HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 06-02-2015 - 6aSUBJECT: MINUTES
DEPARTMENT:
ATTACHMENT(S):
Draft Minutes
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: June 2, 2015
Action Agenda
Item No. 6 -a
PUBLIC HEARING: (Y /N) No
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donna Baker, 245 -2130
I
PURPOSE: To correct and /or approve the minutes as submitted by the Clerk to the Board as
listed below:
April 14, 2015 BOCC Joint Meeting with the Board of Health
(5:30pm)
April 14, 2015 BOCC Work Session (7:OOpm)
April 21, 2015 BOCC Regular Meeting
BACKGROUND: In accordance with 153A -42 of the General Statutes, the Governing Board
has the legal duty to approve all minutes that are entered into the official journal of the Board's
proceedings.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: NONE
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board approve minutes as
presented or as amended.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
1
Attachment 1
DRAFT MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
JOINT MEETING WITH BOARD OF HEALTH
April 14, 2015
5:30 p.m.
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a joint meeting with the Board of
Health on Tuesday, April 14, 2015 at 5:30 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in
Chapel Hill, N.C.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair McKee and Commissioners Mia Burroughs,
Barry Jacobs, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Mark Dorosin
COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT:
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Assistant County Manager
Cheryl Young and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other staff members will be identified
appropriately below)
BOARD OF HEALTH MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Susan Elmore, Dan Dewitya, Tony
Whitaker, Liska Lackey, and Nick Galvez
BOARD OF HEALTH MEMBERS ABSENT: Paul Cheminski, Sam Lasris, Corey Davis, Michael
Carstans
BOARD OF HEALTH STAFF PRESENT: Health Director Colleen Bridger
Chair McKee called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. He said that Commissioner Price
may be late and Commissioner Dorosin would be unable to attend tonight.
Welcome from the Chairs
Susan Elmore thanked the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) for meeting with
the Board of Health (BOH) tonight. She said the BOH will be presenting their strategic plan with
4 focus areas:
1.) Substance Abuse and Mental Health
2.) Child and Family Obesity
3.) Access to Care
4.) Engagement
She said Health in All Policies will also be discussed. She said there will be a Family
Success Alliance update as well as a Dental Clinic update.
1. Update on Board of Health Strategic Plan
Dr. Colleen Bridger said there is a lot of information being presented this evening. She
said the PowerPoint presentation would be presented along with the opportunity for questions
at any time.
Liska Lackey presented the following PowerPoint slides:
Orange County Board of Health
Strategic Plan Update
Highlights
1 Innovative, Prevention Focused Plan
2 2014 -2016 Strategic Plan
4 Started Summer 2014
Evidence -Based Interventions
8 Substance Abuse /Mental Health
9 • Advocate for improved substance abuse and mental health services
10 • Advocate for the importance of early childhood and mental health
11 • Explore connection between health and the criminal justice system
12 • Continue to support partners in Smoke Free Public Places (SFPP) policy
13 implementation and evaluation
14 Communication Efforts
15 • OC — Proud to be Smoke Free
16 . Buzz Rides
17 • prominent advertising and surveying with UNC Student transport business
18 Compliance
19 0 Employee and resident videos on approaching others about smoking in public places
20 • Addressing Underage and Binge Drinking
21 . Health Department involvement in Town and Gown Task Force to address underage
22 drinking, and binge drinking
23 . New collaborative position to implement action steps in plan
24•
25 Liska Lackey said research and experience show a healthy childhood is the foundation
26 for future success. She said the Health Department is developing a campaign focused on the
27 importance of early childhood. She said this message will appear in written articles, print
28 advertising, and social media, culminating with a community screening of the documentary
29 Raising of America. She said a survey shows the community is gaining greater awareness of
30 the SFPP. She added that new university students entering the area each year requires a
31 greater push for education about the policy. She said this public education is taking place in
32 various ways. She said the Health Department has conducted fourteen Fresh Start classes; six
33 hundred and fifty boxes of nicotine replacement therapy have been distributed; the staff has
34 successfully advocated for the reimbursement of smoking cessation counseling and has also
35 secured these services for clients at Orange County Mental Health. She said all staff members
36 at the Inter -Faith Council shelter have been trained on tobacco cessation and piloting a
37 cessation program with Freedom House.
38 Liska Lackey said in the past year, the BOH has advocated for changes in the State of
39 North Carolina Pharmacy Regulations and lead the way in making "naloxone "( more accessible
40 to the community in fall 2013. She said Orange County passed the first standing order for
41 dispensing at a health Department. She added because of these efforts, every health
42 department in North Carolina can now do the same. She said these efforts have expanded to
43 allow first responders to carry naloxone locally as well, with Carrboro already trained, Chapel
44 Hill going live shortly, and the Sheriff's Department in the midst of training now. She said these
45 changes are a tremendous example of interdepartmental collaboration.
46 Liska Lackey said the Health Department has been working with Healthy Carolinians
47 regarding the safe disposal of unused prescriptions drugs. She said all law enforcement
1 agencies now have at least one box for such disposal. She said Healthy Carolinians has been
2 leading the conversation about prescription drug misuse, abuse and overdose.
3
4 Nick Galvez presented the following slides:
6 Childhood & Family Obesity
7 • Catalyze and facilitate obesity prevention partnerships
8 • Identify evidence -based interventions to implement county -wide
9 • Advocate for policies to reduce obesity through environmental and regulatory changes
10 • Making Orange County Breastfeeding Friendly
11
12 Health Considerations in Transit
13 • Continued to invite local and state transportation stakeholders to educate the Board
14 • Lauren Blackburn, NCDOT, Director of Bicycle and Pedestrian Division
15 • Bret Martin, Orange County Planning Department
16 • Sought seat on Orange Unified Transportation Board to increase the formal input of
17 health in transportation planning
18
19 Ongoing Projects
20
21 Nick Galvez said that the Health Department has created a dedicated breastfeeding
22 room in Whitted Clinic. He said current human resource policies regarding breastfeeding are
23 being reviewed. He said steps are being recommended for improvement on best practice,
24 including the need for formal policy language for staff about breastfeeding support and
25 education from the insurance company, availability of private space for breastfeeding, and the
26 availability of flexible scheduling to accommodate breastfeeding mothers. He said the BOH
27 passed a breastfeeding resolution outlining the health and economic benefits of breastfeeding
28 in June 2014.
29 Nick Galvez said an ongoing project is the Childcare Recognition Program. He said a
30 survey of childcare centers was conducted regarding their willingness to participate in a
31 childcare recognition program involving the implementation of the Nutritional and Physical Self
32 Assessment for Childcare (NAPSAC) and the Let's Move Improvement Program. He said staff
33 is currently working to implement the survey and will present findings to the BOH.
34 Nick Galvez said the BOH is looking at school nutrition. He said the BOH has outlined a
35 number of action steps related to providing technical assistance to schools to improve nutrition
36 policies and offerings. He said the BOH is also seeking to participate in the local Food Policy
37 Council. He said the BOH plans to request policy recommendations from this Council in the
38 future.
39 Commissioner Rich asked about local childhood obesity rates.
40 Nick Galvez said this is tracked at the high school level but not at younger ages.
41 Commissioner Rich said she would like to see childhood obesity taken seriously and
42 understands it is a larger issue than the BOH can handle alone.
43 Commissioner Pelissier asked if the food in schools will become healthier.
44 Colleen Bridger said there have been some discussions with the school nutritionists.
45 She added it is a challenge because it costs less money to provide less healthy foods. She
46 said a middle ground needs to be found. She said a new superintendent has been appointed in
47 Orange County Schools (OCS), and she is hopeful this will provide some continuity that has
48 been missing due to staff turnover.
49 Commissioner Jacobs said he has a proposal to make it easier for the schools to buy
50 local food. He said this proposal will be discussed in the work session following this meeting.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
4
He said progress can be made in small steps. He mentioned Child Care Services, which
prepares many meals each year. He said working with them may be a way to have a smaller
scale starting point for change instead of tackling an entire school system.
Colleen Bridger said she and Commissioner Pelissier visited Headstart in several OCS
elementary schools. She said the food in these programs was healthier than the elementary
school student food, and perhaps lessons could be learned from Headstart.
Dan Dewitya presented the following slides:
Access to Care
• Serve as catalyst/advocate for health outcomes in the Family Success Alliance
• Advocate for policies to improve access to care
• Foster a culture of innovation
• Communicate about effective interventions and advocate for their funding
Family Success Alliance
• Growing # and % of children living in poverty in Orange County
• Early childhood has a large impact for entire lifespan — academics, health, job,
community
Innovation Grants
Engagement
• Stay up -to -date on conversations and actions from other county advisory boards
• Develop policy statements on priority health areas
Dan Dewitya said 2014 Innovation Grants included:
• A speaker series with topics such as Mobile Health Technologies and Anna the
Avitar, a virtual reality character for WIC participants
• Home visiting tablets were used to aid in processing times
• A wearable personal health technology rental system was started as well as
sit/stand work stations.
He said in 2015 projects include
• Video remote interpretation software service
• The Whitted Bike Share Program pilot
• Improving mobile technology apps for health improvement
Commissioner Rich asked about the Whitted Bike Share Program.
Donna King said they are replicating a bike program, similar to one at UNC, for staff
housed at the Whitted Building to take out a loaner bike when needing to take small trips
around Hillsborough. She said they are still researching details before starting the program.
Commissioner Rich asked if this program is an effort to promote bicycle use over
automobile use for short trips.
Donna King said yes.
Commissioner Burroughs asked for more information about sit -stand stations.
Colleen Bridger explained that there is a platform for the computer keyboard and a
holder for the screen. She said you move these items up when you want to stand and down
when you want to sit. She said the pilot run of these stations showed that participants spent
1 about fifty percent of their day sitting and fifty percent standing, which is optimal. She said
2 twenty percent of staff has elected to use the sit stand desk.
3 Commissioner Pelissier said she would like the Commissioners to have such work
4 stations.
6 2. Health in All Policies
7 Tony Whitaker said this is an idea that is cross departmental and a collaborative
8 approach that attempts to include health considerations in all policy decisions. He presented
9 the following PowerPoint slides:
10
11 How can decisions impact our health?
12
13 Tony Whitaker shared a graphic showing how many different areas play into public
14 policy. He said the graphic shows that seventy percent of the factors that influence health are
15 related to behaviors and environment. He added environment includes social environment,
16 economic climate, educational environment as well as our physical environment. He said this is
17 not a novel concept yet it is also not widespread.
18
19
20•
21•
22•
23•
24•
25•
26•
27•
28
29
30
Examples
Health Impact Assessment (HIA) Tool
California's Health in All Policies Task Force
Staffing to increase HIAP
Require it!
The How -To to HIAP
31 Tony Whitaker asked what Health in All Policies could look like in Orange County. He
32 said it would be a systematic way, as policies are developed, for health based considerations to
33 be made before policies are enacted. He added the BOCC is already good at doing this in an
34 informal way. He said he wanted to present Health in All Policies as a bona fide concept that
35 has precedent. He said the BOH would like to partner with the BOCC to implement it in a
36 tangible way that would better the health of Orange County residents.
37 Commissioner Rich said she liked the idea and how can they incorporate it into the
38 County Manager's budget recommendations.
39 Commissioner Pelissier said as a Board they should adopt a resolution committing to
40 Health in All Policies and ask the Board of Health for help in implementation. She said the
41 Southern Human Services Center is already geared towards healthy living, and this concept
42 could be furthered as services are expanded on the campus.
43 Bonnie Hammersley said she has some experience with Health in All Policies from
44 previous work in another county. She said it is an interesting approach that considers the big
45 picture of how people are impacted by decisions made by County Government, which she
46 thinks is a good idea.
47 Commissioner Rich suggested making Health in All Policies part of the BOCC annual
48 retreat's goals.
1 Commissioner Jacobs said Health in All Policies could be wedded to social justice, and
2 he would rather see social justice as the larger heading and make Health in All Policies a
3 smaller heading.
5 3. Family Success Alliance Update
6 Meredith Stewart said one of the catalysts for the initiative was seeing that the number of
7 children living in poverty was increasing in Orange County. She said this also reflected statewide
8 trends. She reiterated the importance of early childhood to future success in all areas of life. She
9 said brain formation during early years has implications for years to come. She said a particular
10 area of influence are Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) that can change the way the brain is
11 built in early childhood.
