HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 11-05-2015 - 6-a - Minutes 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 5, 2015
Action Agenda
Item No. 6-a
SUBJECT: MINUTES
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donna Baker, 245-2130
Draft Minutes
PURPOSE: To correct and/or approve the minutes as submitted by the Clerk to the Board as
listed below:
September 29, 2015 BOCC Joint Meeting with Schools
October 1, 2015 BOCC Joint Meeting with Fire Departments
October 6, 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
SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT: There is no Orange County Social Justice Goal impact associated
with this item.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board approve minutes as presented
or as amended.
1
I Attachment 1
2
3 DRAFT MINUTES
4 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
5 CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO BOARD OF EDUCATION
6 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION
7 JOINT MEETING
8 September 29, 2015
9
10 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a joint session with the Chapel
11 Hill—Carrboro Board of Education and the Orange County Board of Education on Tuesday,
12 September 29, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Building in Hillsborough, N.C.
13
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Earl McKee and Commissioners Mia
15 Burroughs, Mark Dorosin, Barry Jacobs, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich
16 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
17 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
18 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Deputy Clerk Travis
19 Myren and Clerk to the Board Donna S. Baker (All other staff members will be identified
20 appropriately below)
21 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Debbie Piscitelli,
22 and Board Members Tom Carr, Lawrence Sanders, Tony McKnight, Steve Halkiotis, Brenda
23 Stephens, Donna Coffey and Superintendent Todd Wirt and Interim Superintendent Pam Jones
24 were also present.
25 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS ABSENT:
26 CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO CITY SCHOOL BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS PRESENT:
27 Chair Mike Kelly and Board Members Andrew Davidson, Jamezetta Bedford, James Barrett,
28 David Saussy, Annetta Streater, and Superintendent Tom Forcella and Assistant
29 Superintendent Todd LoFrese were also present.
30 CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO CITY SCHOOL BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS ABSENT:
31 Michelle Brownstein
32
33 Chair McKee called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m.
34
35 1. Welcome and Opening Remarks - Chair Kelley, Chair Piscitelli and Chair McKee
36 Chair McKee welcomed everyone, and applauded the effort to work collaboratively
37 towards the best education possible for the children of Orange County.
38 Chair Kelly echoed Chair McKee's sentiments.
39 Chair Piscitelli said this meeting provides a dedicated time to have these discussions.
40 She said both the philosophical and financial support from the Board of County Commissioners
41 is appreciated.
42
43 2. School Capital Needs Prioritization
44 Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS) — Presentation of Capital Needs
45 Orange County Schools (OCS) — Presentation of Capital Needs
46 Paul Laughton, Orange County Interim Finance and Administrative Services Director,
47 said the abstract contains attachments from the two school systems. He reviewed the scope of
48 work for these assessments, and he said that this evening would be a joint presentation
49 between the two schools.
50 Todd LoFrese showed a short video, which gave an overview of the needs from both of
51 the school districts.
2
1 Todd LoFrese said there are significant school needs throughout the County, which he
2 and Pam Jones would be presenting.
3 Pam Jones and Todd LoFrese presented the following PowerPoint slides:
4
5 Facilities Needs Presentation
6 September 29, 2015
7 Pam Jones and Todd LoFrese
8
9 Todd LoFrese presented this slide:
10
11 Our Goal
12 • Two Districts
13 • Two Similar, but Different Set of Needs
14 • Two Different Approaches
15 • One Goal
16 — To Provide: Safe, Secure, and Healthy Facilities to Support Student Learning and
17 Achievement
18
19 Pam Jones presented the following slides:
20
21 Thorough, Detailed, Responsible
22 • Process started in 2011
23 • Professional Architectural and Engineering Evaluation
24 • Comprehensive recommendations, linked to Orange County School Construction
25 Standards
26 • Scaled back:
27 — CHCCS original $200 million, now$160 million
28 — OCS original $161 million, now $65 million* (Board of Education Prioritized $50-
29 $70 million only)
30
31 OCS Facilities Summary
32 Focus on projects not fundable through current Capital Investment Plan (CIP) allocations
33 in these areas:
34 — Safety
35 — Replacement of antiquated mechanical equipment
36 — Cedar Ridge classroom wing
37 — Replacement of Transportation facilities
38 — Upgrade/Replace food service facilities/equipment
39
40 Areas of Work
41 • Estimated total: $15.9 million
42 • Major Mechanical System Replacement
43 — A.L. Stanback Middle
44 — Cameron Park Elementary
45 — Central Elementary
46 — Efland Cheeks Elementary
47 — Grady Brown Elementary
48 — Hillsborough Elementary
49 — Orange High School
50
3
1 Areas of Work
2 • Estimated total: $28.5 million
3 • Major Infrastructure Projects
4 – A.L. Stanback Middle
5 – Cameron Park Elementary
6 – Central Elementary
7 – Efland Cheeks Elementary
8 – Grady Brown Elementary
9 – Hillsborough Elementary
10 – Orange High School
11
12 Areas of Work—All Schools
13 • Food Service: $ 1.4 million
14 • Safety: $2.7 million
15
16 Area of Work—Additions
17 Cedar Ridge High School: $14.7 million
18 • Occupied 2002
19 • Design included 500 student addition
20 • Capacity: 1000
21 • Current enrollment: 1149
22 • SAPFO projects high school capacity at 110.2% in 2022-2023
23
24 Todd LoFrese presented the following slides:
25
26 CHCCS Older Facilities Summary
27 • Older schools need significant investments
28 • Recommendations
29 – Fix aging infrastructure issues
30 – Bring older schools to OC standard
31 – Address safety and security
32 – Increase capacity and delay new schools
33 – Eliminate mobile classrooms
34 – Delays operational increases
35
36 CHCCS Facilities Assessment: 6 slides (charts)
37
38 Pam Jones continued the PowerPoint presentation:
39
40 Collaboration Opportunity
41 Based on $125 million Bond distributed roughly by ADM, both districts would like to
42 jointly fund a centralized transportation maintenance center.
43 – Efficiency
44 – Effectiveness
45 – Safety
46 – Appropriate Working Conditions
47
48 Todd LoFrese concluded the PowerPoint presentation:
49 Long Term
50 • Current Annual Pay as you Go, '/4 Cent, and Lottery
4
1 — CHCCS $1.988 million for computers, $1.988 million for facilities
2 — OCS $1.1 million for computers, $1.4 million for facilities
3 Consider the Math
4 — CHCCS Facilities $1.988 million/20 Schools = $99,400 per school
5 — CHCCS Combined Insured Value = $388 million. Current annual capital
6 spending is .5% (.005) of total value
7 — OCS Facilities $1.4 million/13 Schools = $107,000 per school
8 — OCS Combined Insured Value = $232 million current annual capital spending is
9 less than .6% (.006) of total value
10 • A bond will help us begin to catch up.
11 • Additional ongoing maintenance funding will be needed for older and newer facilities
12 moving forward.
13 • Continued community support
14
15 Commissioner Dorosin asked if all pre-k classrooms would be moved to the Lincoln
16 Center.
17 Todd LoFrese said not the dual language pre-k classrooms, but about 22 others would
18 move.
19 Commissioner Rich asked if the option of rebuilding Chapel Hill High School from
20 scratch has been considered.
21 Todd LoFrese said this option had been considered, but to build a new school that size
22 would cost at least about$75 million. He said CHCCS is seeking to be good stewards of the
23 available resources.
24 Commissioner Rich said Carrboro High cost $45 million, and asked if there is a reason
25 that Chapel Hill High School would cost so much.
26 Todd LoFrese said Carrboro High was bid over 10 years ago, and there are now higher
27 construction costs. He said Carrboro High also has fewer students. He said tearing down
28 Chapel Hill High School safely would also add considerable cost to the project, whereas
29 Carrboro High School just needed to be built.
30 Commissioner Price said she noticed that OCS has no new construction or total rehab,
31 but rather repairs here and there. She asked if there is any plan for newer construction farther
32 down the line.
33 Pam Jones said total rehab was considered in the facilities assessment, and it was
34 determined to not be worth the cost. She said capacity is currently manageable, but as
35 Hillsborough develops the statistics may change. She said one option that was considered in
36 the assessment was to expand Efland-Cheeks Elementary School. She said the district's
37 buildings are deteriorating to the point that, if drastic action is not taken soon, the buildings will
38 fall down.
39 Commissioner Price said that is her concern. She said the current condition of the
40 buildings seem beyond repair. She said she was not thinking about the capacity, but looking at
41 this long term.
42 Pam Jones said Cameron Park, Central and Hillsborough Elementary Schools are on
43 the list for mechanical and infrastructure repairs. She said Central is in better shape than the
44 others, due to repairs about five years ago. She said the repairs would go a long way to
45 address many needs of the buildings.
46 Commissioner Price asked CHCCS if the plans in the Board's packet are based on
47 consultant's recommendations for safety.
48 Todd LoFrese said CHCCS used the same consultants as OCS, and one of CHCCS's
49 recommendations is to address safety concerns at the older schools.
5
1 Chair McKee asked if the proposed $9 million is the total cost for the centralized
2 transportation center.
3 Pam Jones said yes. She said the assessment estimated $7 to $8 million, but a bit more
4 has been added to take site acquisition into consideration.
5 Commissioner Burroughs thanked the school districts for their collaboration on this
6 presentation.
7 Chair Piscitelli said she attended the last Board of County Commissioners' meetings,
8 about what may be on the bond and the meeting where the public was able to make comments.
9 She said hearing the word "neglected", in reference to the older schools, bothered her. She
10 said the Board should remember that the schools always try to be good stewards of all funds,
11 and that needs have simply outpaced annual capital dollars.
12 Chair Piscitelli said technology is now an integral device to provide instruction to all
13 students (ESL, visual learners, etc.). She said this is the reason why both districts are
14 committed to funding technology, as well as facility and maintenance costs. She said another
15 issue is the students with disabilities and accommodating them due to older schools'
16 infrastructure. She said school shootings have increased throughout the nation, and $2.7
17 million is needed to address safety.
18 Tom Forcella said an important piece is the time and effort that has gone into the
19 assessments and prioritizations of the schools. He said great time and care has been taken to
20 address the needs effectively and most appropriately, for both districts.
21 Commissioner Jacobs said one other factor that has affected funding has been the
22 State's reduction in school construction funding over the years. He said the recent growth in
23 Orange County is also a factor, causing the schools to depend more on local funding.
24 Chair McKee responded to Chair Piscitelli's comments about the word "neglect", saying
25 it is benign neglect, not intentional. He said it is the result of trying to do the best with the
26 available resources. He echoed Tom Forcella's comments about the amount of effort and time
27 put into the assessment process.
28 Commissioner Dorosin asked if CHCCS has a timetable for Phases 2 and 3.
29 Todd LoFrese said in the information previously provided to the Board of County
30 Commissioners, there is have a 10-year construction plan for these phases. He said the first 4
31 years would be for Chapel Hill High School, and 2 years for Lincoln Center. He said at that
32 point, finances would be assessed and hopefully more renovations could continue.
33 Commissioner Dorosin asked if Phase 1 would take 10 years.
34 Todd LoFrese said the CHCCS plan lays out projects that are both funded and not
35 funded. He said CHCCS is requesting for planned funding to be used to address current needs.
36 Commissioner Dorosin said the feedback he is hearing is not an issue of"neglect", but
37 rather criticism of the long range planning. He said it would be important to maximize existing
38 land.
39 Todd LoFrese said the schools adequate public facilities ordinance (SAPFO) process is
40 already in place, and similarly both districts review the CIP process each year.
41 Andrew Davidson referred to page 4 of the document and said Phases 1 and 2 are
42 where priority is placed on capacity. He said in Phase 3, there is less focus on capacity
43 increase.
44 James Barrett said the standard was to take all elementary schools to hold 585 students.
45 He asked if Commissioner Dorosin wants this number revisited, due to potential population
46 increases.
47 Commissioner Dorosin said that possibility should be on the table, and he anticipates in
48 five years that there will be need for a new elementary school. He said if continued growth can
49 be anticipated, capital plans could be re-visited to see if some school plans can be tweaked to
50 increase capacity. He said there must be flexibility. He said finding land to build new schools
51 would be a challenge, especially in Chapel Hill.
6
1 Discussion ensued.
2 Commissioner Rich asked if there is a plan for the relocation of students, while parts of
3 Chapel Hill High School are being torn down.
4 Todd LoFrese said this will be a challenge. He said as the design process proceeds,
5 there will be a better idea of how to address this issue.
6 Commissioner Rich asked if Todd LoFrese could give a rough estimate of the number of
7 students to be displaced.
8 Todd LoFrese said this is unknown at this time.
9 Commissioner Jacobs referred to Commissioner Dorosin and James Barrett's
10 conversation. He said built into this process are assumptions. He said it might be helpful to
11 look at some of these built in assumptions as the process goes forward.
12 James Barrett said he agreed.
13 Tom Forcella said utilizing space more effectively and efficiently is an important area that
14 should be focused on.
15 Commissioner Price referred to OCS, and said she is looking at the quality of education
16 provided, and the need to upgrade the science rooms. She said it might be preferable to build a
17 wing rather than do renovations. She said many schools might not have room to expand. She
18 said she is also concerned about the unfunded media center at Hillsborough Elementary. She
19 asked if there is an idea as to what is on the horizon.
20 Pam Jones said as the assessment was put together, the core of the buildings was
21 considered and it is imperative to take care of what already exists. She said roof work,
22 infrastructure, and HVAC work needs to be upgraded as soon as possible, and thus are a
23 priority.
24 Commissioner Price said she is talking about long-term issues.
25 Steve Halkiotis said there has never been enough money to maintain schools'
26 infrastructure, HVAC and roofs. He said everything has been added on over the years, and
27 these issues have been around for a long time. He reiterated that there is over $600 million
28 value in the schools, but only $200,000 to take care of them all.
29
30 CHCCS
31 Key Elements of Older Facility Recommendations
32 (included in the 2015-25 CIP Recommendation)
33 The recommendations are for a comprehensive program that focuses on the district's
34 ten oldest schools that accommodate almost 50% of district students.
35
36 Facility recommendations include:
37 o Correction of building code violations;
38 o Improved safety by consolidating operations and controlling entry;
39 o Indoor air quality deficiencies and health concerns addressed;
40 o Replacement of malfunctioning mechanical equipment;
41 o Relief of traffic congestion problems;
42 o Deconstruction of some inefficient buildings;
43 o Extending the life of the schools.
