HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 03-01-1994-X-B A
1
ORANGE C O U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: March 1, 1994
Action Agenda
Item #_-�
SUBJECT: REPORT ON TOWNSHIP ADVISORY COUNCILS (TACs)
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes _x—No
ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Gene Bell
- TAC Survey/Response Presented Ext. 2589
to Planning Board on 5-17-93
- 5-17-93 Planning Board Minutes
- Summary of TAC Membership and TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Activities for FY 1992-93 and Hillsborough - 732-8181
the first half of FY 1993-94 Durham - 688-7331
- TAC Operating Guidelines Mebane - 227-2031
Chapel Hill - 967-9251
PURPOSE: To receive a report on the membership and activities
of the County's seven TACs for Fiscal Year (FY) 1992-
93 and the first half of FY 1993-94 .
BACKGROUND: Section I (Introduction) of the Land Use Element of
the Orange County Comprehensive Plan states that TACs
were organized in the fall of 1977. Their purpose as
stated in the Operating Guidelines for Township
Advisory Councils is " . . .to advise the Planning Board
concerning local opinions about planning matters as
H specified in the Orange County Zoning Ordinance and
Orange County Planning Board Rules of Procedure. "
Their first task was reviewing revisions to the
Subdivision Regulations. Between January 1979 and
February 1981 TACs were intensely involved in
preparation of the Land Use Plan and over 75 meetings
were held.
Following Plan adoption, some TACs entered a period of
inactivity. TACs were reactivated county-wide in
early 1986 to participate in township updates to the
Land Use Plan. Following the township plan updates,
several TACs once again lapsed into periods of
inactivity. With the exception of the Bingham TAC, it
has often proven difficult to get a quorum of TAC
members in the absence of a specific plan/project or
pressing issue needing their review and comment.
A report prepared for the Planning Board in May 1993
indicates a variable level of activity among the TACs.
e
2
A questionnaire was sent to TAC members in March 1993 '
to solicit input about the effectiveness of the TACs
and to gather opinions about their activities, or lack
thereof. Stamped return envelopes were mailed with
the questionnaires, but only 44% were returned. Major
findings were, 1) more than 80% believed that citizens
were not aware of TAC meetings/agendas/issues, and 2)
over 90% of respondents felt their TAC should meet on
a regular basis.
Over the past year-and-a-half, the Bingham TAC has met
consistently. The Little River TAC was reactivated in
December 1993 and plans to meet quarterly. While all
TACs haven't met on a regular basis in recent years,
they have all been invited to, and involved in,
projects such as Rural Character, University Station,
Economic Development Districts, watersheds/zoning,
solid waste, Cooperative Planning, and historic
preservation.
i
RECOMMNDATION: Receive as information. However, if the Commissioners
desire a more active role for TACs, the Administration
recommends that it be referred to the Planning Board
for handling.
r
r
DK15:3-1TACS.DOC
3
TOWNSHIP ADVISORY COUNCIL QUESTIONNAIRE
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
THE QUESTIONNAIRE On March 15, 1993, the Township Advisory Council
questionnaire was sent out to each of the 54 current TAC members (For a copy of
the questionnaire, see the first attachment to this document.). To encourage TAC
members to return the survey, a self-addressed, stamped envelop was included
with the questionnaire. The members were asked to respond by March 31 , 1993.
The Planning Department waited until April 13th to compile the results (For a
detailed summary of the TAC member responses, see the second attachment to
this document.).
TAC RESPONSE Of the 54 questionnaires sent out, 24 were returned by the
deadline. This is a 44.4% response rate. Below is a table summarizing the
responses by township.
TOWNSHIP NUMBER OF NUMBER OF
ADVISORY: ..: TAC :.. . ...
RETURNED PERCENT
COUNCIL:. MEMBERS QUESTIONNAIRES RETURNED
Bingham 9 7 77.8%
Cheeks 10 4 40.0%
Chapel Hill 4 2 50.0%
Cedar Grove 11 4 36.4%
Eno 5 2 40.0%
Hillsborough 8 1 12.5%
Little River 7 4 57.1 %
TOTAL: :. 54':. 24 44.4%
OVERALL RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS Refer to the attached table for a detailed
summary of the TAC members responses to each question.