12 She said those facts combined to create a desire to mitigate the effects of poverty on
13 children and families in Orange County. She said the Harlem Children's Zone, which presents the
14 idea of a pipeline from cradle to college /career, was considered as a potential model to adapt to
15 Orange County. She said the pipeline idea presents a seamless set of services, programs and
16 policies that provide for the success of children and families. She said a slightly modified version
17 of the pipeline idea is being created in Orange County. She said it has four large goals:
18
19 1.) Children are healthy and prepared for school
20 2.) Children and Youth are healthy and succeed in school
21 3.) Youth graduate from High School and go on to college or a career
22 4.) Families and neighborhoods are supporting the healthy development of children
23
24 She said in the Fall of 2014, an initial six zones, where the largest number of children and
25 families were struggling to make ends meet, were narrowed down to two. She said the process
26 included community input in writing and in- person presentations by each zone. She said zone
27 four and zone six are the final two zones and will ultimately receive a different name. She said
28 zone four is in the northern part of the County near New Hope Elementary and A.L. Stanback
29 Middle School. She said zone six is in western Chapel Hill /Carrboro area. She commented that
30 the two zones are extremely different in many ways. She said a gap analysis was started to see
31 where the gaps in the pipeline were in the two zones. She said the analysis was completed via
32 door to door interviews with community members, one on one interviews with service providers
33 and organizations, focus groups, and an online survey. She said the information gathered
34 through this process was just presented to the two zones last week. She said there was a great
35 response and feedback from both communities. She said the information presented to the two
36 zones were both qualitative and quantitative. She said the community feedback will be presented
37 to the Family Success Alliance Advisory Council on Monday, April 20t .
38 Meredith Stewart said the next part of the process is to identify short term and long term
39 ambitious ideas that can fill the gaps in the pipeline. She said additional goals are to create a
40 robust evaluation plan, increasing data available to do the evaluation, and continuing with strong
41 community engagement. She said a group will be traveling to the Harlem Children's Zone to visit
42 the practitioners institute and see how the pipeline works in person versus theory.
43 Chair McKee expressed thanks for the efforts of all working on this project and agreed
44 with the crucial timing of working with children in need as early as possible in order to secure
45 future success.
46
47 4. Dental Clinic Update
48 Colleen Bridger distributed and reviewed a hand out. She said the first graph shows that
49 before closing the Southern Human Services Center clinic the average annual revenues were
50 $300,000. She said after closing the dental clinic these numbers dropped off and have taken a
1 couple of years to return to baseline. She said the projections for this year's revenues are
2 $425,000 to $450,000 with just one clinic in Hillsborough.
3 Colleen Bridger said the other key point is the number of patients they serve. She said
4 this number has increased by 912 patients from Fiscal Year 2009 -2010 to Fiscal Year 2013 -2014.
5 She said this is a sixty one percent increase. She said this is a real testament to the Dental Clinic
6 staff.
7 Colleen Bridger said the amount of money received per patient is down, which means
8 fewer patients have insurance and are paying on a sliding scale.
9 Colleen Bridger said the question she gets a lot is what happened to those patients in the
10 southern portion of the County. She said more patients from the southern portion of the County
11 are being seen now than when there were two clinics. She added when the percentage of
12 patients is considered, the percentage of patients from the southern portion of the County is lower
13 than it was when there was a clinic there.
14 Colleen Bridger said the bottom line is that the consolidation was good for their Dental
15 Clinic and for determining how to deliver dental services efficiently and effectively. She said when
16 the Southern Human Services Center is expanded in the near future; she would like to see
17 another dental clinic in the facility. She said part of the consolidation involved going from a four
18 operatory clinic in Chapel Hill to an eight operatory clinic in Hillsborough. She said they are ready
19 to expand the number of staff in Hillsborough. She said there is a fairly long waiting list for non -
20 emergency adult patients. She said the Health Department's Budget request includes an
21 additional Dental Team. She said a good amount of the cost of the request is offset by additional
22 revenues from billing for those services. She said dental services in Hillsborough should be
23 expanded this year and there should be a plan for expansion in the next few years in the southern
24 half of the County.
25 Commissioner Rich asked if more people are visiting the Clinic because they cannot afford
26 care elsewhere.
27 Colleen Bridger said there are two types of other dental facilities: private providers and
28 Piedmont Health Services. She said that the private dental offices are absolutely out of financial
29 reach for the patients of the Dental Clinic. She said that Piedmont Health Services are more
30 expensive than Orange County, but she does not think that this is part of the motivation but rather
31 that they have limited operatory clinics and thus very long wait lists.
32 Commissioner Burroughs asked if Piedmont is limited by space.
33 Colleen Bridger said yes. She added if a clinic is built by the County at the Southern
34 Human Services Center, perhaps Piedmont could staff and operate it. She said this idea would
35 solve Piedmont's space issues and the community's access issues.
36 Commissioner Jacobs asked if the Dental Clinic at the University of North Carolina (UNC)
37 continues to exist.
38 Colleen Bridger said yes, but the community is triaging patients that cannot be seen at the
39 County Dental Clinic to be seen by the UNC Dental Clinic. She said the UNC clinic is not seen as
40 a safety net dental provider but rather a safety net dental specialist. She said complicated cases
41 are referred to the UNC Dental Clinic.
42 Commissioner Jacobs recalled an award had been given and that congratulations were in
43 order for Dr. Bridger and Stacy Shelp for publicizing some aspect of public health.
44 Colleen Bridger said that Ms. Shelp created the wonderful annual report for the Health
45 Department. She said the report was submitted to the North Carolina City and County
46 Communicators (NC3C), and it was awarded first place.
47
48 Commissioner Price arrived at 6:27 p.m.
49
1 Commissioner Jacobs said the information about the Dental Clinic would be perfect for a
2 press release. He said the data presented this evening show that good services are being
3 provided and that demand is high. He said as the potential of a second clinic is a contested topic,
4 it would be nice for the community to be up to date.
5 Colleen Bridger said this could be done.
6 Chair McKee said he thought that Piedmont had taken on some of the southern residents.
7 Colleen Bridger said there was an arrangement that Piedmont would see former Health
8 Department patients at Health Department rates, but this has not actualized due to Piedmont
9 having long wait times.
10 Chair McKee agreed that collaboration between Piedmont Health Services and the Health
11 Department at a future dental clinic at Southern Human Services Center would be a good idea.
12 He asked if Piedmont Health Services has been approached about this possibility.
13 Colleen Bridger said yes, there have been multiple conversations, and Piedmont Health
14 Services is very interested in this potential partnership.
15
16 5. Questions and Answers
17 Commissioner Rich said on page twenty -one of the BOH Strategic Plan the leading
18 causes of death in Orange County are listed. She said that in regard to deaths caused by cancer,
19 the report states the three top cancers are all related to lung cancers. She asked if this is atypical.
20 Colleen Bridger said the only cancer rate where Orange County is higher than the State
21 rate is breast cancer.
22 Chair McKee thanked the BOH for their time this evening and for their efforts on behalf of
23 the health of Orange County.
24
25 The meeting adjourned at 6:35 p.m.
26
27 Earl McKee, Chair
28
29 Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
I
Attachment 2
DRAFT MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
WORK SESSION
April 14, 2015
7:00 p.m.
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a work session on Tuesday, April
14, 2015 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 Manager
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. Durham - Orange Light Rail Transit Report
Patrick McDonough, Triangle Transit Manager of Planning and Transit Oriented
Development, said an updated briefing on the transit project is being presented via PowerPoint,
followed by a portion of the flyover video of the corridor.
Durham - Orange Light Rail Transit Project
• Recent Project Update
• What We Study for the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
• Five Key Decisions in EIS: Reviewing the Data
• Build or No Build
• Little Creek Crossing
• Duke /VA Station Location Choice
• Rail Operations and Maintenance Facility (ROMF) Site
• New Hope Creek Crossing
• Ask Questions Along the Way
• No Action Required At This Meeting
Secretary Foxx Visit Feb Wh
Elected Official Corridor Tours
What We Study
• Transit Ridership
• Regional Travel Patterns
• Capital & Operating Costs
• Noise / Vibration
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
• Cultural & Historic Resources
• Public Parklands
• Natural Resources
• Energy Use
• Traffic
• Utilities
• Air Quality
• Water Quality
• Land Use
• Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities
• Visual & Aesthetic
• Minority & Low - Income Population Impacts
• Neighborhoods
• Business & Residential Impacts
• Population Served
• Employment Served
• Construction Impacts
Five Key Decisions
• Build or No Build
• Little Creek Crossing
• Duke /VA Station Location Choice
• Rail Operations and Maintenance Facility (ROMF) Site
• New Hope Creek Crossing
To Build or Not to Build
• Build
• No Build
Little Creek: C1 Eliminated
• US Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) provided a letter stating that C1A, C2, and
C2A were viable alternatives but that C1 was not.
• USACOE would not authorize use of federal government property (game lands and a
waterfowl impoundment) for C1 "given the availability of less damaging alternatives."
Little Creek: Travel Time
• C2 time 56 seconds shorter than C1A
• C2A time 10 seconds shorter than C2
Little Creek: Ridership
• Lowest ridership alternative: C1A, NHC2, Duke Eye Care Center Station with 23,560
daily riders
• C2 and C2A both add over 700 daily riders compared to C1A
Little Creek: Capital Cost
• Lowest capital cost alternative: C2, NHC -LPA, either Duke /VA station at $1.522 billion
• C2A adds $7.6m in capital cost
I C1A adds $36.Om in capital cost
2
3 Little Creek: Operating Cost
4 • Lowest operating cost alternative: C1 (eliminated), NHC -LPA, either Duke /VA station at
5 $16,846,000/year
6 • C2 and C2A add $56,900 /year in operating /maintenance cost
7 • C1A adds $82,100 /year in operating /maintenance cost
8
9 Little Creek: Public Parklands -4(f)
10 • Section 4(f) requires consideration of park and recreational lands, wildlife and waterfowl
11 refuges, and historic sites in transportation project development.
12 • Before approving a project that uses Section 4(f) property, FTA must either:
13 (1) determine that the impacts to the property are de minimis (will not adversely affect
14 the activities, features, or attributes of property), or
15 (2) undertake a Section 4(f) Evaluation.
16 • C2A has least impact to Section 4(f) properties
17
18 Little Creek: Natural Resources
19
20 Little Creek: Water Resources
21 Low Impact Design techniques have kept total acreage and linear feet impacts low for
22 project of this size
23 Timeline for Local Gov't Participation
24 • Jan 2015 — Review Five Key Decisions
25 • March -June 2015 — Local Governments & Public Review Data on Benefits / Impacts of
26 Alternatives
27 • April — May 2015 — GoTriangle Develops Recommended NEPA Preferred Alternative
28 • September /October 2015 — Official 45 -day comment period: Local Governments and
29 Citizens provide comments on Key Decisions and any other items related to the D -O
30 LRT Project
31 • Fall /Winter 2015 — GoTriangle Develops Final EIS
32 • February 2016 — Record of Decision issued by FTA
33
34 Discussion
35
36 Commissioner Jacobs said Orange County has been involved in protecting New Hope
37 Creek since the 1980s and would like to know Triangle Transit's proposal and what any
38 alternatives are for protecting it.
39 Patrick McDonough said showing the video would best answer that question.
40
41 Video started at 7:16pm
42
43 Commissioner Rich asked if homeowners in the East 54 development knew of the light
44 rail proposal.
45 Patrick McDonough said he thought that many did know of the proposal.
46 Commissioner Rich said she recalled that signs had been put up in the past but when
47 she spoke recently with new home owners, that they were unaware that the light rail would be in
48 front of the property.
il
1 Patrick McDonough said there have been two meetings with the Home Owners
2 Association (HOA), and letters have also been received. He said individual home owners may
3 not be aware but the HOA is.
4 Commissioner Rich asked if signage could be posted to make the community aware.
5 Patrick McDonough said he is not sure of the best way to handle such communication,
6 but he is pleased that the East 54 HOA is aware of the project and is involved in the discussion.
7 Commissioner Price asked how loud the rail will be and if home owners will need to
8 soundproof.
9 Patrick McDonough said part of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) looks at this
10 very issue. He said they have three categories of receptors of evaluating the noise level and
11 are in the process of this evaluation. He said there will be a draft EIS by the end of the year.
12 Commissioner Pelissier asked about the rail going through the Friday Center's parking
13 lot.
14 Patrick McDonough said the University of North Carolina (UNC) has agreed to have it
15 studied and are working on expressing their preference. He said no official statement has been
16 issued by UNC thus far, but they seem to be leaning towards C2A. He added UNC is seeking
17 to work with the Town of Chapel Hill on the issue and will state their final preference in the
18 future.
19 Chair McKee asked about parking facilities.
20 Patrick McDonough said in this corridor, with the Friday Center, there are about 800
21 spaces. He said they would maintain the park and ride at the Friday Center and he said if UNC
22 considered redeveloping the Friday Center, changes could be considered at that time.