44
45 Implementation of the recommendations eliminate mobile classrooms (also in need of
46 renovations) while providing additional student capacity.
47 o Elementary school capacity increase = 555.
48 o High school capacity increase = 230 +/-
49
50 Increased student capacity would result in deferment of new elementary school and
51 high school additions well beyond the ten-year CIP window.
7
1 o Board requesting the redirection of$57.6 million in projected capital expenditures
2 for new schools towards "Phase 2" older facility recommendations.
3 o Delays significant operational increases with opening a new school.
4
5 Bond funds and future capital funds directed to the ten oldest schools will make available
6 CIP (Pay-as-you-go) revenue for needed maintenance at district's other "newer" schools
7 that are 20-30 years of age.
8
9 OCS Facility Recommendations
10 • 2013 Facilities Assessment reflected needed repairs/replacements/additions in excess
11 of$160million as of the date of the assessment.
12 • OCS receives approximately $2.6 million for capital funding annually.
13 • Of the $160 million overall needs, OCS Board of Education prioritized projects to funding
14 levels of$50, $60 and $70 million, with projects in the following areas given highest
15 priority:
16 o Safety;
17 o Replacement of antiquated and failing mechanical equipment that would
18 exceed normal CIP funding capabilities;
19 o Cedar Ridge High School classroom wing addition;
20 o Replacement of Transportation facilities;
21 o Upgrade and replacement of food service facilities and equipment.
22 • Phase 1 projects per the attached sheet would be completed assuming a $50 million
23 allocation of the potential 2016 bond.
24 • Unfunded projects would be addressed if higher allocation from potential 2016 bond
25 were allocated and/or through future CIPs.
26 • Based on approved CAP Certificates to date, OCS has adequate elementary and middle
27 school capacity for the current 10-year CIP period. The Cedar Ridge classroom addition
28 will address the needed high school capacity, which is projected to reach SAPFO
29 capacity by 2022. A planning/constructing/opening period of approximately three years is
30 anticipated.
31 Replacement and consolidation of Transportation facilities is included in the OCS Phase
32 1 request, but is envisioned as a joint project with CHCCS. OCS is the recognized LEA
33 for Transportation for both OCS and CHCCS (State only recognizes one per County).
34 The 1950's vintage Transportation facilities for both CHCCS and OCS are woefully
35 inadequate. Some buses will not fit and still close the bay doors, for example.
36 Potential bond funds will allow OCS to divert future pay-as-you-go CIP funds to other
37 critical projects addressed in the Facilities Assessment, but not included in Phase 1
38
39 3. Discussion of Potential Comparative Analysis of School Capital Needs
40
41 Third Party Professional to Rank and Rate Needs based on Determined Criteria
42 Commissioner Jacobs said the proposals do not coincide with the presentations, and it is
43 difficult for the Board of County Commissioners to decide priorities without objective criteria.
44 He said security is a key component. He suggested asking a third party to review and rank
45 each project, based on the following criteria:
46 • Security
47 • Health and safety
48 • Structural integrity
49 • Capacity
50 He added that the value of improvement versus replacement could be another criteria.
8
1 Commissioner Jacobs said the third party could review all projects, without knowing
2 which district they belong to, and then present findings to the Board of County Commissioners
3 who could take the highest ranked projects to the voters by way of a bond. He said he knows
4 there are other variables that may be factored in, such as the average daily membership (ADM)
5 and the political components. He said it could be a more emotionless process if a third party
6 was used.
7 Commissioner Pelissier said she thought Commissioner Jacobs' suggestion was an idea
8 to pursue, since the State recently decided to use empirical ratings with the transit issues in
9 order to take out the political ramifications. She added that this could be a better way to
10 convince the public with a bond.
11 Commissioner Price asked if this suggestion would be a duplication of what CHCCS has
12 already done.
13 Chair McKee said no, but rather this would take projects presented to the Board tonight
14 by both districts, and let a third party objectively review and rank the projects based on the five
15 criteria.
16 Commissioner Price said the districts had already worked with consultants.
17 Chair McKee said this is open for discussion.
18 James Barrett said a criterion he felt was missing was logistics. He said there are some
19 projects that are logistically simpler than others, and may therefore take priority.
20 Commissioner Jacobs said it was not in his criteria, but that does not mean that it cannot
21 be added. He said agreed upon criteria would be needed that apply to both districts across the
22 board.
23 Donna Coffey asked if hiring a consultant would do the same thing as a capital needs
24 advisory task force, which has been used in past bond referendums.
25 Chair McKee said their Board of County Commissioners has not had this discussion yet,
26 but from his standpoint this could be an alternative to such a committee. He said the consultant
27 would be unaffiliated with either district or the Board of County Commissioners. He said
28 another question is whether bond funds are allocated based on ADM or on a project basis. He
29 said Commissioner Jacobs' suggestion might lead to funding being distributed more on a
30 projects basis. He said the discussion is about getting feedback on this suggestion.
31 Commissioner Burroughs said she is interested in this suggestion, but she served with
32 CHCCS when this process started. She said the issue of phasing has been part of the process
33 from the beginning, whereas the OCS's projects are smaller projects; so she is uncomfortable
34 comparing apples and oranges. She said these are elected school boards, and she is
35 uncomfortable with encroaching on their processes.
36 Steve Halkiotis said he would like to hear more about this suggestion, and he has been
37 through several bond processes. He said on past capital needs committees, there have always
38 been advocates for a variety of needs. He said he does not have a dog in this fight, but is only
39 interested in the students in both districts. He said if there is not a united front going forward,
40 this bond may fail. He said the more attractive the bond package is, the more people will come
41 out to support it.
42 Steve Halkiotis said he appreciated the suggestion, but asked if there is good reason to
43 bring in a third party when there has been success in the past with a collaborative effort, by
44 using committees for the bond process.
45 Chair McKee said the projects that have been presented cannot be accomplished with
46 $125 million, and this suggestion is a way to prioritize projects. He said he hoped to generate
47 discussion, not to start a fight.
48 Commissioner Jacobs responded to Donna Coffey's question, saying the Board of
49 County Commissioners has not always agreed with the bond process, but this is the process.
50 He said both school systems have presented a more detailed assessment than has ever be
51 done previously.
9
1 Commissioner Jacobs said he made the third party suggestion, as he wants to know
2 which facility is the most vulnerable to be entered by an unauthorized person. He said he
3 wanted to know this type of information as a whole, prior to talking to the voters about
4 supporting a bond. He said there must be some basis to take to the voters.
5 Chair Kelly asked if the five criteria are security, health and safety, structural integrity,
6 capacity, and improvement versus replacement as well as possibly adding logistics.
7 Commissioner Jacobs said yes, and that it may be wise to further the discussion to see if
8 more criteria should be included.
9 Chair Kelly said this proposal is logical, but the issues start to break down when deciding
10 to whose opinion one should listen. He said being objective is very difficult and that people
11 have been working on this for a while. He said some decisions are simply educational, and
12 should be made by an elected school board versus an outsider. He expressed concern about
13 the timeline when adding another variable into the process. He said the school districts have
14 been on this "train" for four years. He expressed concern for the cost of such an analysis, as
15 well as what would happen when the school board disagreed with the consultant or the BOCC,
16 and how disagreements would be resolved. He said $125 million is only a down payment on
17 what the schools need.
18 Chair Kelly said if this process is going to be applied to the bond funds, then similar
19 criteria should also apply to the Board of County Commissioners and the CIP. He said it is
20 valuable to have the best information possible, but no information is perfect.
21 Jamezetta Bedford echoed the comments of Steve Halkiotis and Chair Kelly. She said
22 capacity is a big issue for CHCCS, but not with OCS, and that is one problem with the proposed
23 ratings. She said this suggestion is a usurping of elected school boards by the Board of County
24 Commissioners. She said the architect being used by the CHCCS is the same one being used
25 by the County for the jail, and as such the County should have some level of confidence in the
26 architect. She said the architect has evaluated the older buildings objectively, and the resulting
27 assessments should be trusted.
28 Jamezetta Bedford said there is no value in this proposal, and asked what would happen
29 if the independent third party gave all the funds to only one school district. She said there must
30 be allocations to both school districts if there is any hope of gathering public support. She said
31 the suggestion makes no political sense.
32 Jamezetta Bedford said deciding how to allocate the proposed bond funds is important.
33 She said this suggestion is a very bad idea and not a positive step.
34 Annetta Streater said she believed that the public has confidence in the two school
35 districts, and their boards, to be responsible to the students, their families, and to the taxpayers.
36 She asked for the Board of County Commissioners to have the same confidence in the school
37 boards to make the best recommendations for the school districts. She said all involved have
38 thought through the variables and needs very carefully, with great dedication.
39 Commissioner Dorosin said in support of Commissioner Jacobs that the Board of County
40 Commissioners is the one body that is charged to look out for all the students through the
41 Board's funding capacity. He said if these are urgent needs that will be addressed through a
42 bond, the funding must be candidly explained to the public. He said being frank and
43 straightforward about the process is imperative.
44 Steve Halkiotis said the last time the County went out for a bond in 2001, specific
45 projects had to be listed. He said it is now his understanding that the bond counsel has said
46 that a lump sum can be approved on a bond without a listing of projects.
47 Chair McKee said the Board has not had this discussion.
48 Commissioner Rich said she echoed the comments of Steve Halkiotis. She said she
49 also agreed with Commissioner Dorosin that there was not a chance to discuss a lot of this as
50 part of the bond process. She said it is important to be as honest as possible with the voters.
10
1 Chair Piscitelli said she appreciated this discussion. She said it is always valuable to
2 look at a situation with fresh eyes and consider a variety of ideas.
3 Commissioner Jacobs said in 2001 the public was told which projects would be done
4 with the bond funds. He said there was not enough funding to do everything then either. He
5 said the BOCC varied slightly from the recommendations given at that time and funded both
6 school districts. He said his suggestion of a third party review is in no way meant to be
7 disrespectful to the school systems, boards or consultants. He said the BOCC might just have a
8 different way of organizing things.
9 Commissioner Burroughs said the easiest answer to the voters is that the funds would
10 be split by ADM. She said she is confident that each district will stretch this money, as it falls so
11 short of meeting all the needs. She said it is critical that the projects be as defined as possible,
12 as the process of educating the public moves forward.
13 Andrew Davidson said by the time November 2016 comes around, the voters would be
14 feeling bond fatigue as both the Town of Chapel Hill and the State are proposing bonds as well.
15 He said the more divisive this bond is, the more difficult it will be to pass.
16 James Barrett said the best way to move forward on this bond is as a unified front. He
17 said Commissioner Jacob's third party review suggestion is the antithesis of this, as it shows a
18 strong sense of mistrust of those in the schools and their dedication to working for the best
19 interest of the students.
20 Donna Coffey agreed with everything that has been said and emphasized the
21 importance of having a strong educational component that is seen by the voters as a
22 collaborative effort by all three boards. She said it is also important to let the public know that
23 the bond will not address all of the needs.
24 Commissioner Pelissier said this has been a good discussion, and she did support
25 exploring this proposal. She said this discussion has brought a lot more clarity on the process.
26 She said she now believes that this proposal would not be right for this process.
27 Commissioner Pelissier said once the bond funds are allocated, the question that must
28 be answered is what are the next steps to address the needs that are not going to be funded by
29 the bond. She said the public must know that there is a long-term plan for all the schools'
30 needs.
31 James Barret said he has told his community that the process must start somewhere to
32 move on to address further needs. He said without support for Phase 1, there would be no
33 Phase 2.
34 Chair McKee said this open discussion was extremely valuable. He said it was vital for
35 the schools to be heard before the BOCC has its own discussions. He said it will be difficult to
36 work out the priorities, and how to present them to the public. He said these types of
37 discussions should happen in an ongoing manner, allowing all parties to work collaboratively to
38 provide safe, secure and healthy environments for the County's children.
39
40 4. Impacts of State Approved Budget
41
42 Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools
43 Todd LoFrese said the State budget leaves a $300,000 gap in funding for teaching
44 assistants, and this is of great concern to the schools.
45 Commissioner Dorosin said he would like updates, as it relates to the State legislature
46 and Charter Schools, when it is available. He said he understands that a portion of any grant
47 monies will have to go to Charter Schools. He said this would make it difficult to receive grants.
48 Todd LoFrese said it is an additional $250,000 that CHCCS would share with Charter
49 Schools. He said it is of concern, and he is interested to see what the general assembly will do.
50 Commissioner Dorosin asked if it is known how many CHCCS students go to charter
51 schools, and it was answered about 200, and 475 for OCS.
11
1
2 Orange County Schools
3 Dr. Wirt said the OCS memo is also in the agenda packets. He said the State did fund
4 step increases but restructured the steps in the past. He said this left the school district having
5 to cover some teachers that fell on the top end of those tiers and are moving up in a step
6 increase. He said it is important to note that 59 percent of OCS teachers received no pay
7 increase of any kind this year.
8
9 5. Discussion of School Related Topics
10 Chair McKee said Commissioner Dorosin suggested discussing the following items:
11 • Collaborative Opportunities between Districts
12 • Expanding Innovations (e.g. Magnet Schools, Year Round Schools)
13 • Programs/Plans to Address Achievement Gap
14
15 Commissioner Dorosin asked if student reassignment is being considered to address the
16 concentration of low-well students at certain schools. He said the achievement gap is still too
17 wide in both districts.
18 Commissioner Dorosin said the issue of segregation in schools is still a real problem.
19 He asked if the schools have ever examined the enrollment of students in Advanced Placement,
20 or gifted classes, by race or socio-economic level. He said this is a significant issue that Wake
21 County has attempted to address. He would like to see the schools in Orange County follow
22 suit.
23 Commissioner Dorosin said there is only one year round school in Orange County, and
24 asked if this is something that may be increased in the future.
25 Commissioner Dorosin said CHCCS has two dual-language schools, which are a
26 strategy for achieving more diversity. He asked if there are plans to explore and expand these
27 schools.
28 Tom Forcella said the CHCCS long-range plan to address achievement gaps is one of
29 the district's priorities, and he elaborated on some of the CHCCS programs. He said year round
30 schooling makes a lot of sense to him, as long as it is not done simply for facility reasons.
31 Tom Forcella said the two districts are working to find more areas of collaboration.
32 Chair McKee suggested that any detailed information could be forwarded to the Board at
33 a later date.
