marketable areas.
Steve Brantley said he speaks daily with planning department about prospects. He said
staff has toured this economic development area, and these core 100 acres have the best
potential for future development. He said at least two existing businesses on the Orange
Durham County line are also expanding.
Steve Brantley referred to the housing and trailer areas in the western part of the Eno
EDD. He said he has not experienced industry coming in and forcing their way into that kind of
environment, as there are too many other sites across the state that would not require that kind
of relocation for residents.
Craig Benedict said as with the Hillsborough and Efland Mebane small area plan, staff
also conducted an Eno small area planning exercise in the mid- 2000s. He said this was the
background planning that the Planning Board, the Commissioners and the residents were
involved with.
Commissioner Dorosin said the summary is that the focus will be on a smaller area for
infrastructure in an effort to lure economic development, and once this happens, this area will be
turned over to the City of Durham for ownership, operation and maintenance. He said the City
of Durham will and probably annex this area. He asked if this summary is correct.
Craig Benedict said this is a correct summary.
Commissioner Jacobs said of the three economic development districts, this Eno group
was by far the most frustrated. He asked if the past members of the work group are being kept
apprised of how things are changing.
Craig Benedict said after the study was received, a pause was taken in the process. He
said ideas are now being developed and staff will keep the board members involved and
updated.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs seconded by Commissioner Rich for the Board
to:
1. Approve the amendment; and
2. Authorize staff to transmit it to the City of Durham.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
23
8. Reports
NONE
9. County Manager's Report
NONE
10. County Attorney's Report
NONE
11. Appointments
a. Triangle Transit Special Tax Board — Appointments
The Board considered making 2 appointments to the Triangle Transit Special Tax Board.
A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
nominate Commissioner Price to position #1 and Commissioner Jacobs to position #2 on the
Triangle Transit Special Tax Board.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
12.
Board Comments
Commissioner Pelissier wanted to let everyone know that Triangle Transit Executive
Director David King has submitted his resignation and the recruitment process for a new
Executive Director has begun.
Commissioner Dorosin said he was at a meeting recently with residents who live in
mobile home parks in Orange County. He heard some distressing reports about their living
situations. He said he will be coming forward with some suggestions, and he thinks there are
some real opportunities to engage on these issues.
Commissioner Jacobs said the Board needs to remember that there are also
manufactured communities within the municipalities that are under financial stress and in need
of attention.
Chair McKee said he appreciated the opportunity to sit in the middle chair, and he will do
his best to represent the Board and the County.
34 13. Information Items
35 e November 18, 2014 BOCC Meeting Follow -up Actions List
36 e Tax Collector's Report - Numerical Analysis
37 e Tax Collector's Report - Measure of Enforced Collections
38 e Tax Assessor's Report - Releases and Refunds under $100
39 e Update on Solarization Programs for Orange County
40 e BOCC Chair Letter Regarding Petitions from November 18, 2014 Regular Board Meeting
41
42 14. Closed Session
43 NONE
44
45 15. Adjournment
46 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
47 adjourn the meeting at 9:26pm.
48
49 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
50
24
2 Earl McKee, Chair
4 Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board
Attachment 6
2
3 DRAFT MINUTES
4 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
5 REGULAR MEETING
6 December 9, 2014
7 7:00 p.m.
8
9 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday,
10 December 9, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center, in Chapel Hill, N.C.
11
12 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair McKee and Commissioners Mia Burroughs,
13 Mark Dorosin, Barry Jacobs, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, 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 Chair McKee called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
21
22 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
23
24 PUBLIC CHARGE
25 The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge.
26
27 2. Public Comments
28 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
29 Terry Rekeweg read from the following written comments:
30 1 have spoken in the past about how an Alternative rail route may outperform the current
31 Durham - Orange light rail project. I attended the TTA public meeting last month and talked to
32 many people who agreed that there should be another alternative.
33
34 The Alternative plan would change the location of 5 middle stations. The beginning point would
35 still be at Duke University and downtown Durham.
36 The Alternative provides for a faster ride from Chapel Hill to downtown Durham (a savings of 2-
37 5 minutes).
38
39 Other benefits are:
40 - Savings of $400 million
41 - It serves a greater percentage of low- income and minority households
42 - It provides 4.5 square miles more area within walking distance to rail stations, which promotes
43 more affordable housing and Transit Oriented Development
44 - It is much safer by eliminating the need to build 27 new railroad grade crossings
45 - Planning maps suggests that it would have higher ridership and relieve more traffic
46 congestion
47 - It has fewer environmental impacts.
48
49 Imagine this future scenario: If you were to board the Alternative light rail at the UNC station,
50 ride to the west side of RTP, then change to the proposed commuter train to continue your trip
I to, let's say, downtown Cary, it would take 36 minutes and 21 miles, a very attractive
2 transportation options. In contrast, the current rail plan would add almost 13 miles and 25
3 minutes more to this trip, which means that most people would choose instead to drive or take a
4 bus from Chapel Hill to RTP and Cary. Would anyone here be willing to travel 13 miles out of
5 the way, everyday, on your commute to work?
6
7 The current rail plan could be considered a 2 -D system. It goes from Chapel Hill to Durham.
8 The Alternative rail plan is 3 -D, just like the Triangle region. IT goes to Chapel Hill, to Durham,
9 and to the west side of RTP.
10
11 Imagine future Chatham Park transit riders making a bus to rail transfer in Chapel Hill and
12 heading towards Raleigh, a good direct transfer corridor. These riders may decide to do
13 business while in Chapel Hill. Without this direct Alternative rail route, Chatham Park
14 commuters may decide to drive instead on Hwy. 64 towards Raleigh. Chapel Hill may lose out
15 on potential tax revenue.
16
17 Please comment to Triangle Transit that this Alternative plan needs to be included during the
18 NEPA process.
19
20 The Federal Transit Administration says" "If during the NEPA process, new reasonable
21 alternatives not considered during the planning Alternatives Analysis are identified or new
22 information about eliminated alternatives comes to light, those alternatives must be evaluated
23 during the NEPA process. "
24
25 Scott Washington said he is a Hillsborough historian who is enthusiastic about all of the
26 history in Orange County. He said the epicenter of this seems to be in Hillsborough, including a
27 constitutional convention held there in 1788. He reviewed some of the history surrounding the
28 significance of this as it related to the passage of the Bill of Rights. He reviewed the following
29 email comments and information:
30
31 On the Bill of Rights Day and for the last two years in Hillsborough, we've held a special
32 simultaneous Community Bell Ringing event to mark that date in 1791 when the Bill of Rights
33 went into force (the first ten amendments to the U. S. Constitution) protecting the essential
34 liberties and legal fairness of all Americans.
35
36 Last year we rang bells across the Historic Hillsborough district for 222 seconds, one second in
37 honor of each year the Bill of Rights has been in force since December 15, 1791 when it went
38 into effect. This year, 2014, we plan on ringing bells simultaneously for 223 seconds starting at
39 1:OOPM.
40
41 This year will mark our third year with annual tradition and like other years, we expect five of the
42 area's historic churches of different denominations (St. Matthews Episcopal, Hillsborough
43 United Methodist, Hillsborough Presbyterian, First Baptist, and Dickerson Chapel) to ring their
44 church bells along with citizen and civic bells from the merchant district of historic Hillsborough
45 down King Street past the old Courthouse and to the Regulator Site. Instead of speeches, we
46 ring bells of all sizes in honor of the many years that the Bill of Rights has been in force and do
47 so all at the same time for 223 seconds at 1:OOPM.
48
49 Scott Washington encouraged everyone to come out to Hillsborough to be part of this
50 event.
1
2 Joey Honeycutt read from the following prepared statement:
3 Good evening. My name is Joey Honeycutt, and I'm the Crisis Response Coordinator for the
4 Orange County Rape Crisis Center. As part of my role, I coordinate the Orange County Sexual
5 Assault Response Team (or SART).
6
7 In mid -2013, the SART began to focus its attention on gaps in service impacting children and
8 adolescents who have experienced sexual violence. Our current system of care for children
9 who are victims of sexual violence is very fractured. Children are seen in a "floating" clinic at
10 UNC Hospital that may be in the Emergency Department one day and the Pediatric clinic the
11 next. These already- traumatized and frightened children are often surrounded by chaos -
12 beeping machines, screaming children who are getting shots, medical staff rushing around.
13 There are often no confidential spaces for the children or their families to talk to law
14 enforcement officers or to social workers, and in many cases children are further traumatized
15 by being asked to repeat their story multiple times to different professionals. Making matters
16 worse, there are often multiple follow up appointments scheduled at different locations around
17 the community. In short, our system of care, for all that it is well- intentioned and staffed by
18 wonderful people, is simply not meeting the needs of traumatized children and their families.
19
20 In recognizing these barriers within our current system, the SART began to discuss the need for
21 a Child Advocacy Center in Orange County. Child Advocacy Centers (or CACs) are designed
22 to be a "one stop shop" for children and families who have experienced a traumatic event.
23 These facilities are child - friendly spaces where a child can be seen by a doctor, interviewed by
24 a trained forensic interviewer, be connected with an advocate, and receive therapy services.
