HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 12-09-2014 APPROVED 1/22/2015
MINUTES
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
December 9, 2014
7:00 p.m.
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday,
December 9, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center, in Chapel Hill, N.C.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair McKee and Commissioners Mia Burroughs,
Mark Dorosin, Barry Jacobs, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich
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)
Chair McKee called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
1. Additions or Chanqes to the Aqenda
PUBLIC CHARGE
The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge.
2. Public Comments
a. Matters not on the Printed Aqenda
Terry Rekeweg read from the following written comments:
I have spoken in the past about how an Alternative rail route may outperform the current
Durham-Orange light rail project. I attended the TTA public meeting last month and talked to
many people who agreed that there should be another alternative.
The Alternative plan would change the location of 5 middle stations. The beginning point
would still be at Duke University and downtown Durham.
The Alternative provides for a faster ride from Chapel Hill to downtown Durham (a savings of
2-5 minutes).
Other benefits are:
- Savings of$400 million
- It serves a greater percentage of low-income and minority households
- It provides 4.5 square miles more area within walking distance to rail stations, which
promotes
more affordable housing and Transit Oriented Development
- It is much safer by eliminating the need to build 27 new railroad grade crossings
- Planning maps suggests that it would have higher ridership and relieve more traffic
congestion
- It has fewer environmental impacts.
Imaqine this future scenario: If you were to board the Alternative light rail at the UNC station,
ride to the west side of RTP, then change to the proposed commuter train to continue your trip
to, let's say, downtown Cary, it would take 36 minutes and 21 miles, a very attractive
transportation options. In contrast, the current rail plan would add almost 13 miles and 25
minutes more to this trip, which means that most people would choose instead to drive or take
a bus from Chapel Hill to RTP and Cary. Would anyone here be willing to travel 13 miles out of
the way, everyday, on your commute to work?
The current rail plan could be considered a 2-D system. It goes from Chapel Hill to Durham.
The Alternative rail plan is 3-D, just like the Triangle region. IT goes to Chapel Hill, to Durham,
and to the west side of RTP.
Imagine future Chatham Park transit riders making a bus to rail transfer in Chapel Hill and
heading towards Raleigh, a good direct transfer corridor. These riders may decide to do
business while in Chapel Hill. Without this direct Alternative rail route, Chatham Park
commuters may decide to drive instead on Hwy. 64 towards Raleigh. Chapel Hill may lose out
on potential tax revenue.
Please comment to Triangle Transit that this Alternative plan needs to be included during the
NEPA process.
The Federal Transit Administration says" "If during the NEPA process, new reasonable
alternatives not considered during the planning Alternatives Analysis are identified or new
information about eliminated alternatives comes to light, those alternatives must be evaluated
during the NEPA process."
Scott Washington said he is a Hillsborough historian who is enthusiastic about all of the
history in Orange County. He said the epicenter of this seems to be in Hillsborough, including
a constitutional convention held there in 1788. He reviewed some of the history surrounding
the significance of this as it related to the passage of the Bill of Rights. He reviewed the
following email comments and information:
On the Bill of Rights Day and for the last two years in Hillsborough, we've held a special
simultaneous Community Bell Ringing event to mark that date in 1791 when the Bill of Rights
went into force (the first ten amendments to the U. S. Constitution) protecting the essential
liberties and legal fairness of all Americans.
Last year we rang bells across the Historic Hillsborough district for 222 seconds, one second in
honor of each year the Bill of Rights has been in force since December 15, 1791 when it went
into effect. This year, 2014, we plan on ringing bells simultaneously for 223 seconds starting at
1:OOPM.
This year will mark our third year with annual tradition and like other years, we expect five of
the area's historic churches of different denominations (St. Matthews Episcopal, Hillsborough
United Methodist, Hillsborough Presbyterian, First Baptist, and Dickerson Chapel) to ring their
church bells along with citizen and civic bells from the merchant district of historic Hillsborough
down King Street past the old Courthouse and to the Regulator Site. Instead of speeches, we
ring bells of all sizes in honor of the many years that the Bill of Rights has been in force and do
so all at the same time for 223 seconds at 1:OOPM.
Scott Washington encouraged everyone to come out to Hillsborough to be part of this
event.
Joey Honeycutt read from the following prepared statement:
Good evening. My name is Joey Honeycutt, and I'm the Crisis Response Coordinator for the
Orange County Rape Crisis Center. As part of my role, I coordinate the Orange County Sexual
Assault Response Team (or SART).
In mid-2013, the SART began to focus its attention on gaps in service impacting children and
adolescents who have experienced sexual violence. Our current system of care for children
who are victims of sexual violence is very fractured. Children are seen in a "floating" clinic at
UNC Hospital that may be in the Emergency Department one day and the Pediatric clinic the
next. These already-traumatized and frightened children are often surrounded by chaos—
beeping machines, screaming children who are getting shots, medical staff rushing around.
There are often no confidential spaces for the children or their families to talk to law
enforcement officers or to social workers, and in many cases children are further traumatized
by being asked to repeat their story multiple times to different professionals. Making matters
worse, there are often multiple follow up appointments scheduled at different locations around
the community. In short, our system of care, for all that it is well-intentioned and staffed by
wonderful people, is simply not meeting the needs of traumatized children and their families.