34 Commissioner Dorosin said County Commissioners need to be better appraised as to
35 what is going on with the districts, and he is just reflecting back questions he has been asked
36 from the community.
37 Tom Forcella said the schools could come and share with the Board of County
38 Commissioners at future work sessions or regular meetings to keep the Board informed and
39 updated.
40 Commissioner Dorosin said he would welcome this.
41 Dr. Wirt said the issue of achievement gap in OCS is being addressed in an ongoing
42 manner. He said an equity audit was conducted looking at classes offered, how talent is
43 nurtured at early ages, and how gifted students are identified. He said OCS is seeking to offer
44 professional development in these areas. He said he is very new to the district, but OCS is
45 looking internally at policies, procedures and practices around choice within the district. He said
46 options for choice are supported. He said it might be unfair to look at a high performing year-
47 round school and solely attribute its success to the fact that it is year-round. He said he is open
48 to year-round schools, but wants to make sure they are a good answer. He said choice
49 programs are being considered where there are open seats in the schools. He said
50 programming that will improve performance for all students is important, and not just
12
1 programming that will attract choice students. He said this type of work is important, and he has
2 lots of ideas. He said OCS is in the midst of asking a lot of questions and working out the best
3 options with which to proceed.
4 Commissioner Burroughs asked if the school boards would send their meeting agendas
5 to Clerk to the Board, then Commissioners could attend if there is a topic of interest listed.
6 Commissioner Burroughs said this is CHCCS Chair Kelly and Jamezetta Bedford's last
7 joint meeting, because they will be "retiring". She acknowledged their service.
8 Chair McKee encouraged the school boards to send any other questions or comments to
9 the BOCC. He reiterated the Board's appreciation of the conversation.
10
11 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Rich to adjourn
12 the meeting at 9:48 p.m.
13
14 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
15
16
17 Earl McKee, Chair
18
19 Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
1
1 Attachment 2
2
3 DRAFT MINUTES
4 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
5 JOINT MEETING WITH THE
6 ORANGE COUNTY CHIEF'S ASSOCIATION
7 October 1, 2015
8 7:00 p.m.
9
10 The Orange County Board of Commissioners held a joint meeting on Thursday, October
11 1, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Building in Hillsborough, N.C.
12
13 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Earl McKee and Commissioners Mia
14 Burroughs, Barry Jacobs, Bernadette Pelissier, and Renee Price
15 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioner Rich and Commissioner Dorosin
16 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
17 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Deputy County Manager
18 Travis Myren and Clerk to the Board Donna S. Baker (All other staff members will be identified
19 appropriately below)
20
21 VOLUNTEER FIRE CHIEFS PRESENT:
22 Brad Allison, Fire Chief, Caldwell FD, Matt Sullivan, Interim Fire Chief, Town of Chapel Hill,
23 Susanna Williams, Town of Carrboro, Jeff Borland, Fire Chief, Cedar Grove FD, Phillip Nasseri,
24 Fire Chief, White Cross FD, Jeff Cabe, Fire Chief, Orange Rural FD, John Stroud, Fire Chief,
25 North Chatham FD, Kevin Brooks, Fire Chief, Efland FD, Matthew Mauzy, Chief, South Orange
26 Rescue Squad (SORS), Mike Tapp, Fire Chief, New Hope FD, Steve McCauley, Fire Chief,
27 Orange Grove FD, Keith Hayes, Chief, Eno FD, Jim Groves, Orange County Emergency
28 Services Director
29
30 VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPTS. — CHAIRS, BOARD OF DIRECTORS
31 BARRY, Caldwell BOD President, Bill Waddell, Orange Grove, BOD President
32 Wayne Paschall, Eno BOD President, Matt Heinz, Orange Rural BOD President, Fred Stipe,
33 SORS BOD President Howard Pratt, New Hope BOD President, Tony Blake, White Cross BOD
34 President, Shawn Garrard, Eno River BOD
35
36 Chair McKee called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m.
37
38 1. Welcome and Introductions
39 Chair McKee asked for a moment of silence for the victims of the Oregon tragedy.
40 Chair McKee said he just signed a Declaration of State of Emergency, which focuses on
41 flooding and high waters in the local rivers.
42 Chair McKee said Jim Groves would be leaving Orange County as Emergency Services
43 Director, and taking a position in Durham. He thanked him for his service, and said he would be
44 missed.
45 Chair McKee introduced Chief Brad Allison, of the Fire Chiefs Council, who wanted to
46 give an overall update to the Board about all of the fire departments' accomplishments and
47 highlights. He said a strategic plan was established in 2012. He said the departments are right
48 on track with this plan thus far. He reviewed the following highlights:
49
50 • ISO ratings
51 • Building fire stations
2
1 • Fire Prevention
2 • Update of equipment - from grants
3 • Advanced training level for swift water
4 • Biggest- Strategic Plan
5
6 Goals:
7 • Continue to recruit volunteers
8 • Outreach with community partners- Emergency Services and Sheriff's Dept.
9 • Training Facility
10 • EMT training/certification
11 • Pursue grants
12 • Joint purchasing of equipment
13 • Keeping up with standards
14
15 Chair McKee said Commissioner Dorosin and Commissioner Rich were not able to
16 attend tonight.
17
18 2. Public Safety Training Facility for Fire/Emergency Medical Services/Law
19 Enforcement
20 Chief Allison said there are 391 volunteers in Orange County, and a facility is needed to
21 train these volunteers properly. He said Chapel Hill is building a new facility. He said at this
22 meeting last year, the request was made for the BOCC to offer assistance, if the land for a
23 facility could be secured. He said the Efland Fire Department offered to donate some land. He
24 said Chapel Hill is looking to build a huge training facility to accommodate fire, EMS and law
25 enforcement. He said the idea has been proposed for the Town and the County to collaborate
26 and create a large, jointly shared facility in a centralized location such as Blackwood Farm. He
27 said such a facility would benefit all the departments.
28 Chapel Hill Chief Sullivan said the discussions are in the very early stages, since the
29 present facility is very old. He said if a joint facility could be built it would be a win-win situation
30 for all.
31 Chief Cabe said in order to get ISO certification the facility must be centrally located to
32 the majority of the stations, and that is why a joint facility is being considered.
33 Jim Groves said this proposal is for the day-to-day operational needs as opposed to the
34 Triangle J Council of Governments (TJCOG) regional proposal. He said maybe going forward
35 TJCOG could be invited to participate in a joint facility in Orange County.
36 Commissioner Burroughs asked if there is an estimate of the needed acreage.
37 Chief Allison said that would depend on the design, but the biggest obstacle has been
38 the acquisition of land.
39 Chief Cabe said the acreage would depend on the uses. He said anywhere from two to
40 five acres would be needed to build a combination burn building/drill tower and to be able to get
41 fire trucks to it. He said EMS has different needs, such as driver training. He said if classrooms
42 are desired on site, then space would be needed for a classroom building. He said the facility
43 could be large and complex, or small and simple. He said law enforcement would have yet
44 other needs. He said most burn buildings use gas, thus having much less run off, and as such
45 do not have to be as far removed as in the past.
46 Chief Sullivan from Chapel Hill said there are public safety training center architects that
47 do this type of work daily across the country. He said clarifying the needs would be a good
48 starting point.
49 Chief Cabe said South Orange Rescue Squad (SORS) provides specialized rescue. He
50 said this squad would need to have some defined space for training props, high elevations, etc.
3
1 Chief Allison said the volunteer departments would partner with the municipalities to
2 flesh out some of these details.
3 Chair McKee asked if there were any ideas regarding the financing of a joint facility.
4 Chief Allison said it is hoped that the County could help with permitting and initial costs,
5 and then all stakeholders would put in funds for the facility as well.
6 Chief Brooks said an increase in the fire tax could be a possibility.
7 Chief Cabe said charging user fees for outside entities could be implemented to recoup
8 some of the cost.
9 Commissioner Price asked if Orange County would be able to waive fees for permitting.
10 John Roberts he would have to research that.
11 Commissioner Price said waiving the fees could help reduce the costs for the fire
12 departments.
13 Chair McKee asked if the fire departments would keep the Board updated as the plans
14 move forward for a joint training facility.
15 Fred Stipe asked if there were any other counties that have a similar multi-agency
16 training facility.
17 Interim Chief Susanna Williams said New Hanover County and their local community
18 college did a similar facility.
19 Jim Groves suggested looking at Lee and Buncombe Counties as well.
20 Commissioner Price said North Carolina Association of County Commissioners might
21 have some information too.
22 Chief Allison said a price cannot be put on safety, and it is imperative that volunteers are
23 trained as well as possible.
24
25 3. Radio Upgrades
26 Chief Allison said radio upgrades were discussed at their last meeting and will defer to
27 Jim Groves and other Fire Chiefs. He said there are still some dead spots throughout the
28 County.
29 Jim Groves said there is some funding for towers, but in order to build a tower a radio
30 study must first be conducted. He said a RFP will be written soon and a consultant hired to
31 guide them through this assessment. He said there is a separate RFP for paging, and it has
32 been put on the back burner for now so the focus can be placed on the radio coverage.
33
34
35 4. Status Updates
36 a) Emergency Medical Services/9-1-1/County Strategic Plan Update
37 The Allen Report, prepared by Solutions for Local Government and published in 2012,
38 addressed improvements needed to the Orange County Emergency Medical Services and
39 Communications Center Operations. This update will also address the County's Strategic Plan
40 and the status for each of the 19 recommendations identified in the report.
41 Jim Groves presented the following PowerPoint slides:
42
43 Orange County Emergency Services Update
44 October 1, 2015
45
46 Acronyms
47 ALS—Advanced Life Support (Intermediate/ Paramedic)
48 AVL—Automatic Vehicle Location
49 BLS— Basic Life Support (Medical Responder/ EMT)
50 CAD — Computer Aided Dispatch
51 EMD — Emergency Medical Dispatch
4
1 EMS — Emergency Medical Service
2 OCES —Orange County Emergency Services
3 QA—Quality Audit and Improvement
4 QRV—Quick Response Vehicle
5 SORS —South Orange Rescue Squad
6 VHF —Very High Frequency
7 VIPER—Voice Interoperability Plan for Emergency Responders
8
9 EMS Operations
10 EMS Statistics
11 Call Volume Comparison By Year
12 ■ 2015 = 10,450 (as of 9/26/2015)
13 o Projected calls for 2015 = 13,950
14 ■ 2014 = 13,338
15 ■ 2013 = 12,369
16 Average Response Time Comparison By Year (Chute + Travel)
17 2015 = 9:35 Avg. (as of 9/26/2015)
th
18 o 90 percentile is 16:37 (M-5 to go 24 hours this coming year...will help)
19 ✓ Increased call volume
20 ✓ Staffing (remediation & OT management) took M-7 off line frequently
21 ✓ Increased wait times at Emergency Departments (Duke biggest impact)
22 2014 = 8:53 Avg.
th
23 o 90 percentile is 15:51
24 2013 = 9:00 Avg.
25
26 EMS Recommendations
27 R-1 Adjust M-5 and M-8 Coverage Hours (complete)
28 Based on recent geographic call data (North/South)
29 o M-5 coverage remained 6am-6pm (unchanged)
30 o M-8 coverage changed to 6pm-6am
31 R-2 Add additional ambulance 9am-9pm (complete)
32 M-9 added 8am-8pm based on recent geographical call data
33 o Co-located at Orange Grove FD
34 R-3a&b Use SORS for BLS and bring on BLS ambulance (on-going)
35 ■ Impact of UNC Hillsborough may drive collaboration of a BLS unit for transport
36 R-4 Assess Fire Department capabilities for First Responder (complete)
37 ■ With the EMS co-location initiatives with the Fire Departments, this recommendation
38 may become null
39 R-5a Implement Fire Department First Responder Initiative (complete)
40 ■ Continuing work with the Orange County Medical Director to enable Fire Departments
41 that wish to provide ALS (EMT Intermediate) to do so. Implementation is in progress.
42 R-5b QRV Initiative (null)
43 ■ Offered as an alternate recommendation to R-5a
44 R-6 Staff& Equip six (6) ALS ambulances (on-going)
45 ■ OCES is requesting one new (1) ambulance each year to replace older units
46 ■ Monitoring effectiveness of program each year
47 ■ Intent is to not over-purchase or over-staff
48 o Call volume and response times drive units and staffing
49 o M-5 to become 24 hour unit this coming year
50 R-7 Hire Paramedic Level Shift Supervisor 24/7 (Complete)
5
1 Asst. Supervisors were reclassified to Supervisors on 1/1/2015
2 R-8 Prepare a space needs assessment (90% complete)
3 ■ Stewart Cooper Newell awarded contract on 10/1/2013
4 ■ Staff met with firm the week of 10/7/2013 to begin space needs assessment
5 ■ Draft space needs assessment presented to OCES on 3/5/2014
6 ■ Revised space needs assessment presented to OCES on 5/20/2014
7 ■ Space layout provided to OCES on 8/6/2015
8 R-9 Identify nine (9) strategic locations for future EMS base (in-process)
9 ■ Integral part of the Stewart Cooper Newell discussions
10 ■ Co-location or co-build with Fire Departments may require modification of this
11 recommendation due to the success of the co-locations thus far
12 o Orange Rural
13 o Orange Grove
14 o Carrboro
15 o New Hope
16 o Eno (M-5 24 hour)
17 o Hillsborough/Orange Rural (potential co-build in 15/16 and 16/17)
18 o Chapel Hill (co-location/co-build in 16/17 and 17/18)
19 GIS Modeling underway to determine 8 and 12 minute drive times
20 R-10 Obtain sites for development (not started)
21 ■ Based on outcome of R-8 and R-11
22 R-11 Procure EMS planning and design services (not started)
23 ■ Dependent on co-build schedule with Chapel Hill and Hillsborough/Orange Rural
24 R-12 Advertise, bid, construct EMS facilities (not started)
25 Based on outcome of R-8, R-10 and R-11
26
27 9-1-1 Operations
28
29 9-1-1 Communications FLOW (NFPA 1221)
30
31 9-1-1 Communications Statistics
32 Call Comparison By Year
33 ■ 2015 Incoming = 39,261 7/1/2015 to present (YTD)
34 o 22,356 911 Calls
35 o 19,905 Administrative (excluding abandoned calls)
36 o Projected call volume (911 and Admin) is 157,044
37 ■ Average Dispatch Time = 2.16
38 o New NFPA 1221 Standard(July 2013) is 1:36
39 ■ 9-1-1 Call Answer Time = % answer time < 15 sec = 99.34%
40 o NFPA 1221 Standard(July 2013) is < 15 sec 95%
41
42 ■ 2014 Incoming = 132,525 Calls
43 o 79,241 911 Calls
44 o 53,284 Administrative (excluding abandoned calls)
45 ■ Average Dispatch Time = 1:33
46 o New NFPA 1221 Standard (July 2013) is 1:36
47 ■ 9-1-1 Call Answer Time = % answer time < 15 sec = 99.43%
48 o New NFPA 1221 Standard (July 2013) is < 15 sec 95%
49
50 9-1-1 Recommendations
51 R-13 Hire full time Data Systems Manager (complete)
6
1 Mr. Kevin Medlin was promoted to Data Systems Manager on 10/18/2013
2 R-14 Hire full time Training/Quality Assurance Officer (complete)
3 ■ Training Coordinator filled but currently vacant due to attrition
4 ■ Job posted and currently accepting applications
5 ■ Estimated mid November 2015 to fill the position
6 R-15 Hire additional Training/QA Officer (complete)
7 ■ Currently filled by Ms. Laurie Piche
8 R-16 & 17 Hire Telecom municator positions (in-process/on-going)
9 ■ New model of hiring Telecom municators should help complete this recommendation
10 o Call Taker (can be under 21 years of age)
11 o Dispatcher (must be 21 years of age or older for DCI certification)
12 ■ 7 new employees will be released to the 911 Center in Oct./Nov.