23 Chair McKee asked about parking at the Woodmont Station.
24 Patrick McDonough said there is no parking lot. He said parking here was considered
25 originally, but the Friday Center is a much better access point. He said there is also a large lot
26 at Leigh Village, the next station up the line. He said in considering the flow of traffic at peak
27 times, Woodmont is a much more difficult station to get cars in and out of than either the Friday
28 Center or Leigh Village.
29 Chair McKee asked why a station would be there if there is no parking available.
30 Patrick McDonough said the Town of Chapel Hill is planning to develop more densely in
31 this area in the future. He said the Town sees this as a walk up station.
32 Commissioner Pelissier said there is a proposal for a large development at Leigh
33 Village.
34 Patrick McDonough said yes, there is a group of landowners, who own about 300 acres
35 in the area, working together to create a master plan for a large development. He said the City
36 of Durham is seeking to develop regulations to support the plan. He said a public meeting will
37 be held on April 30tH
38
39 Video stopped at 7.43pm.
40
41 Commissioner Price asked about extra bus services.
42 Patrick McDonough said when Orange County adopted the plan there were bus
43 improvements included. He said many of the bus improvements have already been
44 implemented.
45 Commissioner Price asked if the other route options line up with the bus plan, since C1
46 has been ruled out.
47 Patrick McDonough said construction takes about 3 to 4 years, and during this time they
48 would be working with all local transits, such as Chapel Hill Transit, Duke Transit, etc. He said
49 if the light rail can better meet the transportation needs then the buses will be removed from
50 service and be freed up to serve in a different capacity. How the buses can best be used will
I be determined by transit authorities over time as they study needs. He added bus and rail
2 integration is very important and it is being looked at in an ongoing manner.
3
4 Commissioner Pelissier said the BOCC only have minimal work sessions to choose from
5 in order to give feedback on the key decision points and she suggested to Bonnie Hamersley
6 that it be added to the September work session.
7 Patrick McDonough said that BOCC commentary would be very welcomed this evening
8 and he suggested the BOCC have further discussion in May, in order to give feedback in a
9 more timely manner.
10 Commissioner Rich said since C1 is out and C1A is about $36 million more, C1A does
11 not seem like money well spent. She said after being on the tour she is not sure how she feels
12 about C2 and C2A. She said she thinks the rail being closer to the park and ride at the Friday
13 Center makes the most sense to her.
14 Commissioner Dorosin said the operations cost makes C1A the least favorable. He said
15 that one of the determining factors should be for the rail being as close to the road as possible.
16 He said this visibility would allow vehicle commuters can see the train going by as they sit in
17 traffic and wish they were on it. He said this would be the best advertising possible for the
18 benefit of the train service.
19 Commissioner Pelissier agreed with Commissioner Dorosin about the visibility of the rail,
20 and said she would go with C2A. She said she could accept C2 but likes C2A better.
21 Commissioner Jacobs agreed with Commissioner Pelissier, and the same principal
22 applies to the New Hope Creek alternatives.
23 Commissioner Price said she would like a better idea of where additional housing would
24 be developed. One of the purposes of the rail is to increase mobility for the largest number of
25 people.
26 Patrick McDonough said local governments come into the picture and are key to the
27 issue of land use. He said the Town of Chapel Hill and the City of Durham are in the driver's
28 seat in terms of the types of zoning they will put in. He said Triangle Transit is working in
29 partnership with both communities. He said a Federal grant has been applied for to help think
30 creatively about these issues. He said a decision about the grant is still pending.
31 Commissioner Burroughs said she felt good about C2 and C2A. She said she is leaning
32 towards C2A and echoed the sentiment regarding the value of the rail being highly visible.
33
34 2. Presentation on Alternatives to On -site Septic Systems
35 Allan Clapp, Orange County Environmental Health, presented the following PowerPoint
36 presentation:
37
38 Septic System Options
39
40 Major Considerations
41 • Soils
42 • Septic System Options
43 • Development Type
44 • Enforcement/Legal
45 • Accessibility
46 • Operation and Maintenance
47
48 Georgeville Series
49
50 Wynott Series
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
M
Golston Series
Aerobic zone
Pump System Components
If the drain field is higher than the house, a pump system must be used.
Advanced Treatment System Components -
Waste is treated to almost a drinking water standard and works for non - conventional soils.
Septic Trench Options
• Conventional Trench
• Accepted Trench Products
• Chamber Trench
• Polystyrene Trench
• Tire Chips
• Panel Block
• Low Pressure Pipe
• Drip
Commissioner Pelissier asked if any of these alternatives exist in Orange County.
Alan Clapp said yes. He said Orange County has an aerobic treatment unit as well as some
pete filters.
Conventional Trench (photo)
Aerobic zone
Chamber Trench (photo)
• 25% Drain field reduction
Trench is same as conventional but no rock (photo)
• Polystyrene Trench
• 25 % Drain field reduction
Polystyrene Systems (photo)
• 25 % Drain field reduction
• Accepted Trench Product as equivalent to Conventional
Panel Block System
• Allows 50% reduction
• Requires 36" of usable soil.
LPP Trench (photo)
LPP Distribution Network (photo)
Development Types
• On Lot systems
o Conventional
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
7
o Land Hooks
• Off Site Systems
• Conservation /Cluster
• Common Area /HOA
Conventional Developments
Conservation or Cluster Development
Cluster Development
Common Area with HOA
Land Hooks
Supply Line Network (2 lines)
Supply Line Network (7 lines)
Ganged Supply Line Network (26 lines)
Enforcement
• Local Health Department
o Permitting for Soils /Siting /Construction
• Planning Department
• Type of Development (Conventional vs.
• Watershed status
• Supply Lines as part of Utility Plan
Legal
• Ownership and Control
• Developer
• Homeowner
• Homeowner's Association
• Tri -party Agreement
• Easements
• Encroachments
Special Purpose Lots (photos)
Conservation)
Accessibility
• Must be able to access all components of the system without "trespassing" or going onto
another property
• Drain field
• Supply lines
• Tankage
o O &M
o Repairs
The "Good" (photo)
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
The "Bad" (photo)
The "Ugly" (photo)
Operation and Maintenance
• Issues
• Out of sight out of mind
• That's not my system
• Who's responsible?
• Certified Operator
Drain Field- poorly maintained (photo)
Drain Field -well maintained (photo)
Best Planning Practices for Remote Systems
• Locate and use the best soils for drain fields
• Designate the appropriate type of remote fields for the type of development proposed
• Allow for dedicated all- weather access to the drain fields instead of easements
• Design for operation and maintenance
Commissioner Dorosin asked if the drain field could be used for any other purpose.
Alan Clapp said yes. He said the field in the picture is used as a community playing
field, used for playing Frisbee, dog walking, running, etc. He said this drain field is about fifteen
acres and is an asset to the community.
Commissioner Dorosin asked if anything could be built on top of the field.
Alan Clapp said no structures can be built on a drain field.
Commissioner Rich asked about the financial pros and cons of having an individual
septic system versus a community one. She asked if it is controlled by the HOA.
Alan Clapp said there are models where the home owner owns the house lot as well as
the septic lot. He said with an HOA it can be more expensive, and this is an area ripe for abuse
by an HOA.
Commissioner Dorosin said there could be smaller property lots, and the septic system
could be put in a community area. He said this could work well with a development for safe and
affordable housing.
Commissioner Rich asked if the maintenance is different depending on the system.
Allan Clapp said the maintenance from the health department would be same whether
the system is on site or off site. He said there is a maintenance difference with an offsite
system and an HOA has to hire an operator to go out yearly and check the system. He said an
on the lot system is checked every five years.
Commissioner Pelissier asked if there is any data that indicates which works best.
Allan Clapp said the HOA model seems to work best.
Commissioner Pelissier asked for clarification about the tri -party agreements.
Allan Clapp said a tri -party agreement is an agreement between the HOA, the Health
Department and the developer. He said these types of agreements have typically worked well.
Commissioner Dorosin said HOAs are already relied on to maintain open spaces. He
said our development model encourages HOAs.
Craig Benedict said sixteen years ago, the majority of subdivisions were conventional,
two acre lots with on site systems. He said through regulations the conservation cluster design
has been recommended. He said, over time, the trend has shifted towards smaller lots with
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
I
shared open space in the rest of the development. He said now about ninety percent of local
subdivisions have this conservation cluster design, with at least thirty three percent open space
and an HOA.
Commissioner Dorosin said HOAs are already required or encouraged through
incentives. He said this structure is already a part of the development model, and having HOAs
engaged does not seem unreasonable. He said the HOA fear of not having money to maintain
the system is the same fear as not having money to maintain the open space.
Commissioner Jacobs said this requires a higher degree of maintenance, responsibility
and open space. He said there are debates within HOAs about whether residents want to pay
for things ranging from maintaining private roads to maintaining the community systems. He
said this is where he finds more potential problems. He said if HOAs are to be more relied
upon, then the County may want to have more say over HOA responsibilities. He asked if such
oversight is even within the legal purview of BOCC.
Craig Benedict showed the Board a copy of the latest edition of Rural by Design by
Randall Arendt. He said Orange County is mentioned in the book. The author has visited
Orange County occasionally over the past twenty years since his first edition of the book. He
said part of the open space and flexible design idea came from Arendt's ideas in the mid 1990s.
He said that Arendt currently sees the thirty -three percent open space concept as a minimum.
He said Arendt is leaning more towards fifty or sixty percent open space. He added that in
some cases the open space could be farmed, forestry, stream buffers, etc. He said that Arendt
also suggests lots as small as 10,000 square feet to minimize roads and impervious off site
septic systems.
Commissioner Jacobs said in the past developers were using the setbacks required in
the ordinance as open space and thus offering almost no additional open space. He said this
continued until the ordinance was changed.
Craig Benedict presented the following slides:
Zoning Regulations — septic system (tanks and nitrification fields)
• PROHIBITED FROM BEING LOCATED:
• Within stream buffers
■ Staff Comment: Section 4.2.2 (1) of UDO establishes a waiver provision
where lots created prior to January 1, 1994 or October 19, 1999 (lots in
Cane Creek Overlay) can get an exemption from this prohibition.
• Within 300 feet of the reservoir in the University Lake Critical Watershed Overlay
(tank and field).
• Within Cane Creek and Upper Eno Critical area new septic tanks are prohibited
within 150 feet of the reservoir. Nitrification fields cannot be within 300 feet of
reservoir.
■ Staff Comment: Health regulations only require a 100 ft. setback from a
reservoir and 50 ft. from a stream
• Within 100 feet of a perennial or intermittent stream.
■ Staff Comment: Again we have a waiver requirement to ensure we are
not denying a property owner use of their property.
Zoning Regulations — septic system
On -site versus off -site installation
• OFF SITE SEPTIC TREATMENT AND /OR DISPOSAL PROHIBITED WITHIN
UNIVERSITY LAKE CRITICAL AND PROTECTED WATERSHED OVERLAY
DISTRICT(S).
10
1 • ALL OTHER DISTRICTS —CAN OCCUR WITH APPROVAL OF FLEXIBLE
2 DEVELOPMENT SUBDIVISION (SECTION 7.12 OF UDO)
3
4 Commissioner Jacobs asked about clustering in the watershed, which was previously
5 determined to be inappropriate by the Board of the Orange Water and Sewer Authority
6 ( OWASA). He said the OWASA Board hired a consultant to review the issue. He said the
7 notion of doing something different with the units was very controversial.
8 Commissioner Pelissier asked if anyone had used the offsite under flexible
9 development. She recalled a development that had recently been before the Board where off
10 site was not possible. She said perhaps that was because of the required lot size.
11 Craig Benedict said in the Dunhill subdivision in the Rural Buffer there were four off site
12 systems, with the majority being on site.
13 Commissioner Pelissier said now that greater open space is more desirable, perhaps
14 the County should review the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) and consider changing
15 the lot size requirements. She added without such a change, no one will apply. She said such
16 a change may also open some opportunities for affordable housing as previously mentioned by
17 Commissioner Dorosin.
18 Craig Benedict said there is a new housing market for very small houses and the lot size
19 should be reviewed to consider how to accommodate these new styles.