In recognizing these barriers within our current system, the SART began to discuss the need
for a Child Advocacy Center in Orange County. Child Advocacy Centers (or CACs) are
designed to be a "one stop shop" for children and families who have experienced a traumatic
event. These facilities are child-friendly spaces where a child can be seen by a doctor,
interviewed by a trained forensic interviewer, be connected with an advocate, and receive
therapy services. CACs are able to facilitate better collaboration among community
professionals through the Multi-disciplinary Team (MDT), a team of professionals who focus
exclusively on cases involving children to ensure that all bases are being covered in providing
service and access to the child and their family. Orange and Chatham Counties are two of
only 22 counties in North Carolina that do not currently have a Child Advocacy Center.
In spring of this year, Sarah Furman and I hosted a meeting to which we invited community
partners across Orange and Chatham counties to discuss our need for a CAC to serve both
communities. From that meeting, we agreed to divide into two task forces: one task force
would be responsible for figuring out the logistics of bringing a CAC to Orange and Chatham
counties—funding, location, service model, etc. The other task force would begin the process
of creating a protocol for a MDT to begin reviewing current child sexual abuse cases in Orange
County. The MDT has been a particular priority for two reasons: 1) because having a
functional MDT is a requirement for CAC accreditation; and 2) because a MDT will allow us to
optimize collaboration and service within our current system while we also work toward
creating a better system overall.
Carmen Coley read from the following prepared statement:
My name is Carmen Coley, and I am Coordinator of Child Victim Services for Chatham County.
I provide advocacy and support for sexually abused children and their families in Chatham
County and chair Chatham County's Multidisciplinary Child Sexual Abuse Team. Our
Multidisciplinary Team was formed in 2001 to review all open child sexual abuse cases in the
county to ensure that investigations are well-coordinated, thorough, and appropriate and that
children and families receive the medical and mental health care, advocacy, and support that
they need. Team members include our Managing Assistant District Attorney, the Department
of Social Services Investigations Supervisor, juvenile and family violence officers from our
three law enforcement agencies, and representatives from UNC Hospitals, the Guardian ad
Litem Program, the department of Juvenile Justice, and Family Violence and Rape Crisis
Services. We review every open child sexual abuse case every month, from the time of the
initial report until the case is resolved. Case reviews allow us to make sure that, from the very
beginning, information is shared freely among individuals and agencies involved in
investigating child sexual abuse cases and providing services for abused children and their
families. Chatham County has a record of every child sexual abuse case reported since 2001,
including investigation and prosecution outcomes.
In 2000, Chatham County Board of Commissioners created my position, Child Victim Services
Coordinator, out of concern that child sexual abuse investigations were being poorly
coordinated between the Department of Social Services and our county's three law
enforcement agencies. Social workers and law enforcement officers were conducting
separate investigations, resulting in children being interviewed about their victimization multiple
times by multiple individuals from multiple agencies. Already-victimized children were being
further traumatized by the repeated interviews; telling a complete stranger in great and
agonizing detail how someone who was supposed to protect you instead sexually assaulted
you is not an easy thing for anyone, let alone a child. Having to do that three or four times with
three or four different people, is torturous. Additionally, multiple interviews invariably result in
slight discrepancies with each retelling of the abusive event, making the difficult job of the
prosecutor even more difficult, as defense attorneys are apt to ignore the overwhelming
consistency of multiple accounts to jump on inconsequential variations of minute details.
Streamlining the process through multidisciplinary coordination successfully addresses these
issues, leading to better outcomes for children and greater success in prosecuting sex
offenders.
I ask the Orange County Board of Commissioners to consider creating a similar county-funded
position in Orange County to improve multidisciplinary coordination among those professionals
entrusted with investigating sex crimes against children and providing services for these very
vulnerable children.
Thank you.
Sarah Furman read from the following prepared statement:
Hello. My name is Sarah Furman. I am a Crisis Counselor with the Chapel Hill Police
Department and member of the newly established Orange County Multidisciplinary Team.
From here on, Multidisciplinary Team will be referred as MDT. I am here to speak on the behalf
of the Orange County team about the critical need for a MDT Coordinator position in Orange
County.
You heard from Carmen on some of the benefits of having a well-established MDT, including
reduction in trauma and re-victimization, better outcomes for children, and improved
prosecutions. Let us consider a few others that our team has identified since our first meeting
in May 2014. These include:
• Reduction in duplication of services and fragmentation in the service delivery process;
• Efficient, timely, and precise investigations;
• Support and enhancement of each individual agency's efforts;
• Identifying systemic gaps and limitations;
• Optimizing the health and well-being of victims, families, and providers.
What a real deficit it has been for our community to not have such a service since the
children's advocacy movement began in the 80s.
The mission of The Orange County MDT is to facilitate a well-coordinated, systematic
response to child maltreatment that optimizes child health and well-being through enhanced
inter-agency communication, child focused case planning, and efficient and precise
investigation and prosecution.
Our team is comprised of a representative from Division of Juvenile Justice; Office of the
Guardian ad Litem; Orange/Chatham Counties District Attorney's Office; Orange County
Department of Social Services; Orange County Public and Charter Schools; UNC Healthcare;
Orange County Sheriff's Department; Local Municipal Police Departments; Orange County
Rape Crisis Center; and the Compass Center for Women and Families. All of us share in a
passion for and commitment to the safety and health of all children while promoting strong and
healthy families. It is for this reason that, in addition to our full-time jobs, we are also committed
to meeting monthly for two hours to develop the MDT and review cases.