25 CACs are able to facilitate better collaboration among community professionals through the
26 Multi- disciplinary Team (MDT), a team of professionals who focus exclusively on cases
27 involving children to ensure that all bases are being covered in providing service and access to
28 the child and their family. Orange and Chatham Counties are two of only 22 counties in North
29 Carolina that do not currently have a Child Advocacy Center.
30
31 In spring of this year, Sarah Furman and I hosted a meeting to which we invited community
32 partners across Orange and Chatham counties to discuss our need for a CAC to serve both
33 communities. From that meeting, we agreed to divide into two task forces: one task force
34 would be responsible for figuring out the logistics of bringing a CAC to Orange and Chatham
35 counties — funding, location, service model, etc. The other task force would begin the process
36 of creating a protocol for a MDT to begin reviewing current child sexual abuse cases in Orange
37 County. The MDT has been a particular priority for two reasons: 1) because having a
38 functional MDT is a requirement for CAC accreditation; and 2) because a MDT will allow us to
39 optimize collaboration and service within our current system while we also work toward creating
40 a better system overall.
41
42 Carmen Coley read from the following prepared statement:
43 My name is Carmen Coley, and I am Coordinator of Child Victim Services for Chatham County.
44 I provide advocacy and support for sexually abused children and their families in Chatham
45 County and chair Chatham County's Multidisciplinary Child Sexual Abuse Team. Our
46 Multidisciplinary Team was formed in 2001 to review all open child sexual abuse cases in the
47 county to ensure that investigations are well- coordinated, thorough, and appropriate and that
48 children and families receive the medical and mental health care, advocacy, and support that
49 they need. Team members include our Managing Assistant District Attorney, the Department of
50 Social Services Investigations Supervisor, juvenile and family violence officers from our three
il
1 law enforcement agencies, and representatives from UNC Hospitals, the Guardian ad Litem
2 Program, the department of Juvenile Justice, and Family Violence and Rape Crisis Services.
3 We review every open child sexual abuse case every month, from the time of the initial report
4 until the case is resolved. Case reviews allow us to make sure that, from the very beginning,
5 information is shared freely among individuals and agencies involved in investigating child
6 sexual abuse cases and providing services for abused children and their families. Chatham
7 County has a record of every child sexual abuse case reported since 2001, including
8 investigation and prosecution outcomes.
9
10 In 2000, Chatham County Board of Commissioners created my position, Child Victim Services
11 Coordinator, out of concern that child sexual abuse investigations were being poorly
12 coordinated between the Department of Social Services and our county's three law
13 enforcement agencies. Social workers and law enforcement officers were conducting separate
14 investigations, resulting in children being interviewed about their victimization multiple times by
15 multiple individuals from multiple agencies. Already- victimized children were being further
16 traumatized by the repeated interviews; telling a complete stranger in great and agonizing detail
17 how someone who was supposed to protect you instead sexually assaulted you is not an easy
18 thing for anyone, let alone a child. Having to do that three or four times with three or four
19 different people, is torturous. Additionally, multiple interviews invariably result in slight
20 discrepancies with each retelling of the abusive event, making the difficult job of the prosecutor
21 even more difficult, as defense attorneys are apt to ignore the overwhelming consistency of
22 multiple accounts to jump on inconsequential variations of minute details. Streamlining the
23 process through multidisciplinary coordination successfully addresses these issues, leading to
24 better outcomes for children and greater success in prosecuting sex offenders.
25
26 I ask the Orange County Board of Commissioners to consider creating a similar county- funded
27 position in Orange County to improve multidisciplinary coordination among those professionals
28 entrusted with investigating sex crimes against children and providing services for these very
29 vulnerable children.
30
31 Thank you.
32
33 Sarah Furman read from the following prepared statement:
34 Hello. My name is Sarah Furman. I am a Crisis Counselor with the Chapel Hill Police
35 Department and member of the newly established Orange County Multidisciplinary Team. From
36 here on, Multidisciplinary Team will be referred as MDT. I am here to speak on the behalf of the
37 Orange County team about the critical need for a MDT Coordinator position in Orange County.
38
39 You heard from Carmen on some of the benefits of having a well - established MDT, including
40 reduction in trauma and re- victimization, better outcomes for children, and improved
41 prosecutions. Let us consider a few others that our team has identified since our first meeting in
42 May 2014. These include:
43 • Reduction in duplication of services and fragmentation in the service delivery process;
44 • Efficient, timely, and precise investigations;
45 • Support and enhancement of each individual agency's efforts;
46 • Identifying systemic gaps and limitations;
47 • Optimizing the health and well -being of victims, families, and providers.
48 What a real deficit it has been for our community to not have such a service since the children's
49 advocacy movement began in the 80s.
50
I The mission of The Orange County MDT is to facilitate a well- coordinated, systematic response
2 to child maltreatment that optimizes child health and well -being through enhanced inter - agency
3 communication, child focused case planning, and efficient and precise investigation and
4 prosecution.
5
6 Our team is comprised of a representative from Division of Juvenile Justice; Office of the
7 Guardian ad Litem; Orange /Chatham Counties District Attorney's Office; Orange County
8 Department of Social Services; Orange County Public and Charter Schools; UNC Healthcare;
9 Orange County Sheriff's Department; Local Municipal Police Departments; Orange County
10 Rape Crisis Center; and the Compass Center for Women and Families. All of us share in a
11 passion for and commitment to the safety and health of all children while promoting strong and
12 healthy families. It is for this reason that, in addition to our full -time jobs, we are also committed
13 to meeting monthly for two hours to develop the MDT and review cases.
14
15 In the past 7 months, we have come to realize that there are significant gaps in the quality of
16 services our team is able to provide. This is due, primarily, to the priorities of our full -time jobs.
17 Having a sole focus on the duties of the coordinator position and no direct attachment to
18 involved agencies, an MDT Coordinator would fill these gaps. It is for this reason that we ask
19 the Orange County Board of Commissioners to consider creating a county- funded MDT position
20 in Orange County and for your support and guidance in moving forward. Thank you.
21
22 Diana McDuffie is a member of the Friends of the public library of Carrboro, McDougle
23 and Cybrary. She expressed appreciation for the diligent work of the Board on the Southern
24 Branch Library. She reviewed the timeline of this work, up to the identification of the final site,
25 Brewer Lane. She said the overall response from the public input process to the Board of
26 County Commissioners was yes to a community library and yes to the Brewer Lane site. She
27 thanked the Board for this input process, and she said the community supports their efforts and
28 looks forward to seeing the end of this story in 2015. She noted that several members of the
29 friends group were in attendance.
30
31 Janel Sexton said her statement is regarding an issue with impervious surface in
32 Orange County. Her family purchased a 10 acre property in Orange County and thought they
33 understood the impervious surface regulations. She reviewed her situation, as outlined in the
34 following letters and emails:
35
36 Janel Sexton (letter)
37 Janel & Bryan Sexton
38 224 Whirlaway Lane
39 Chapel Hill, NC 27516
40 (919) 942 -2229
41
42 October 26, 2014
43
44 Dear County Commissioners:
45
46 My family moved from out of state to Chapel Hill in 2010. We were very excited to find a house
47 on a 10 acre lot that we could afford. With four small children we thought it would be the perfect
48 backdrop for an active and happy childhood. Before the house closing, we were informed that
49 our lot had 493 square feet of impervious surface left to use. Although this was a new concept
50 to us, we thought we understood what we were agreeing to and didn't anticipate a problem, as
I we had no plans to add any major structures to our property. As we settled in, and experienced
2 North Carolina variations in weather and precipitation, we realized that the backyard was mostly
3 dirt and weeds, and when it rained, it was a muddy eyesore. Even after we added a small swing
4 set, the mud and clay was tracked all over our house, making a terrible mess.
5
6 We realized we needed to landscape a portion of the yard, and went to a great deal of time and
7 expense to do so in an affordable and environmentally friendly way. We researched options,
8 and at this point we learned how incredibly restrictive our area is when it comes to impervious
9 surface definitions. We chose pervious pavers for our backyard patio, along with grass, shrubs,
10 and other plants. We were disappointed to learn that Orange County considers pervious pavers
11 to be impervious, but were also told that they were re- considering their position on this matter.
12
13 As the landscaping project was completed, we decided (partially influenced by the begging of 4
14 persistent children) we wanted to add a pool to our backyard before getting a fence installed. In
15 order to get a pool, however, we need 3 feet of border all around the pool to secure it. This
16 would add another (approximately) 385 square feet of impervious. It would be well within our
17 allotment, if only our pervious pavers were not counted against us. We began the process of
18 investigating and trying to get approval for this next phase.
19
20 On March 1, 2013, I emailed the Orange County Board of County Commissioners, describing
21 the situation. I received several sympathetic responses, including notes from Frank Clifton and
22 Barry Jacobs. I was told the County Commissioners were considering the issue. Mr. Clifton
23 forwarded my email to Craig Benedict, and I received this thoughtful response from Mr.