13 ■ New Telecom municator Academy to start Oct./Nov.
14 o 12 is the target for the next academy
15 R-18 Purchase AVL hardware for new EMS vehicles (complete)
16 ■ All new units will be outfitted with AVL
17 R-19 Provide informational meetings with emergency responders to share new software
18 capabilities (complete/on-going)
19 ■ 9-1-1 Users Group re-activated
20 o Members of each response organization are represented
21 ■ Information shared during Chiefs Association meeting
22 ■ On-going weekly collaboration via email and phone
23
24 OCES Strategic Plan
25
26 OCES Strategic plan —Admin Division (3 slides)
27
28 OCES Strategic plan — EMS Division (2 slides)
29
30 OCES Strategic plan —Communications Division (3 slides)
31
32 OCES Strategic plan —fire marshal Division (2 slides)
33
34 OCES Strategic plan — Emergency Mgt. Division (2 slides)
35
36 Commissioner Price asked if there is a reason for the increase in calls.
37 Kim Woodward said there are typically two reasons:
38 1. Increase in the general population
39 2. Increase in the aging population
40 Chief Cabe referred to page 9 slide number 7, which states, "continuing to work with the
41 Orange County Medical Director to enable Fire Departments that wish to prove ALS (EMT
42 intermediate) to do so." He said the budget at Orange Rural would not support this. He said
43 Orange Rural is stopping at the medical responder level.
44 Chair McKee said this is a consideration. He said the higher the level of service that is
45 provided, the greater the cost. He expressed appreciation for the smaller ambulances.
46 Commissioner Price asked if the Fire Departments do outreach with Durham Tech and
47 high school students.
48 Kim Woodward said there have been tremendous efforts towards outreach. She said
49 there is a paramedic academy at Durham Tech, and nine paramedics will be joining EMS this
50 year.
7
1 Jim Groves said outreach is done wherever possible. He said there is a goal to have
2 400 cert volunteers, involving the community.
3 Jason Shepherd, Orange County Fire Marshal, said Orange County Schools (OCS)
4 recently reached out to him to incorporate fire protection from Durham Tech into the schools.
5 He reached out to the State Fire Marshal's office to get certification-based training into the high
6 schools. He said a program already exists to certify high school students. He has connected
7 the school system to the State Fire Marshal's office to move this conversation and idea forward
8 in Orange County. He said he would keep the Board updated.
9
10 b) Update on Coverage for Insurance Issues (Remaining Areas Outside Six (6) Road
11 Miles)-
12 Jason Shepherd reviewed the following information:
13 Since the October 2014 joint meeting with the BOCC, Fire Chiefs and Emergency
14 Services, there have been two additional fire stations constructed and approved which reduced
15 the amount of homes outside of the 6 road mile issue. White Cross Fire Department added
16 Station 2 on Neville Road that allowed 239 addressable structures into a protection class. The
17 City of Mebane Fire Department added Station 3 that allowed all parcels in the East Alamance
18 insurance district into a rated protection class. The BOCC has approved exchanges between
19 fire protection districts on the insurance layer to bring homes into a protection class rating. The
20 insurance districts include White Cross, West Orange, Cane Creek, Cedar Grove and Central
21 Orange
22 Chair McKee asked if it is know how many homes are still located outside the 6-mile route
23 distance.
24 Jason Shephard referred to the map on back page of agenda packet where this legend
25 information is located at the bottom of the map.
26
27 c) Emergency Medical Services Co-Location
28 Jim Groves reviewed the following information:
29 On March 19, 2013 the Board of County Commissioners approved an agreement with
30 the Orange Rural Fire Department to co-locate one (1) Emergency Medical Services (EMS) unit
31 at the Phelps Road Station. Subsequently, the BOCC has approved agreements with Orange
32 Grove, Carrboro, and New Hope Fire Departments to co-locate EMS units at those stations as
33 well. This item provides an opportunity for the BOCC to hear from the Fire Chiefs on how the
34 co-location initiative is working out.
35 Jim Groves said this item is to provide feedback to the Board of County Commissioners
36 on how co-location is doing.
37 Chief McCauley, Orange Grove Fire Chief, said there are no problems with co-location,
38 and it is a very collaborative relationship.
39 Chief Cabe said there have been some "bumps" but nothing major, and it is beneficial.
40 He said there is discussion about Medic 5 moving to Eno. He said Orange Rural's intention is to
41 finish Walker Road Station and make Phelps Road into an EMS base with fire trucks as well.
42 Chief Sullivan, Carrboro Fire Chief, said that there are no problems with their stations,
43 and it is a beneficial situation. He said the only challenge at Station 1 is lack of personal space
44 for EMS.
45 Chief Tapp, New Hope Fire Chief, said there is a good working relationship with Orange
46 County EMS.
47 Chief Nassari, White Cross Fire Chief, said the funding from Orange County for extra
48 supplies is greatly appreciated.
49 Matthew Mauzy, SORS, said they co-locate as well and have done so for about 40
50 years. He said a new ambulance was recently added to their fleet, and they just began 7 day a
8
1 week staffing in conjunction with Orange County. He said this offers greater consistency within
2 the system.
3 Chief Sullivan said smoke alarm companies have been contacted regarding recycling
4 smoke alarms. He said smoke alarms could be returned to the original company where they will
5 be recycled.
6 Chair McKee asked Bonnie Hammersley to check with solid waste to see if Orange
7 County can participate in the recycling process.
8 Chief Williams said she had already made this contact, and there was concern about the
9 ionization in the alarms. She said these types of alarms could be disposed of directly, but
10 probably not recycled.
11 Chair McKee said he would still like for solid waste to look into this as well.
12 Jim Groves said the Fire Marshal could work with Gayle Wilson at Solid Waste.
13
14 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Price to
15 add a closed session for the purpose of: Per 143-318.11(a)(3), "To consult with an attorney
16 employed or retained by the public body in order to preserve the attorney-client privilege
17 between the attorney and the public body"
18
19 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
20
21 CLOSED SESSION:
22
23 A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier seconded by Commissioner Burroughs
24 to go into closed session at 8:45 p.m. for the purpose of: Per 143-318.11(a)(3), "To consult with
25 an attorney employed or retained by the public body in order to preserve the attorney-client
26 privilege between the attorney and the public body."
27
28 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
29
30 RECONVENE INTO REGULAR SESSION
31
32 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs seconded by Commissioner Pelissier
33 to reconvene the meeting into regular session at 9:40 p.m.
34
35 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
36
37 ADJOURNMENT
38 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs seconded by Commissioner Price to adjourn
39 the meeting at 9:40 p.m.
40
41 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
42
43
44 Earl McKee, Chair
45
46 Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board
47
48
49
1
I Attachment 3
2
3 DRAFT MINUTES
4 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
5 REGULAR MEETING
6 October 6, 2015
7 7:00 p.m.
8
9 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, October 6,
10 2015 at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Building, in Hillsborough, N.C.
11
12 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair McKee and Commissioners Mia Burroughs,
13 Mark Dorosin, Barry Jacobs, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley and Deputy Clerk to the
17 Board David Hunt (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below)
18
19 Chair McKee called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m.
20
21 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
22 Chair McKee asked for a moment of silence to recognize the recent tragic events in
23 Oregon.
24 He noted the following items at the Commissioners' places:
25 - pink sheet- letter for item 5a: Class A Special Use Permit for the Emerson Waldorf School
26 - white sheet- letter for item 7a: Additional discussion regarding a November 2016 Bond
27 Referendum.
28 - PowerPoint for item 8a: Report on Small Business Investment Grants, Agriculture Economic
29 Development Grants, and Small Business Loan Program
30 - Report from Planning and Inspections
31
32 PUBLIC CHARGE
33
34 Chair McKee dispensed with the reading of the public charge.
35
36 2. Public Comments
37
38 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
39
40 b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
41
42 3. Announcements and Petitions by Board Members
43 Commissioner Dorosin had no announcements or petitions.
44 Commissioner Price said she received an announcement from the National Association
45 of Counties (NACo), stating that President Obama has declared October to be National Cyber
46 Security Awareness month. She said this information has been forwarded to Jim Northrup, who
47 identified several efforts being made locally in this arena.
48 Chair McKee said there is a team in Orange County working on cyber security. He
49 acknowledged the efforts of this team.
50 Commissioner Pelissier had no announcements or petitions.
2
1 Commissioner Rich congratulated the Community Home Trust Board on their fundraiser.
2 Commissioner Rich reiterated her previously made petition about the creation of a
3 women and children's safe house in Orange County. She said she hopes this conversation will
4 move forward into action soon.
5 Commissioner Jacobs said the Sheriff is very committed to such a shelter.
6 Commissioner Jacobs asked if there is a status update regarding the payment in lieu
7 system for parks and open space from development. He said a master plan for parks has been
8 adopted, and he understands a payment in lieu system should now be possible.
9 Commissioner Jacobs referenced a petition he made about a month ago, asking the
10 Planning Department to create a development analysis for new projects being built inside Town
11 limits and their impact on the County. He asked if this could be completed prior to the Town of
12 Hillsborough meeting to discuss Collins Ridge and Waterstone.
13 Commissioner Jacobs said several citizens had contacted Commissioners about
14 fireworks, and the Orange County noise ordinance. He asked if the Planning staff, the Sheriff's
15 Department and the County Manager could ascertain the specific concerns and determine the
16 best way to address them.
17 Chair McKee said he would refer this to Planning, the Manager, and the Sheriff.
18
19 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/Special Presentations
20
21 a. Arts & Humanities Month —2015 Piedmont Laureate James Maxey
22 The Board was introduced to, and heard a brief selection from, Hillsborough resident
23 and speculative fiction author James Maxey, the 2015 Piedmont Laureate, during National Arts
24 & Humanities Month (October).
25 Martha Shannon, Orange County Arts Commission Director, presented the following
26 background information:
27
28 BACKGROUND:
29 The 2015 Piedmont Laureate Program is co-sponsored by the Orange County
30 Arts Commission, the City of Raleigh Arts Commission, the Durham Arts Council, and United
31 Arts Council of Raleigh and Wake County. Now in its seventh year, the primary goal of this
32 program is to promote awareness and heighten appreciation for excellence in the literary arts
33 throughout the Piedmont region. The Arts Commission participates so that Orange County
34 writers can apply and Orange County sites can host the Piedmont Laureate free of charge. The
35 Piedmont Laureate is contracted for 20 events (readings or workshops at schools and public
36 sites) and at least 5 media appearances throughout the three-county area during calendar year
37 2015.
38 The 2015 application process was open to all speculative fiction authors residing in
39 Orange, Durham or Wake counties who met the guideline criteria. In addition to the program
40 sponsors, the selection panel included Samuel Montgomery-Blinn (Publisher, Bull Spec
41 Magazine), Mur Lafferty (speculative fiction author) and Tony Daniel (Editor, Baen Publishing
42 Enterprises). Two finalists were selected by the panel and interviewed by the program
43 sponsors. James Maxey was chosen. As a free Halloween offering, Mr. Maxey will be reading
44 his ghost story "Silent As Dust" at the Burwell School Historic Site in Hillsborough from 7-8 pm
45 on Friday, October 30, 2015.
46 James Maxey read a paragraph from one of his short stories, and reviewed his work
47 history.
48
49 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to
50 recognize James Maxey as the 2015 Piedmont Laureate.
3
1
2 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
3
4
5 b. Resolution Recognizing Evelyn Lloyd for Service on the Historic Hillsborough
6 Commission
7 The Board considered a resolution recognizing Evelyn Lloyd for her service on the
8 Historic Hillsborough Commission, and authorizing the Chair to sign.
9 Commissioner Jacobs read the resolution:
10
11 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
12
13 RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING EVELYN LLOYD FOR HER SERVICE ON THE HISTORIC
14 HILLSBOROUGH COMMISSION
15
16 WHEREAS, the Historic Hillsborough Commission was created by an Act of the North Carolina
17 General Assembly in 1963; and,
18
19 WHEREAS, the Historic Hillsborough Commission was created to serve in cooperation with the
20 Hillsborough Historical Society, the elected officials of Hillsborough and Orange County, and
21 appropriate public agencies; and,
22
23 WHEREAS, the Historic Hillsborough Commission has the power to preserve and restore the
24 Town of Hillsborough, and its immediately adjacent area, as a living, functioning, educational,
25 and historical exhibit of North Carolina's early life and times; to acquire and to dispose of
26 property, real and personal; to repair, restore, or otherwise improve such properties; and to
27 write, compile, publish, or sponsor historical works as may pertain to the town and area; and,
28
29 WHEREAS, the Historic Hillsborough Commission shall consist of not fewer than 25 members
30 appointed by the Governor and, in ex officio capacity, the Mayor of the Town of Hillsborough,
31 the Chair of the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, the Orange County Register of
32 Deeds, the Orange County Clerk of Superior Court, and the Secretary of Cultural Resources or
33 designee; and,
34
35 WHEREAS, the Historic Hillsborough Commission owns and operates the Burwell School
36 Historic Site, sharing this significant historic resource with the greater Orange County
37 community and beyond; and,
38
39 WHEREAS, Evelyn Pauline Lloyd was appointed by the Governor of the State of North Carolina
40 and was inducted into the Historic Hillsborough Commission on September 4, 1974; and,
41
42 WHEREAS, she has served continuously for 41 years on the Historic Hillsborough Commission,
43 longer than any other member of the Commission; and,
44
45 WHEREAS, her term of office on the Historic Hillsborough Commission will conclude in October
46 2015; and,
47
48 WHEREAS, Evelyn Pauline Lloyd has been a lifelong resident of Hillsborough, and she and her
49 family have a long record of service to the Town where she has served with distinction and
4
1 dedication despite the burdens on running a service-oriented small business and has also
2 served for 24 years as a Town of Hillsborough Commissioner;
3
4 NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Orange County Board of Commissioners does
5 hereby recognize Evelyn Pauline Lloyd for her service and commitment to the preservation of
6 local history in the seat of Orange County and does hereby wish her well in the future
7 endeavors she undertakes with her customary determination, thoroughness and warmth.