In the past 7 months, we have come to realize that there are significant gaps in the quality of
services our team is able to provide. This is due, primarily, to the priorities of our full-time jobs.
Having a sole focus on the duties of the coordinator position and no direct attachment to
involved agencies, an MDT Coordinator would fill these gaps. It is for this reason that we ask
the Orange County Board of Commissioners to consider creating a county-funded MDT
position in Orange County and for your support and guidance in moving forward. Thank you.
Diana McDuffie is a member of the Friends of the public library of Carrboro, McDougle
and Cybrary. She expressed appreciation for the diligent work of the Board on the Southern
Branch Library. She reviewed the timeline of this work, up to the identification of the final site,
Brewer Lane. She said the overall response from the public input process to the Board of
County Commissioners was yes to a community library and yes to the Brewer Lane site. She
thanked the Board for this input process, and she said the community supports their efforts
and looks forward to seeing the end of this story in 2015. She noted that several members of
the friends group were in attendance.
Janel Sexton said her statement is regarding an issue with impervious surface in
Orange County. Her family purchased a 10 acre property in Orange County and thought they
understood the impervious surface regulations. She reviewed her situation, as outlined in the
following letters and emails:
Janel Sexton (letter)
Janel & Bryan Sexton
224 Whirlaway Lane
Chapel Hill, NC 27516
(919) 942-2229
October 26, 2014
Dear County Commissioners:
My family moved from out of state to Chapel Hill in 2010. We were very excited to find a house
on a 10 acre lot that we could afford. With four small children we thought it would be the
perfect backdrop for an active and happy childhood. Before the house closing, we were
informed that our lot had 493 square feet of impervious surface left to use. Although this was a
new concept to us, we thought we understood what we were agreeing to and didn't anticipate
a problem, as we had no plans to add any major structures to our property. As we settled in,
and experienced North Carolina variations in weather and precipitation, we realized that the
backyard was mostly dirt and weeds, and when it rained, it was a muddy eyesore. Even after
we added a small swing set, the mud and clay was tracked all over our house, making a
terrible mess.
We realized we needed to landscape a portion of the yard, and went to a great deal of time
and expense to do so in an affordable and environmentally friendly way. We researched
options, and at this point we learned how incredibly restrictive our area is when it comes to
impervious surface definitions. We chose pervious pavers for our backyard patio, along with
grass, shrubs, and other plants. We were disappointed to learn that Orange County considers
pervious pavers to be impervious, but were also told that they were re-considering their
position on this matter.
As the landscaping project was completed, we decided (partially influenced by the begging of
4 persistent children) we wanted to add a pool to our backyard before getting a fence installed.
In order to get a pool, however, we need 3 feet of border all around the pool to secure it. This
would add another (approximately) 385 square feet of impervious. It would be well within our
allotment, if only our pervious pavers were not counted against us. We began the process of
investigating and trying to get approval for this next phase.
On March 1, 2013, I emailed the Orange County Board of County Commissioners, describing
the situation. I received several sympathetic responses, including notes from Frank Clifton and
Barry Jacobs. I was told the County Commissioners were considering the issue. Mr. Clifton
forwarded my email to Craig Benedict, and I received this thoughtful response from Mr.
Benedict:
"I have done some research on your property and subdivision and although I
presently do not have the solution, I wanted to let you know that my office is
working on it. These impervious rules were a mandate from the state, so our
interpretations cannot stray too far from their standards. It does make sense what
your request is and I will endeavor to make it work. Thank you for your patience."
I did not hear back after this, and our project was put on hold. I was later told the state and the
country was considering modifications to the current rules. I waited patiently.
This fall I felt a renewed sense of urgency as summertime swimming led to the resurrection of
my children's begging for a pool. I began again, trying to find a way to make this project
happen.
At the state, I spoke with Mike Randall in the storm water permitting unit on October 10, 2014. I
was told that based on state provisions, we would get credit from the state for the pervious
pavers. I was told that given the fact that we have disconnected structures (e.g., there are no
pipes draining the water off our lot), and that our pavers have a low impact on water quality,
according to state regulations, we would be permitted to have both the pavers and the pool.
On October 29, 2014 I spoke at length with Bradley Bennett and was again encouraged to files
for a variance. Both Mr. Randall and Mr. Bennett said they would be happy to speak with
someone about these issues.
More recently, in September and October of this year I've exchanged emails, and spoken with
Michael Harvey, Supervisor of Planning and Inspections at Orange County.
On October 20, 2014 my husband and I met face to face with Michael Harvey in the Planning
and Inspections Department at Orange County, and he shared that although the impervious
surface restrictions of this watershed area have been re-visited in recent years, updates have
not been made. Furthermore, he provided us with a memorandum dated September 4, 2014
that was submitted by him and Craig Benedict to the Board of County Commissioners
regarding state guidelines on what constitutes an impervious surface. In the report it states the
State Environmental Management Commission (EMC) consider as permeable "Permeable
pavement materials include porous concrete, permeable interlocking concrete pavers, concrete
grid pavers, porous asphalt and any other materials with similar characteristics."(p.2 of report.)
With the help of Wesley Pool in the Orange County Erosion Control division I looked at the
GIS of my land. Based on the topography of my land, the storm water collects in the middle of
my land, where there is a natural dip in elevation. During times of high precipitation, a small
stream forms across the length of my backyard.