20
21 3. "10% Campaign" and Local Food Economy
22
23 Carl Matyac, presented the following PowerPoint presentation:
24
25 10% Campaign
26 Orange County Local Foods Initiative
27
28 Center for Environmental Farming Systems (CEFS)
29 • Building North Carolina's Sustainable Local Food Economy
30 • Goal: Encourage consumers to commit 10% of their existing food dollars to support
31 local food producers, related businesses and communities
32 • Partnering with NC Cooperative Extension
33
34
The 10% Campaign
35
•
Pledge to spend 10 percent of your existing food dollars locally
36
•
Weekly response to email questions
37
•
Progress is tracked and entered into statewide database
38
39
The 10% Campaign:
40
•
Promotes North Carolina farmers, foods, communities, and businesses
41
•
Educates consumers, decision - makers, and the media
42
•
Collaborates with the many influential organizations /initiatives already in place
43
•
Expanding the market will result in new farm, food, and manufacturing businesses and
44
create jobs. 2012 Resolution to support the 10% Campaign in Orange County
45
46
Orange
County Agriculture
47
•
Stable for past 15 years — 2012 cash receipts: $31 Million
48
•
Types of crops have changed over the years
49
•
Direct to consumer sales up from $26,000 in 1997 to $1.44 million in 2012
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
11
• Farms growing vegetables up from 11 in 1997 to 77 in 2012
• Orange County ranks first in NC in direct sales to consumers of diversified produce,
poultry, and livestock products.
Activities Related to 10% Campaign
• PLANT @ Breeze
o Incubator Farm
• Community Gardens
• Food Council
o Community Based
• Agricultural Summit
o Annual Conference
• Orangecountyfarms.org
o Web site for finding producers and markets
• Ag Preservation Board
o Voluntary Ag Districts
• Piedmont Food and Ag Processing Center
• Agriculture Economic Developer Position
• Growinorange.com
o Economic Development Website
Mike Ortosky, Economic Development Office, presented the following slides:
Example Countv Exoenditures — FY 2014
Sheriff Department/Jail $257,905
Department on Aging (Senior Meals) $170,905
Caterinq $ 21,510
Total $450,320
Example:
Sheriff /Jail
Four Main Vendors:
• IFH /Performance — located in Hickory NC & Florence SC now owned by Performance
Food Group (national firm — Virginia)
• US Foods — national firm (Illinois) with local offices in Charlotte & Distribution Center in
Zebulon, NC
• R &H Produce — located at State Farmers Market — NC Company since 1982
• Sysco - national firm (Texas) — Office in Charlotte, NC - Distribution Center in Selma,
N.C.
Food System Schematic
"Local"
• Many different interpretations
• CEFS (10% Campaign) "local is a relative concept"
• CEFS does not assign a mileage limit
• Refers to production & consumption in the same geographic region
• Goal is to optimize sourcing of food in that region
• Collards vs. Oranges
12
1 "Value Radius"
2
3 Considerations
4 • Do we want to embrace the CEFS 10% Campaign as it exists (including its definition of
5 "local ") or do we want a program specific to Orange County?
6
7 • Do we want to create requirements or offer incentives toward achieving greater sourcing
8 of local foods?
9
10 • Can we effectively achieve the goal by collaborative investments (public - private) in a
11 "farm to fork" food system infrastructure which would facilitate local sourcing?
12
13 Recommendations
14 • Make the 10% Campaign the first priority of the Orange County Economic Development
15 Plan which is under construction at the Economic Development Office.
16
17 • Fund an initial public outreach campaign and ongoing quarterly /seasonal activities to
18 raise public awareness of the 10% initiative.
19
20 • Direct the Agriculture Economic Developer to work with County departments to increase
21 local food sourcing and develop and maintain a local producer /provider database
22 (buying guide) for use by County departments in their local sourcing efforts. This buying
23 guide will be continually updated and shared throughout all departments.
24
25 • Authorize the Economic Development Office to create a Food Systems Advisory Team
26 to assist in the further implementation and ongoing management of the 10% Campaign
27 and other food system economic development efforts.
28
29 • Direct the proposed Food Systems Advisory Team to also evaluate the possibility of a
30 separate but complimentary "local food sourcing" campaign specific to Orange County.
31
32 Merge many of the current initiatives into a common collaborative effort to grow
33 agricultural economic development and local food systems by creating market
34 infrastructure (food enterprise district, food hub, PFAP, rural aggregation center, Breeze
35 Farm development, etc.).
36
37 Commissioner Burroughs said the aggregation system seems like a big issue to
38 achieving the sourcing of local foods.
39 Mike Ortosky said there is one in Yancey County, and initially farmers were reluctant.
40 He said the farmers get eighty percent of the wholesale value. He said there is more buy -in
41 now. He said ultimately aggregation is the answer especially for smaller to mid -size
42 businesses. He said even larger businesses are looking at it as well. He said larger
43 businesses, like Whole Foods, want to buy locally if there is a way for small growers to provide
44 palettes of food at a time versus ten pounds at a time.
45 Commissioner Jacobs commented on the definition of "local ". He said there has been
46 same debate about the arts commission commissioning art for future and whether to do it
47 locally or to do a national search. He said he does not favor a national search but understands
48 that it makes it more difficult if the definition of local means Orange County.
13
1 Commissioner Jacobs said that there are more ways to do incentives. He said getting
2 locally produced foods into the local schools has been a goal for years, and it has proved
3 difficult. He suggested a pilot project to help local producers to get certification so that their
4 foods can go into schools. He suggested workig with just one school, or school system, initially.
5 He said Orange County could view it as an economic development tool and provide an
6 economic incentive by helping to provide the difference in the cost between what would be paid
7 to someone like Aramark versus paying someone locally. He asked if this concept had been
8 seen elsewhere.
9 Mike Ortosky said he has not seen specific examples, but there is a long list of incentive
10 possibilities. He said that not only Public Schools but also local colleges and universities are
11 interested in buying locally. He said everyone runs into the same problem of how we get
12 enough quantity. He added that the economic incentive would not have to last forever as
13 eventually the practice would become part of the fabric of the way food is accessed.
14 Commissioner Jacobs said trying to get someone in Orange County to start an
15 aggregating business may be difficult. He said he calls it a food broker. He said grants had
16 been sought previously to create to such a position. He said the government does not have to
17 do it but can encourage it, support it and commit to it. He asked Mike Ortosky to get a vision of
18 how the economic department can enable someone in the private sector to do the aggregation.
19 Mike Ortosky said he agreed with the use of the private sector. He said that direction
20 was pursued that Orange County would not have to subsidize for very long.
21 Commissioner Jacobs asked if the Sheriff has been spoken with about changing some
22 of the ways the jail purchases their food.
23 Mike Ortosky said it is on his agenda to meet with all who purchase foods. He said that
24 US Foods has a grant to work with several interns from NC State to figure out how to source
25 more locally. He said they are motivated economically but also by the demand for locally
26 sourced food.
27 Commissioner Rich said the Orange County web site indicates that there are Food
28 Coordinators in every county in North Carolina. She asked if there is contact with the Food
29 Coordinator in Orange County.
30 Carl Matyac said the Food Coordinator is Mike Lanier in Cooperative Extension, and he
31 is actively involved in the Breeze Farm program and currently his job has been expanded into
32 Caswell and Person Counties.
33 Commissioner Pelissier said she liked all of the recommendations. She asked if
34 different zoning and land use be required when a food hub or a food enterprise district is
35 mentioned. She said she wants the County to encourage this process to move forward.
36 Mike Ortosky said some of this could happen in Economic Development Districts
37 (EDDs). He said that two existing buildings, one County owned and one not, are being viewed
38 this Thursday as possible locations. He said he is unsure how much would have to be changed
39 through planning. He said there are a lot of innovation clusters being formed around the
40 Country. He said they are typically formed around biotech or IT, and occasionally around food
41 systems. He said the smaller version is food enterprise district, which is all of an economic
42 development district. He said even smaller version is the food hub. He spoke with developer in
43 Baltimore who is building a food hub. He said this is a campus with all of the collaborative
44 facilities on site. He said a part of that would be the rural aggregator, who could be out of town
45 or part of the economic district. He said the goal is to build a market for growers.
46 Commissioner Jacobs said Mike Lenier was originally hired for Mike Ortosky's position.
47 He said he appreciates the amount of effort going into this process. He said it is a refreshingly
48 aggressive opportunity.
49 Commissioner Price said the farmers would need a guarantee that someone is going to
50 buy their product. She said it will be important to start small. She said the aggregator models
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
14
are very similar to past co -ops. She said in co -ops someone would pool all the types of
produce from the various farms and get them to the market.
Commissioner Jacobs said a lot of the co -ops go back to the progressive movement one
hundred years ago. He said there is no longer a philosophical framework to work together
without government or big business involvement.
Mike Ortosky said it is important to just keep the conversation and the process moving
forward.
Commissioner Burroughs said the schools have to review their vendors every five years,
and that is a good time to have these conversations about local foods.
David Stancil said the schools have been approached and the County continues to try
and foster conversation.
David Stancil said when the Board of County Commissioners approved this Resolution
in 2012, they were asked to go back to review currently practices. He said departments that do
major catering were also surveyed.
Chair McKee expressed thanks for the hard work being done. He said he is particularly
intrigued about the aggregator. He said it will be critical that growers in Orange County have a
market for their product. He said if that piece cannot be put in place, the process will stall.
A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to
adjourn the meeting at 9:20 p.m.
Donna Baker
Clerk to the Board
Earl McKee, Chair
Attachment 3
2
3 DRAFT MINUTES
4 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
5 REGULAR MEETING
6 April 21, 2015
7 7:00 p.m.
8
9 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, April
10 21, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center, in Chapel Hill, N.C.
11
12 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair McKee and Commissioners Mia Burroughs,
13 Barry Jacobs, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Mark Dorosin
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Assistant County Manager
17 Cheryl Young and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other staff members will be identified
18 appropriately below)
19
20 Chair McKee called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. He said Commissioner Dorosin
21 would be unable to attend tonight due to a work conflict.
22
23 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
24 Chair McKee noted the following items at the Commissioners' places:
25 - White sheet - revised attachment 2 for item 6 -c- Amendment to the Orange County Code of
26 Ordinances Regarding the Parks and Recreation Council.
27
28 PUBLIC CHARGE
29 Chair McKee dispensed with the reading of the Public Charge
30
31 2. Public Comments
32 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
33
34 b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
35 (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda
36 below.)
37
38 3. Announcements and Petitions by Board Members
39 Commissioner Price said she attended the Unity in Community event and was glad to
40 see that this event was growing. She said, while at this event, she talked to people about the
41 need for extended hours for bus transit. She said she also attended the Junior Livestock Show
42 and Sale. She said it was very impressive to see young people showing the fruits of their
43 labors in the world of agriculture.
44 Commissioner Price said there have been ongoing meetings regarding the possibility of
45 a Veteran's Memorial in Orange County. She said the Chair and Mayor for the Town of Chapel
46 Hill will be getting a letter reflecting the will of the group, which includes Veterans from all parts
47 of the County, regarding a potential site for this memorial. She said the group is interested in
48 donating money to help fund the project. She said this is a great collaboration of staff,
49 Veterans and community members.
I Chair McKee thanked Commissioner Price and Commissioner Jacobs for their efforts
2 with this memorial.
3 Commissioner Rich said she is a member of the Intergovernmental Parks Work Group.
4 She said the group recently received an update from the Town of Chapel Hill on the artificial turf
5 at Cedar Falls Park. She said the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) spent $670,000 to
6 put artificial turf at this site, and the town added $530,000 for updating the facilities. She said
7 the Town has tracked use of the facilities from when they opened in Fiscal Year 2012 -2013
8 through 2013 -2014. She said there were an additional 67,200 through participants using the
9 field through rentals. She said there were also 7500 people who used the field during open
10 public use hours. During 2012 -2013, prior to the renovations, the number of people using the
11 field was under 5000. She said the use is astonishing. She added people are staying overnight
12 in the area for tournaments, thus creating additional revenue in room rates. She said the
13 project was a very good investment. She thanked the Commissioners for their support of this
14 project.
15 Commissioner Rich petitioned the Board to create an Intern Mentorship Program that
16 would begin in the summer of 2016. She had talked with the Human Resources Director and
17 the County Manager, both of whom feel positive about the potential of this program.
18 Commissioner Rich again petitioned the Board to make the Commissioners' emails
19 public. She has spoken with the County Manager and the IT department and would like to
20 garner the support of the BOCC for this practice.
21 Chair McKee said the technical aspect of getting the emails made public should be
22 able to be determined by the staff fairly quickly, and the petition can move forward.
23 Chair McKee said the artificial turf fields are a very good example of collaboration
24 between Town and County, benefitting everyone.
25 Commissioner Burroughs petitioned the Board to look at the feasibility of sit/stand
26 desks outside of the Health Department for County employees (the health department has
27 already initiated this process). She commented on the likely short and long term health benefits
28 for employees. She asked for staff to research this and to bring information back to the BOCC.
29 Chair McKee said he too attended the Junior Livestock Show and Sale. He said over
30 150 animals were shown by the 4 -H members. He said despite the weather it was a very
31 successful show.