24 Benedict:
25
26 "1 have done some research on your property and subdivision and although 1
27 presently do not have the solution, I wanted to let you know that my office is
28 working on it. These impervious rules were a mandate from the state, so our
29 interpretations cannot stray too far from their standards. It does make sense what
30 your request is and I will endeavor to make it work. Thank you for your patience."
31
32 1 did not hear back after this, and our project was put on hold. I was later told the state and the
33 country was considering modifications to the current rules. I waited patiently.
34
35 This fall I felt a renewed sense of urgency as summertime swimming led to the resurrection of
36 my children's begging for a pool. I began again, trying to find a way to make this project
37 happen.
38
39 At the state, I spoke with Mike Randall in the storm water permitting unit on October 10, 2014. 1
40 was told that based on state provisions, we would get credit from the state for the pervious
41 pavers. I was told that given the fact that we have disconnected structures (e.g., there are no
42 pipes draining the water off our lot), and that our pavers have a low impact on water quality,
43 according to state regulations, we would be permitted to have both the pavers and the pool. On
44 October 29, 2014 1 spoke at length with Bradley Bennett and was again encouraged to files for
45 a variance. Both Mr. Randall and Mr. Bennett said they would be happy to speak with someone
46 about these issues.
47
48 More recently, in September and October of this year I've exchanged emails, and spoken with
49 Michael Harvey, Supervisor of Planning and Inspections at Orange County.
50
7
1 On October 20, 2014 my husband and I met face to face with Michael Harvey in the Planning
2 and Inspections Department at Orange County, and he shared that although the impervious
3 surface restrictions of this watershed area have been re- visited in recent years, updates have
4 not been made. Furthermore, he provided us with a memorandum dated September 4, 2014
5 that was submitted by him and Craig Benedict to the Board of County Commissioners regarding
6 state guidelines on what constitutes an impervious surface. In the report it states the State
7 Environmental Management Commission (EMC) consider as permeable "Permeable pavement
8 materials include porous concrete, permeable interlocking concrete pavers, concrete grid
9 pavers, porous asphalt and any other materials with similar characteristics." (p.2 of report.)
10
11 With the help of Wesley Pool in the Orange County Erosion Control division I looked at the GIS
12 of my land. Based on the topography of my land, the storm water collects in the middle of my
13 land, where there is a natural dip in elevation. During times of high precipitation, a small stream
14 forms across the length of my backyard.
15
16 We have 10 acres of land, with nothing covering the ground aside from our house, a short
17 driveway, and the pervious pavers. It is hard to understand why we can't also have a pool on
18 our land. I have tried explaining this predicament to family and friends (and my children) as they
19 look out upon all my acres of open land, and they are stunned. We have paid over $13,000 in
20 property taxes each year and will pay over $14,000 in property taxes for 2015, yet we can't use
21 our land for the enjoyment of our family. This seems unjust.
22
23 We respectfully ask that you consider our request for a variance, and allow us enough
24 impervious to install a pool. This would require approximately 350 square feet for the coping
25 around the pool. If our pervious pavers we not counted against us, we would have plenty to do
26 this.
27
28 Thank you for your time and consideration,
29
30 Janel D. Sexton
31
32 Emails sent and received from 2013:
33
34 Dr. Sexton:
35
36 This is an issue under review by the County Commission at this time.
37 Your input is important and concerns understood. I have forwarded your inquiry to Craig
38 Benedict our Director of Planning and Inspections. He may follow up with more specific
39 requests for information.
40
41 Best wishes.
42
43
44 Frank W. Clifton, Jr.
45 Orange County Manager
46 200 South Cameron Street, P.O. Box 8181
47 Hillsborough, NC 27278
48 Office 919 245 2306 Fax 919 644 3004
49 fcliftonp_orangecountync.gov
50 www.orangecountync.gov
1
2 "If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything."
3 Samuel L. Clemens
4
5 - - - -- Original Message---- -
6 From: janelsextonp_g ail.co j ailto:ianelsexto�ail.co ]
7 Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 11:12 AM
8 To: ALL _BOCC_ MANAGER _CLERK; jane1sextg2ff_g ail.co
9 Subject: Impervious surface
10
11 From: Janel Sexton
12 Phone Number: 919 - 942 -2229
13 Message:
14 Dear County Commissioners:
15 1 am writing to express my extreme frustration with Orange County's
16 policy regarding the restrictions placed on impervious surfaces. I live on a 10 acre lot and have
17 nothing in my backyard - -and am so severely restricted that I am left with hardly any "impervious
18 allowance" to even put in a patio. As a result my family, including my 4 children, has little
19 opportunity to enjoy our backyard, as it is mostly mud and weeds. We would like for you to
20 approve the use of pervious pavers so we have more options in which to develop our backyard
21 space.
22 Thank you,
23 Dr. Sexton
24
25 Dear Mr. Benedict,
26 Thank you for your responsiveness. We have begun the process of meeting with a landscaper,
27 and are trying to come up with a plan that will work.
28 We appreciate any help you can offer. We are on lot #7, at the end of Whirlaway Ln. The back
29 of our lot borders Dairyland Rd.
30 We would hope to have the option of putting in a pool someday, and are open to wood decking,
31 but we'd sure like to have a patio with space for a table and chairs, and also for our children to
32 ride around on a hard surface.
33 Thank you,
34 Janet
35
36
37 On 3/1/13 2:05 PM, "Craig Benedict" <c enedictp_orangecountync.gov> wrote:
38
39 1 have done some research on your property and subdivision and although I presently do not
40 have the solution, I wanted to let you know that my office is working on it. These impervious
41 rules were a mandate from the state, so our interpretations cannot stray too far from their
42 standards. It does make sense what your request is and I will endeavor to make it work.
43 Thank you for your patience.
44
45 Craig N. Benedict, AICP
46
47 Janet Sexton added that she has submitted a letter and a report stating that the state
48 accepts the pervious pavers. She referenced property photographs and a hydrology report
49 from the Orange County GIS website. She asked that the pavers be accepted as pervious, or
50 for a variance to be granted to allow for continued development of the property with a pool.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
I
Robin Jacobs, Executive Director of the Eno River Association, thanked the Board of
County Commissioners for their continued support and their relationship. She presented the
Board with the 2015 calendar, and she expressed thanks for the Commissioner's recent letter in
support of the local grant application for the Mountains to Sea Trail Bridge.
Chair McKee thanked the Eno River Association for their partnership efforts with the
County, and he congratulated them for their most recent land acquisition.
Commissioner Dorosin asked John Roberts about the variance requested by Janel
Sexton, and he asked if this would go to the Board of Adjustment.
John Roberts said if it was applicable, it would be initiated with the planning department,
and it would eventually go to the Board of Adjustment if it was appropriate to her property. He
said he has talked with Michael Harvey briefly, and at this point he does not feel it would be
appropriate for her property.
b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
(These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda
below.)
3. Petitions by Board Members
Commissioner Jacobs said art is needed in the Whitted building. He asked about the
plan to bring art to the public spaces in the building. He hopes this space can be used as a
vehicle to support the arts in Orange County.
A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
direct the County Attorney to come back with an explicit policy for when and under what
circumstances the BOCC can, might, and cannot require vendors and contractors to pay a
living wage.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Commissioner Price said this year the Board has a conflict with the date of the Town of
Chapel Hill's salute to Community heroes. She petitioned the Board to have staff express the
County's regrets for not being there and to congratulate the winners.
Commissioner Price said she would also like to follow up on the Board's plans for
honoring volunteer firefighters.
Commissioner Jacobs said the plan was to do this at the annual meeting with the
firefighters.
Commissioner Pelissier said at the Assembly of Governments meeting in 2013 there
was a nodding of heads when several elected officials suggested coming up with a
collaborative plan for all parties regarding a comprehensive affordable housing system. She
said this has fallen through the cracks, and she would like to make a formal petition for the
County manager to take a lead on this effort.
Commissioner Pelissier requests that the County manager work with the town managers
to develop and present an organizational model to be considered for adoption by all the elected
boards in the county, to accomplish the following:
1. Ensure that all partners work together to develop a comprehensive plan for affordable
housing.
2. Incorporates addressing the recent petitions of Board of Commissioner members regarding
tiny houses and mobile homes.
10
1 3. Identifies the respective roles of Department of Social Services and Housing, Human Rights
2 and Community Development and how they are coordinated and /or complimentary. (This
3 question was raised by members at a recent meeting).
4
5 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Price to bring
6 back the use of a three month rolling calendar starting in January, to include all relevant
7 meeting dates, and to be updated monthly to the Board of Commissioners.
8
9 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
10
11 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
12
13 a. Presentation of Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for FYE 6/30/2014
14 The Board received the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the fiscal
15 year, which ended June 30, 2014.
16 Clarence Grier presented the fiscal year audit. He said the budget is the plan, and
17 these are the financial results of the plan. He said the audit is required by state statute and the
18 auditors are Martin Starnes and Associates. He said the audit meets the stringent standards of
19 the Government Finance Officers Associations (GFOA) and this was the 29th year the County
20 received the GFOA certification for financial reporting.