We have 10 acres of land, with nothing covering the ground aside from our house, a short
driveway, and the pervious pavers. It is hard to understand why we can't also have a pool on
our land. I have tried explaining this predicament to family and friends (and my children) as
they look out upon all my acres of open land, and they are stunned. We have paid over
$13,000 in property taxes each year and will pay over $14,000 in property taxes for 2015, yet
we can't use our land for the enjoyment of our family. This seems unjust.
We respectfully ask that you consider our request for a variance, and allow us enough
impervious to install a pool. This would require approximately 350 square feet for the coping
around the pool. If our pervious pavers we not counted against us, we would have plenty to do
this.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Janel D. Sexton
Emails sent and received from 2013:
Dr. Sexton:
This is an issue under review by the County Commission at this time.
Your input is important and concerns understood. I have forwarded your inquiry to Craig
Benedict our Director of Planning and Inspections. He may follow up with more specific
requests for information.
Best wishes.
Frank W. Clifton, Jr.
Orange County Manager
200 South Cameron Street, P.O. Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Office 919 245 2306 Fax 919 644 3004
fclifton oranqecountync.qov
www.orangecountync.gov
"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything."
Samuel L. Clemens
-----Original Message-----
From: janelsexton(a�qmail.com [mailto:ianelsexton(a�qmail.com]
Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 11:12 AM
To: ALL_BOCC_MANAGER_CLERK; janelsexton(c�qmaiLcom
Subject: Impervious surface
From: Janel Sexton
Phone Number: 919-942-2229
Message:
Dear County Commissioners:
I am writing to express my extreme frustration with Orange County's
policy regarding the restrictions placed on impervious surfaces. I live on a 10 acre lot and have
nothing in my backyard--and am so severely restricted that I am left with hardly any
"impervious allowance" to even put in a patio. As a result my family, including my 4 children,
has little opportunity to enjoy our backyard, as it is mostly mud and weeds. We would like for
you to approve the use of pervious pavers so we have more options in which to develop our
backyard space.
Thank you,
Dr. Sexton
Dear Mr. Benedict,
Thank you for your responsiveness. We have begun the process of ineeting with a landscaper,
and are trying to come up with a plan that will work.
We appreciate any help you can offer. We are on lot#7, at the end of Whirlaway Ln. The back
of our lot borders Dairyland Rd.
We would hope to have the option of putting in a pool someday, and are open to wood
decking, but we'd sure like to have a patio with space for a table and chairs, and also for our
children to ride around on a hard surface.
Thank you,
Janel
On 3/1/13 2:05 PM, "Craig Benedict" <cbenedict(a�oranqecountync.qov> wrote:
I have done some research on your property and subdivision and although I presently do not
have the solution, I wanted to let you know that my office is working on it. These impervious
rules were a mandate from the state, so our interpretations cannot stray too far from their
standards. It does make sense what your request is and I will endeavor to make it work.
Thank you for your patience.
Craig N. Benedict, AICP
Janel Sexton added that she has submitted a letter and a report stating that the state
accepts the pervious pavers. She referenced property photographs and a hydrology report
from the Orange County GIS website. She asked that the pavers be accepted as pervious, or
for a variance to be granted to allow for continued development of the property with a pool.
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 porosin 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 Aqenda
(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.
3. Identifies the respective roles of Department of Social Services and Housing, Human Rights
and Community Development and how they are coordinated and/or complimentary. (This
question was raised by members at a recent meeting).
A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Price to bring
back the use of a three month rolling calendar starting in January, to include all relevant
meeting dates, and to be updated monthly to the Board of Commissioners.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
a. Presentation of Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for FYE 6/30/2014
The Board received the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the fiscal
year, which ended June 30, 2014.
Clarence Grier presented the fiscal year audit. He said the budget is the plan, and
these are the financial results of the plan. He said the audit is required by state statute and
the auditors are Martin Starnes and Associates. He said the audit meets the stringent
standards of the Government Finance Officers Associations (GFOA) and this was the 29th year
the County received the GFOA certification for financial reporting.
Clarence Grier recognized his financial staff, and introduced Crystal Roberts from
Martin Starnes and Associates.
Crystal Roberts presented the following PowerPoint slides:
Orange County
2014 Audited Financial Statements
Audit Highlights
❑ Unmodified opinion
No Significant Deficiencies noted
No Material Weaknesses Identified
Budget vs. Actual (graph/table)
General Fund (graph/table)
Tax Collection Percentages (graph/table)
Fund Balance History (General Fund) (graph/table)
Fund Balance
Available fund balance as defined by the Local Government Commission (LGC) is
calculated as follows:
Total Fund Balance
Less: Non spendable (not in cash form, not available)
Less: Stabilization by State Statute (by state law, not available)
Available Fund Balance
This is the calculation utilized as the basis for comparing you to other units and
calculating your fund balance percentages.
Fund Balance Position-General Fund
Total Fund Balance $62,114,947 Non spendable - 29,242
Stabilization by State Statute - 12,102,492
Available Fund Balance $49,983,213
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 porosin 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 porosin 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 porosin 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 inembers, and Chair McKee presented a plaque to
the department.
b. Resolutions Recoqnizinq North Carolina Literary Hall of Fame Inductees from
Oranqe County
The Board considered five resolutions recognizing Jaki Shelton Green, Allan Gurganus,
Louis D. Rubin, Jr., Lee Smith, and Elizabeth Spencer for their induction into the North
Carolina Literary Hall of Fame and authorizing the Chair to sign.