32
33 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
34 a. Proclamation Recognizing Chapel Hill High School's Fencing Team Winning the
35 2015 State Championship
36 The Board considered approving a proclamation recognizing the Chapel Hill High
37 School Fencing Team for winning the 2015 State Championship and authorizing the Chair to
38 sign.
39 Commissioner Rich read the following proclamation:
40
41 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
42 PROCLAMATION OF RECOGNITION FOR
43 CHAPEL HILL HIGH SCHOOL'S FENCING TEAM WINNING THE
44 2015 STATE CHAMPIONSHIP
45
46 WHEREAS, on February 21, 2015 the Chapel Hill High School Fencing Team captured the
47 North Carolina Fencing League's State Championship; and,
48
49 WHEREAS, under the guidance of Coach Doug Guild, Chapel Hill High School's Fencing
50 Team earned its third state title, also winning the trophy in 2012 and 2014; and,
1
2 WHEREAS, laan Hufford, Ariel Hoerter, Jack Obringer, Brody Rich - Voorhees, Zoe Miller and
3 Darshan Gove contributed to winning the State Championship; and,
4
5 WHEREAS, through hard work, dedication, teamwork, and commitment, the Tigers brought
6 honor upon themselves, Chapel Hill High School, the Chapel Hill / Carrboro
7 School District and Orange County;
8
9 NOW, THEREFORE, be it proclaimed that the Orange County Board of Commissioners
10 expresses its sincere appreciation and respect for the Chapel Hill High School Fencing Team,
11 for the Tigers' outstanding achievement, and for their inspiration to youth across North Carolina
12 through their dedication, teamwork, and athletic prowess.
13
14 THIS, THE 21St DAY OF APRIL, 2015.
15
16 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Price to
17 approve the proclamation and authorize the Chair to sign the proclamation on behalf of the
18 Board.
19
20 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
21
22 5. Public Hearings
23 NONE
24
25 6. Consent Agenda
26
27 Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda Commissioner Price removed item
28 6 -d, Strategic Communications Plan (SCP), for discussion.
29
30 Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
31 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to
32 approve the remaining items on the consent agenda.
33
34 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
35
36 Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
37 Item 6 -d — Strategic Communications Plan (SCP)
38 Commissioner Price referred to page nine of the SCP, where a paragraph about
39 Audience Identification is discussed. She said she is struggling with the language of the
40 paragraph and wondered if it the paragraph was necessary.
41 Cheryl Young said when a communication strategy is considered, it is important that a
42 full list of the potential audience be included. She said sometime assumptions are made about
43 who may be interested in information. She said the intention of the paragraph is to offer a
44 listing to insure no one is left out. She said this puts a communication strategy in place that will
45 try and reach everyone.
46 Commissioner Price asked if this listing was a sort of hierarchy. She said in certain
47 situations other government officials would likely desire communications. She said perhaps she
48 is thinking mostly of emergency situations, and there may be separate protocol for those
49 events.
il
1 Cheryl Young said Emergency Services has a separate plan that is submitted to and
2 approved by the State. She said this document does not impede into that area.
3 Commissioner Price asked about language on page twelve that stated the Board may at
4 times "adopt a voice of persuasion "; and uses a bond referendum as an example. She said she
5 is not certain that the Board, current or future, will always be in consensus or be able to
6 persuade voters one way or another on a given topic.
7 Cheryl Young said the document sets forth that it is the responsibility of a Board
8 member to make certain that they clarify when they are speaking on behalf of themselves and
9 when they are speaking on behalf of the Board. She added that the document further states
10 that, in general, the Chair, or his /her designate, is considered to be the voice of the Board.
11 Commissioner Price said perhaps the example of the bond referendum was not an
12 appropriate one and could be removed.
13 Cheryl Young said the goal of the language was for the Board to encourage people to
14 vote and it was difficult to determine a good example. She said the bond referendum was
15 ultimately chosen as it is an instance when once the Board as a whole decides to move
16 forward, then the collective Board is moving forward and will encourage the public to vote for it.
17 Commissioner Price asked about the Communications Governance Team mentioned on
18 page fourteen and the creation of pilot program to live tweet BOCC meetings.
19 Cheryl Young said the Public Information Officer, Carla Banks, started this pilot program
20 about one month ago.
21 Commissioner Price said she did not know how this pilot program was going to work but
22 now understands clearly.
23 Commissioner Jacobs said the practice of listing the Commissioner that may be involved
24 in a work group or task force on the information contact has been declining. He said he would
25 like to see the practice resumed with regularity.
26 Commissioner Jacobs said he finds the Strategic Communications Plan to be somewhat
27 vague. He said perhaps the Communications Governance Team will help solve the issues. He
28 said he assumes a group will be established to flesh out the recommendations contained within
29 the document.
30 Cheryl Young said there will be an implementation that will go further into the plan, and
31 the plan is for guidance only.
32 Commissioner Jacobs said there is no recommendation for the Board to establish such
33 a group at this time.
34 Cheryl Young said appointments to the Communications Governance Team will be
35 requested from the Board after adoption of the plan.
36 Commissioner Jacobs said during the 2014 ice storm communication to the public was
37 not centralized. He said the County website would be a useful tool during such times to provide
38 updates on what the government is doing as well as information about utilities, etc. He said he
39 understands that Emergency Services updates some of this information, but he is not sure that
40 is their function.
41 Cheryl Young said such communication is directed by Emergency Services and
42 supported by the County Manager's office. She said the SCP calls for the County Manager's
43 Office to identify the duties and responsibilities of the Public Information Officer and the Public
44 Information Office.
45 Commissioner Jacobs asked if the Board should assume all details pertaining to this
46 type of emergency communication will be worked out, and the Board will find out during an
47 emergency if this assumption is true.
48 Bonnie Hammersley said during this past inclement weather in 2015 her office put
49 together an Emergency Communications Team. She said some of the communications were
50 improved, including greater use of the web page. She said her 2015 -2016 budget will have a
I response to the SCP and how it will be implemented. She said the document tonight is a
2 guiding document.
3 Commissioner Jacobs thanked the County Manager and said he would await her budget
4 recommendations and save his comments for that time.
5 Commissioner Price asked for clarification regarding point number ten, under priority A
6 list, on page thirteen (using the numbering at the bottom of the pages). She said the language
7 referring to establishing protocols to determine if information should be shared with all members
8 of the BOCC seemed counterintuitive to the original purpose of the SCP, which was to have
9 everyone on the same page. She also asked for clarification about point number fifteen, under
10 priority B, also on page thirteen regarding the existing ad hoc relationship among professionals.
11 Cheryl Young said in reference to protocols to follow regarding information
12 dissemination amongst Commissioners, every Commissioner may not want to receive every
13 communication that is sent from the County. She added that when there is communication that
14 is outside of the normal communication, there must be a protocol in place to insure that no
15 Commissioner is left out.
16 Cheryl Young said, with regard to number fifteen, there is an ad hoc group that has
17 been meeting for two years and is made up of community members and other governmental
18 entities. She said this point is included in the SCP to formalize and add some structure to this
19 ad hoc group.
20 Commissioner Rich clarified that the document is a guide and needs to be adopted by
21 the Board before they appoint the governance team. She said once the team is created,
22 including one of the Commissioners, then details of issues like those brought up this evening
23 will be addressed in much greater depth. She said that in case of emergency, the County
24 Manager is the go -to person for the BOCC and the Board Chair is the one to call a State of
25 Emergency. She said with that combination, and the ad hoc committee, she hopes that all
26 questions will be answered in a timely manner.
27
28 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
29 approve the Strategic Communications Plan for Orange County.
30
31 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
32
33 a. Minutes
34 The Board approved the minutes as submitted by the Clerk to the Board for the following
35 meetings: March 17, 2015 and March 19, 2015.
36 b. Fiscal Year 2014 -15 Budget Amendment #8
37 The Board approved budget and grant project ordinance amendments for fiscal year 2014 -2015
38 for the Department of Aging.
39 c. Amendment to the Orange County Code of Ordinances Regarding the Parks and
40 Recreation Council
41 The Board will adopted a resolution to amend the Orange County Code of Ordinances related
42 to the Parks and Recreation Council and associated language.
43 e. County Support for My Brother's Keeper
44 The Board will expressed support for the My Brother's Keeper (MBK) initiative in Orange
45 County and authorized County staff to proceed with any necessary steps with the Community
46 Giving Fund and the Triangle Community Foundation to accept and process tax - deductible
47 contributions in support of My Brother's Keeper.
48
49
50 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
2 7. Regular Agenda
3
4 a. Solid Waste Program Fee Recommendation - Solid Waste Advisory Group
5 The Board received the Solid Waste Advisory Group (SWAG) recommendation on the
6 funding mechanism for solid waste /recycling programs and considered endorsing the fee, to
7 then be communicated to the Towns of Carrboro, Chapel Hill and Hillsborough.
8 Gayle Wilson, County Solid Waste Director, said last June the BOCC created the
9 SWAG, and this intergovernmental group began meeting in August. He said subsequent to the
10 group's creation, additional representatives were added: one from the University of North
11 Carolina (UNC) and one from UNC Healthcare. He said in November 2014 the group's primary
12 focus became the funding mechanism for the County wide recycling program. He said the staff
13 have been meeting and communicating on a regular basis. He said at the November 20th
14 Assembly of Governments (AOG) meeting, a preliminary update was given regarding the
15 progress of the advisory group. He said on March 26th the AOG met and discussed two
16 proposed options for funding the recycling program:
17 • option 1: a two part fee; an urban fee and a rural fee and
18 • option 2: a single County -wide comprehensive fee
19
20 He said at the SWAG meeting on April 1, 2015, SWAG endorsed option 2, and this
21 option went back to each governmental entity to vote on. He said Chapel Hill and Hillsborough
22 have already met and voted for option 2. He said the Town of Carrboro is meeting tonight. He
23 said SWAG is present tonight for a possible decision from the BOCC.
24 Gayle Wilson said the County Manager is recommending that the Board of County
25 Commissioners endorse the fee recommendation and direct the County Manager to incorporate
26 the fee into the proposed Fiscal 2015 -2016 Annual Budget; and direct the County Manager to
27 communicate the BOCC decision to the Carrboro, Chapel Hill and Hillsborough Town Managers
28 and request that the Towns prepare to incorporate County authorization to assess the Solid
29 Waste Programs Fee into their Fiscal 2015 -2016 Budget Ordinances.
30 Commissioner Price asked for the criteria if residents are in need of a subsidy for the
31 fee.
32 Gayle Wilson said there is an income criterion of about $29,000 per year for the
33 homeowner of the property. He added the homeowner must reside in the property for which
34 they seek a subsidy. He said the current 3 -r fee subsidy will need to be modified to incorporate
35 the new fee.
36 Commissioner Price requested the lengthening of the hours at the Convenience Centers
37 as the rural residents will not be getting curbside service immediately.
38 Chair McKee asked to limit the current discussion to questions only. He said debate can
39 occur after public comment.
40
41 PUBLIC COMMENT:
42 Alex Castro, Jr. said he is a rural resident in Bingham Township. He said he is
43 concerned about the proposed expansion of the rural curbside recycling. He said many people
44 do not have a curb or a short paved way to the road. He added that some residents are
45 mobility challenged and hauling a loaded ninety -five gallon recycling bin to the roadside would
46 be a strain and a difficult task. He said everyone has a mail box at the road side but not
47 everyone has a good location to place a ninety -five gallon bin at the road side. He referenced
48 his own property having a forty -five degree slope and being unable to accommodate a bin. He
49 said other residents have long, gravel or dirt driveways that make the large bin difficult to move.
50 He said the current practice of taking manageable sized containers to the Convenience Centers
7
1 has worked well. He said the residents travel to do all their daily activities, and stopping at the
2 Convenience Center is just another item on their list. He said the potential reduction in services
3 to consolidate services only at Walnut Grove and the Eubanks Center would be a great
4 inconvenience. He said the current Orange County recycling rates of sixty -four percent are the
5 best in the State, and he sees no need to change something that is working. He said he would
6 rather see outlying Convenience Centers supported. He said instead of gold plating the
7 Eubanks Center the County should make better use of the funds by making improvements to
8 the Centers. He said Orange Public Transit is going to expand services to Efland, Cedar Grove
9 and Little River. He said it would be nice to have bus stop signs and rudimentary shelters
10 instead of building a massive upgrade to the Eubanks Center. He said it is important to
11 consider the impact of decisions. He said the needs of the Solid Waste Department are being
12 served and not those of the rural seniors.
13 Chair McKee said the Board normally does not respond to public comments but will do
14 so this time as they have heard comments similar to Mr. Castro's several times. He said he felt
15 it is important to take time to address the concerns.