Question 1 : In what year were you appointed to the TAC?
(22 of 24 responded)
50% (11 individuals) were appointed to their TAC before 1990. Four members
could not remember when they were appointed (but knew they had been members
"for a long time.")
4
Question 2: Would you still be interested in serving on a TAC that met
quarterly? (No / Yes)
(24 of 24 responded)
70% (17 individuals) of those TAC members that responded to the questionnaire
were still interested in serving on their TAC. The other 30% (7 individuals) were
no longer interested in serving.
Question 3: How often would you estimate the TAC has met since your
involvement? (Quarterly/ Yearly/Less than once a year)
(20 of 24 responded)
45% (9 individuals) believed that their TAC met less than once a year. 35% (7
individuals) of those TAC members that responded to the questionnaire believed
that their TAC met quarterly. 20% (4 individuals) believed that their TAC met on a
yearly basis.
Question 4: Do you currently serve on any other Orange County
Committees? (No / Yes)
(24 of 24 responded)
Approximately 65% of the respondents indicated that they were members of other
Orange County Committees. Those committees include: the Human Services
Advisory Commission (HSAC), the Water Resources Study Committee, the
Agricultural Districts Advisory Board, Agriculture Stabilization and Conservation
Service (ASCS), the Commission for Women, the Board of Adjustment, the Animal
Control Board, the Cable Television Advisory Committee and the Rural Education
Center.
Question 5: Do people in the community (other than TAC members)
generally attend TAC meetings? (No / Yes, often / Yes,
occasionally/ Yes, rarely)
(22 of 24 responded)
Approximately 40°x6 (9 individuals) of the respondents indicated that citizens
occasionally attend TAC meetings. 27% (6 individuals) of those TAC members
that responded to the questionnaire indicated that other people in the community
do not attend the TAC meetings. 23% (5 individuals) indicated that citizens
attended their TAC meetings, but only rarely, and approximately 10°x6 (2
individuals) responded that people in the community attend their TAC meetings
often.
5
Question � (a) Citizens in the township are generally aware of the existence of
the TAC. (True /False)
(23 of 24 responded)
74% (17 individuals) indicated that citizens were not aware of their TAC.
(b) Citizens in the township are generally aware of TAC meetings/
agendas. (True /False)
(23 of 24 responded)
80% (20 individuals) responded that citizens were not aware of TAC meetings or
their agendas.
(c) Citizens in the township are generally informed on upcoming
TAC issues. (True /False)
(22 of 24 responded)
86% (19 individuals) believed that citizens were not informed on upcoming TAC
issues.
Question 7: STATEMENT. The Planning Board is responsive to our TAC's
_ concerns. (Strongly Agree/Agree/Disagree /Strongly
E Disagree)
(24 of 24 respondents)
Half of respondents agreed (either agreed or strongly agreed) that the Planning
Board is responsive to TAC concerns. Close to 20% did not have an opinion.
Question 8: STATEMENT. The staff planner assigned to our TAC is
responsive to our requests. (Strongly Agree /Agree /Disagree
Strongly Disagree)
(24 of 24 responded)
83% of the respondents indicated that they agreed or strongly agreed that their
staff planner was responsive to their requests. Only one individual expressed
dissatisfaction with the staff planner's performance. 3 individuals (13%) had no
opinion.
Question 9: STATEMENT., Our TAC should meet on a regular basis to
` receive updates and discuss issues of interest to the Township.
(Strongly Agree /Agree /Disagree /Strongly Disagree)
(24 or 24 responded)
R91 % (22 individuals) agreed that their TAC should meet on a regular basis and
4 discuss issues that are of interest to the Township. Only two individuals (8.7%)
disagreed.
f
t
6
Question 10: STATEMENT: Our TAC should not meet unless there is a "big
issue" being discussed. (Strongly Agree /Agree /Disagree /
Strongly Disagree)
(24 of 24 responded)
Of those TAC respondents, 96% (23 individuals) indicated that they disagreed or
strongly disagreed with the statement, "Our TAC should not meet unless there is a
big issue being discussed." Only one respondent agreed with this statement.