Jaki Shelton Green was the only member in attendance.
Commissioner Rich read the following resolution:
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING JAKI SHELTON GREEN,
A NORTH CAROLINA LITERARY HALL OF FAME
INDUCTEE FROM ORANGE COUNTY
WHEREAS, the North Carolina Literary Hall of Fame celebrates and promotes the rich literary
heritage of North Carolina by commemorating its leading authors and
encouraging the continued flourishing of great literature; and
WHEREAS, the North Carolina Literary Hall of Fame was established under the leadership of
Sam Ragan, Poet Laureate and Southern Pines newspaper editor; and
WHEREAS, the North Carolina Literary Hall of Fame was authorized by a Joint Resolution of
the North Carolina General Assembly in July 1993, and formally established in
May 1996 by a grant from the North Carolina Department of Cultural
Resources to the North Carolina Writers' Network; and
WHEREAS, the North Carolina Literary Hall of Fame has recognized Jaki Shelton Green, who
has significant ties to Orange County; and
WHEREAS, Orange County takes pride in its historic role as a center of art and learning, and
is proud to celebrate County residents as exemplars of the literary community
whose words enrich our lives;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Orange County Board of Commissioners does
hereby recognize and congratulate Jaki Shelton Green as an inductee into the
North Carolina Literary Hall of Fame, and expresses its appreciation of her
and her literary works as cultural assets representing Orange County.
This, the 9th day of December 2014.
Jaki Shelton Green thanked the Board for all of their support and said it has been a
wonderful journey.
A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to
approve and authorize the Chair to sign the attached resolutions recognizing Jaki Shelton
Green, Allan Gurganus, Louis D. Rubin, Jr., Lee Smith, and Elizabeth Spencer for their
induction into the North Carolina Literary Hall of Fame.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
5. Public Hearinqs - NONE
6. Consent Aqenda
• Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
Commissioner Jacobs removed Item 6-c for discussion.
• Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
approve the remaining items on the Consent Agenda.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
a. Minutes
The Board approved the minutes from October 21, 2014 as submitted by the Clerk to the
Board.
b. Authorization to Declare Equipment Surplus
The Board declared six pieces of heavy equipment surplus.
d. Fiscal Year 2014-15 Budqet Amendment#4
The Board approved budget and grant project ordinance amendments for fiscal year 2014-15
for the Health Department, Planning and Inspections, Department on Aging, Department of
Social Services, and Library Services.
e. Application for North Carolina Education Lottery Proceeds for Chapel Hill — Carrboro
City Schools (CHCCS) and Continqent Approval of Budqet Amendment# 4-A Related
to CHCCS Capital Proiect Ordinances
The Board approved an application to the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction
(NCDPI) to release proceeds from the NC Education Lottery account related to FY 2014-15
debt service payments for Chapel Hill — Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS), and to approve
Budget Amendment#4-A (amended School Capital Project Ordinances), contingent on the
North Carolina Department of Public Instruction's (NCDPI) approval of the application.
f. Approval of Expanded White Cross Fire Insurance District
The Board approved the White Cross Fire Insurance District Map that has been expanded to
include properties within six road miles of White Cross Fire Department Station 2.
g. Proclamation — Bill of Riqhts Day
The Board adopted a proclamation to officially recognize Bill of Rights Day in Orange County
during the month of December and authorized the Chair to sign.
h. Hillsborouqh Commons Lease Amendment for Expansion of Northern Oranqe
Employment and Traininq Center
The Board approved a proposal to amend the Hillsborough Commons Lease to include the
recently vacated space adjacent to the Department of Social Services ("DSS") in Hillsborough
for the purpose of expanding employment and training efforts in northern Orange County;
authorize the Manager to execute the Lease Amendment upon County Attorney approval
during the Winter break; and authorize the DSS Director to budget unanticipated revenue
received in this fiscal year for any costs related to the lease and occupancy of the space.
i. Approval of Budqet Amendment#4-B Related to Position Chanqes and Receipt of
Additional Medicaid Revenue within the Health Department
The Board approved Budget Amendment#4-B related to position changes and receipt of
additional Medicaid revenue within the Health Department, specifically to: approve changing a
currently budgeted 1.0 FTE Public Health Nurse I position to two .50 FTE Public Health Nurse I
positions; increase a currently budgeted .50 FTE Public Health Nurse II Preparedness
Coordinator position to a .60 FTE position; approve changing a currently budgeted temporary
grant funded Medical Office Assistant position to a permanent .50 FTE position; and approve
the receipt of$5,468 in additional Medicaid revenue.
• Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
c. Contract Renewal for Enqineerinq Services
The Board considered approving a contract amendment to the existing agreement for
general engineering and environmental services for the Solid Waste Management Department
with Draper Aden Associates, Inc. for engineering and consulting services for two (2) additional
years through December 31, 2016 and authorizing the Chair to sign.
Chair Jacob said he has previously asked about the length of this contract, the location
of the vendor, and whether the vendor pays a living wage.