16 Commissioner Jacobs said the BOCC worked extensively with staff to make sure
17 residents can still use their small recycling bins instead of the larger bins.
18 Gayle Wilson said as they implement the program, in the areas not served by curbside
19 recycling, a survey or two will be conducted to see what type of bin residents would prefer. He
20 said those residents preferring smaller bins that can be placed in a vehicle and driven to the
21 road way may certainly receive them. He said it is not mandatory to recycle, but staff would
22 encourage everyone to do so.
23 Gayle Wilson said for those that qualify for the handicapped program, the staff will
24 continue to come to the home to retrieve the recycling. He said the resident would not have to
25 bring anything to the end of their driveways.
26 Chair McKee said the fee is a combined one for curbside service and the Convenience
27 Centers. He said the recycling fee has been discontinued for the past two years. He said this
28 fee is a reinstatement of the previously discontinued one, and for those who were already on a
29 route the fee is a modest increase. For those who were not on a route, he recognizes the fee is
30 a bit more of an increase. Chair McKee reiterated that the BOCC usually does not respond to
31 public comments, but as there is a vote on this issue this evening, the questions should be
32 answered.
33 Norma White said she is here to speak on the behalf of the rural seniors. She said five
34 out of the seven townships are rural: Little River, Cedar Grove, Cheeks, Eno and Bingham.
35 She said roughly twelve to thirteen percent of the population of these townships is seniors over
36 the age of 65. She said they number about 4000, according to the 2010 census. She said the
37 number of seniors in all of Orange County number about 16,000, so the seniors in rural
38 townships constitute about twenty -five percent of all seniors in the County. She said seniors
39 are aging in place in their townships. She said the numbers will only increase by the next
40 census, five years away. She said seniors are trying to stay put in their homes, and this
41 practice should be supported when possible. She said the given rural condition is gravel
42 driveways from the homes to the main roads. She said moving any rolled item over such a
43 surface is difficult. She said she is glad to hear that, for those who qualify for the handicapped
44 program, staff will come to their homes. However, those over 65 years of age in the rural
45 townships should be able to opt out of the County arrangement for curbside recycling. She said
46 rural seniors dispose of their garbage and recycling differently by use of their cars and the
47 convenience centers. She said she hopes that Orange County will pay attention and help make
48 the lives of the seniors easier to deal with.
49 Bonnie Hauser said she likes the idea of the flat fee but feels that the rural services may
50 suffer as Towns start to add pressure on costs or fees. She said when the global economy
I crumbled, Orange County quickly cut the hours at Convenience Centers and tried to close
2 Bradshaw Quarry Road, which was a small and inexpensive center. She said this center
3 remained open after public response. She said soon after that debate the County announced a
4 program to overhaul and modernize all Convenience Centers. She said this came as a great
5 surprise to rural residents who had fought strongly to keep a small center like Bradshaw Quarry
6 Road open. She said the new $2 million Walnut Grove Center is impressive, but she wonders if
7 a more modest center would have been sufficient. She said the new center planned for
8 Eubanks will cost more. She said at the same time the County's plan to upgrade rural
9 Convenience Centers has been deferred, with Bradshaw Quarry not on the list for
10 improvements. She said there is community concern that after spending millions on Walnut
11 Grove and Eubanks, that the County will close its rural centers under pressure about costs.
12 She said perhaps the concern is unfounded, but actions speak louder than words. She said
13 one way to alleviate community concerns is re- sequence the project and upgrade High Rock,
14 Ferguson, and Bradshaw Quarry first, costing a lot less. She said if the towns decide to
15 challenge the fees, it will not be at the expense of rural services. She said once the flat fee
16 project is fully adopted, the plan for Eubanks can be revisited with the hope of doing a more
17 modest facility.
18 Bonnie Hauser said if there is County -wide curbside pick up then small haulers should
19 be accommodated. She said local haulers use pick -up trucks to retrieve trash and recycling at
20 homes in one trip. She said it is a wonderful option for seniors and these businesses are
21 already serving the rural areas and their services are flexible, cost effective and a better fit for
22 the rural areas. She added the process would work even better if the small haulers were
23 allowed to use the Walnut Grove facility versus hauling waste to Durham. She asked the
24 BOCC to commit to flexible, cost effective services for all residents.
25 Commissioner Price asked if it is possible to extend the hours and services at the
26 convenience centers.
27 Gayle Wilson said yes. He said the idea can be discussed during the budget talks.
28 Commissioner Rich said she served on the SWAG committee. She said she wanted to
29 note that the Eubanks facility is a priority of the Town leaders as well as UNC. She said it is a
30 well used facility. She said the Town is very supportive of the Eubanks Center upgrade.
31 Commissioner Jacobs said the SWAG was also trying to make a recommendation for
32 adoption in a timely manner so as to fit into all of the budget discussions around the County.
33 He said that Carrboro was the most vociferous of having one fee but is expected to vote in
34 favor of it this evening at their meeting; which is a significant accomplishment. He said most of
35 the elected officials on the SWAG saw the importance of having a unified approach and
36 stressing the commitment to county wide recycling. He said symbolically the one fee was
37 preferred by the elected officials.
38 Commissioner Jacobs said the SWAG is meeting tomorrow and will start discussing the
39 interlocal agreement. He said staff had also been asked to provide a list of goals, and one
40 reiteration of goals had been presented to the SWAG, to which the SWAG had responded. He
41 said the group will discuss another reiteration tomorrow. He said by the end of the fiscal year
42 the SWAG should be able to relate where these priorities are going. He said some priorities
43 may not come into play for years, while others can be addressed immediately.
44 Commissioner Jacobs said he appreciated Chair McKee correcting repeated
45 misinformation by residents. He said there has been no discussion at all about closing any
46 Convenience Centers. He said doing a use survey of the different waste facilities has been
47 discussed to see who gets the benefits of the different services.
48 Commissioner Pelissier said in the last few years there have been a lot of conversations
49 about the rural versus urban recycling and she hopes there will now be conversation on how
I
1 everyone can do their best with recycling. She said recycling has increased dramatically with
2 new large bins and success is being achieved.
3 Commissioner Rich said when the information about the roll carts went out to the rural
4 segments, the response was enormous. She said roll carts could not be delivered quickly
5 enough. She asked if there are still rural residents waiting for carts.
6 Gayle Wilson said that is correct and he said a survey indicated about 7000 residents
7 wanted the new roll carts. He said 7600 roll carts were purchased in the current budget. He
8 said the existing carts are all distributed, and 300 more carts have been ordered. He said they
9 will be distributed as soon as they arrive. He said many people who thought they did not want
10 the roll carts have changed their minds.
11 Commissioner Rich said no one is telling residents in the Towns and County what to do,
12 but the goal is to give people recycling options and promote recycling. She said the
13 participation goal was 61 % and with it being at 64% percent, everyone should be very proud.
14 Chair McKee said residents with trash pick up in urban areas will not use Convenience
15 Centers as much as those living in rural areas. He said he has spoken with Chapel Hill
16 residents about the Convenience Centers, and when these residents need the Convenience
17 Centers, they really need them. He said that having the Convenience Centers open for items
18 that cannot be put out on the curb is a major convenience for them. He said the lower number
19 of carts initially purchased may have been the result of his objections to buying carts when the
20 response was unknown. He said he is glad to see more carts are needed versus having too
21 many and them going to waste. He said the issue of carts versus bins has been addressed.
22 He said the fee will be present whether the service is used or not. He said at his home he has
23 a large cart. He said before using this he went to the Convenience Center. He said currently
24 he and his wife carry the recyclables to the collection point behind Home Depot.
25 Chair McKee said he agreed with Commissioner Price's idea of trying to extend the
26 convenience centers' hours while they wait for the rural roll carts to be distributed. He said he
27 has never heard any conversation about closing the Convenience Centers by this Board or
28 anyone else during his tenure.
29 Commissioner Rich said she does have some concerns about the extension of hours
30 but will wait for the budget discussions.
31
32 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Rich to:
33
34 1) endorse the fee recommendation and direct the County Manager to incorporate the fee into
35 the proposed Fiscal 2015/16 Annual Budget; and
36
37 2) direct the County Manager to communicate the BOCC decision to the Carrboro, Chapel Hill
38 and Hillsborough Town Managers and request that the Towns prepare to incorporate County
39 authorization to assess the Solid Waste Programs Fee into their Fiscal 2015/16 Budget
40 Ordinances.
41
42 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
43
44 Chair McKee expressed thanks to the members of the public for their comments.
45
46 b. Community Home Trust Interlocal Agreement
47 The Board considered entering an Interlocal Agreement with the Towns of Chapel Hill,
48 Carrboro and Hillsborough with regard to oversight and funding of the Community Home Trust.
49 Bonnie Hammersley (she was just repeating the above paragraph, so I deleted that)
50 read the following background information:
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
10
BACKGROUND:
In 1990, the County, along with Carrboro, Hillsborough, and Chapel Hill, created the Orange
Community Housing Corporation (OCHC) to create affordable housing opportunities in Orange
County. Since its inception, the Towns and the County have annually provided operating
support to the organization.
In 1998 the Towns and County recommended that OCHC staff the newly created Community
Land Trust later renamed the Community Home Trust. The Community Home Trust has
requested that the elected boards consider entering into an interlocal agreement to:
1. Clarify the responsibilities of the Towns, Orange County, and the Community Home
Trust; and
2. Provide a formula for allocating operating funds for the organization.
At the November 2014 Assembly of Governments meeting, the elected officials were briefed on
the progress of developing an interlocal agreement regarding the Community Home Trust. Staff
reported that each partner would return to their respective boards with a draft of an agreement.
The staffs have worked with the Community Home Trust staff to draft the attached agreement.
Key components of the agreement include:
1. Reinforcement that the County and the Towns are committed to creating successful
affordable housing opportunities Orange County;
2. Acknowledgement and agreement that the Community Home Trust's programs serve
households earning up to 115 percent of the area median income;
3. Annual review of the agreement during the annual budget cycle by the elected boards of all
of the partners;
4. Continuing to appoint a representative from each jurisdiction to the Community Home
Trust board of directors (Section 111.6)
5. Identification of responsibilities of the Community Home Trust (Section III.C), and the partner
jurisdictions (Section III.D);
6. Agreement on an annual funding formula based on the ratio of Community Home
Trust homes to the total number of the organization's homes (Section III.D.3);
7. Agreement to allow Community Home Trust to provide an unrestricted fee simple deed of
trust to lenders of Home Trust homes. In short, if a home is foreclosed upon, the
Towns and County agree to cancel all affordability restrictions recorded against the property.
This would increase the lending options to buyers. (Section III.D.5a.);
8. Agreement that homes subsidized by local funds may be resold to households earning up to
115% of the area median income without repaying the funds (Section III.D.5.b); and
9. Agreement that homes could be sold out of the Community Home Trust inventory upon
approval of the Manager (Section III.D.5.c).
Since the agreement would be reviewed annually, the staffs from each jurisdiction would
11
1 continue to work with the Community Home Trust to evaluate the funding formula and the
2 current model for homeownership. If identified, alternative models will be brought forward to the
3 Board for consideration.
4
5 FINANCIAL IMPACT
6 Based on the proposed formula, the County's annual financial contribution will be 33% of the
7 approved funding needs of the Community Home Trust.
8
9 RECOMMENDATIONS
10 The Manager recommends that the Board approve the Interlocal Agreement and authorize the
11 Manager to execute the same.
12
13 Bonnie Hammersley said in November 2014 the median income was increased to 115%
14 and the fee simple deed language "unrestricted" was not included. She said this change has
15 been made and the unrestricted language is now included.
16
17 PUBLIC COMMENT:
18 Robert Dowling, Executive Director, Community Home Trust (CHT), said the Board is
19 the first governmental body to discuss this item, and they have been talking about this
20 agreement for two years. He said a shared set of expectations is desired and should have
21 been in place years ago. He said the CHT is a creation of local governments. He said the CHT
22 has done a variety of things for local governments, but in the past 12 years the focus has been
23 on inclusionary housing mostly in Chapel Hill. He said the CHT has been successful, and there
24 are 240 homes in their inventory of affordable homes. He said the challenges faced by the
25 CHT are financial. He said 99 -year ground leases are being assigned, and the organization
26 needs to be viable and well run. He said there has been no increase in funding in 7 years
27 which is not sustainable. He said the agreement offers a model for funding the organization.
28 Commissioner Rich said she was on the CHT Board before Commissioner Price, and a
29 good portion of their meetings were spent talking about this proposal. She said at the AOG
30 there was an overall positive feel from all the local governments.