Question 11 : STATEMENT. It is more effective if/ express my opinions and
concerns at other public forums (e.g. public hearings or other
Orange County meetings) than at TAC meetings. (Strongly
Agree /Agree /Disagree /Strongly Disagree)
(24 of 24 responded)
Opinion was mixed as to the effectiveness of the TAC meeting for expression of
opinions and concerns. Nearly half (45.8%) disagreed or strongly disagreed with
the statement, "It is more effective if I express my opinions and concerns at other
public forums (e.g. public hearings or other Orange County meetings) than at our.
TAC meeting." Eight individuals (33.3%) agreed or strongly agreed with the
statement. 20% (5 individuals) did not have an opinion.
Question 12: STATEMENT- TAC meetings are useful, productive and
informative. (Strongly Agree /Agree /Disagree/Strongly
Disagree)
(24 of 24 responded)
75% (18 individuals) of the respondents indicated that the TAC meetings were
useful, productive and informative. Three respondents (12.5%) did not believe the
meetings were useful, productive or informative. Three ,individuals (12.5%) did not
have an opinion.
s
7
COMMENTS Comments from TAC members were also solicited. Below is a
selection from their written-in observations.
CH1 "The staff was very responsive to the TAC.... If the TACs don't meet
regularly, then it is too difficult to get 'up to speed' for big issues."
CH2 "The Chapel Hill Township TAC is no longer organized and has not met for
several years."
CK1 " [We] need to get more people involved with the meetings."
CK3 "TAC meetings are only communications that many of our rural people have
with County Administration other than taxes."
LR2 "I don't have the feeling that we have a cohesive TAC group - more frequent
meetings could help with that. It's never been clear to me exactly what the
mission of TACs is (except as contact people for the Planning Staff). Some
clarification of purpose might generate [a] more organized approach for the
group."
CG3 "TAC should meet before public hearings to obtain township views.... [The]
Chair [should] give the community's opinion ... [to the] Commissioners...."
E1 "When 'projects' can effect your neighborhood folks will turn out - if they
don't know [about the projects] during planning stage, they get upset and
rightly so.... If TACs do not have regular meetings discussing plans for their
township, [there is] little reason to have them at this point. I don't know
what the purpose is for the TACs. We had input for the landfill and what
we thought about rural character. [Since] then, nothing. Evening meetings
sometimes prevent older folks from attending."
B1 "I feel that there is great opportunity for the many newcomers to Bingham
and to Orange to learn about our community issues if there could be well-
publicized, regular (quarterly) meetings of the TAC. There is a need to know
out there, to alleviate the fear of 'being done to.'"
B3 "As long as the TAC is included in the decision making process they are
useful. An example of not including the TAC in the proposed economic
development districts. This county should continue to bring the government
to each community and not depend on public hearings. The reason is, you
will have less emotion in TAC meetings. You will get more meaningful
communication from the citizens. I believe the County is just starting to see
the positive effects of TACs. The county needs to advertise the TAC
meetings better. If you have to buy adds, so be it."
B7 "It takes one or two interested people to keep a TAC going. The other
townships need to find some. Staff support has been great!"
8
RECOMMENDATION '
(1) Create a "fresh-start" for the TACs. To revive the TACs, the Planning
Department should look towards a new beginning. The TACs should meet
as one large group (possibly a day retreat) to work together to develop
communication between TACs and with the Planning staff. This initial
meeting would help all members to better understand the TAC system and
purpose, and to know the members of other TACs (which could be valuable
resources to their meetings). After this organizational meeting, TAC chairs
should consider meeting (possibly quarterly or biannually) to discuss
membership, communication, and meeting problems and solutions.
(2) Solicit new TAC members. There were a significant number of respondents
(30%) that indicated that they were no longer interested in serving. The
55% no-response rate to the questionnaire suggests that more individuals
may no longer be interested in serving on their TAC. Therefore, the Planning
Department should solicit for new members. Current and old members are a
great resource for suggestions of new members.
(3) Clarify mission of TACs. One TAC member expressed confusion about the
purpose of the TACs. I believe that many more TAC members are confused
about the mission of the groups. There seems to be a mix of expectations
and goals. For instance, one Bingham TAC member sees the TAC as a place
for newcomers to get to know about the area. Another member saw his/her
TAC as a liaison between "the people" and the County Commissioners. r
Another suggested that the TACs be used to get peoples' opinions -
replacing "public hearings." At the meeting/retreat of all the TACs, a work
session should be devoted to developing a mission and a set of goals for the
entire TAC system and each individual TAC. The mission and goals would
be in line with the existing guidelines already established for TACs.