21 Clarence Grier recognized his financial staff, and introduced Crystal Roberts from Martin
22 Starnes and Associates.
23 Crystal Roberts presented the following PowerPoint slides:
24
25 Orange County
26 2014 Audited Financial Statements
27 Audit Highlights
28 ❑ Unmodified opinion
29 No Significant Deficiencies noted
30 No Material Weaknesses Identified
31
32 Budget vs. Actual (graph /table)
33 General Fund (graph /table)
34 Tax Collection Percentages (graph /table)
35
36 Fund Balance History (General Fund) (graph /table)
37
38 Fund Balance
39 Available fund balance as defined by the Local Government Commission (LGC) is
40 calculated as follows:
41 Total Fund Balance
42 Less: Non spendable (not in cash form, not available)
43 Less: Stabilization by State Statute (by state law, not available)
44 Available Fund Balance
45 This is the calculation utilized as the basis for comparing you to other units and
46 calculating your fund balance percentages.
47 Fund Balance Position - General Fund
48 Total Fund Balance $62,114,947 Non spendable - 29,242
49 Stabilization by State Statute - 12,102,492
50 Available Fund Balance $49,983,213
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
11
Available Fund Balance 2013 $44,903,439
Increase in Available FB $ 5,079,774
Available Fund Balance as a Percent of Expenditures and Transfers out — General Fund
Major Enterprise Funds
SportsPlex Solid Waste
Fund Fund
Total operating revenues $ 3,191,865 $ 5,352,943
Total operating expenses $ 2,919,997 $ 11,266,438
Operating Income (Loss) $ 271,868 $ (5,913,495)
Major Enterprise Fund
Cash Flow Unrestricted
Debt Service From Operations Net Position
Solid Waste $ 763,409 $ (2,715,370) $(1,487,578)
SportsPlex $ 683,474 $ 396,379 $ 834,947
Crystal Roberts said the fund balance increased by $7.5 million as compared to the prior
year.
Commissioner Dorosin asked if the 26.5 percent fund balance is the number that is
comparable to the minimum requirement of the LGC.
Clarence Grier said the LGC minimum is 8 percent, and the GFCO recommendation is
16.67 percent. He said Orange County's policy is 17 percent, which represents two months of
expenditures. He said during the budget process the County appropriated $10 million for this
year's budget, and when you take out that $10 million it brings the fund balance down to
approximately 20 percent.
He said he and the manager will review the fund balance in January and bring back
some recommended uses for the additional amount that is over the policy recommendation.
Commissioner Dorosin referred to the slide with the fund balance dollar amount, and he
asked about the $5 million increase in available fund balance. He referred to Clarence Grier's
statement that $10 million was taken out, and asked if that means that the net loss is only $5
million.
Clarence Grier said there is actually a net increase of $2 million if you take out that $5
million. He said this is because there was an increase of $7.5 million to the fund balance, and
when you take that out of the available, it shows an actual increase of $2.7 million.
Commissioner Dorosin said $10 million was taken out, and this shows an increase of $5
million. He asked if this means the County is really only $5 million down.
Clarence Grier said this is correct.
Commissioner Jacobs asked how long the County has been under contract with Martin
Starnes to do the audit. He asked if there is a policy for when other bids are solicited.
Clarence Grier said there are two more years on this contract, and the next time this
goes out for bid will be the end of fiscal year 2016.
Commissioner Jacobs said this information needs to be appended to this audit report
each year, along with the policy on rotating auditors.
Commissioner Burroughs asked if a management letter is sent out as part of the audit.
Crystal Roberts said a management letter is a possibility, but Orange County has not
received a letter in the past four three years, as these are only sent out when there are issues.
Clarence Grier recognized his staff members, and Chair McKee presented a plaque to
the department.
12
1 b. Resolutions Recognizing North Carolina Literary Hall of Fame Inductees from
2 Orange County
3 The Board considered five resolutions recognizing Jaki Shelton Green, Allan Gurganus,
4 Louis D. Rubin, Jr., Lee Smith, and Elizabeth Spencer for their induction into the North Carolina
5 Literary Hall of Fame and authorizing the Chair to sign.
6 Jaki Shelton Green was the only member in attendance.
7
8 Commissioner Rich read the following resolution:
9
10 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
11
12 RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING JAKI SHELTON GREEN,
13 A NORTH CAROLINA LITERARY HALL OF FAME
14 INDUCTEE FROM ORANGE COUNTY
15
16 WHEREAS, the North Carolina Literary Hall of Fame celebrates and promotes the rich literary
17 heritage of North Carolina by commemorating its leading authors and
18 encouraging the continued flourishing of great literature; and
19
20 WHEREAS, the North Carolina Literary Hall of Fame was established under the leadership of
21 Sam Ragan, Poet Laureate and Southern Pines newspaper editor; and
22
23 WHEREAS, the North Carolina Literary Hall of Fame was authorized by a Joint Resolution of
24 the North Carolina General Assembly in July 1993, and formally established in
25 May 1996 by a grant from the North Carolina Department of Cultural
26 Resources to the North Carolina Writers' Network; and
27
28 WHEREAS, the North Carolina Literary Hall of Fame has recognized Jaki Shelton Green, who
29 has significant ties to Orange County; and
30
31 WHEREAS, Orange County takes pride in its historic role as a center of art and learning, and is
32 proud to celebrate County residents as exemplars of the literary community
33 whose words enrich our lives;
34
35 NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Orange County Board of Commissioners does
36 hereby recognize and congratulate Jaki Shelton Green as an inductee into the
37 North Carolina Literary Hall of Fame, and expresses its appreciation of her and
38 her literary works as cultural assets representing Orange County.
39
40 This, the 9th day of December 2014.
41
42 Jaki Shelton Green thanked the Board for all of their support and said it has been a
43 wonderful journey.
44
45 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to
46 approve and authorize the Chair to sign the attached resolutions recognizing Jaki Shelton
47 Green, Allan Gurganus, Louis D. Rubin, Jr., Lee Smith, and Elizabeth Spencer for their
48 induction into the North Carolina Literary Hall of Fame.
49
50 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
13
2 5. Public Hearings - NONE
3
4 6. Consent Agenda
5 • Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
6 Commissioner Jacobs removed Item 6 -c for discussion.
7
8 • Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
9 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
10 approve the remaining items on the Consent Agenda.
11
12 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
13
14 a. Minutes
15 The Board approved the minutes from October 21, 2014 as submitted by the Clerk to the
16 Board.
17 b. Authorization to Declare Equipment Surplus
18 The Board declared six pieces of heavy equipment surplus.
19 d. Fiscal Year 2014 -15 Budget Amendment #4
20 The Board approved budget and grant project ordinance amendments for fiscal year 2014 -15
21 for the Health Department, Planning and Inspections, Department on Aging, Department of
22 Social Services, and Library Services.
23 e. Application for North Carolina Education Lottery Proceeds for Chapel Hill — Carrboro
24 City Schools (CHCCS) and Contingent Approval of Budget Amendment # 4 -A Related
25 to CHCCS Capital Project Ordinances
26 The Board approved an application to the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction
27 (NCDPI) to release proceeds from the NC Education Lottery account related to FY 2014 -15
28 debt service payments for Chapel Hill — Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS), and to approve
29 Budget Amendment #4 -A (amended School Capital Project Ordinances), contingent on the
30 North Carolina Department of Public Instruction's (NCDPI) approval of the application.
31 f. Approval of Expanded White Cross Fire Insurance District
32 The Board approved the White Cross Fire Insurance District Map that has been expanded to
33 include properties within six road miles of White Cross Fire Department Station 2.
34 g. Proclamation — Bill of Rights Day
35 The Board adopted a proclamation to officially recognize Bill of Rights Day in Orange County
36 during the month of December and authorized the Chair to sign.
37 h. Hillsborough Commons Lease Amendment for Expansion of Northern Orange
38 Employment and Training Center
39 The Board approved a proposal to amend the Hillsborough Commons Lease to include the
40 recently vacated space adjacent to the Department of Social Services ( "DSS ") in Hillsborough
41 for the purpose of expanding employment and training efforts in northern Orange County;
42 authorize the Manager to execute the Lease Amendment upon County Attorney approval during
43 the Winter break; and authorize the DSS Director to budget unanticipated revenue received in
44 this fiscal year for any costs related to the lease and occupancy of the space.
45 i. Approval of Budget Amendment #4 -13 Related to Position Changes and Receipt of
46 Additional Medicaid Revenue within the Health Department
47 The Board approved Budget Amendment #4 -B related to position changes and receipt of
48 additional Medicaid revenue within the Health Department, specifically to: approve changing a
49 currently budgeted 1.0 FTE Public Health Nurse I position to two .50 FTE Public Health Nurse 1
50 positions; increase a currently budgeted .50 FTE Public Health Nurse 11 Preparedness
14
1 Coordinator position to a .60 FTE position; approve changing a currently budgeted temporary
2 grant funded Medical Office Assistant position to a permanent .50 FTE position; and approve
3 the receipt of $5,468 in additional Medicaid revenue.
4
5 Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
6
7 c. Contract Renewal for Engineering Services
8 The Board considered approving a contract amendment to the existing agreement for
9 general engineering and environmental services for the Solid Waste Management Department
10 with Draper Aden Associates, Inc. for engineering and consulting services for two (2) additional
11 years through December 31, 2016 and authorizing the Chair to sign.