31 Commissioner Jacobs said affordable housing is a nationwide problem. He said this
32 has been a long time community effort.
33
34 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Price for the
35 Board to approve the Interlocal Agreement and authorize the Manager to execute the same.
36
37 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
38
39 Chair McKee said over the next year there must be a plan to address the issue of
40 affordable housing with the Towns and to work with CHT and other organizations to address
41 this problem. He said the need for affordable housing in Orange County may not be as great
42 as some other areas, but there is still a need.
43 Commissioner Rich said Allan Leigh who had been Chair of the CHT is leaving. She
44 said that Allan had guided them through this agreement, and she sends well wishes to him from
45 the Board.
46
47 c. Child Care Budget Planning Information
48 The Board discussed funding needs and possible strategies for meeting the need for
49 child care subsidy for Orange County families.
12
1 Nancy Coston, Social Services Director, said this item was to be discussed in March but
2 was canceled due to inclement weather but she wanted to update them on some possible
3 scenarios. She reviewed the following background information:
4
5 BACKGROUND: The Orange County Department of Social Services (DSS) has offered
6 subsidized child care to all children placed on the waitlist prior to January 1, 2015, as directed
7 by the Orange County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) using funds in the Social
8 Services current fiscal year budget, state reallocations and funds made available by the BOCC.
9 A new waiting list was started on January 1, 2015. Staff was asked to come back to the BOCC
10 and present funding proposals for different child care subsidy scenarios for FY 2015 -16.
11 Although some scenarios were developed for the March 5, 2015 work session that was
12 canceled due to inclement weather (see attached), additional trend analysis has now been
13 included in the information being presented. The original cost estimate for Fiscal Year 2014-
14 2015 was based on an expectation of 820 children per month receiving subsidy. Due to some of
15 the changes implemented for part time care and due to the time needed to enroll new children,
16 the expenses for this year will be below the $5,023,956 and 820 children originally anticipated.
17 The new estimate for children served during this fiscal year will be 724 per month and currently
18 807 are receiving subsidy.
19
20 Although the original estimate for state child care revenue was $3.4 million, DSS has actually
21 received $4.4 million after several reallocations. With these changes, the agency anticipates
22 approximately $150,000 in county funds remaining in the child care fund on June 30, 2015. All
23 estimates in this abstract also include the cost to continue serving the children impacted by the
24 change in income eligibility and family composition implemented by the North Carolina General
25 Assembly last year (school age children below 133% of the Federal Poverty Level and children
26 living with relatives other than parents).
27
28 Given that the children who have been served from the waitlist will continue to be served next
29 year, the cost for next year is estimated at $4,342,500 assuming average attrition and taking no
30 new children from the waitlist. Since the state estimate has again been reduced to $3.4 million,
31 the budget approved by the Social Services Board and submitted to the County Manager
32 includes an increase of $639,000 in County dollars to cover the cost of currently enrolled
33 children. This estimate does not allow for clearing the current waitlist or serving children as
34 attrition occurs. These funds, if appropriated, would serve an average of 724 children per
35 month. There are currently 115 children on the waiting list and the agency estimates that 100
36 children would receive services if the waiting list was cleared through June 30, 2015. The
37 Department has been studying ways to eliminate the current waitlist. Based on conversations
38 with state officials, the Department anticipates receiving an additional $300,000 above the
39 estimated $3.4 million in the DSS proposed 2015 -2016 budget. The Department believes that
40 approximately 800 children per month could be served with the funds in the budget
41 recommended by the Social Services Board. If there is some shortage of funds to meet this
42 need, the Department could cover these costs by moving any unexpended funds from other line
43 items during the year. Therefore the Department recommends clearing the current waitlist and
44 continuing without a waitlist through June 30, 2015.
45
46 Another stated goal of the Board of County Commissioners is to eliminate the waitlist on an
47 ongoing basis. Trend data has been analyzed by the Department and the highest number of
48 children served when there was no waitlist was 928. The trends also show that on average
49 approximately 30 children are added to the waitlist each month and 12 terminate from subsidy
50 each month. Based on this net increase of 18 children being added to the subsidy program
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
13
each month (and therefore requiring varying amounts of support for the year), the Department
estimates eliminating the waitlist would add $702,000 in county costs to the Fiscal Year 2015-
2016 budget. This amount would be in addition to the $928,615 in the proposed budget
approved by the DSS Board. If more than $300,000 in reallocated funds are received from the
state or if attrition proves higher than projected, these costs might be lower. If funds are not
made available to eliminate the waitlist, children would be added to the waitlist beginning July 1,
2015. Only if the average number of children drops below 800 would children from the waitlist
be served.
Another strategy for addressing this need would be to increase the number of children served
incrementally. The estimated annual cost to add 50 children to the monthly average of children
served is $300,000 and this is based on each child receiving subsidy for all 12 months. By
increasing the average number of children served, the Board could develop an alternative
strategy to address the need and thereby reduce the length of time children are on the waitlist.
Nancy Coston said there will need to be a discussion during the budget process about
whether or not to continue to fund services to 200% the poverty rate for children ages six and
up. She said right now children ages six and up should be funded up to 133% the poverty rate
but Orange County has been serving up to 200% at cost to the County. She said this is a factor
that has been figured into any estimates provided to the BOCC with an assumption that
services would continue to be provided up to 200% the poverty rate. She said DSS strives
never to terminate services once a child has been removed from the waiting list. She said the
State revenue has always been a shooting match for DSS. She said typically the State ends
up giving more money than estimated but it is not a guarantee. She said this year Orange
County received $1 million more than estimated from the State. She assumes there will be
some additional money next year but not necessarily as much.
Nancy Coston asked if the Board of County Commissioners has the desired information
from her office and does the BOCC need more option scenarios. She said the 50 children
being served every month for 12 months will cost $300,000. She said there are about 130 on
the childcare wait list since January 1, 2015. She said there are monies in the budget. She
said with the flexibility DSS was given this year to move money around, it is believed that they
can serve those children next year with their current budget proposal for 2015 to 2016.
Chair McKee asked if the County Manager had anything to add and how it may play into
her proposal.
Bonnie Hammersley said she has worked closely with Nancy Coston on this issue and
her recommended budget does reflect what Nancy Coston just shared with the Board, and
those children will continue to be covered going into 2015 -2016.
Commissioner Jacobs said Nancy Coston has always been supportive of doing as much
as possible with the waiting list and getting subsidies. He said he especially appreciates the
way she is doing the process, giving these residents some assurance they would not be
dropped. He said his concern is that this is almost an open ended problem and he appreciated
Nancy Coston's caution in giving the incremental options for the Board to consider.
Nancy Coston said that is why specifics cannot be assured, because the need is such a
constant moving target. She said DSS is sensitive that this is an exponential kind of issue for
the children that are added on each month. She said DSS does the exponential math each
time.
A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to
recommend that the Board discuss child care funding options, approve clearing the waitlist
through June 30, 2015, and identify any other information needed to develop a long range
14
1 budget proposal for child care subsidy and provide guidance to the Department regarding the
2 current waitlist.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
Commissioner Jacobs asked if clearing the waiting list would include the 130 people on
it currently.
Nancy Coston said yes. She added there would be another 40 -50 people by July 1,
2015.
Commissioner Jacobs asked, if the Board passes this motion, whether they are
committing to almost 200 more people beyond those already being subsidized; at the cost of
$6,000 per person.
Nancy Coston said yes.
Commissioner Pelissier asked if the figure given by DSS in scenario number 3 is based
on one hundred and eighty children.
Nancy Coston said yes. She said it is assumed that 180 would be joining the ranks by
July 1, 2015.
Commissioner Pelissier asked when voting, the Board is really voting on scenario
number 3 in terms of the actual cost figures.
Nancy Coston said yes.
Commissioner Jacobs asked for the additional cost of clearing the wait list compared to
clearing to where it is now.
Nancy Coston said the calculations for next year would cover the numbers in scenario 3;
if there is flexibility to move money around. She said if both the County and the State give the
funds that DSS expect next year it would enable the wait list to be cleared through June 30,
2015. She said the waiting list would start again July 1,' 2015
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
d. Additional Discussion on Funding School and County Capital Needs with a
Potential November 2016 Bond Referendum
The Board discussed potentially addressing County and School capital needs with a
November 2016 Bond Referendum and providing direction to staff on next steps.
Bonnie Hammersley said the Board of County Commissioners discussed this on March
3, 2015. She said the issue regarding the lack of the school facility priority lists hindered the
discussion, thus it is being brought back tonight. She said Orange County Schools (OCS) have
indicated that their priority list will not be ready until May. She said attachment 1 to the abstract
has decision points outlined as a guide for the BOCC.
Chair McKee said some of the reluctance of OCS to provide a priority list may have
hinged on their search for a new superintendent. He said a new superintendent is now secured
and is to be sworn in on April 27, 2015. He said the OCS priority list should now hopefully
move forward quickly. He opened up a general discussion and thanked the manager for the
decision points to aid the Board in moving through the discussion.
Decision points:
HOW SHOULD ORANGE COUNTY FUND SCHOOL AND COUNTY CAPITAL PROJECTS?
POTENTIAL NOVEMBER 2016 BOND REFERENDUM
Does the Board want to schedule a bond referendum?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
15
A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier
to approve scheduling a bond referendum.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
If there is a bond referendum, when should the bond referendum occur?
May 2016 or November 2016
A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Price to
schedule the bond referendum for November 2016.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
If there is a bond referendum, should it address one need, or multiple needs?
Commissioner Jacobs suggested a scientific voter poll be conducted to ask the
residents of Orange County what they would like to see on a bond referendum. He said the
Board recognizes that school needs predominate but seems divided on whether these needs
should be the sole purpose of the bond issue. He suggested giving the voters an opportunity to
think about the issues rather than acting on individual convictions of the Board members.
Commissioner Burroughs said she thinks that there is more than enough work to be
done in many facilities within both school systems. She said the needs are far greater than
what can be accomplished by this bond referendum. She said she appreciates Commissioner
Jacobs's suggestion for a poll but it would be difficult to poll the voters to sort out priorities. She
said she does not have much faith in that particular tool being helpful. She will continue to
advocate for the bond for the schools. She said it is not even close to what the schools will
need, but the systems will make these funds work to the best of their ability, using them wisely.
Commissioner Price echoed Commissioner Burroughs. She said all the Commissioners
have been out in the community and have a good idea of the capital needs. She said the
recycling fee will be new, as well as the upcoming property revaluation, and she feels adding
multiple items to the bond is too much to ask of the constituents. She supports focusing on
schools only for this bond.
Commissioner Rich said she has talked to the community and has not met one person
who supports having just the schools on the bond. She said Chapel Hill has an upcoming bond
with four or five issues. She said each issue is up for a vote, and if people only want to support
schools they would only vote for the schools. She said she believes a majority of the money
would go to the schools. She added she sees no reason to be shortsighted and that this is the
Board's opportunity to fund the schools as well as possibly affordable housing. She is not in
favor of having a bond with just one issue on it.
Commissioner Pelissier said she previously supported schools and affordable housing
on the bond, but she is now in favor of having one issue on the bond and that is for schools.
She said the conversation about the possibility of a bond arose out of the needs of schools.
She said the schools needs are evident now. She said the Board knows that a bond would
raise taxes. She said that doing a poll, and the necessary education of the public, would be too
complex. She said if other items are on the bond and they fail, it leads to a lost opportunity to
give the schools more funds. She said the Board knows the schools' needs already exceed
what the bond can offer and taking away from those funds causes the needs to go unmet. She
added there are real needs and not a wish list of fancy things for the schools.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
16
Commissioner Pelissier said she too has talked to other elected officials and community
members and most said to make the bond simple by focusing only on schools. She said the
public can be informed about the needs and why taxes would need to be increased.
Commissioner Price said there still needs to be an action plan regarding affordable
housing and the details of such a plan are uncertain at this time.
Chair McKee said he also originally advocated for both schools and affordable housing
being on the bond. He said until a comprehensive plan regarding how to address affordable
housing is created with the Towns that the issue should not be put on a bond referendum. He
said he now supports having one issue on the bond and that being schools.
Commissioner Jacobs said the decision to have only one issue on the bond short
changes the residents of Orange County. He said there should be no reason to be afraid to
hear the opinions of the voters. He said he found the voters discriminating enough to
determine their own priorities and to tell their elected officials these priorities. He said a
monochromatic bond is not a good idea. He said the CI P does not bind future Boards. He said
a bond is an agreement of what the voters want and the provision of those wants. He said a
CIP is changeable, and none of the other things like senior needs, affordable housing needs,
park needs, or improvements in sidewalks or bike lane will be guaranteed in this bond if the
only item on it is schools. He said he has always supported schools but every year at public
budget hearings the Board points out to citizens that it is the responsibility of the Board to care
for more than just the schools and the education systems. He said it is his opinion that this
decision flies in the face of those comments.