(4) Advertise TAC meetings and agendas. Overwhelming majorities indicated
that citizens in their community were unaware of TAC meetings, unaware of
agendas at these meetings and unaware of up-coming issues. In addition,
individuals wrote-in that the planning department should advertise these
meetings (Example, see 63). In response to these comments, the Planning
Department should increase the visibility of the TACs and their meetings.
One member suggested advertisements or public announcements in the
newspaper.
(5) Hold regular (guarterly) meetings. An overwhelming majority (96%) of TAC
members that responded to the questionnaire believed that they would be
more effective if they met regularly. They did not believe that meeting for
"big issues" was the way their groups should function. Once the TACs
have been reorganized and new members have been appointed, starting a
regular meeting schedule will be possible.
5-17-93 Planning Board Minutes 9
The May 1991 approach and the recommended course of
action for the June meetings of this year are
summarized in a memo dated May 10, 1993 (a copy is
an attachment to these minutes on pages
The Planning Staff recommends that the Planning
Board endorse the proposed meeting framework, with
additions as the Board deems appropriate.
Discussion indicated that the Planning Board wanted
input from as many citizens as possible, including
additional options which they might suggest.
b. Mike Tapp, Orange County Fire Marshall
Mr. Tapp was investigating a fire and unable to
attend. Archie Daniel, Deputy, presented
comments/concerns from the Sheriff 's Department
earlier in the meeting. Mr. Tapp will be asked to
present his concerns at a future meeting.
c. TAC Survey/Response
Presentation by David Stancil.
There has been a variable level of activity among
the TACs. Some TACs meet on a quarterly basis as
recommended by the TAC Guidelines, many meet only
when a county issues is important to their township
and others do not meet at all.
In March of 1993, a questionnaire was sent out to
each of the 54 current TAC members. The purpose of
the survey was to solicit input about the
effectiveness of the TACs and to gather opinions
about the councils and their activities or the lack
of activities. Stamped return envelopes were mailed
with the questionnaires, but only 44% were returned.
There were two significant findings: ( 1) more than
80% of the respondents believed that citizens were
not aware of TAC meetings and agendas, and were not
informed about upcoming TAC issues; and (2 ) over 90%
of respondents believed that their TAC should meet
on a regular basis.
The results of the survey will be used by the
Planning Department to recommend changes in the
organization and format of the TACs.
Cynthia Shultz, Planning Intern, reviewed and
summarized the responses. A copy of the
questionnaire, responses, and summary is an
attachment to these minutes on pages 4;�_ t4 7
10
Discussion indicated that the Planning Board would
like more information from the TACs and regular
meeting schedules. Collins noted the possibility of
involving TAC chairs by providing copies of plats
and applications for subdivisions that are proposed
in thei-: rFsnective townships .
Board members expressed their appreciation for the
information provided by Shultz.
d. Small Area Plan Process
Jobsis stated that she liked the idea of a pilot
program for a small area plan as suggested by
Commissioner Willhoit. She felt it would provide
information needed to determine the workability of
such a process in Orange County.
Eidenier noted that her impression from the work
session on March 10, 1993 was that Commissioner
Willhoit felt that there were some areas of the
County ready to adopt the Rural Character Strategies
as proposed. He indicated he did not want anything
to interfere with that, but, that there were other
areas that would be good candidates for small area
plans.
Burklin stated that information could be provided
from the TAC meetings as proposed by Staff that
could indicate whether the townships felt their area
was suitable for some of the rural character
strategies and/or small area plans. He continued
that the Board could help determine some questions
for the Staff to ask that would help provide such
information for the Board.
Cantrell stated that her initial reaction to the
small area planning process is open but she was
concerned with the possibility of what was
determined to be "patchwork" development over the
county. She also expressed concern that there would
be an extremely limited number of people actually
participating in the extended work that would be
necessary. She continued that the small area plan
in the southern portion of Orange County had only
four people working on it and she felt this did not
represent all of the population. She expressed the
fear that such planning would be a real "slick" move
toward a completely elite Orange County and she was
very much opposed to such a move. Her concern was
that it may not be a truly representative process of
the County. Waddill agreed with the concerns
expressed by Cantrell.