12 Chair Jacob said he has previously asked about the length of this contract, the location
13 of the vendor, and whether the vendor pays a living wage.
14
15 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Price to
16 request that anytime the County is extending an existing contract, staff will supply information
17 regarding how many years that contract has been in existence, whether the vendor has an
18 office or is located in Orange County, and whether or not the vendor pays a living wage.
19
20 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
21
22 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
23 approve a contract amendment to the existing agreement for general engineering and
24 environmental services for the Solid Waste Management Department with Draper Aden
25 Associates, Inc. for engineering and consulting services for two (2) additional years through
26 December 31, 2016 and authorize the Chair to sign.
27
28 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
29
30 7. Regular Agenda
31
32 a. Social Services Child Care Proposal for 2014 -2015
33 The Board considered a proposal for serving children needing child care subsidy in
34 Orange County with a plan that will only address the current fiscal year but will provide a
35 framework for additional discussions during the next budget planning cycle.
36 Nancy Coston said the Board had asked her to go back and work on a new proposal.
37 She said her staff has reviewed all information and funding, and the proposal being brought
38 forward is to make no changes in the people being served through June 30th, and to implement
39 the fee change.
40 She reviewed the following information from the abstract:
41 At a Board budget work session on November 11, 2014, the Department of
42 Social Services (DSS) shared the impacts of recent budget cuts and eligibility changes on
43 families in Orange County. The Board requested additional information and recommendations
44 from DSS staff and the Board of Social Services on options for serving these children. The DSS
45 staff and board have developed a proposal for the remainder of this fiscal year. The eligibility
46 changes, recommendations and financial impacts for this year can be found in the attached
47 chart.
48
49 For several years, the state has not rebased subsidy allocations using the available census
50 data. This year begins a six -year cycle to implement this rebasing and Orange County's base
15
1 allocation has decreased by approximately $700,000. The second phase of the implementation
2 will occur in July 2016. After the original allocation, Orange County received a reallocation
3 of$290,000 and has been informed of the possibility of one more reallocation this year. The
4 Orange County Partnership for Young Children has also applied for additional Smart Start
5 subsidy funds and if received, these would be added to the DSS contract. In addition, DSS has
6 received some funds through IV -E of the Social Security Act to serve low income children who
7 enter foster care. All of these funds have been included in this proposal. After reviewing details
8 about the families receiving child care, DSS projects that the State funds, Smart Start funds and
9 $595,000 in County funds already in the agency budget should be sufficient to serve the
10 existing caseload.
11
12 After receiving the comments from the Board of County Commissioners and from the DSS
13 Board, DSS had studied the financial impact of the items discussed at the work session for
14 addressing the immediate needs. DSS proposes serving children over age 5 with families below
15 to the 200% Federal Poverty Level (FPL), not imposing the new income eligibility and fee
16 requirements on relatives who are working with DSS to assure child safety and begin serving all
17 children currently on the wait list effective January 1, 2015. Any requests for child care after
18 January 1 st would be subject to a new waiting list until the financial impacts of these changes
19 can be calculated. If funds become available, working families will be served from the wait list
20 based on the date added to the list. Families being served with County funds will be informed
21 that these services will continue through June 30, 2015, and will then be dependent on
22 decisions during the 2015 -2016 budget deliberations. If this entire plan cannot be implemented,
23 it is recommended that the relative care and service to current recipients up to 200% FPL be
24 prioritized for consideration.
25
26 As part of the budget process, DSS will submit a plan for ongoing child care services with
27 annualized costs for all proposals and with recommended priorities. The DSS Board is also
28 planning to meet with the local legislative delegation to seek changes in some of the most
29 harmful changes.
30 FINANCIAL IMPACT: Based on the attached financial statement and caseload projections, the
31 costs for continuing mandated services can be covered with the County funds already budgeted
32 for DSS. The estimated additional County costs to fund the proposal from DSS for 2014 -2015 is
33 $566,000. With the appropriation of the $350,000 from the Social Justice as noted below, the
34 balance available in the Social Justice Fund will be $100,000.
35
36 Nancy Coston said that clearing the waiting list does not mean that all of those children
37 will be served, because many have moved, or their situations have changed. She said this is
38 why financial predictions can be difficult. She reviewed a chart showing the financial impact.
39 She said she is requesting flexibility to move money around as needed.
40 Commissioner Price asked what happens to the waiting list for next fiscal year.
41 Nancy Coston said a new waiting list will be started the day the current waiting list is
42 cleared. She said it is impossible to predict the numbers. She said when the waiting list is
43 cleared, people become very interested in childcare.
44 Commissioner Rich asked how people find out they are no longer on the list.
45 Nancy Coston said staff will call and send letters. She said there are often group
46 interviews to complete the eligibility paperwork, and as soon as this is done, vouchers are given
47 out, and recipients take these to a preferred child care center.
48 Commissioner Rich asked if there have been people that fall through the cracks.
16
1 Nancy Coston said the best way to avoid this is to keep the waiting list from getting old.
2 She said it can be more challenging to find people once the waiting list is six months old or
3 more.
4 Commissioner Dorosin commended Nancy Coston for preparing this proposal. He
5 asked if it is fair to say that the $400,000 on the chart is the amount that it would take to get 321
6 children off the waiting list. He said if only half of these were actually served, it would open up
7 those spots for the next people that walk in.
8 Nancy Coston said yes, that would be correct for the rest of this year.
9 Commissioner Dorosin said this proposal is not just maintain the status quo, but it is
10 expanding the residents being served in Orange County.
11 Nancy Coston said this stops the bleeding from the cuts and the changes in eligibility,
12 and it reaches out to the working families on the waiting list.
13 Commissioner Pelissier said in the future, it would be good to track the numbers on the
14 waiting lists so the Board of County Commissioners can see the rise and fall of child care
15 demand.
16 Nancy Coston said she would be glad to this. She said a drop usually happens as a
17 result of some infusion of money, and perhaps this can be shown in the report too.
18 Commissioner Jacobs thanked Nancy Coston and reiterated that the County is trying to
19 keep the program afloat. He said another long waiting list is the section 8 housing list, and
20 when staff looks at housing issues in relation to the petition, he would like to see how much
21 Orange County can do. He said this is a list that rarely gets down to zero, as the federal
22 government has been cutting at this for a long time.
23 Commissioner Price said she would like to know if staff can give an idea of how many
24 children would need to be served in order to not have a waiting list.
25 Nancy Coston said it might be possible to look at how many get added to the waiting list
26 every month early in the life of the list. She said this is probably a pretty good estimate of the
27 monthly amount. She said this would probably be a fairly contained amount, but it would be a
28 much larger amount if you extrapolated it into next year.
29 Commissioner Price asked, if the Board could appropriate more money, if Nancy Coston
30 is able to come up with this number.
31 Bonnie Hammersley said she will work with Nancy Coston, but there is a lag and a delay
32 with the list. She said, as a better number is formulated, it will be brought forward. She said
33 Nancy Coston included a caveat in the motion, stating that she would keep the manager
34 informed if there was a larger need.
35 Commissioner Rich asked how much will be left in the social justice fund for 2014 -15.
36 Clarence Grier said $100,000 would be left.
37 Commissioner Pelissier said the Board had indicated an interest in having the $100,000
38 in the social justice fund for the Family Success Alliance project. She said the Board had
39 indicated intent to use this amount.
40 Clarence Grier said the Department of Social Services (DSS) has some salary savings
41 that may be available for use to offset some of the overage.
42 Commissioner Rich said she just wants to make sure funds are there to do all of the
43 things the Board promised to do.
44 Commissioner Price said more money will be coming in as a cushion.
45 Clarence Grier said he and Bonnie Hammersley will review that, next month.
46
47 A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs
48 to approve the DSS proposal, transfer $350,000 from the Social Justice Fund to DSS for child
49 care, and allow DSS to utilize any funds available within its budget to pay these costs. If
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
17
additional County funds outside of the agency's budget and the social justice fund are needed,
the DSS Director will submit a request to the Manager for Board consideration.
Commissioner Price made a friendly amendment to add the Manager's recommendation that: If
additional County funds outside of the agency's budget and the social justice fund are needed,
the DSS Director will submit a request to the Manager for Board consideration.
Commissioner Pelissier and Commissioner Burroughs accepted the friendly amendment.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
b. Limited Opening Plan - Blackwood Farm Park
The Board considered a plan to open Blackwood Farm Park on a limited basis to the
public, and to review the planned amenities and activities to be available.
David Stancil said his staff has been working for much of 2014 on developing some
ideas for how to move forward with this park. He reviewed the following PowerPoint slides and
Maps:
Blackwood Farm Park
Limited Opening Plan
Blackwood Farm Park
• 152 -acre park site
• NC 86, New Hope Church Road
Master Plan Committee
Master Plan Adopted 2011
Limited Opening Plan
• Funds approved 2013/2014
• Limited Opening Phase I
• Target — March 6
Proposed Initial Facilities
• Trails (4 miles)
• Picnic shelter
• Picnic table and benches
• Historic interpretive farmstead signage
• Agriculture demo area
• Open field
• Informal Fishing
• Infrastructure
Planned Initial Operation
• Expect weekend operation
• Beginning March
• Need for staff presence due to pond
Next Steps
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
IN
• Prepare and submit site plan based on schematic
• Solicit and award bids for picnic shelter and parking area
• Hire park manager, prepare for opening
• Phase II — FY 2017 -18?