Commissioner Rich said the lack of an affordable housing plan should not preclude
asking the voters to vote for funding for affordable housing. She said with such a vote at least
there will be a funding mechanism in place. She said the Board should pay attention to the
Chapel Hill bond as it is a competing issue. She said the Chapel Hill bond may include solid
waste, despite their lack of a solid waste plan. She said she is supportive of schools, and just
because she wants to put affordable housing on a bond does not mean she does not support
schools.
Chair McKee said the Board is clearly not unified. He said having one issue on this
bond does not preclude a future bond for other needs. He said it his opinion that the current
overarching need in Orange County is schools.
Commissioner Burroughs said putting schools on the bond as a single issue will help
save money down the road. She said such stewardship of funds is a good decision.
A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier
that this bond will be for the capital needs of the schools.
VOTE: Ayes, 4 (Chair McKee, Commissioner Price, Commissioner Pelissier, Commissioner
Burroughs); Nays, 2 (Commissioner Jacobs and Commissioner Rich)
MOTION PASSES 4 -2
Chair McKee said just because this is a divided vote does not mean this is a divided
Board on their commitment to schools or other needs throughout the County.
If there is a bond referendum, what process will be followed? And does the number of
"needs" on the referendum affect the process?
Not applicable
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
17
Will there be a Bond Referendum Advisory Committee /Capital Needs Advisory Task
Force? Does this change if there is only one need addressed via the referendum?
Chair McKee said with only one item on the bond that an advisory committee is not
warranted.
Commissioner Pelissier said though she agreed that a bond committee is not needed,
she does believe a public engagement process is necessary. She said there should be joint
meetings with both school boards as well as allow for the public to thoroughly review what the
Boards are saying and to make public comments on the proposed bond.
Commissioner Rich said the $125 million bond will be used very quickly, and she would
like to see a long term plan as to how to maintain schools in the future.
Commissioner Jacobs asked how would the money be divided between the two school
districts and who would make those decisions.
Chair McKee said, in his opinion, such decisions would be made either under the
direction of the BOCC or by an Advisory Committee, in conjunction with staff.
Commissioner Burroughs said there are two elected school boards, and she knows at
least one board that has spent a great deal of time determining the priorities. She agreed with
Commissioner Pelissier regarding public engagement. She said she is not sure another
committee is needed. She said it is duplicative of their elected officials. She does see merit in
the creation of a separate group to look at long term maintenance. She said she does believe
the education committee is needed to go out and share information. She said the Board of
County Commissioners will need to decide how to split the funding. She said making potentially
difficult decisions is part of the Board's responsibility.
Commissioner Pelissier echoed Commissioner Rich's comments about having a long
term plan for the maintenance of not only schools, but all County facilities. She said regarding
the division of funds, the BOCC will need to look at both school systems and what they are
proposing, and the projections for increased capacity.
Commissioner Rich said she does not have a problem with another committee. She
said she and Commissioner Pelissier served on a committee for the' /4 cents sales tax. She
said the committee was valuable as it was a mixture of community residents and elected
officials.
Chair McKee asked if the committee to which Commissioner Rich is referring was the
Education Committee or a separate committee.
Commissioner Rich said it would be a separate committee from the school Committee.
Commissioner Pelissier said this committee was not appointed by the BOCC but rather
bubbled up within the community, and it worked well. She said a committee is needed but not
necessarily appointed by the BOCC.
Chair McKee asked how the BOCC wanted to proceed regarding his suggestion that the
Capital Needs Advisory committee be taken off the table but that an Education Committee be
formed.
Commissioner Price said she saw the value in an Education Committee with this bond
referendum.
Commissioner Jacobs said the conversation is going in many different directions
simultaneously. He agreed with Commissioner Burroughs that there has been long term
planning by the school systems on maintenance but this was overtaken by circumstances. He
said whatever the Board does a public process will be needed.
Commissioner Jacobs said he agreed with Commissioner Rich that there needs to be
long term plans for capital needs that the County can afford.
IN
I A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs
2 to not have an Advisory Task Force but a Bond Education Committee.
3
4 Commissioner Rich asked if the Commissioners will appoint these members.
5 Commissioner Pelissier said her motion only addressed the existence of an Education
6 Committee without saying if the Board will appoint or to set the committee's size.
7 Commissioner Rich asked if the Board would discuss the committee tonight or at
8 another time.
9 Chair McKee said it could be discussed tonight or at a later date if the Board so wills.
10
11 VOTE: Ayes, 5; Nays, 1 (Commissioner Jacobs)
12
13 MOTION PASSES 5 -1
14
15 Chair McKee said we will now turn the discussion to the composition of the Education
16 Committee.
17 Commissioner Burroughs said she would be comfortable leaving this decision for a little
18 further down the road.
19 Commissioner Price said some of the members should be appointed by the Board of
20 County Commissioners, to insure a core group, and other members could be recruited
21 elsewhere. She said there should be some flexibility on the committee and perhaps some staff
22 or a couple of Board of County Commissioners could work on it.
23 Chair McKee agreed with Commissioner Burroughs to delay this discussion at this time
24 and to have proposed solutions for composition on a future agenda.
25 Commissioner Rich said she would like to see some suggestions for Committee
26 members. She would like some research to go into who would be the best people to help the
27 Board educate the community.
28 Chair McKee asked if Commissioner Rich wanted staff to "flush out" suggestions of the
29 Board or if the Board should make suggestions as to who would sit on this committee.
30 Commissioner Rich said the staff needs to talk to the Towns and the staff of the School
31 Boards.
32 Chair McKee agreed with Commissioner Rich and said the issue will be taken as a
33 consideration item.
34 Commissioner Burroughs said the amount of the bond needs to be discussed.
35
36 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier
37 to set the amount of the bond at $125 million.
38
39 Commissioner Rich asked for the difference in the tax rate between a $100 million and
40 $125 million bond.
41 Paul Laughton said this would be a little less than a penny on the tax rate. He said to go
42 from $100 million to $125 million would be an additional penny on the tax rate.
43 Commissioner Rich said the $100 million brought about 4 cents on the tax rate.
44 Paul Laughton said yes and that the $125 million will be a little under 5 cents on the tax
45 rate.
46
47 VOTE: Ayes, 4 (Chair McKee, Commissioner Pelissier, Commissioner Price, Commissioner
48 Burroughs); Nays, 2 (Commissioner Jacobs and Commissioner Rich).
49
50 MOTION PASSES 4 -2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
19
John Roberts said to Commissioner Rich that there is no ten year limit between bonds,
but there is a ten year limit on issuing the bonds once the bond order is approved.
Paul Laughton said there is a seven year limit to issue the bond amount with a
possibility of a three year extension.
Commissioner Burroughs asked if the tax increase happens all at once or is spread out
over time.
Paul Laughton said that the tax increase would not happen in one year but will be
spread out over time.
Commissioner Rich said at some point Orange County citizens will eventually get bond
fatigue. She said there will be bond fatigue after the Chapel Hill Bond.
Commissioner Price asked if the financial scenario changes before the bond is on the
ballot, whether the Board is committed to $125 million.
John Roberts said this decision is just expressing the intent of the Board, and it is not
binding. He said as the Board goes through the process they will be making more binding
decisions as related to the bond.
Chair McKee said there will be time to talk with the School Boards once they have
determined their list of priorities.
Commissioner Price asked if it is possible to place an additional item in the bond should
there be a huge outcry for it.
Staff answered yes.
8. Reports
NONE
9. County Manager's Report
Bonnie Hammersley said there is a transportation event on Friday, April 24th in
recognition of National County Month. She invited all the Commissioners to attend.
10. County Attorney's Report
John Roberts said the House concluded its bill filing last week. He said the total number
of bills filed this year is 1654, which is somewhat low. He said the County Omnibus bill is
moving through committee and includes recyclable materials legislation.
Chair McKee thanked him for his updates on bills that adversely affect the County. He
said there are two bills that affect reallocation of the sales tax distribution. He said on the
surface he is enthusiastically supportive of reallocation on per capita rather than point of sale.
He said the devil is in the details because one of the bills would not only change the distribution
method but would try and tell the County how they could spend this money, which is another
taking of County prerogative.
11. Appointments
a. Carrboro Northern Transition Area Advisory Committee —Appointment
The Board considered making an appointment to the Carrboro Northern Transition Area
Advisory Committee.
A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
appoint the following to the Carrboro Northern Transition Area Advisory Committee:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
20
• Ms. Anahid Vrana to a partial term (Position #2) "Carrboro Northern Transition Area
Advisory Committee — BOCC Appointee" expiring 01/31/2017.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
b. Human Relations Commission —Appointments and Changes
The Board considered making appointments and position changes to the Human
Relations Commission.
A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
appoint the following with proposed changes to the Human Relations Commission:
Change in current representative (Position #11) "Town of Hillsborough" move to
(Position #16) "At- Large" representative for Ms. Natalie Turner expiring 06/30/2015.
(Ms. Turner moved from Hillsborough, but still lives in Orange County. The
Clerk's office was not apprised of this change until after the March 17th BOCC
meeting)
Change in representative (Position #16) "At- Large" representative to (Position #11)
"Town of Hillsborough" representative for Rev. Rollin Russell expiring 06/30/2015. (Rev.
Russell is a resident of the Town of Hillsborough)
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
c. Orange County Parks and Recreation Council —Appointments
The Board considered making appointments to the Orange County Parks and
Recreation Council.
A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Price to
appoint the following to the Orange County Parks and Recreation Council:
• Evelyn Daniel to a first full term (Position #1) "Carrboro Town Limits" expiring
03/31/2018.
• John Greeson to a partial term (Position #2) "Hillsborough Township" expiring
03/31/2016.
• Thomas Rhodes to a partial term (Position #5) "At- Large" expiring 03/31/2016.
• Appoint/ Move Dr. Tori Williams -Reid to (Position #10) "Hillsborough Town Limits" from
position #2 "Hillsborough Township" (replaced by John Greeson if appointed). This will
fulfill her first full term expiring 09/30/2016.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
12.
Board Comments
Commissioner Burroughs had no comments.
Commissioner Jacobs asked if John Roberts could give the Board a link to the bills with
his updates.
Commissioner Jacobs said some of the thread of their petition process, previously
discussed at the retreat, has been lost, and he asked to put it back on a work session to
discuss.
Commissioner Jacobs said both he and Commissioner Price are working on the
Veteran's Memorial.
21
1 Commissioner Pelissier said she attended the Legislative Breakfast for the Chapel Hill
2 Carrboro City Schools ( CHCCS). She said there was discussion regarding pending legislation,
3 but it was also an opportunity for the CHCCS Board to let the legislative delegation know some
4 of the efforts in which they are involved. She said there is statewide discussion about a pay
5 model for teachers but CHCCS want to move toward a performance based model as opposed
6 to getting increases in pay based on longevity. She said it was a very good discussion.
7 Commissioner Pelissier said Thursday is the Annual WCHL Radio Station forum, and
8 many of the Board of County Commissioners will be participating.
9 Commissioner Rich encouraged residents to call or email the Commissioners
10 individually to get factual information about issues rather than depending on blogs.
11 Commissioner Rich said she too attended the Junior Livestock Show and Sale for the
12 first time and had a good time, as did her son.
13 Commissioner Price said she attended the District Meeting for the North Carolina
14 Association for County Commissioners (NCACC) held in Durham, and it was interesting to hear
15 other commissioners talking about the same issues seen by the BOCC in Orange County.
16 Chair McKee added to Commissioner Rich's blog comment that he does try to forward
17 public emails to staff in an effort to obtain factual information with which to respond.
18 Chair McKee said this past Monday the Board had breakfast in Chapel Hill with about
19 one hundred members of the public. He said there was sort of an elected officials "speed
20 dating ", changing tables every so often in order to hear a variety of concerns and questions.
21 He said every table had questions and concerns, but no two tables had the same questions or
22 concerns. He said it was a very interesting time.
23
24 13. Information Items
25
26 • April 7, 2015 BOCC Meeting Follow -up Actions List
27 • Memo Regarding Rural Roll Cart Distribution
28 • Memo Regarding Agricultural Preservation Board Appointments to Agricultural Economic
29 Development Grant Subcommittee
30 • BOCC Chair Letter Regarding Petitions from April 7, 2015 Regular Meeting
31
32 14. Closed Session
33
34 NONE
35
36 15. Adjournment
37 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
38 adjourn the meeting at 9:30 p.m.
39
40 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
41
42
43 Earl McKee, Chair
44
45 Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board
46