11
TOWNSHIP ADVISORY COUNCIL (TAC) MEMBERSHIP
SINCE JULY 1992
The seven tables below track the memberships of the Township Advisory
Councils (TACs) for Fiscal Year(FY) 1992-93 and the first half of FY 1993-94.
Membership for 1994 is assumed to be the same as the last 1993 record. The
records of membership varied by date among the TACs and in some cases it was
necessary to include membership data prior to July 1992 for comparative purposes.
Table 8 summarizes the membership totals for all of the TACs.
TABLE 1
BINGHAM TAC MEMBERSHIP
Name 3192 1/93 3/93 6/93 7/93 8/93
James Gray PB PB PB
Norm Gustaveson VC VC VC VC VC VC
Edward Johnson X X X X X X
Quentin Patterson X X X X X X
Jane MacNeela X X X X X X
Jeffrey Peloquin X X X X X X
Miriam Murdock X X
Marc-david Cohen X X X X X X
Wendell Burch X X X X X X
Patrick Mulkey C C C C C C
Judy Cox X X X X X
Doug Terry
(OWASA) OW OW OW
Bill Waddell PB PB PB
Beth Barba X X
TOTALS: 9 10 9 9 10 10
PB : Planning Board Representative
C : Chair of TAC
VC : Vice Chair of TAC
12
TABLE 2
CEDAR GROVE TAC MEMBERSHIP
Name 3/91 6/93 7/93 8/93
Melvin Beasley X X X X
Rocky Hall X X X X
Michael Muller C C C C
Roger Tate X X X X
Elizabeth Walters X X X X
Virginia Boland PB PB PB PB
Daryl Clayton X X X X
Frankie Pope X X X X
Theresa Grywalski X X X X
Sam Borland X X X X
Larry Rogers X X X X
Arthur Whiffed
(info only) X X X x
Joseph Seivold X X
Tommy Pope X X X X
TOTALS: t1 11 12 12
TABLE 3
CHAPEL HILL TAC MEMBERSHIP
Name 9/92 7/93 8/93
Robert Gwyn X X X
Kirk Pelland C C C
Marvin Poythress X X X
Burnice Hackney X X X
William Strom X x
Greg Heafner x
Letitia Kelly x
James Mathewson x
TOTALS: 4 4 8
13
TABLE 4
CHEEKS TAC MEMBERSHIP .
Name 7/91 8/93
John Ward C C
Marilyn Liner VC VC
Jackie Bell X X
Mary Bobbitt-Cooke X X
Benny Cecil X X
Ralph Edwards X X
Sim Efland X X
Samuel English X X
Joan Jobsis PB PB
Marie Tate X X
Aimee Tattersall X X
Matthew Beckwith X
Leo Allison X
TOTALS: 10 12
TABLE 5
HILLSBOROUGH TAC MEMBERSHIP
Name 12/91 8/93
Moreland Claytor X X
Tarleton Davis X X
Wendy Olson X X
Barbara Page X X
Leigh Peek X X
Richard Robinson X X
Bob Rose X X
Bev Webb X X
James King X
Tony Whitaker X
TOTALS: 8 10
14
TABLE 6
Z
ENO TAC MEMBERSHIP
Name 1/92 3/93 4/93 8/93
Josephine Barbour X X X X
Elizabeth Dyer X
T. Wesley Simmons X X
Donald Warren X X X X
Jay Zaragoza X X X X
TOTALS:. 5 4 3 3
TABLE 7
LITTLE RIVER TAC MEMBERSHIP
Name 3/91 6/93 7/93 8/93
Steve Berry X X X X
Calvin Davis X X X X
Sharon Whitmore X X X X
Karen Barrows PS PB PB PS
Brad Walker X X X X
George Horton X X X X
Vern Miller X X X X
Earl Davis X X
Ralph Cain X
William Corr X
TOTALS: 6 6 7 9
4
i
15
TABLE 8
TOWNSHIP ADVISORY COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP
SUMMARY TABLE
TOWNSHIP 1991 1992 1993
Bingham 3/92 9 1/93 10
3/93 9
6/93 9
7/93 10
8/93 10
Cedar Grove 3/91 11 6/93 11
7/93 12
8/93 12
Chapel Hill 9/92 4 7/93 4
8/93 8
Cheeks 7/91 10 8/93 12
Eno 1/92 5 3/93 4
4/93 3
8/93 3
Hillsborough 12/91 8 8/93 8
Little River 3/91 6 6/93 6
7/93 7
8/93 9
t
16
REGULAR TAC MEETINGS DURING FY 1992-93 �
AND THE FIRST HALF OF FY 1993-94
The Bingham and Little River TACs have met during FY 1992-93 and the first
half of FY 1993-94. The other TACs did not meet. Below is a summary of the
Bingham and Little River TAC's meet dates and agendas.