8
9 This the sixth day of October, 2015.
10
11 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Rich for the
12 Board to approve and authorize the Chair to sign the attached resolution recognizing Evelyn
13 Pauline Lloyd for her service on the Historic Hillsborough Commission.
14
15 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
16
17 c. Proclamation Naming Fairview Park Ballfield for James Stewart
18 The Board considered a proclamation naming the existing baseball/softball field at the
19 County's Fairview Park for the late Mr. James "Junebug" Stewart and authorizing the Chair to
20 sign.
21 David Stancil, Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks and Recreation (DEAPR)
22 Director, presented this item. He said Fairview Park was constructed in 2010-2011, through
23 combined local and State funding. He said the idea for this park started in the late 1980s, and
24 while waiting for an official field, Mr. Stewart created an informal field at this location, called the
25 "Field of Dreams", to allow neighborhood children to participate in sports leagues.
26 Commissioner Price read the proclamation.
27
28 PROCLAMATION
29 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
30 Recognizing JAMES "JUNEBUG" STEWART
31
32 Whereas, James Stewart and his neighbors in a predominantly African-American neighborhood
33 waited nearly two decades for playing fields for the children of the Fairview community; and
34
35 Whereas, James Stewart, a self-employed mason, overcame personal trials and tribulations
36 and took the initiative along with family and friends to construct a full-fledged baseball field atop
37 a closed and abandoned public landfill; and
38
39 Whereas, the ball field, known locally as the "Field of Dreams", opened in the summer of 1999;
40 and
41
42 Whereas, James Stewart, a lifelong resident of Fairview, was the inspirational force behind the
43 Fairview Youth Baseball Group, also known as the Fairview Eagles; and
44
45 Whereas, the Hillsborough/Orange County Chamber of Commerce awarded the 1999 Ed Riley
46 Helping Hand Award to James Stewart for constructing the Field of Dreams;
47
48 Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved, that the Orange County Board of County Commissioners
49 hereby proclaims that the baseball field at Fairview Community Park of Orange County shall be
5
1 named in honor of the late James "Junebug" Stewart, as a memorial to him, his love for the
2 people of his community and his "Field of Dreams".
3
4 This 6th day of October 2015.
5
6 A motion was made Commissioner Jacobs, by seconded Commissioner Rich for the
7 Board to approve and authorize the Chair to sign the attached proclamation naming the ballfield
8 at Fairview Park for James "Junebug" Stewart, and authorized staff to work with the Board to
9 schedule and plan for a dedication ceremony to be held in October/November 2015.
10
11 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
12
13 Commissioner Jacobs said $800,000 of the funds for the building of Fairview Park came
14 from the 2001 bond referendum for Parks and Open Space.
15
16 5. Public Hearings
17
18 a. Class A Special Use Permit—Schools (Elementary, Middle and Secondary) Public
19 and Private) for the Emerson Waldorf School (Receipt of Planning Board
20 Recommendation — No Additional Public Comment or Testimony Allowed)
21
22 Chair McKee read the following, and declared the public hearing reconvened. He added
23 that the hearing is solely for the purpose of receiving the Planning Board recommendation and
24 allowing new information previously submitted in writing to be entered into the record.
25 The Board shall receive the Planning Board recommendation, close the public hearing,
26 and make a decision on a Class A Special Use Permit (hereafter `SUP') application submitted
27 by the Emerson Waldorf School located at the intersection of New Jericho and Millhouse Roads
28 in Chapel Hill Township. The applicant is proposing revisions to the school's current SUP and
29 requesting approval of a Master Plan outlining the long-term expansion of the school's facilities
30 and infrastructure in accordance with Section 2.7 Special Use Permits and Section 5.8.4
31 "Schools: Elementary, Middle and Secondary" of the Orange County Unified Development
32 Ordinance (UDO).
33 Patrick Mallet, Current Planning, reviewed the abstract and attachments and asked that
34 they be entered into the record, along with the pink attachment at the Commissioners' places.
35 He said the attachments are:
36 1. Vicinity map, outlining the various properties owned by the Emerson Waldorf School and
37 governed by the SUP
38 2. July 1, 2015 Planning Board Abstract
39 3. Expert of the approved minutes from the May 26, 2015 Quarterly Public Hearing
40 4. Expert of the approved minutes from the July 1, 2015 Planning Board Meeting
41 5. Planning Board recommended findings of fact and conditions of approval
42 6. Script for acting on the findings of facts
43 7. Agreement and acceptance from the Emerson Waldorf School, regarding the findings of
44 fact and conditions of approval
45
46 SCRIPT FOR ACTING ON EMERSON WALDORF SCHOOL AT THE INTERSECTION OF
47 NEW JERICHO AND MILLHOUSE ROADS
48 CLASS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION:
49 October 6, 2015 BOCC meeting
50 N OT -- IE:'µllUe text denotes IBO(I':XI], I':MhaIr°/ Ieirr°hlbeir it°egUiir°ed action
6
1 1. (".'hair will explain the PiLfirpose of the literlru lIs to Ireceive the IPIlanlnliing Boclird
2 irecoi�"ir,iiY"ir,ieirid,-itlloiri.
3 For the project, the purpose of the meeting is as follows:
4 To receive the Planning Board recommendation, close the public hearing, and make a
5 decision on a Class A Special Use Permit(hereafter`SUP) application submitted by
6 Emerson Waldorf School proposing a revised SUP with a Master Plan to allow for the long-
7 term expansion of school accordance with Section 2.7 Special Use Permits and Section
8 5.8.4 "Schools:Elementary, Middle and Secondary"of the Orange County Unified
9 Development Ordinance (UDO).
10
11 Z (".hair will declaire the Itvu.ultulllic hearing re-convened for the pUrpose of receiving the
12 Planning IBu.ard irecoi�"ir,iiY"ir,ieirid,-itlloiri ,-iirid ,-is�k staff to irriake their piresentation.
13 NOTE—The re-convening of a hearing is solely for the purpose of receiving the
14 Planning Board recommendation and allowing any new information, previously
15 submitted in writing, to be entered into the record. The hearing is not intended to solicit
16 additional input from the public or the applicant.
17
18 While the BOCC may ask staff questions related to the review of a given item,
19 comments from the public or the applicant shall not be solicited. The accepting of
20 additional public comments at this stage of the review (i.e. the reconvened hearing)
21 would constitute a violation of the UDO.
22
23 3. Staff will review the abstract and ask it be entered into the record. Staff will review the
24 Findings of Fact (Attachment 5) for the Special Use component of the project.
25
26 4. Questions will be asked of staff.
27
28 5� A irriotion was irriade by BiLflrmUghS, and seconded by (',.,.oiY"ir,iiY"ir,iIissIloirieir Rich
29 to close the Igu.ultulliic hearing.
30 Vote: LJinanirriOUS
31
32 N 0 . ............. 01111cetIhIis Iiis doine, I�)I4iiiiiIiiiig Staff caininot ainsweir ques'doins cur III irovIide
33 ad&i'tio114 detalHl
34
35 6. The BOCC will first need to take action on the Special Use Permit findings of fact. The
36 findings of fact have been organized per relevant UDO section to aid in making motions
37 to approve or deny. The cadence on taking action should be as follows
38
39 a A irriotion was irriade by Rich, seconded by Doirosin
40 finding the,a ant has corriplied with the Ipir ovisio iris of Section(s) 2.2 : Ind 2.7.3
41 of the Orange LJinified IDevelopirlrient Ordinance as detailed Iby the findings
42 contained within Attachirrient 5 of the at)stircict I package.
43
44 VOTE: LJNANIM0LJS
45
46 NOTE— if the motion is to reject the individual making the motion will need to
47 provide some explanation justifying the finding that the applicant has not
48 established, through competent material and substantial evidence, the project is
49 in compliance with Section(s) 2.2 and 2.7.3 of the UDO.
50
7
I b A irriotion was i by Rich, seconded by Pirice
2 fi iri d I iri g t h e a ant has corriplied with the Ipir ovisio iris of Section 2.7.5 of the
3 ra iri g e it-Jinified IDeveIIoIpirrient Ordinance as detailed Iby the findings
4 contained within Attachirrient 5 of the at)stiract 1 package.
5 VOTE: LJNAN1M0LJS
6
7 NOTE— if the motion is to reject the individual making the motion will need to
8 provide some explanation justifying the finding that the applicant has not
9 established, through competent material and substantial evidence, the project is
10 in compliance with Section 2.7.5 of the UDO.
12 c. A irriotion was i by Rich, seconded by
13 Pelissier finding the a,pjA�iqant has with the pirovisions of Section 5.3.2 (B) of the
14 0irainge it-Jinified IDevelopirlrient Ordinance as detailed Iby the findings
15 contained within Attachirrient 5 of the at)stiract 1 package. Second.
16
17 VOTE: LJNAN1M0LJS
18
19 NOTE— if the motion is to reject the individual making the motion will need to
20 provide some explanation justifying the finding that the applicant has not
21 established, through competent material and substantial evidence, the project is
22 in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (B) of the UDO.
23
24 d� A irriotion was i by Rich, seconded by Pirice
25 finding the corriplied with the Ipir ovisio iris of Section 5J3.4 of the
26 ()ra iri g e ("'.0Unty it-Jinified Developirrient Ordinance as detailed by the findings
27 contained within Attachirrient 5 of the at)stiract 1 package.
28
29 VOTE: LJ WAIN 1M0LJS
30
31 NOTE— if the motion is to reject the individual making the motion will need to
32 provide some explanation justifying the finding that the applicant has not
33 established, through competent material and substantial evidence, the project is
34 in compliance with Section 5.8.4 (B) of the UDO.
35
36 e. A irriotion will need to IIu e i regairding corripliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) of
37 the Ordinance as follows
38
39 NOTE—Whomever makes the motion will have to cite the `evidence' in the
40 record utilized justifying the motion to approve or deny. Attachment 5 contains
41 the recommendations of the Planning Board including the evidence utilized to
42 reach the conclusion. This 'evidence' must be spelled out explicitly by the
43 Commissioner making the motion.
44
45 If the motion is to deny then the Commissioner making the motion will have to
46 spell out explicitly the evidence within the record utilized to justify a negative
47 finding:
48
49 L A irriotion was i by Rich, seconded by (',.,.oiY"ir,iiY"ir,iIissIloirieir
g e , eire ��is SUfficient evidence in the irecord the �pir(.,)ject 50 Doirosin findin
8
1 corriplies with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (a) of the L00 lire that the Use will
2 irriaintain and piroirriote the I pLflbliC health, safety and geneiral welft-lire, lIf
3 located wheire I piroposed and developed and opeirated accoirding to the
4 plan -IS SLflbirriitted.
5
6 This irriotion lIs 1based on corripetent irriateirial and evidence enteired unto
7 the irecoird of these I piroceedings, InClUding:
8
9 NOTE—the following represents the findings of the Planning Board. If
10 the motion is to find there is sufficient evidence in the record to find
11 compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (a) this list must be read verbatim
12 so it is in the record.
13 Application package and testimony including:
14 o Biological Inventory completed by The Catena Group;
15 o Forest Stewardship Plan completed by Kelly Douglass;
16 o Impact Analysis completed by Everett `Vic' Knight
17 o Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) completed by
18 SEPI Engineering
19 o State Clearinghouse comments on how the project
20 complied with the UDO.
21 Staff testimony and abstract package from May 26, 2015
22 quarterly public hearing.
23 Planning Board packet from July 1, 2015 regular meeting.
24 AND
25 A lack of competent material evidence in the record
26 demonstrating the applicant did not comply with the UDO.
27
28 If the motion is to find there is insufficient evidence in the record to find
29 the project is in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (a), the
30 Commissioner making the motion will have to specifically denote what is
31 absent and explain what, if any, evidence is in the record disputing the
32 claims of the applicant that they are in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A)
33 (2) (a).
34
35 VORC: UlNA\flHMOUS
36
37 IL A irriotion was irriade by Rich, Seconded by (',.,.oi"ir,iir"ir,iIiss1loirieir
38 Pirice flinding theire Is SUfficient evidence In the irecoird the I pir(.,)ject
39 corriplies with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b) of the L00 lire that the Use will
40 irriaintain the VcIlUe of conflgUOUS piropeirty.
41
42 This irriotion lIs 1based on corripetent irriateirial and evidence enteired linto
43 the irecoird of these I piroceedings, InClUding:
44
45 NOTE—the following represents the findings of the Planning Board. If
46 the motion is to find there is sufficient evidence in the record to find
47 compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b) this list must be read verbatim
48 so it is in the record.
49 • Application package and testimony including:
9
1 o Impact Analysis completed by Everett `Vic' Knight on
2 how the project complied with the UDO.
3 • Staff testimony and abstract package from May 26, 2015
4 quarterly public hearing.
5 • Planning Board packet from July 1, 2015 regular meeting.
6 AND
7 • A lack of competent material evidence in the record
8 demonstrating the applicant did not comply with the UDO.
9
10 If the motion is to find there is insufficient evidence in the record to find
11 the project is in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b), the
12 Commissioner making the motion will have to specifically denote what is
13 absent and explain what, if any, evidence is in the record disputing the
14 claims of the applicant that they are in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A)
15 (2) (b).