A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Price to
request that anytime the County is extending an existing contract, staff will supply information
regarding how many years that contract has been in existence, whether the vendor has an
office or is located in Orange County, and whether or not the vendor pays a living wage.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
approve a contract amendment to the existing agreement for general engineering and
environmental services for the Solid Waste Management Department with Draper Aden
Associates, Inc. for engineering and consulting services for two (2) additional years through
December 31, 2016 and authorize the Chair to sign.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
7. Reqular Aqenda
a. Social Services Child Care Proposal for 2014-2015
The Board considered a proposal for serving children needing child care subsidy in
Orange County with a plan that will only address the current fiscal year but will provide a
framework for additional discussions during the next budget planning cycle.
Nancy Coston said the Board had asked her to go back and work on a new proposal.
She said her staff has reviewed all information and funding, and the proposal being brought
forward is to make no changes in the people being served through June 30th, and to implement
the fee change.
She reviewed the following information from the abstract:
At a Board budget work session on November 11, 2014, the Department of
Social Services (DSS) shared the impacts of recent budget cuts and eligibility changes on
families in Orange County. The Board requested additional information and recommendations
from DSS staff and the Board of Social Services on options for serving these children. The
DSS staff and board have developed a proposal for the remainder of this fiscal year. The
eligibility changes, recommendations and financial impacts for this year can be found in the
attached chart.
For several years, the state has not rebased subsidy allocations using the available census
data. This year begins a six-year cycle to implement this rebasing and Orange County`s base
allocation has decreased by approximately $700,000. The second phase of the
implementation will occur in July 2016. After the original allocation, Orange County received a
reallocation of$290,000 and has been informed of the possibility of one more reallocation this
year. The Orange County Partnership for Young Children has also applied for additional Smart
Start subsidy funds and if received, these would be added to the DSS contract. In addition,
DSS has received some funds through IV-E of the Social Security Act to serve low income
children who enter foster care. All of these funds have been included in this proposal. After
reviewing details about the families receiving child care, DSS projects that the State funds,
Smart Start funds and
$595,000 in County funds already in the agency budget should be sufficient to serve the
existing caseload.
After receiving the comments from the Board of County Commissioners and from the DSS
Board, DSS had studied the financial impact of the items discussed at the work session for
addressing the immediate needs. DSS proposes serving children over age 5 with families
below to the 200% Federal Poverty Level (FPL), not imposing the new income eligibility and
fee requirements on relatives who are working with DSS to assure child safety and begin
serving all children currently on the wait list effective January 1, 2015. Any requests for child
care after January 1 st would be subject to a new waiting list until the financial impacts of these
changes can be calculated. If funds become available, working families will be served from the
wait list based on the date added to the list. Families being served with County funds will be
informed
that these services will continue through June 30, 2015, and will then be dependent on
decisions during the 2015-2016 budget deliberations. If this entire plan cannot be
implemented, it is recommended that the relative care and service to current recipients up to
200% FPL be prioritized for consideration.
As part of the budget process, DSS will submit a plan for ongoing child care services with
annualized costs for all proposals and with recommended priorities. The DSS Board is also
planning to meet with the local legislative delegation to seek changes in some of the most
harmful changes.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Based on the attached financial statement and caseload projections, the
costs for continuing mandated services can be covered with the County funds already
budgeted for DSS. The estimated additional County costs to fund the proposal from DSS for
2014-2015 is $566,000. With the appropriation of the $350,000 from the Social Justice as
noted below, the balance available in the Social Justice Fund will be $100,000.
Nancy Coston said that clearing the waiting list does not mean that all of those children
will be served, because many have moved, or their situations have changed. She said this is
why financial predictions can be difficult. She reviewed a chart showing the financial impact.
She said she is requesting flexibility to move money around as needed.
Commissioner Price asked what happens to the waiting list for next fiscal year.
Nancy Coston said a new waiting list will be started the day the current waiting list is
cleared. She said it is impossible to predict the numbers. She said when the waiting list is
cleared, people become very interested in childcare.
Commissioner Rich asked how people find out they are no longer on the list.
Nancy Coston said staff will call and send letters. She said there are often group
interviews to complete the eligibility paperwork, and as soon as this is done, vouchers are
given out, and recipients take these to a preferred child care center.
Commissioner Rich asked if there have been people that fall through the cracks.
Nancy Coston said the best way to avoid this is to keep the waiting list from getting old.
She said it can be more challenging to find people once the waiting list is six months old or
more.
Commissioner porosin commended Nancy Coston for preparing this proposal. He
asked if it is fair to say that the $400,000 on the chart is the amount that it would take to get
321 children off the waiting list. He said if only half of these were actually served, it would
open up those spots for the next people that walk in.
Nancy Coston said yes, that would be correct for the rest of this year.
Commissioner porosin said this proposal is not just maintain the status quo, but it is
expanding the residents being served in Orange County.
Nancy Coston said this stops the bleeding from the cuts and the changes in eligibility,
and it reaches out to the working families on the waiting list.
Commissioner Pelissier said in the future, it would be good to track the numbers on the
waiting lists so the Board of County Commissioners can see the rise and fall of child care
demand.
Nancy Coston said she would be glad to this. She said a drop usually happens as a
result of some infusion of money, and perhaps this can be shown in the report too.
Commissioner Jacobs thanked Nancy Coston and reiterated that the County is trying to
keep the program afloat. He said another long waiting list is the section 8 housing list, and
when staff looks at housing issues in relation to the petition, he would like to see how much
Orange County can do. He said this is a list that rarely gets down to zero, as the federal
government has been cutting at this for a long time.