David Stancil said staff has had meetings with neighbors on both sides of the property,
who have shared some interesting perspectives.
David Stancil said there may be a budget amendment in the future to transfer some
funding to seasonal personnel. He suggested that staff move ahead with the next steps and
then come back to the Board of County Commissioners with a status report on this project in
February.
Commissioner Dorosin said there is an item about restroom facilities or port -a- potties,
and he asked if the County owns these.
David Stancil said these could be purchased or leased. He said the plan was to put in
some port -a -lets at first while the number of visitors is determined. He said if this does not
work, staff would come back to ask for more funding during next year's budget.
Commissioner Dorosin referred to the Americans with Disabilities (ADA) access. He
noted that the driveway is all gravel, and he asked if some part of that is going to be paved and
if there will be a trail from the parking area to the picnic area.
David Stancil said the driveway will remain graveled, but there will be a paved ADA
accessible space with an accessible trail to the picnic area that loops around.
Commissioner Dorosin said he liked the historical aspect of the project, but he said
putting signs all around is not ideal. He suggested the use of phone downloads to give the
interactive oral histories. He said these could be on the website as well.
David Stancil said the signage will be unobtrusive, but the phone idea may be a great
way to minimize that. He will look into it.
Commissioner Jacobs said if this is voted on tonight, the bids will be awarded for the
parking lot and the shelter. He asked if he could assume that the vendors will be asked to pay
a living wage, or if a motion needs to be made to include this.
John Roberts said he does not know how much that will cost, and there are some
contracts where the County is not authorized to make that kind of requirement.
David Stancil said these items are the two biggest price tags in the project.
Commissioner Jacobs said there used to be signs at other future park sights, and he
asked if there is a plan, as we get closer to a bond, to label those parcels that will be future
parks.
David Stancil said this was done at Twin Creeks in 2001. He said this is not done right
now because it tends to attract attention and pull people in before staff is ready to have them on
the property. He said this could be done as properties get closer to being ready.
Commissioner Rich followed up on the living wage issue. She wonders, moving
forward, if the County can make it clear when putting out bids for jobs that we prefer to work
with contractors that pay a living wage. She said it is important to start getting their message
out there to vendors.
Commissioner Jacobs said the intent of his earlier motion was to have the attorney
come back with a policy to adopt. He said he only brought this up now because this project is
ready to go out for a bid now, and it would not come back to the Board for additional work while
the bids went out. He hopes the attorney will come back with something that will accomplish
exactly what Commissioner Rich is saying, but that will be in January.
Commissioner Rich asked if the pond is being stocked with fish.
David Stancil said staff has looked into this, but the plan is to try leaving it as it is, as
there are already fish in the pond, and it is a fairly popular fishing spot.
19
1 Commissioner Rich asked if the County is currently liable for any accidents that might
2 happen at the pond now and if there will be liability moving forward.
3 John Roberts said the liability is the same as any other County property. He said the
4 location is next to a school, and there is an attractive nuisance doctrine, but the County has
5 liability insurance to cover issues of that nature. He said having the property staff and open
6 during designated hours would lessen the liability. He said no trespassing signs would also
7 help.
8 Commissioner Pelissier asked if there is a gate to prevent driving into the park when it is
9 now open.
10 David Stancil said yes, but people park outside and walk in.
11 Commissioner Pelissier referred to the agricultural demonstrations and asked what will
12 happen to the food that is grown. She suggested that it could be donated to organizations such
13 as PORCH.
14 David Stancil said staff is still working on this plan and what will be done with the
15 product, which will be low in volume.
16 Commissioner Price referred to the map, and asked for an explanation of the
17 Emergency Access points.
18 David Stancil said this was the original trail map done by GPS to show emergency
19 access to people on the trails using a Gator or motorized vehicle.
20 Commissioner Jacobs referred to the growing of food and said there are schools all
21 around the park. He said the original plan was to coordinate with these schools to grow the
22 vegetables.
23 Chair McKee said a possible park manager was mentioned. He asked if this salary is
24 included in the proposed budget.
25 David Stancil this was approved as part of the original budget.
26 Chair McKee said this must be an old pond, and some of these farm ponds drop off
27 sharply in depth. He said it is important to insure safety for children.
28 David Stancil said staff has been in this pond, and he thinks the banks have worn down.
29 He said the plan is to let the vegetation to grow high in the non - fishing areas.
30 Chair McKee asked if anyone can be trespassed off of the property if there are not any
31 "no trespassing" signs.
32 John Roberts said anyone can be trespassed off of the property based on conduct, but
33 without signs, someone is not automatically a trespasser if they are found on the site.
34 David Stancil said there are diamond shaped park boundary signs around the property,
35 but these do not say "no trespassing."
36 Commissioner Dorosin asked if signage stating that the park is closed except for
37 specific hours would make it implicit that you are trespassing if you are there when it is closed.
38 John Roberts said that should be implicit.
39 Commissioner Price asked about the northern boundary where the park abuts
40 residential properties, and whether there will be any barriers.
41 David Stancil said the plan does not envision any fencing on the northern boundary of
42 the property yet, but this may be considered as the planning goes forward.
43 Commissioner Price said it would be good to tell people in the park that private property
44 is beyond a certain point.
45 David Stancil said this can be done.
46
47 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Price to
48 authorize staff to proceed with described actions to open the park on a limited basis with a
49 target of March 2015, and to direct staff to with the County Attorney to determine on which
20
1 projects and to what extent it is allowable for the County to require payment of a living wage by
2 contractors.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
Commissioner Dorosin said he would like some clarification on the living wage issue.
He supports the idea, but he is confused about when this is permissible, and he would like more
information from John Roberts on this issue, and what the motion does related to that. .
John Roberts said in 2013 the legislature passed some amended language that allows
Counties to contract with private entities, but it states that they may not require a living wage as
a condition of bidding on a contract. He said a living wage requirement could probably be
added to any contract that is under the bidding threshold.
Commissioner Dorosin said if a contract is put out to bid, the County cannot say that a
vendor must pay a certain amount to its workers in order to get the contract, but the County
could specify for a preference for working with contractors that pay a living wage. He said if
the lowest bid came in, and it was a contractor who pays the federal minimum wage, the
County would be required to accept that bid.
John Roberts said yes, the County can put a preferential statement in any contract, but
per state statute the lowest responsive, responsible bid must be accepted.
Commissioner Dorosin asked if bids are solicited for projects that fall below the
threshold of needing to go out to bid.
John Roberts said there are typically requests for proposals that are similar to bids, but
for smaller contracts those generally are not bid at all. He said small projects would be
anything under $25,000 to $35,000.
Commissioner Dorosin asked if the County is subject to the same requirement to pick
the lowest bidder in the case of a request for proposal (RFP) for these smaller projects.
John Roberts said no, that requirement is only for actual bidding contracts.
Commissioner Dorosin asked Commissioner Jacobs if his motion is asking that an RFP
be done for the picnic and parking areas for this project.
Commissioner Jacobs said they had asked staff to work with the attorney to determine
whether a living wage can be required for those projects. He said his original motion was to
have in writing the answers to the exact questions that the attorney just articulated, in order to
have a policy that the County can adopt instead of going through this for every contract. He
said since this project will be done prior to the adoption of any policy, he was giving John
Roberts the maximum room to work with staff on these two projects. He said the attorney
would be the best one to determine what is required.
Chair McKee said he has a problem with the motion and he would like to separate the
two motions for the project and the living wage.
Commissioner Jacobs and Commissioner Price agreed to this.
John Roberts said the motion can be amended through friendly amendment.
A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Price to
authorize staff to proceed with the described actions to open the park on a limited basis with a
target date of March 2015.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Dorosin to
direct staff to work with the County attorney to determine on which projects and to what extent it
is allowable for the Board to require payment of a living wage by contractors.
21
1 Commissioner Burroughs asked if this is the same motion that was passed earlier or if it
2 is just for this project.
3 Commissioner Jacobs said this motion is only for this project.
4 Commissioner McKee said he still has reservations that the Board needs to move
5 forward with a formal policy before applying any part of that policy.
6
7 VOTE: Ayes, 6 — Nays, 1 (Chair McKee)
8
9 c. Approval of Purchase of Roll Carts for Rural Roadside Recycling Program
10 The Board considered authorizing the purchase of 7,600 95- gallon roll carts at a total
11 cost of $444,144 for the rural roadside recycling collection program.
12 Gayle Wilson said he would like to take a moment to make an announcement. He said
13 in reference to the Solid Waste year ending, June 2014, and waste reduction percentages that
14 the percentage for Orange County is 64 percent, which means Orange County has met its goal.