16
17 L.II�IIIIIII: U IINA\U II IM U S
18
19 i i . imir h� �i� r �s �y �.i� �, s
ecor1e1 Ib Q,oirirhirirhisslioirieir
20 Pel li�:�s ie r fli iri d i iri ,Ire -it Iii
21 ��orir'hl llli��s with ����cti�:�ir�����-.3.2 (A) (2) (c) of the U.00 in that the Use is in
22 hain"riony with the area in which it is to be 1located and the Use is in
23 corir'hl llliance with the I plan for I physical deveIlopir°irheint of the ("'.0Uinty as
24 eirirhlbodied in these ir eg U Ilatioiris and in the Q',.,;oir°ir,iIpir'e ieiris:ive IPlan.
25
26 This irirhotlion is 1based on corir'hl etent irirhateirlial and evidence enteired Into
27 the irecoird of these I iroceedings, lInClUdiiriq:
28
29 NOTE—the following represents the findings of the Planning Board. If
30 the motion is to find there is sufficient evidence in the record to find
31 compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (c) this list must be read verbatim
32 so it is in the record.
33 Application package and testimony including:
34 o Biological Inventory completed by The Catena Group;
35 o Forest Stewardship Plan completed by Kelly Douglass;
36 o Impact Analysis completed by Everett `Vic' Knight
37 o Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) completed by
38 SEPI Engineering
39 o State Clearing House comments on how the project
40 complied with the UDO.
41 Staff testimony and abstract package from May 26, 2015 quarterly
42 public hearing.
43 Planning Board packet from July 1, 2015 regular meeting.
44 AND
45 A lack of competent material evidence in the record
46 demonstrating the applicant did not comply with the UDO.
47
48 If the motion is to find there is insufficient evidence in the record to find
49 the project is in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (c), the
50 Commissioner making the motion will have to specifically denote what is
|0
| absent and explain what, if any, evidence isin the record disputing the
2 claims of the applicant that they are in compliance with Section 5.32 (A
3 (2) (C).
5 U�NA\|BOUS
0
7 7� A rri[ti0n was rriade by '.orrirriissi0ner RiCh, seconded by PeUissiert0
8 apjA[q,,yq, the SpeCiaULJse Perrriit.
9
10 Uf the rrioti0n Is to approve the SpeCiaULJse Perrriit. this rrioti0nVVOUUd also need to
|| InCUUde UangUlge Ind iCatin g the BO("(" lrrp0ses the reCorrrrendedCondifl0ns as detailed
12 VVithin 4dtaChrrent 5 ofthe atstraCt paCkage.
|3
14 VOTE: LJNAN1M0LJS
|5
|0 6. Consent Agenda
17 * Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
18 Item 0by Commissioner Price
|9
20 * Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
21 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
22 approve the remaining items on the consent agenda.
23
24 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
25
20 * Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
27 Item 0: North Carolina Department of Transportation Rural Operating Assistance
28 Program (ROAP) Grant Application for FY 2016
29 The Board considered approving the annual FY 2016 ROAP grant application for funds totaling
30 $168,933 and authorized the County Manager and County Finance Officer to sign the certified
31 statement.
32 Commissioner Price said Bret Martin, Transportation Planner 11, would be leaving
33 Orange County, and going to Wake County inOctober. She publicly thanked and recognized
34 Bret asan exceptional employee.
35
30 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to
37 approve the annual FY 2016 ROAP grant application for funds totaling $168,933 and authorized
38 the County Manager and County Finance Officer to sign the certified statement.
39
40 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
4|
42 a. Minutes
43 The Board approved the minutes from September 1, 2015 as submitted by the Clerk to the
44 Board
45 b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds
40 The Board adopted a reso|udon, which is incorporated by referenoe, to release motor vehicle
47 property tax values for twelve (12) taxpayers with atotal of fourteen (14) bills that will result ina
48 reduction of revenue in accordance with NCGG.
49 c. Property Tax Releases/Refunds
11
1 The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release property tax
2 values for twenty (20) taxpayers with a total of thirty-three (33) bills that will result in a reduction
3 of revenue in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 105-381.
4 d. Applications for Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion
5 The Board considered sixteen (16) untimely applications for exemption/exclusion from ad
6 valorem taxation for sixteen (16) bills for the 2015 tax year.
7 e. Fiscal Year 2015-16 Budget Amendment#2
8 The Board approved budget ordinance amendments for fiscal year 2015-16 for Solid Waste,
9 Animal Services/Spay and Neuter Fund, Department on Aging, Library Services, and Social
10 Services.
11 f. Application for North Carolina Education Lottery Proceeds for Orange County
12 Schools (OCS) and Contingent Approval of Budget Amendment #2-A Related to OCS
13 Capital Project Ordinances
14 The Board approved an application to the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction
15 (NCDPI) to release proceeds from the NC Education Lottery account related to FY 2015-16
16 debt service payments for Orange County Schools (OCS), and approved Budget Amendment
17 #2-A (amended School Capital Project Ordinances), contingent on the NCDPI's approval of the
18 application and authorized the Chair to sign.
19 g. North Carolina Department of Transportation Rural Operating Assistance Program
20 (ROAP) Grant Application for FY 2016
21 The Board approved the annual FY 2016 ROAP grant application for funds totaling $168,933
22 and authorized the County Manager and County Finance Officer to sign the certified statement.
23 h. Consideration of an Amendment to the 2015 Schools Adequate Public Facilities
24 Ordinance Technical Advisory Committee (SAPFOTAC) Report
25 The Board approved amendments to the 2015 Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance
26 Technical Advisory Committee (SAPFOTAC) Report.
27 i. Authorization to Declare Item Surplus
28 The Board declared a skid steer as surplus and authorized the AMS Director to affect the sale
29 of the item through GovDeals.
30 j. Acceptance of Vehicles From Second Family Foundation and Approval of Budget
31 Amendment #2-113
32 The Board accepted three vehicles from the Second Family Foundation to be used by
33 temporary employees at the Department of Social Services (DSS) to transport foster and other
34 at-risk youth to employment sites and to other services and enrichment activities, and approved
35 Budget Amendment#2-B.
36
37 7. Regular Agenda
38
39 a. Additional Discussion Regarding a November 2016 Bond Referendum and
40 Possible Consideration of a Preliminary Resolution To Set Bond Purposes and
41 Amounts
42 The Board continued a discussion regarding a November 2016 Bond Referendum and
43 considered adopting a preliminary resolution to set bond purposes and amounts.
44 Chair McKee referred this item to Bonnie Hammersley.
45 Bonnie Hammersley referred the Commissioners to the memorandum on the CIP. She
46 introduced the Bond Counsel Bob Jessup.
47 Bob Jessup said this evening is another procedural step toward putting a bond on the
48 ballot in November 2016.
49 Bob Jessup gave an overview of process, saying there are five steps:
50 1) Preliminary resolution
12
1 2) Set maximum parameters
2 3) Purposes and maximum amounts
3 4) LGC application
4 5) Public hearing
5 He said after these five steps there would be a final vote and a resolution setting the
6 referendum details. He said currently the November 2016 election date is being considered
7 Commissioner Jacobs asked if the Manager could please elaborate on the memo at the
8 Commissioners' places.
9 Bonnie Hammersley said the CIP is a 10-year plan, and she referenced the memo
10 below:
11
12 MEMORANDUM
13 October 6, 2015
14
15 TO: Board of Orange County Commissioners
16
17 FROM: Bonnie Hammersley, Orange County Manager
18
19 RE: Capital Investment Plan (CIP) Related to Bond Referendum Discussion
20
21 As part of the bond referendum discussions, Commissioners have asked about alternative
22 financing packages that express the priorities of the Board of Orange County Commissioners
23 while maintaining an overall bond amount of$125 million.
24
25 Tonight, the Board of Orange County Commissioners (BOCC) will consider a resolution that
26 establishes the maximum bond referendum amount and the purposes for which those bonds
27 may be used. In addition to this financing mechanism, the Board may also consider amending
28 the Capital Investment Plan (CIP) to address the needs that have been emphasized during the
29 bond discussion.
30
31 The CIP is a ten (10) year plan, with the first five (5) year projects with specific detail
32 information and the remaining five (5) years (out years) with less detailed information about the
33 projects. The CIP is reviewed and adopted by the BOCC on an annual basis with appropriated
34 funds for the current year only. Including funding in the CIP has the advantage of limiting the
35 overall bond referendum amount and provides additional flexibility to fund projects as they
36 mature to the stage of needing to be financed as well as determining annual tax rate impacts.
37
38 The difference between the two funding sources is the type of financing that is used to borrow
39 the funds. The bond referendum allows the County to issue general obligation (GO) bonds,
40 backed by the full faith and credit of the County, while the CIP would be funded with other types
41 of borrowing, typically limited obligation bonds (LOB) or installments financing. Using the bond
42 to finance all of the purposes typically has the advantage of being able to access lower interest
43 rates. General obligation bonds almost always carry a slightly lower interest rate than limited
44 obligation financing.
45
46 In either case, the Davenport analysis indicates that the County can support a total financing
47 package of up to $135 million without violating the County's debt policy for affordability or
48 exceeding its capacity to issue debt compared to its peers. Although financing projects through
49 the CIP will have higher interest rates, the Finance Department does not believe that those
13
1 rates would be different enough to have a material impact on the overall costs to the County
2 with respect to the tax rate, affordability and capacity benchmarks.
3
4 If you have questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you.
5
6
7 Commissioner Dorosin asked if it is cheaper to borrow through the bond or through the
8 CIP.
9 Bonnie Hammersley said borrowing through the bond is cheaper, because the general
10 obligations bonds are backed by the full faith and credit of the County. She added that as
11 Orange County has a AAA bond rating, a favorable interest rate would be received. She said
12 limited obligation bonds would probably receive a good interest rate as well.
13 Commissioner Dorosin asked if a vote is taken tonight determining certain amounts for
14 certain purposes, then moving forward the Commissioners could only reduce or eliminate
15 funds, and no additional funds or purposes could be added.
16 Bob Jessup said yes.
17 Chair McKee said he would like to go to public comment on this item.
18
19 PUBLIC COMMENT:
20 Allan Rosen, the Project Manager for the Interfaith Council for Social Service, thanked
21 the BOCC for its on going support for affordable housing. He said he supports bond funding for
22 both schools and affordable housing, as good homes plus good schools equals great
23 communities. He asked the BOCC to lead the development of a strategic plan for affordable
24 housing and to assign at least $10 million bond funds to allow for the execution of such a plan.
25 He said such funding could provide 500 housing units.
26 Natalie Britt, Vice President for Rental Development at DHIC, said she supports bond
27 funding for affordable rental housing in Orange County.
28 Burnis Hackney said he supports bond funding for both schools and affordable housing.
29 He said the two needs go hand-in-hand. He said he is also speaking on behalf of Saint Paul's
30 Church which is committed to developing affordable housing.
31 Marty Smith said he is from Tennons Woods Community in Efland, and he supports
32 funding for affordable housing and the schools.
33 Rose Snipes said she too is a member of Saint Paul's AME Church, and affordable and
34 senior housing are the congregation's number one priorities, as well as educational
35 development for children.
36 Jane Kerwin said she attended the September 15, 2015 meeting and noticed that no
37 one stepped forward to oppose a bond. She said it was even suggested that a larger bond be
38 approved. She emphasized the great physical needs of the schools and that the schools must
39 be safe and ADA compliant.
40 Mark Marcoplos said he is here to ask that affordable housing be included in the bond in
41 the amount of$10 million. He said he also supported funding for the schools and seniors. He
42 also noted his appreciation for the public that has come out to speak at the two meetings and
43 made the vital connections between safe, affordable housing and good schools.
44 Jill Simon said she is speaking on behalf of the Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools
45 (CHCCS) PTA Council and would like the full bond amount of$125 million for the schools, as
46 well as additional funds for affordable housing.
47 Joann Mitchell said she is a Habitat homeowner, and she supports funding for
48 affordable housing in the bond.
49 Jonathan Young, Community Empowerment Fund, said he supported bond funds for
50 affordable housing.
14
1 Donna Champointe said she supports funding for affordable housing in the bond.
2 Commissioner Price thanked the community for their comments on the bond.
3 Commissioner Dorosin applauded the organized advocacy of the public, and noted he
4 had been pushing hard for affordable housing funding in the proposed bond. He said he
5 previously felt that $5 million should be allocated to affordable housing, but now feels a higher
6 amount may be possible based on updated information from staff. He said there will likely need
7 to be a balance of getting funds from both the CIP and the bond. He said there is a compelling
8 case for all needs to be funded, and he feels $10 million would be appropriate for affordable
9 housing.
10 Commissioner Rich said she agreed with Commissioner Dorosin. She also thanked the
11 affordable housing community for working together to advocate on behalf of the needs of
12 Orange County. She said that increasing the bond to allot $10 million for affordable housing
13 seems very manageable and hopes that some of that money could be dedicated to seniors.
14 Commissioner Pelissier said she is heartened to see the public recognizing the
15 interconnection between the needs within the County. She said the schools need far more than
16 $125 million. She said bond funds are not the only way to address capital needs, and she
17 encouraged the public to stay involved as the BOCC goes through the CIP on a yearly basis.
18 Commissioner Burroughs said the Poet Laureate set the tone for the evening. She said
19 Democracy should be a process of working together to move the County forward. She said the
20 bond funds would only meet half of the schools needs. She said she looked at the CIP and
21 concludes that there are some flexible funds available to address other needs, but those funds
22 appear to be in the out years. She said that may be too far away, and more discussion may be
23 necessary to see how the CIP could provide more funds. She said she supports funding for
24 both the schools and affordable housing through a combination of the bond and CIP, but is
25 uncomfortable going to $135 million solely through the bond.
26 Commissioner Jacobs said it has been really heartening to see so many people come
27 forward to move the BOCC to include affordable housing in the bond package. He said he is
28 hopeful that this will happen. He said this bond is the "goldilocks" package, it must be neither
29 too hot nor too cold; it must be just right. He said the bond package must be as inclusive as
30 possible.
31 Chair McKee said the Board is trying to get it just right. He said the first bond discussion
32 was held in 2013, and regardless of how the needs are addressed, they must be addressed
33 and this will cost money. He said little money has been spent on the schools in the last 10
34 years. He said the bond conversation ramped up in early 2015 with a preliminary vote of intent
35 to focus on the schools in April. He said the BOCC could have conducted a final vote at that
36 time, but did not do so in order to include Commissioner Dorosin as well as give the public a
37 chance to comment on the needs of the County. He said the BOCC has received several
38 hundred emails, has listened to all public comments, and has considered the issues very
39 carefully. He said he has been convinced of the need for both schools and affordable housing.