Commissioner Price said she would like to know if staff can give an idea of how many
children would need to be served in order to not have a waiting list.
Nancy Coston said it might be possible to look at how many get added to the waiting
list every month early in the life of the list. She said this is probably a pretty good estimate of
the monthly amount. She said this would probably be a fairly contained amount, but it would
be a much larger amount if you extrapolated it into next year.
Commissioner Price asked, if the Board could appropriate more money, if Nancy
Coston is able to come up with this number.
Bonnie Hammersley said she will work with Nancy Coston, but there is a lag and a
delay with the list. She said, as a better number is formulated, it will be brought forward. She
said Nancy Coston included a caveat in the motion, stating that she would keep the manager
informed if there was a larger need.
Commissioner Rich asked how much will be left in the social justice fund for 2014-15.
Clarence Grier said $100,000 would be left.
Commissioner Pelissier said the Board had indicated an interest in having the $100,000
in the social justice fund for the Family Success Alliance project. She said the Board had
indicated intent to use this amount.
Clarence Grier said the Department of Social Services (DSS) has some salary savings
that may be available for use to offset some of the overage.
Commissioner Rich said she just wants to make sure funds are there to do all of the
things the Board promised to do.
Commissioner Price said more money will be coming in as a cushion.
Clarence Grier said he and Bonnie Hammersley will review that, next month.
A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs
to approve the DSS proposal, transfer $350,000 from the Social Justice Fund to DSS for child
care, and allow DSS to utilize any funds available within its budget to pay these costs. 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 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 Openinq 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
• 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 porosin 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 porosin 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 porosin 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.
Commissioner Rich asked if the County is currently liable for any accidents that might
happen at the pond now and if there will be liability moving forward.
John Roberts said the liability is the same as any other County property. He said the
location is next to a school, and there is an attractive nuisance doctrine, but the County has
liability insurance to cover issues of that nature. He said having the property staff and open
during designated hours would lessen the liability. He said no trespassing signs would also
help.
Commissioner Pelissier asked if there is a gate to prevent driving into the park when it
is now open.
David Stancil said yes, but people park outside and walk in.
Commissioner Pelissier referred to the agricultural demonstrations and asked what will
happen to the food that is grown. She suggested that it could be donated to organizations
such as PORCH.
David Stancil said staff is still working on this plan and what will be done with the
product, which will be low in volume.
Commissioner Price referred to the map, and asked for an explanation of the
Emergency Access points.
David Stancil said this was the original trail map done by GPS to show emergency
access to people on the trails using a Gator or motorized vehicle.
Commissioner Jacobs referred to the growing of food and said there are schools all
around the park. He said the original plan was to coordinate with these schools to grow the
vegetables.
Chair McKee said a possible park manager was mentioned. He asked if this salary is
included in the proposed budget.
David Stancil this was approved as part of the original budget.
Chair McKee said this must be an old pond, and some of these farm ponds drop off
sharply in depth. He said it is important to insure safety for children.
David Stancil said staff has been in this pond, and he thinks the banks have worn
down. He said the plan is to let the vegetation to grow high in the non-fishing areas.
Chair McKee asked if anyone can be trespassed off of the property if there are not any
"no trespassing" signs.
John Roberts said anyone can be trespassed off of the property based on conduct, but
without signs, someone is not automatically a trespasser if they are found on the site.
David Stancil said there are diamond shaped park boundary signs around the property,
but these do not say "no trespassing."
Commissioner porosin asked if signage stating that the park is closed except for
specific hours would make it implicit that you are trespassing if you are there when it is closed.
John Roberts said that should be implicit.
Commissioner Price asked about the northern boundary where the park abuts
residential properties, and whether there will be any barriers.
David Stancil said the plan does not envision any fencing on the northern boundary of
the property yet, but this may be considered as the planning goes forward.
Commissioner Price said it would be good to tell people in the park that private property
is beyond a certain point.
David Stancil said this can be done.
A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Price to
authorize staff to proceed with described actions to open the park on a limited basis with a
target of March 2015, and to direct staff to with the County Attorney to determine on which
projects and to what extent it is allowable for the County to require payment of a living wage by
contractors.
Commissioner porosin 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 porosin 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 porosin 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 porosin 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 porosin 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 porosin 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.
Commissioner Burroughs asked if this is the same motion that was passed earlier or if it
is just for this project.
Commissioner Jacobs said this motion is only for this project.
Commissioner McKee said he still has reservations that the Board needs to move
forward with a formal policy before applying any part of that policy.
VOTE: Ayes, 6 — Nays, 1 (Chair McKee)
c. Approval of Purchase of Roll Carts for Rural Roadside Recyclinq Proqram
The Board considered authorizing the purchase of 7,600 95-gallon roll carts at a total
cost of$444,144 for the rural roadside recycling collection program.
Gayle Wilson said he would like to take a moment to make an announcement. He said
in reference to the Solid Waste year ending, June 2014, and waste reduction percentages that
the percentage for Orange County is 64 percent, which means Orange County has met its
goal. He noted that Alamance County is at 23 percent; Chatham County is at 41 percent; and
Durham County is at 13 percent.