in h m
WHEN: September 1, 1992
WHAT: OWASA issues dominated this TAC meeting. Questions were
answered about fencing and logging around Cane Creek. Landfill
sites were also discussed.
WHEN: November 10, 1992
WHAT: There were no items on the agenda for this TAC meeting. The
chairman of the TAC invited the candidates for the Board of
County Commissioners to speak to the residents of Bingham.
WHEN: January 21, 1993 _
WHAT: A report on solid waste and greenboxes was presented by the f
Public Works Department. The other agenda items were as
follows:
1. Airport work group
2. Update on Rural Character Study and the watershed
planning process
3. TAC membership vacancies
WHEN: April 22, 1993
WHAT: The OWASA sludge recycling plant and a number of other issues
were discussed at the TAC meeting. The agenda was as follows:
1. OWASA sludge recycling program
2. TAC study / issues update
a. Rural Character Study
b. Water supply watershed
C. Economic development districts
d. Traffic issues
3. New development projects in Bingham
4. Other TAC business
t
} 17
WHEN: August 5, 1993
1 WHAT: Items to be presented at the August 23rd Public Hearing were the
focus of the TAC meeting. The agenda consisted of the following
items:
1. Items on the August 23rd Public Hearing
a. Water Supply Watershed Plans for Orange
County
b. CP-3-93, Amendment to the Comprehensive
Plan filed by Bobby Kirk.
2. Planned community meetings in September for Rural
Character Recommendations.
3. OWASA update
4. Update on Bingham Community Nodes
5. Other TAC matters
WHEN: November 11, 1993
WHAT: Two items dominated the TAC meeting: Recycling and Greenbox
Locations, and OWASA's placement of a sludge storage facility in
Bingham Township. The agenda consisted of the following items:
1. Recycling and Greenbox Update (Public Works)
a. Recycling efforts in Orange County
b. Recycling of household hazardous waste
C. Changes in greenbox sites
2. OWASA Update
a. Planning sludge storage facility
b. Cane Creek Park operating hours
3. Other TAC Business
a. Proposed January TAC/OWASA meeting
Little River
WHEN: December 14, 1993
WHAT: Reactivation of the TAC and identification of the issues to be
addressed in 1994. The agenda consisted of the following items:
1. Purpose and mission of the TAC;
2. Review of TAC operating guidelines;
3. History of the Little River TAC;
4. Profile of Little River Township;
5. Current issues facing the township; and
6. Future items for the TAC to consider.
1a
PROJECTS / ISSUES WITH TAC INVOLVEMENT
TACs were used by the Planning Department for a number of county issues in
fiscal year 1992-93 and the first half of 1993-94. The Department will continue to
solicit citizen opinion through the TACs as well as other sources. The list below
summarizes the issues that TACs were involved in during the last year and a half.
(1) Hillsborough Cooperative Planning Workgroups
WHEN: Three (3) public meetings were held in August and
September of 1992.
WHAT: The sessions were used to inform the public on the work of
the Cooperative Planning Committee. Two (2) meetings
were held in the evening and one (1) was held in the
afternoon. Members from the Hillsborough, Eno and Chapel
Hill TACs were invited to attend these sessions.
(2) University Station
WHEN: TAC meetings were not held to specifically address the
University Station project. +
WHAT: TAC chairs were informed of the status of the study and
were informed of the general meetings and hearings about
the study.