40 Chair McKee said he has asked the Manager to put together a comprehensive master
41 plan for the needs of seniors. He said he is uncomfortable going to $135 million for the bond.
42 Commissioner Dorosin asked if$130 million would a possible option.
43 Chair McKee said he would prefer to stay at $125 million.
44 Commissioner Price proposed a big picture approach to the issue. She said there
45 should be a $125 million bond that would be allocated as follows:
46 • $120 million for the capital needs of OCS and CHCCS, allocating 40 percent to OCS and 60
47 percent to CHCCS.
48 • $5 million for affordable housing based on a plan developed and administered by the
49 Orange County Housing, Human Rights, and Community Development Department and
15
1 approved by the BOCC, which plan shall include 35 percent of affordable housing for senior
2 citizens and people with disabilities, including mental illness.
3 Commissioner Price added that a companion proposal would be that $1 million per year,
4 at a minimum, be committed from the CIP to schools to be divided 40-60 between OCS and
5 CHCCS for at least the next five years; and that $1 million per year, at a minimum be committed
6 from the annual operating budget to affordable housing, which may be used for non-capital
7 needs, for at least the next five years. She said the implications of this formula will provide
8 $125 million to schools over the next five to seven years, and $10 million for affordable housing
9 over the next five to seven years. She said this plan could begin with the next fiscal year, as
10 opposed to waiting until 2017 and the passage of the bond. She said this proposal would
11 address housing and education needs, as well as provide employment through housing
12 development projects.
13
14 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs for
15 $120,000,000 for schools and $5,000,000 to address the capital needs for affordable housing.
16
17 Commissioner Dorosin asked if voting on the motion would bind the BOCC to the rest of
18 Commissioner Price's outlined proposal.
19 John Roberts said no, and that changes can be made on how the money is divided once
20 the amount is set.
21 Bob Jessup agreed with John Roberts.
22 Commissioner Rich said she wished that Commissioner Price's carefully prepared
23 outline would have been shared with the entire BOCC prior to tonight's meeting. She said it
24 was a lot of information to take and process on the spot, and it is unfair that half of the Board
25 had the information while the other half did not. She said it is indicative of the entire bond
26 process.
27
28 A motion for a hostile amendment to Commissioner Price's motion was made by
29 Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to raise the bond to $130,000,000,
30 with $117,000,000 to schools, $10,000,000 to affordable housing, $3,000,000 senior facilities;
31 and find $8,000,000 in the CIP for schools, which in addition to the $117,000,000 from the
32 bond, it would give the schools a total of$125,000,000.
33
34 VOTE: Ayes, 3 (Commissioner Dorosin, Commissioner Rich and Commissioner Jacobs); Nays,
35 4 (Commissioner Burroughs, Commissioner Rich, Commissioner McKee, and Commissioner
36 Pelissier)
37
38 Motion failed.
39
40 Commissioner Rich said she would like to make another hostile amendment, raising the
41 bond to $130 million with $120 to schools and $10 million to affordable housing with $5 million
42 coming from the CIP for the schools.
43 Commissioner Jacobs said he is willing to support this amendment. He said it is
44 unfortunate that the Board has not given enough attention to seniors. He said he does not
45 have confidence that monies will be found within the CIP without having a clear plan. He added
46 that groups of Commissioners are making decisions as majorities, without including the rest of
47 the Board.
48 Commissioner Burroughs said she understands the frustrations. She said she is
49 frustrated as well, saying she spoke to each member of the BOCC throughout this process, and
16
1 the record should reflect that fact. She said this is what Democracy looks like. She is
2 saddened that the conversation has taken an unpleasant turn.
3 Commissioner Dorosin said his concern for having $5 million for affordable housing in
4 the CIP is that it is not binding during budget discussions. He said it is a statement of intent,
5 but is not binding, whereas if the $10 million in included in the bond, the funds are guaranteed.
6 Commissioner Jacobs supported Commissioner Dorosin's comments. He said a
7 democratic process is made far more democratic when it is transparent in public, not when
8 phone calls are made privately.
9 Commissioner Pelissier said if the voters approve a bond for a certain amount the
10 BOCC is not obligated to issue all the bond monies either. She said there would be an
11 expectation that bond monies would be issued, just as there should be an expectation that a
12 CIP vote would be honored. She said there is not a 100 percent guarantee either way.
13 Commissioner Pelissier said Orange County has a serious issue with poverty, and she
14 does not want all funds to go to capital needs. She said some rental subsidies might be
15 needed. She said she does not want to commit without a housing plan and does not want to tie
16 all funds to capital needs.
17 Commissioner Price said these accusations, that she put together a proposal and
18 lobbied Commissioners, are untrue. She said her goal was to pull something together that
19 incorporated all that she has heard from the BOCC, staff, and members of the community. She
20 said she has spoken several times with Commissioner Dorosin to reiterate her support of
21 affordable housing. She said she seeks a plan that is not reckless and wants to set aside
22 money in the CIP to allow school plans to move forward sooner rather than later, and to offer
23 flexible spending options for affordable housing.
24 Commissioner Rich clarified that the current motion on the table is her amendment for
25 $120 million for schools and $10 million for affordable housing through the bond and with $5
26 million for the schools from the CIP. She said this is a friendly amendment.
27 Commissioner Burroughs clarified that $130 million would come from the bond and $5
28 million from the CIP.
29 Commissioner Rich said yes.
30 Commissioner Burroughs said she feels there needs to be room for the Senior Centers.
31 She said this is in the long plan, but she is not willing to commit up to $135 million in a
32 combined amount as it stretches the County to its max financially.
33 Commissioner Rich said she wants the amendment to be friendly.
34 Commissioner Dorosin said he does not see a fiscal difference between Commissioner
35 Price's and Commissioner Rich's motions, but he sees a great political difference between
36 them.
37 Commissioner Jacobs agreed with Commissioners Price and Pelissier regarding the
38 difference between capital and operating spending. He said it is very important that any money
39 given to affordable housing must be partially allocated for operational expenses. He said the
40 BOCC has to come up with the money for the operating budget, rather than money that is
41 borrowed for a bond. He said the operating budget has many competing interests. He feels his
42 comments will hold no sway and that it would have been beneficial to have this conversation in
43 a work session previously. He said the BOCC will work it out, but this process is a huge lost
44 opportunity and has been frustrating.
45
46 A motion for a second friendly amendment to Commissioner Price's motion was made
47 by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to raise the bond to $130,000,000
48 with $120,000,000 to schools, $10,000,000 for affordable housing, and find $5,000,000 in the
49 CIP for the schools.
50 Commissioner Price declined this friendly amendment.
17
1 Chair McKee said the Board is back to Commissioner Price's original motion of$120
2 million in the 2016 bond for the schools and $5 million for affordable housing.
3 Commissioner Dorosin said he will vote for this motion because it seems to be the best
4 that can be achieved for affordable housing, but he casts his vote begrudgingly. He said it is
5 disappointing at best.
6 Commissioner Rich said she agreed with Commissioner Dorosin. She said she wants to
7 apologize to the public in attendance, the public that attended the September 15 meeting, and
8 to Robert Seymour who is 91 years old and came to both meetings. She said the public
9 deserved more.
10 Chair McKee called for a vote on the original motion:
11
12 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs for
13 a bond for 2016 in the amount of$120,000,000 for schools and $5,000,000 for affordable
14 housing.
15
16 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
17
18 Commissioner Rich asked if Bond Counsel could clarify the rest of the process.
19 Bob Jessup said the bond portion of the evening is completed. He said the LGC
20 process will move forward. He said in April 2016 there will be the introduction of the bond
21 order, which is simply the formal consideration at a first meeting, without a vote, followed by a
22 public hearing.
23 Commissioner Rich asked if the bond referendum discussion was complete.
24 Bob Jessup said yes.
25
26 A second motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner
27 Jacobs to put $1,000,000 per year to be committed from the Capital Investment Plan to schools
28 to be divided per A.D.M. between the two school districts, Orange County Schools and Chapel
29 Hill-Carrboro City Schools, respectively, for at least the next five years; and $1,000,000 per
30 year, at a minimum, be committed from the Annual Operating Budget to affordable housing
31 which may be used for non-capital needs for at least the next five years.
32
33 Commissioner Rich asked if more than $1 million could be spent.
34 Commissioner Price said yes, that is why the motion says "at a minimum".
35 Chair McKee says the motion sets a minimum figure for schools and affordable housing
36 funding from the CIP.
37 Commissioner Rich asked if the funds would be split 40-60 between OCS and CHCCS.
38 Chair McKee said yes, which roughly equates to A.D.M.
39 Commissioner Rich asked if these percentages only apply to the CIP funds and not the
40 bond funds.
41 Commissioner Price said yes.
42 Chair McKee clarified that the $1 million for affordable housing is an approximately
43 $200,000 increase from the current CIP budget for affordable housing and is not an additional
44 $1 million.
45 Commissioner Rich said affordable housing currently receives $820,000, and asked if
46 the proposal is to raise that to total $1 million, not to add an additional $1 million.
47 Chair McKee said yes.
48 Commissioner Price said this is at a minimum.
49 Commissioner Jacobs said the $820,000 is for more than deferring impact fees. He
50 asked if there is a reason that the motion says "at least" $1 million for schools, when the goal
18
1 was to bring the total for schools to $125 million, when combined with bond funds. He said
2 more than $1 million should not be needed because $125 million total was the goal.
3 Commissioner Jacobs said it is a given that the schools will need more. He said the
4 schools could come back and ask for more money.
5 Chair McKee clarified that Commissioner Jacobs is requesting to remove the "at a
6 minimum" wording as it pertains to the schools.
7 John Roberts said the ADM is not exactly a 40-60 split. He suggested that the wording
8 should be "per A.D.M." which would allow for annual fluctuations.
9
10 A second motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner
11 Jacobs to put $1,000,000 per year to be committed from the Capital Investment Plan to schools
12 to be divided per A.D.M. between the two school districts, Orange County Schools and Chapel
13 Hill-Carrboro City Schools, respectively, for at least the next five years; and $1,000,000 per
14 year, at a minimum, be committed from the Annual Operating Budget to affordable housing
15 which may be used for non-capital needs for at least the next five years.
16
17 VOTE: UNANIMOUS.
18
19 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Dorosin that
20 to consider the likelihood we will face another bond issue in the near future to address schools
21 and other community needs, the Board consider, no later than our retreat adopting a
22 formalized, open and inclusive process for fashioning a bond package that is aligned with
23 Commissioners' goal number two, promote an interactive and transparent system of
24 governance that reflects community values.
25
26 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
27
28 Five minute break
29
30 Commissioner Pelissier said the BOCC is committed to maintaining the facilities for
31 senior services, and has asked the County to create a plan regarding all the facility needs.
32 Commissioner Price said she hopes there will be ongoing support for affordable housing
33 for seniors.
34 Commissioner Jacobs says he looks forward to discussing these items in a work
35 session shortly.
36
37 b. Affordable Housing Fund Criteria
38 The Board considered establishing a process and criteria to fund affordable housing
39 projects using the FY 2015-16 Affordable Housing appropriation.
40 Audrey Spencer-Horsely, Orange County Housing, Human Rights, and Community
41 Development Department Director, reviewed the following information:
42
43 BACKGROUND:
44 The FY 2015-16 Budget includes $1 million to fund affordable housing alternatives. The
45 Budget states that the purpose of this fund is to acquire aggregate parcels, improve existing
46 County-owned properties for future residential development to address displaced manufactured
47 homes, as well as affordable housing alternatives. According to the Five Year Consolidated
48 Plan and FY 2015 Action Plan, the most significant housing need in Orange County is
49 affordable rental housing. The Plan states that 28.4% of renter households contribute 50% or
50 more of annual income to housing costs while 7.7% of owner households contribute the same
19
1 proportion. If the percentage of income dedicated to housing costs is reduced to 30%, the
2 proportion of renter households dedicating at least that amount to housing increases to 44.1%.
3 The Plan further concluded through interviews and surveys that the lack of quality, affordable
4 housing for rent is the largest unmet housing need in Orange County.
5 To address this need, staff is proposing to prioritize the use of the $1 million affordable
6 housing fund to increase or, at a minimum, maintain the supply of affordable rental properties in
7 the community. Eighty percent (80%) of the fund would be used for rental property projects and
8 up to twenty percent (20%) could be applied to homeownership activities. This effort would
9 represent the first phase of an affordable housing plan that will address additional housing
10 needs and identify other opportunities.
11 Under this model, the County would solicit proposals through a competitive request for
12 proposal (RFP) process to purchase rental properties. The RFP would not limit the type of
13 property that could be purchased. Properties could range from multi-family apartment units to
14 manufactured homes. The properties would then be dedicated to housing individuals or families
15 with annual incomes of fifty percent (50%) or less of the local median income for rental and up
16 to eighty percent (80%) median income for homeownership. Funding priority would be given to
17 rental projects. The proposals would allow the County to either fully fund or partially contribute
18 to the purchase of affordable rental housing. However, the properties would be managed and
19 maintained by another party under a lease agreement or other type of contract. A staff team
20 would use the following grading criteria to evaluate proposals and recommend funding:
21
22 1. The property must include one or more rental or homeownership properties.
23 2. The properties must be available to individuals or families with annual incomes of 50% or
24 less of the local median income for rental and up to 80% median income for homeownership.
25 3. Priority will be given to individuals or families referred by County agencies or recognized non-
26 profit partners.
27 4. The proposal must address how the property will be managed and maintained.
28 5. The properties must pass an initial inspection for safety, quality, and feasibility and must be
29 maintained to safety standards, subject to inspection by the County.
30 6. The properties should be located in an area with access to transportation resources, or the
31 proposer must include a plan to address access to transportation.
32 7. Additional consideration will be given to proposals that include contributions from other public
33 or private sources or that leverage additional resources for affordable housing.
34 8. Additional consideration will be given to the speed with which the properties can be made
35 available to tenants.
36 9. Additional consideration will be given for proposals addressing special needs populations,
37 e.g. seniors, persons with disabilities, etc.
38
39 Commissioner Price asked if the specific owners of the housing units could be identified.
40 Audrey Spencer-Horsley said it would depend on the proposal. She said currently
41 priority is being given to proposals where the properties are owned by a third party.