Gayle Wilson reviewed the following background information from the abstract:
Orange County has been discussing the implementation of roll carts in the rural roadside
program for several years, but has experienced continuing delays to proceeding due at least in
part to recycling program funding uncertainty. The Board of County Commissioners (BOCC)
ultimately appropriated funds in the Fiscal 2014/15 budget for the purchase of approximately
7,000 roll carts with the intention of implementing the carts in the fall of 2014.
The BOCC directed staff to determine in advance how many rural program service area
residents wished to receive a roll cart prior to finalizing a purchase recommendation for the
Board's consideration. The BOCC further indicated that should the number of affirmative
resident responses in the current service area not utilize the budgeted quantity of roll carts,
staff could consider surveying the previously proposed service expansion area to solicit
interest in roll carts up to the authorized quantity. In September 2014 Solid Waste staff
provided an information item update (attached) of the proposed implementation plan for rural
roll carts that outlined the process by which the current service area would be surveyed for
interest in receiving a roll cart. Staff also provided a timeline by which a recommendation would
be brought to the BOCC for purchase authorization and ultimately, distribution of the carts to
residents.
In September 2014 a mailing was distributed to all residents (approx. 14,500) in the existing
rural roadside service area. A second mailing was distributed to all of the non-respondents to
the first mailing. As of November 14, 2014, staff had received 7,541 responses by mail, phone,
email or answers via the on-line survey to order carts (6,841); or alternatively to indicate that
they did not want a cart (700). Responses continue to trickle in.
Based on the 6,841 responses to date, plus an estimated 10% additional residents who did not
respond to date for whatever reason that staff anticipates will desire a cart, staff believes the
County can expect at least 7,525 carts will be requested by the time of delivery or soon
thereafter, once the carts become visible along the roadways. Additionally, staff believes a
small stock (75) should be on hand in the event of new construction or to replace lost, stolen or
damaged carts. Additional carts will not be available unless or until they are approved in the
FY-2015/16 budget. Therefore staff is proposing the purchase of 7,600 roll carts at this time.
The 95-gallon rural roll carts will be virtually identical to the roll carts previously distributed in
the Towns with the exception that they will have black lids rather than blue lids. Those who did
not 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 recyclinq(a�oranqecountync.qov. 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
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 porosin 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.
Commissioner Price said she is all for recycling, but she admits that she is
uncomfortable with this proposal. She said residents have not seen this, and she is not even
sure what service area is being discussed. She said only half of the residents that received
the survey responded, and there are still many people that are beyond the service area. She
said many people are still unsure how the service is going to be paid for.
Gayle Wilson said the service area is the same area that the County has had for years
and the respondents came from throughout that area. He believes demand will increase in the
service area once the carts are being used.
Gayle Wilson said he has not taken any questions about the funding and the question
was not raised in any of the surveys that he has seen.
Commissioner Price asked how the fee works.
Gayle Wilson said there are four options that SWAG will consider for funding. He said
everyone receiving the service will pay something, but the details are under discussion. He
said it is likely to look something like the previous tiered version.
Commissioner Price said there are two issues here: 1) Buying the roll carts and issuing
them to residents that want them; and 2) determining how to pay for these.
Gayle Wilson said that is correct, as well as determining how to pay for all of the other
services and programs. He said this service will not be paid for under any of the options being
discussed.
Chair McKee said he agrees with Commissioner Jacobs concerns about putting the cart
before the horse, because there are still unanswered questions about the long term plan. He
understands the service area, and he does not argue with the demand, but he is concerned
with the lack of a long term plan.
He questioned how and if the service area will be expanded countywide. He said there
is also discussion about spending money to put in recycling compactors at Eubanks Road. He
said if curbside is being expanded, he wonders why the money is being spent on the
compactors. He said it seems that two systems are being run.
Commissioner McKee said there is also the issue of how to pay for this, and the Board
has not made that decision. He said the plan is good, and the SWAG is working hard to
address issues, but he is not ready to move forward with this until there is more feedback on
the SWAG's recommendations.
Commissioner Jacobs said the advisory group was presented with these plans as
addressing every rural resident over a period of years. He said people should not pay for
something they are not getting.
Commissioner Jacobs said Gayle Wilson should address the issue about dual systems.
Commissioner Rich said, in reference to the dual systems, the manager is collecting
data from the Solid Waste Convenience Centers regarding who is dropping off what materials.
Commissioner Rich said one question that has been answered is that there is not a
correlating decrease anywhere else when there is an increase in the recycling in the bins. She
said the systems —the carts and the convenience centers - are running in conjunction with
each other.
Gayle Wilson said he has never used the term dual system. He said the reason or the
County's continuing success is the complimentary and overlapping services. He said people
use the convenience centers for different reasons, and the centers are for much more than just
taking bottles and cans and garbage.
Gayle Wilson said there has never been a long term plan, and the system has been
built year to year and decade to decade. He believes that the result of the SWAG will be the
creation of a comprehensive plan for solid waste. He said two of the four funding options
currently under consideration assume a three year phase in of roadside service countywide.
He 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 Manaqer'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.
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 Oranqe 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 porosin asked Chair McKee to also emphasize the need for diversity on
these boards.
c. Nursinq Home Community Advisory Committee —Appointment
The Board considered making an appointment to the Nursing Home Community
Advisory Committee.
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.
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. Adiournment
A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Price to
adjourn the meeting at 10:OOpm.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Earl McKee, Chair
Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board