15 He noted that Alamance County is at 23 percent; Chatham County is at 41 percent; and
16 Durham County is at 13 percent.
17 Gayle Wilson reviewed the following background information from the abstract:
18
19 Orange County has been discussing the implementation of roll carts in the rural roadside
20 program for several years, but has experienced continuing delays to proceeding due at least in
21 part to recycling program funding uncertainty. The Board of County Commissioners (BOCC)
22 ultimately appropriated funds in the Fiscal 2014/15 budget for the purchase of approximately
23 7,000 roll carts with the intention of implementing the carts in the fall of 2014.
24
25 The BOCC directed staff to determine in advance how many rural program service area
26 residents wished to receive a roll cart prior to finalizing a purchase recommendation for the
27 Board's consideration. The BOCC further indicated that should the number of affirmative
28 resident responses in the current service area not utilize the budgeted quantity of roll carts, staff
29 could consider surveying the previously proposed service expansion area to solicit interest in
30 roll carts up to the authorized quantity. In September 2014 Solid Waste staff provided an
31 information item update (attached) of the proposed implementation plan for rural roll carts that
32 outlined the process by which the current service area would be surveyed for interest in
33 receiving a roll cart. Staff also provided a timeline by which a recommendation would be
34 brought to the BOCC for purchase authorization and ultimately, distribution of the carts to
35 residents.
36 In September 2014 a mailing was distributed to all residents (approx. 14,500) in the existing
37 rural roadside service area. A second mailing was distributed to all of the non - respondents to
38 the first mailing. As of November 14, 2014, staff had received 7,541 responses by mail, phone,
39 email or answers via the on -line survey to order carts (6,841); or alternatively to indicate that
40 they did not want a cart (700). Responses continue to trickle in.
41
42 Based on the 6,841 responses to date, plus an estimated 10% additional residents who did not
43 respond to date for whatever reason that staff anticipates will desire a cart, staff believes the
44 County can expect at least 7,525 carts will be requested by the time of delivery or soon
45 thereafter, once the carts become visible along the roadways. Additionally, staff believes a
46 small stock (75) should be on hand in the event of new construction or to replace lost, stolen or
47 damaged carts. Additional carts will not be available unless or until they are approved in the FY-
48 2015/16 budget. Therefore staff is proposing the purchase of 7,600 roll carts at this time.
49 The 95- gallon rural roll carts will be virtually identical to the roll carts previously distributed in the
50 Towns with the exception that they will have black lids rather than blue lids. Those who did not
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
22
opt for carts may continue to use their bins roadside or carry recycling to the convenience
centers or drop -off sites.
If the proposed cart purchase is approved, the carts will be ordered with delivery to residents
expected during the months of late January and February and residents may start using the
carts upon delivery.
The distribution schedule will be partly weather dependent, but should be completed by early
March. Residents may keep the orange bins for personal use or recycle them at any Solid
Waste Convenience Center. Members of the public who have not yet ordered a cart but are
eligible (located in the existing service area) and interested can contact the Solid Waste
Department, 919 - 968 -2788 or recyclingp_orangecountync.gov. Staff anticipates that the carts
will result in increased recycling, greater collection efficiency and fewer worker injuries with
more automated collection and less manual stooping to collect from bins. The first three months
of in -Town recycling using the blue roll carts resulted in a 29 percent increase in tons of
recyclables collected at the curb.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The BOCC appropriated $378,000 for 7,000 roll carts in the FY- 2014/15
budget based on an estimated cost of $54 /each, including distribution. These funds were to be
borrowed from the solid waste enterprise fund reserve at a 2.5% rate over five years. A $75,000
grant (reimbursable) from North Carolina Department of Environment & Natural Resources is
still expected to fund a portion of the rural cart cost. The current cost of the carts is $58.44 or
$444,144 total, including distribution and a mold label on the lid. The increase is a result of an
increase in the cost of resin; the purchase of fewer carts than for the urban program and
obtaining less of a volume discount; higher costs for cart distribution in rural areas as opposed
to in -town' and the mold label on the lid as opposed to decals used for the urban roll carts.
North Carolina General Statute (NCGS) 143- 129(e) (3) allows local governments to make
purchases through a competitive bidding group purchasing program, which is a formally
organized program that offers competitively obtained purchasing services at discount prices to
two or more public agencies. The HGACBuy is a cooperative purchasing group that meets the
requirements of NCGS 143- 129(e) (3). The specific contract number is HGACBuy
Contract #GC01 -13. The $66,144 budget increase is proposed to be funded by increasing the
amount borrowed from the solid waste enterprise fund reserve.
Commissioner Jacobs since the Solid Waste Advisory Group (SWAG) is looking at
options for funding, he wonders if this is not putting the cart before the horse. He said this is
the modality that will be embraced, but it is predicated on having a way to pay for it that is
legally defensible and fiscally practical, and the advisory group has not yet adopted this.
Gayle Wilson said a decision has already been made for the urban system, and three
times as many carts were purchased. He would think that the funding situation for the urban
programs and the rural programs would be the same. He said if a comprehensive way cannot
be found to fund recycling, then 7000 carts will not be the biggest problem.
Commissioner Jacobs said he respects Gayle Wilson's comment, but there have been
so many agonizing conversations about how this will work both financially and legally, and it
seems to have leaked to making a decision. He said the advisory group thinks this is where we
will end up, but the whole board has not been brought along in the discussion of the funding or
the legality.
Gayle Wilson said he does not know what SWAG is going to recommend, and the
Board could delay this decision on roll carts until an ultimate decision is made. He said that is
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
23
an issue the Board of County Commissioners would need to deal with and decide. He said staff
is ready to implement and proceed or stand by and wait for further direction.
Commissioner Jacobs asked if the manager has any guidance.
Bonnie Hammersley said staff's assumption was that the group would come to some
sort of agreement, and the goal was not to slow down the process as there are residents who
are eager for this. She said if it is the will of the Board not to move forward, they will comply
with that.
Commissioner Jacobs said the members on the SWAG have more information and a
sense of where this may go. He said the rest of the Board is not privy to this, and the goal is to
get there with presenting the options for funding recycling. He said he is comfortable with doing
whatever the Board of County Commissioners wants to do.
Commissioner Rich said the group is heading in this direction anyway, and there are
close to 7000 residents that want this service now. She noted that recycling is already being
picked up in different bins. She is in favor of this proposal.
Commissioner Rich noted that the carts in Wilmington N.C. are pink.
Commissioner Pelissier agreed with Commissioner Rich. She said the cost of the carts
is separate from the funding of the entire recycling program. She said this has already been
done for the urban area, and now it needs to be done for the rural area. She is in support of
moving ahead with this.
Commissioner Dorosin asked Commissioner Jacobs and Commissioner Rich to give the
Board a 5 minute summary of the progress of the SWAG to reassure them of where things are
going and how their colleagues are communicating.
Commissioner Rich said the group is getting close to being on the same page as far as
funding recycling. She said the funding options were presented at their last meeting, and
everyone is leaning between one or two options. She said there was also a letter from the
General Assembly regarding the ability to charge for recycling, and it is not considered a fee.
John Roberts said the new language adopted by the General Assembly states that
Counties can use fees and revenue generated from existing facilities for other solid waste
programs. He believes that this means something, and the common sense reading is that as
long as the County uses the revenues generated by existing facilities for other solid waste
programs, it is abiding by this statutory language.
Commissioner Jacobs said, based on that opinion, there were a few things that are
different. He said one difference is that undeveloped properties will not be assessed as part of
an availability fee.
John Roberts said that is correct; fees cannot be assessed against undeveloped
properties. He said the new language expanded on existing language, which only applies to
developed properties. He said this is because undeveloped properties do not generate
municipal solid waste.
Commissioner Jacobs said there is a trade -off between different imperatives and
equities. He said some people on the SWAG felt that there should be no general fund
revenues in this; and then there were some Board members who felt general funds were the
most equitable way, so it was a trade off. He said four different funding possibilities were
presented, and then all of the staffs were sent off to discuss this and then come back with the
trade offs. For example, he said there was discussion about whether there was still a need for
drop off bins, and data was presented to show that these were still valuable.
He said he is comfortable, but he wants to make sure their colleagues are not being left
out.
Commissioner Rich said it is encouraging that UNC and UNC Healthcare are at the
table and seem interested in partnering with the governmental entities.
24
1 Commissioner Price said she is all for recycling, but she admits that she is
2 uncomfortable with this proposal. She said residents have not seen this, and she is not even
3 sure what service area is being discussed. She said only half of the residents that received the
4 survey responded, and there are still many people that are beyond the service area. She said
5 many people are still unsure how the service is going to be paid for.
6 Gayle Wilson said the service area is the same area that the County has had for years
7 and the respondents came from throughout that area. He believes demand will increase in the
8 service area once the carts are being used.
9 Gayle Wilson said he has not taken any questions about the funding and the question
10 was not raised in any of the surveys that he has seen.
11 Commissioner Price asked how the fee works.
12 Gayle Wilson said there are four options that SWAG will consider for funding. He said
13 everyone receiving the service will pay something, but the details are under discussion. He
14 said it is likely to look something like the previous tiered version.
15 Commissioner Price said there are two issues here: 1) Buying the roll carts and issuing
16 them to residents that want them; and 2) determining how to pay for these.