(3) Watershed Regulations
WHEN: Watershed regulations were heard at the September and
November 1993 public hearings.
WHAT: TAC members from affected townships were invited to
attend the public hearings and voice their opinions.
(4) Zoning in Little River and Cedar Grove Townships
WHEN: Meetings were held in August 1993 in Little River and
Cedar Grove Townships.
WHAT: At these information sessions, staff explained zoning to
area residents and answered questions.TAC members were
encouraged to attend.
(5) Long-term Solid Waste Management
WHEN: Throughout fiscal year 1992-93 the Public Works
Department held a series of meetings.
i
19
WHAT: Public works staff addressed the issue of solid waste
management in Orange County. Green box locations and
hours were discussed, as well as trash limitations and ways
to prevent non-Orange residents from using the facilities.
TACs for the respective areas were invited.
(6) Rural Character
WHEN: TAC members were invited to two sets of meetings on the
Rural Character Study. The first set was held in February
of 1992, and the second set in January of 1994. To
accommodate a large number of citizens, the meetings
were held on different nights of the week in various
locations across the county.
WHAT: TAC members were individually invited to attend the
sessions and voice their opinions.
(7) Economic Development Districts
WHEN: The Economic Development Districts went to public hearing
a number of times (February 1993, May 1993, January
1994). There have also been a number of work sessions
and meetings throughout fiscal years 1992-93 and 1993-
94.
WHAT: TAC members, especially chairs, have been kept abreast of
the meetings and the actions of the study group. TAC
members were invited to attend the public hearings to voice
their opinions.
(8) Historic Preservation Inventory Presentation (Chapel Hill Township)
WHEN: The Chapel Hill historic resources inventory presentation
was held in August of 1993.
WHAT: The Chapel Hill TAC members, along with owners of study
list properties were invited individually to attend this
information session.
20
Revised 10-21-85
Revised 1-27-86
Revised 7-20-87
Revised 11-20-89
Revised 1-14-92
OPERATING GUIDELINES
FOR
TOWNSHIP ADVISORY COUNCILS
ORANGE COUNTY, N.C.
ARTICLE I - PURPOSE
A. The purpose of the Township Advisory Councils shall be to advise the
Planning Board concerning local opinions about planning matters as specified
in the Orange County Zoning Ordinance and Orange County Planning Board
Rules of Procedure.
B. The Township Advisory Councils may be involved in the following planning
activities: development of the Land Use Plan, area plans and major
amendments thereto and, as requested on special issues.
ARTICLE II - OFFICERS AND DUTIES
A. Officers
The elected officers shall be a Chair and Vice Chair and such other officers as
desired by the Township Advisory Council (TAC).
1) The Chair shall preside at all meetings of the Township Advisory
Council and have the duties normally conferred by parliamentary usage
on such officers.
2) The Vice Chair shall serve as Acting Chair in the absence of the Chair
and, at such times, shall have the same powers and duties as the Chair.
B. Election Procedures and Terms of Office
The procedures for election of the Chair and Vice Chair shall be as follows:
1
21
+ 1) Officers shall be elected by the Township Advisory Council from
among its members at the first regular meeting of each calendar year.
2) The candidate for each office receiving a majority vote of the Township
Advisory Council members present shall be declared elected.
3) The officers shall be elected for a term of one year and shall be eligible
to succeed themselves for not more than three consecutive terms.
4) Vacancies in the office shall be filled immediately for the unexpired
term by the regular election procedure.
ARTICLE III - MEMBERS
A. Membership
1) An advisory council shall be established for each Township. Each
TAC shall have 7 to 11 members who are residents of that Township.
2) Members of the TAC shall be appointed by the Chair of the Planning
Board upon approval by the Planning Board. Those council members
whose terms have expired, or who have resigned, shall be replaced by
selection from a list formed from Advisory Council suggestions, public
solicitation for interested people, and suggestions from members of the
Planning Board. At the discretion of the Council, outgoing members of
the Council who desire to continue their involvement may be granted
"Ex-Officio" status for a one year period renewable at the discretion of
the TAC and the individual involved, as active, but non-voting
members of the Council.
Also, if no applicant is available to replace an expiring member, that
member would continue to serve until a replacement is found. A TAC
member is eligible for reappointment one year from the expiration date
of the term, whether or not the member has continued to serve during
the interim.