17 Gayle Wilson said that is correct, as well as determining how to pay for all of the other
18 services and programs. He said this service will not be paid for under any of the options being
19 discussed.
20 Chair McKee said he agrees with Commissioner Jacobs concerns about putting the cart
21 before the horse, because there are still unanswered questions about the long term plan. He
22 understands the service area, and he does not argue with the demand, but he is concerned
23 with the lack of a long term plan.
24 He questioned how and if the service area will be expanded countywide. He said there
25 is also discussion about spending money to put in recycling compactors at Eubanks Road. He
26 said if curbside is being expanded, he wonders why the money is being spent on the
27 compactors. He said it seems that two systems are being run.
28 Commissioner McKee said there is also the issue of how to pay for this, and the Board
29 has not made that decision. He said the plan is good, and the SWAG is working hard to
30 address issues, but he is not ready to move forward with this until there is more feedback on
31 the SWAG's recommendations.
32 Commissioner Jacobs said the advisory group was presented with these plans as
33 addressing every rural resident over a period of years. He said people should not pay for
34 something they are not getting.
35 Commissioner Jacobs said Gayle Wilson should address the issue about dual systems.
36 Commissioner Rich said, in reference to the dual systems, the manager is collecting
37 data from the Solid Waste Convenience Centers regarding who is dropping off what materials.
38 Commissioner Rich said one question that has been answered is that there is not a
39 correlating decrease anywhere else when there is an increase in the recycling in the bins. She
40 said the systems — the carts and the convenience centers - are running in conjunction with each
41 other.
42 Gayle Wilson said he has never used the term dual system. He said the reason or the
43 County's continuing success is the complimentary and overlapping services. He said people
44 use the convenience centers for different reasons, and the centers are for much more than just
45 taking bottles and cans and garbage.
46 Gayle Wilson said there has never been a long term plan, and the system has been built
47 year to year and decade to decade. He believes that the result of the SWAG will be the
48 creation of a comprehensive plan for solid waste. He said two of the four funding options
49 currently under consideration assume a three year phase in of roadside service countywide. He
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
25
said the Board of Commissioners will ultimately decide what happens in the unincorporated
area. He said staff would like to prepare a roadmap and follow it as closely as possible.
Gayle Wilson said staff can delay the roll carts and send out communication to
residents. He said it is uncomfortable not having a funding plan, but the County has not had
one for two years, and he feels we are on the cusp of having one from SWAG.
Commissioner Burroughs said she feels comfortable going forward. She said recycling
is something that the County values, and she does not see it ending.
Commissioner Pelissier said the only risk in this is the money being spent on the carts.
She said this is the will of all of the parties, and she does not see that there is really any risk.
Commissioner Jacobs said the charge to SWAG directs the group to come up with a
long range vision, and the part that has been done so far is the easy part. He said the future
discussions of transfer stations and incorporation of the hospitals and university will be the
harder things to come. He said there will be other people brought in for these decisions, but the
goal right now is to get this part done.
Commissioner Jacobs said residents should be assured that even if they do not want a
cart, they can still use their orange bins. He said this has been a continual question, and the
system will be adapted to accommodate those concerns.
Chair McKee said he applauds the increase the carts have caused in the towns, and he
believes there will be an increase in the rural areas as well; however, he would be more
comfortable if the SWAG would come forward first with their recommendations for funding
recycling before these carts are purchased. He said recycling is already being collected and he
does not see the carts as a decision that must be made right now.
Commissioner Rich emphasized that the bins can only be used in the rural areas and
not in the urban areas. She said the trucks in the towns cannot pick up the bins.
A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
authorize the purchase of 7,600 95- gallon roll carts from Rerhig Pacific at a total cost of
$444,144, to be borrowed from the solid waste enterprise fund reserve over five year period at
a 2.5% interest rate.
VOTE: Ayes, 6 — Nays, 1 (Chair McKee)
8. Reports
NONE
9. County Manager's Report
Bonnie Hammersley referred to Clarence Grier's earlier mention of the overage in
general funds. She said options for the use of these funds will be brought to the Board of
County Commissioners for a decision in January.
10. County Attorney's Report
NONE
11. Appointments
a. Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee —Appointments
The Board considered making appointments to the Adult Care Home Community
Advisory Committee.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
26
A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
appoint:
• Mrs. Suzanne Haff to a one year training term (Position #6) At -Large for ending
12/09/2015.
• Ms. Yvonne Mendenhall to a one year training term (Position #7) At -Large for ending
12/09/2015.
• Ms. Deborah Stewart to a one year training term (Position #12) At -Large for ending
12/09/2015.
POSITION
NAME
SPECIAL
EXPIRATION
NO.
REPRESENTATIVE
DATE
6
Mrs. Suzanne Haff
One Year Training Term At-
12/09/2015
Large
7
Ms. Yvonne Mendenhall
One Year Training Term At-
12/09/2015
Large
12
Ms. Deborah Stewart
One Year Training Term At-
12/09/2015
Large
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
b. Chapel Hill Orange County Visitors Bureau — Appointments
The Board considered making appointments to the Chapel Hill Orange County Visitors
Bureau.
A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to
appoint:
• Ms. Rosemary Waldorf to a first full term (Position #2) Chapel Hill - Carrboro Chamber of
Commerce for ending 12/31/2017.
• Ms. Jill McCullough to a first full term (Position #3) Orange County Hillsborough
Chamber of Commerce for ending 12/31/2017.
POSITION
NAME
SPECIAL
EXPIRATION
NO.
REPRESENTATIVE
DATE
2
Ms. Rosemary Waldorf
Chapel Hill - Carrboro
12/31/2017
Chamber of Commerce
3
Ms. Jill McCullough
Orange County /Hillsborough
12/31/2017
Chamber of Commerce
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Commissioner Rich mentioned the Chapel Hill spots that are expiring.
Commissioner McKee noted that he will follow up on the petition to have the Chair
speak with the mayors about filling these positions.
Commissioner Dorosin asked Chair McKee to also emphasize the need for diversity on
these boards.
c. Nursing Home Community Advisory Committee —Appointment
The Board considered making an appointment to the Nursing Home Community
Advisory Committee.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
27
A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to
appoint:
• Mrs. Jerry Ann Gregory to a one year training term (Position #8) At -Large for ending
12/31/2015.
POSITION
NAME
SPECIAL
EXPIRATION
NO.
REPRESENTATIVE
DATE
8
Mrs. Jerry Ann Gregory
At -Large one year training
12/31/2015
term
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
12.
Board Comments
Chair McKee asked for two volunteers for the Legislative Issues Work Group (LIWG).
He said all but three members of the Board have served in the last three years and those three
are Commissioner Pelissier, Commissioner Rich, and Commissioner Burroughs.
A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to nominate
Commissioner Price and Commissioner Pelissier to serve on the LIWG.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Commissioner Rich encouraged everyone to sign up for the Orange County Alert
System.
Commissioner Rich said she and Commissioner Jacobs served as judges in a class at
UNC for student ideas for new and innovative businesses. She said it was encouraging to see
that spark in these kids, and it was an eye opener to the need to retain them here.
Commissioner Pelissier said NCDOT has issued a new process to prioritize projects,
and there was some concern about the light rail project. She said the light rail project was
included in the list, and this means there will likely be some state monies received. .
Commissioner Price said she attended the NC Association of County Commissioners
Board of Directors meeting. She said there is a surplus in revenues, and the extra monies will
be given back to the counties.
Commissioner Jacobs said Wake County advertised on the radio that they would be
having a meeting regarding public transportation, and 600 people attended.
Commissioner Jacobs said there was a third agricultural summit meeting, and this has
morphed to a local food system as a whole with agri- tourism as a component.
Commissioner Jacobs said he and Chair McKee attended the Extension in Community
(ECA) Breakfast. He said this organization is 100 years old, and it was very interesting. He
suggested that their president might come to make a presentation to the Board in the future.
Commissioner Jacobs thanked the clerk and staff for the reception for the outgoing and
incoming elected officials.
Commissioner Jacobs expressed his condolences regarding the recent death of Peter
Kramer.
Chair McKee said he would like to expand on the Commissioner Jacobs mention of the
ECA. He said these used to be known as home demonstration clubs, and he gave some of the
history of this organization. He said this is an important behind the scenes group who does a
lot of good work in the community.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
Chair McKee said he and Commissioner Price were at the agricultural extension
breakfast this morning, and there was a focus on 4 -H and some of the other programs.
Commissioner Price said there was a real sense of community at that meeting.
13. Information Items
• December 1, 2014 BOCC Meeting Follow -up Actions List
• Memo Regarding Unified Development Ordinance Private Road and Access Standards
Report
• Memo Regarding Efland to Mebane, Buckhorn- Mebane EDD, Phase 2 Extension &West
Ten Road Pump Station & Outfall (AKA CIP #44)
• BOCC Chair Letter Regarding Petitions from December 1, 2014 Regular Board Meeting
14. Closed Session
NONE
15. Adjournment
A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Price to
adjourn the meeting at 10:OOpm.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board
Earl McKee, Chair