3) A member of the Planning Board from each Township, designated as
the Township representative to the Planning Board, shall serve as a
liaison between the Township Advisory Council and the Planning
Board.
4) Members shall serve a term of two years, subject to the provisions
given in paragraph 5 below. Members whose terms have expired may
be reappointed for additional terms. After serving three consecutive
terms, a member shall be ineligible for reappointment until one
calendar year has elapsed from the date of completion of the third term.
2
22
5) Initial appointments to the Township Advisory Councils shall expire on r
June 30, 1988. Any new appointments made up to and including June
30, 1986 shall be made to fill the unexpired term. For purposes of
reappointment, residents so appointed shall have their period of service
counted as one initial two year term. Beginning with appointments
made on July 1, 1986, members shall be appointed for two years, with
terms expiring on June 30. Vacancies created by resignation shall be
filled for the unexpired term, with residents so appointed being
subsequently eligible to serve three regular consecutive terms.
B. Attendance
1) Any member of the TAC who misses three consecutive meetings, for
something other than an approved absence as determined by the Chair,
may be removed from the TAC subject to the recommendation of the
TAC chair.
2) Absence due to sickness, death of an immediate family member,
professional leave, or other valid reason shall be considered and
approved absence and shall not affect the member's status.
3) In the event of a long illness or other cause for prolonged absence, the
member may be replaced.
ARTICLE IV - ADMIlVISTRATION
A. The Planning Department shall serve as staff to the Township Advisory
Councils.
B. The Planning Director shall serve as Secretary to the Township Advisory
Councils. The Secretary, subject to the direction of the Planning Board Chair
and the Planning Board, shall provide notices of Township Advisory Council
meetings and shall keep all minutes and records of the TAC. The Planning
Board Chair and Planning Board township liaison shall receive meeting notices
and all other meeting materials at the same time as Advisory Council
members.
C. The reports of the Township Advisory Council meetings shall be submitted in
accordance with the agenda preparation schedule for the quarterly long-range
Planning Board meetings.
D. Township Advisory Council recommendations on public hearing items shall be
received at the Planning Board meeting prior to the public hearing on that
subject.
3
1
23
ARTICLE V - MEETINGS
A. Regular Meetings
Regular meetings of each Township Advisory Council shall be held quarterly
at a specified time and place. To maximum extent practicable, meetings will
be scheduled early in months during which quarterly public hearings are held,
i.e., February, May, August, and November. When there is no business for
the TAC, the TAC Chair in consultation with the Secretary may dispense with
a regular meeting by giving notice to all members. Consecutive regular
meetings cannot be cancelled, i.e., the TAC must meet at least every six
months.
B. Special Meetings
Special meetings may be called by the TAC Chair or at the request of the
Planning Board following the procedure given in Articles IV and V for
scheduling of regular meetings, or by the written request of at least three other
members of the TAC, who will follow the procedure for scheduling of regular
meetings, acting collectively in the role of the TAC Chair. The notice of such
a meeting shall specify the purpose of the meeting and no other business may
be considered except by unanimous consent of the TAC members present.
C. Meeting Notice
The Secretary shall give five days notice for both regular and special meetings.
D. Quorum
A quorum shall consist of either five members or a simple majority of the
appointed members of the Township Advisory Council, whichever number is
greater.
A quorum shall be present for the conduct of formal business.
E. Voting
The vote of a majority of those members present shall be sufficient to decide
all matters before the Township Advisory Council, provided a quorum is
present.
F. Conduct of Meetings
1) A eg nda
All business to be considered shall be listed on the agenda. Items may
be placed on the agenda either by the Planning Board or the TAC Chair
4
24
or the Secretary. Other persons wishing to place items on the agenda
must submit a request to the TAC Chair or Secretary or Planning Board
Chair at least nine days before the meeting. No other business may be
considered except by unanimous consent of the members present.
Z) Public Meetings
All meetings of the Township Advisory Councils shall be open to the
general public.
ARTICLE VI - AMENDMENTS
These Operating Guidelines may, within the limits allowed by law, be
amended at any time by an affirmative vote of the Planning Board.
Planning Board - March S, 1985
5