42 Commissioner Price asked if the County could own the housing.
43 Audrey Spencer-Horsley said it is possible, but it is hoped that proposals will come in
44 that identify creative and innovative ways to meet affordable housing needs. She said County
45 owned land could be one option.
46 Commissioner Rich said when the million was proposed, it was her understanding that it
47 was intended for the banking of some land to serve as a safety net for mobile homes. She said
48 she sees no mention of mobile homes now. She asked if there is specific rationale behind the
49 80/20 split for the rental properties. She asked if a comprehensive needs assessment done in
20
1 both the County and with the Towns. She said it is imperative to partner with the Towns in
2 order to be successful at addressing affordable housing.
3 Audrey Spencer-Horsley said mobile homes are included in the options for which
4 proposals can be submitted. She said partnerships are being formed between all the
5 jurisdictions, as well as the non-profit community and other stakeholders.
6 Commissioner Rich asked if the Towns have gone through a needs assessment, as she
7 wants to see the available monies be used as effectively as possible.
8 Audrey Spencer-Horsley said the consolidated plan included the Towns, and
9 participated in the assessments, giving a benchmark to look at needs. She said the discussion
10 is now focusing on solutions and options. She said the land banking was intended as a safety
11 net for mobile homes, but also to address immediate needs.
12 Commissioner Jacobs applauded staff for being creative and proactive. He said it is
13 long overdue. He said once everyone has spoken, he will make a motion to table this item until
14 the work session next month. He said the Board made a determination in its vote that the $1
15 million was for land banking. He said if the monies are going to be used differently, there
16 should be a conversation that will allow for questions, discussion and follow up.
17 Commissioner Dorosin said he likes the ideas that he is hearing this evening. He said
18 he is concerned about the general nature of the criteria, and he would like to see them be more
19 specific in connection with the goals hoping to be achieved. He said he would like to identify
20 areas that need to be targeted and find specific ways to target them.
21 Audrey Spencer-Horsley said she appreciated that she has been able to see a broader
22 picture than the Board has seen. She said the full picture has been studied, including mobile
23 homes, properties near water and sewer, tiny homes, etc. and how all these areas may fit in
24 best with Orange County's needs. She said the full scope of both the challenges and
25 opportunities could be better discussed in a work session.
26 Commissioner Dorosin said he appreciated hearing that the full picture is being
27 considered. He said he would add considering the quality of the closest elementary school to
28 the list of criteria, as well as demographics of neighborhoods.
29 Commissioner Pelissier said the criteria were interesting to her. She said when the
30 BOCC voted on land banking, it did not have the full set of information and perhaps mobile
31 homes are not the biggest need. She said the Board needs to get full information so that it can
32 prioritize the needs more effectively.
33 Commissioner Rich said the Board has been asking for the mobile home park numbers
34 for some time, and she hopes these numbers can be available for a work session. She added
35 to Commissioner Dorosin's comments stating that it is imperative that affordable housing be
36 along public transit lines. She asked if an apartment is designated as an affordable housing
37 apartment and would it always remain as such.
38 Audrey Spencer-Horsley said that would be a part of the award to negotiate the
39 restrictions to preserve it as affordable housing.
40 Commissioner Rich asked if an estimate of the number of people living in mobile home
41 parks could be provided.
42 Audrey Spencer-Horsley said as much data collection as possible has been gathered,
43 and this can be shared with the Board.
44 Commissioner Rich said she understands that flexibility is needed, but that should a
45 mobile home park close, it will be important to have land available to accommodate people that
46 need to move in a hurry.
47 Commissioner Rich said there should be a dialog with Habitat and the Community Home
48 Trust, as they have asked for flexibility with the land banking. She said the Board informed
49 them that the money was not for Community Home Trust or for Habitat, but now alternatives
50 are being considered. She said having transparent dialog is important.
21
1 Audrey Spencer-Horsley said she has only shared little nuggets tonight. She said the
2 goal is maximize available resources, and little funding is expected from the Home Choice
3 Program.
4 Commissioner Burroughs expressed hope for where the discussion is going. She said
5 having more data will be helpful and agrees with tabling the discussion for a work session.
6 Commissioner Jacobs said he would like to see more proactivity with mobile home park
7 owners and operators, to determine what plans may be in place for their land, and ask for some
8 advance notice if people are going to need to be relocated.
9 Commissioner Price complimented the work already done.
10 Commissioner Dorosin said he did not see land banking solely as a safety net for
11 potentially relocated mobile home residents. He said there are a lot of issues in mobile home
12 parks that may need addressing, and he could see the possibility of building new mobile home
13 parks.
14 Chair McKee said the Board is by no means criticizing the efforts to this point. He said
15 housing needs are very difficult and complicated issues. He said he knows $1 million is not
16 going to be sufficient in the long term. He said this is more of an urban project being close to
17 sewer and water, transportation, etc. He said cost is a big factor as money goes much further
18 in different parts of the County than others. He said having a broader and deeper discussion in
19 a work session is crucial.
20
21 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Rich to table
22 this item until the November 13 work session.
23
24 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
25
26 Audrey Spencer-Horsley acknowledged all the County staff that has worked so well on
27 this project, in conjunction with the non-profit sector, and noted that October is Housing
28 America month.
29
30 8. Reports
31
32 a. Report on Small Business Investment Grants, Agriculture Economic
33 Development Grants, & Small Business Loan Program
34 The Board received a report on the current status of three (3) grant and loan programs
35 ("Small Business Investment Grant", the "Agriculture Economic Development Grant", and the
36 "Small Business Loan Program") that are funded by the County's one-quarter cent sales tax for
37 economic development (Article 46 funds) and administered by the Orange County Economic
38 Development Department to support the retention and growth of small businesses, agriculture
39 and food systems-related agriculture ventures throughout Orange County.
40 Bonnie Hammersley said this is not a presentation on Article 46, but just a report on
41 grants that have been awarded. She said Article 46 funds will be discussed at the next work
42 session.
43 Steve Brantley, Orange County Economic Development Director, said he will review
44 three programs that positively affect the residents of Orange County. He presented the
45 following information:
46
47 BACKGROUND:
48 Two of the intended uses of Article 46 funds for economic development
49 Include the Small Business Investment Grant, and the Agriculture Economic Development
50 Grant, which support the recruitment, retention and growth of small business development, plus
22
1 farming & food systems related enterprises throughout Orange County. Although grant funds
2 began to accrue in 2012 following the passage of the one-quarter cent sales tax in November,
3 2011, no grant activity immediately followed due to a delay in setting guidelines and application
4 procedures. The two grant programs went "live" in 2015 after the Orange County Economic
5 Development Department's Advisory Board in 2014 drafted recommended guidelines and
6 applications, and following the BOCC's review, suggested amendments and approval of the two
7 New grant programs in early 2015.
8 The Small Business Loan Program is similar in to the new grant programs in the
9 sense that the loan program also has an application review committee, guidelines and by-laws,
10 is supported by Article 46 funding, and is also intended to support the recruitment, retention and
11 expansion of small businesses in Orange County. The loan program seeks to assist small firms
12 that may have difficulty accessing traditional banking financing due to small and start-up firms
13 often having insufficient operating history, poorer credit history, etc. The County's loan program
14 was created by the BOCC in 1999, received initial funds to lend in 2007, and became very
15 active in 2011 following a transfer of additional funds to lend. Historic loans have been made up
16 to $50,000.00 for a maximum of 5 years repayment terms.
17 A current summary of activities is presented below regarding the Small Business Investment
18 Grant program, the Agriculture Economic Development Grant program, and the Small Business
19 Loan program.
20 Steve Brantley presented the following PowerPoint presentation:
21
22 (1) Agriculture Economic Development Grants
23 (summary dated 9/21/15)
24 • Program became active after being approved by the BOCC in March 2015. Marketing
25 campaign began.
26 • 7 initial agriculture grants totaling $57,987.00 were recently approved in the program's
27 first quarterly round of applicant reviews.
28 • 1 application was denied.
29 • Grant program is funded by up to $60,000.00 annually from Article 46 proceeds (one-
30 quarter cent sales tax for economic development).
31 • $120,276.26 is available for future agriculture business grants.
32
33 Agriculture Grant Recipients
34 7 GRANT RECIPIENTS:
35 Boxcarr Farms
36 COLORFIELDS
37 Dawnbreaker Farms
38 Four Leaf Farm
39 Smith's Family Fun Farm
40 sweet retreat ORCHARD
41 Taylor Fish Farm
42
43 Approved Agriculture Grants
44 (initial quarterly review)
45
46 Use of Grants by Recipients:
47 • Taylor Fish Farm (Valee Taylor—fish processing)
48 • BoxCarr Farm (Austin Genke —fencing for milk goats)
49 • ColorFields Farm (Kelly Morrison — greenhouses)
50 • Four Leaf Farm (Tim McCaller— greenhouses)
23
1 • Smith Family Farm (Dawn Denson —well for irrigation)
2 • Dawn Breaker Farms (Ben Grimes — small on-farm poultry processing
3 equipment)
4 • Sweet Retreat Orchards (Aniko Redmon — irrigation system)
5
6 New Proposed Agriculture Grants
7 (scheduled for second quarterly review in Nov.)
8 • 2 new completed applications have been received.
9 • 6 additional applications are being completed by applicants.
10 • $60,000 in total requested awards is forecast for the upcoming second quarterly review
11 of new applications.
12 • Initial marketing round included radio and newspaper ads; most recent marketing effort
13 had 800 post cards mailed out during the week of September 7; several phone calls and
14 e-mail inquiries have been received and indicate several more applications will occur.
15
16 Agriculture Economic Development Grant
17 Application Review Committee
18 5 total members, currently comprised as follows:
19 ➢ 2 representatives from the Agriculture Preservation Board appointed by the
20 BOCC - Vaughn Compton & Noah Ranells.
21 ➢ 1 agriculture sector representative from the Orange County Economic
22 Development Advisory Board - vacant.
23 ➢ Orange County Cooperative Extension Agent— Dr. Carl Matyac.
24 ➢ Orange County Economic Development Department's agriculture economic
25 developer— Mike Ortosky.
26 Board meets quarterly; next meeting date is November 18.
27
28 Activity contributing to public awareness
29 of the Agriculture Grant Program
30 Breeze Farm Master Plan - preparation for funding purposes.
31 Piedmont Food &Agriculture Processing Facility tenant activity.
32 Rural Food Aggregator/ Food Hub / and Piedmont Food &Agriculture Processing
33 Center expansion concept planning.
34 Farmer and food business entrepreneurs meetings & assistance.
35 Recent workshop at Durham Tech on food system entrepreneurs.
36 Farm to Fork 2015 event planning.
37 Orange County Agriculture Summit 2016 planning.
38 Ongoing presentations to groups regarding agriculture economic development.
39 Meetings regarding a concept to establish a large food hub campus & food enterprise
40 district.
41 Meetings with area county officials, consultants & residents regarding the formation of a
42 regional food innovation cluster & an Orange County food council
43
44 (2) Small Business Investment Grant Program
45
46 Submitted Grants (initial quarterly review):
47 15 grant applications were submitted & reviewed:
48 7 — Hillsborough
49 5 - Chapel Hill
24
1 3 —Carrboro
2
3 Approved Grants:
4 8 grants were awarded:
5 4 - Hillsborough $31,352.00
6 1 - Chapel Hill $10,000.00
7 3 - Carrboro $20,360.00
8 $61,712.00
9
10 Orange County's Small Business
11 Investment Grant Recipients
12 • Carrboro Community Acupuncture
13 • MasterPeace Barber Shop - Hillsborough
14 • Regulator Brewing Company, LLC - Hillsborough
15 • Seal The Seasons - Hillsborough
16 • The Accidental Baker - Hillsborough
17 • Trill Financial, LLC — Chapel Hill
18 • tempeh girl - Carrboro
19 • WomanCraft - Carrboro
20
21 Small Business Investment Grant Program
22
23 Use of Grants by Recipients:
24 Carrboro
25 Carrboro Community Acupuncture
26 (Kim Calandra — business & marketing expansion)
27 Tempeh Girl(Beth May—sales expansion)
28 Woman Craft(Katherine Palomba— promotional activities)
29
30 Chapel Hill
31 Trill Financial(Simon Jung — computer testing equipment)
32
33 Hillsborough
34 MasterPeace Barber(Mark Holt— improvements to business)
35 Regulator Brewing (Anna McDonald Dobbs — marketing)
36 Seal The Seasons (Patrick Mateer & Will Collins—frozen food production)
37
38 Small Business Investment Grant Program
39
40 New Proposed Business Grants
41 (scheduled for second quarterly review on Oct. 20, 2015)
42 5 deferred applications — Chapel Hill $37,188.00
43 11 new applicants:
44 ➢ 1 - Cedar Grove applicant $10,000.00
45 ➢ 4 - Chapel Hill applicants $23,000.00
46 ➢ 1 - Efland applicant $10,000.00
47 ➢ 5 - Hillsborough applicants $33,000.00
48 Business Investment Grant Application Review Committee:
25
1 ➢ 5— 7 total subcommittee members from the Orange County Economic
2 Development Department's Advisory Board.
3 Meets quarterly; next meeting date is October 20, 2015.
4
5 Latest Activity (dated 10/5/15)
6 New Proposed Business Grants (scheduled for second quarterly review ending September 30,
7 2015)
8 • 5 deferred applications — Chapel Hill $37,188.00
9 • 29 new applicants:
10 ➢ 1 — Cedar Grove applicant $10,000.00
11 ➢ 1 — Carrboro applicant
12 ➢ 17 —Chapel Hill applicants $140,541.67
13 ➢ 1 — Efland applicant $10,000.00
14 ➢ 9— Hillsborough applicants $73,000.00
15
16 (3) Small Business Loan Program
17 • Article 46 includes a provision to provide up to $200,000.00 annually in additional
18 lending flexibility to Orange County's existing Small Business Loan Program.
19 • The Program's current loan portfolio is supported by a separate source of revolving
20 funds previously authorized by the BOCC, and no Article 46 monies have been required,
21 to date, to supplement the Program.
22 • There are no loan delinquencies in the Program's activity.
23
24 Small Loan Business Recipients
25 Mystery Brewing Company— Hillsborough
26 Seal the Season — Hillsborough
27 MasterPeace Barbershop— Hillsborough
28 Accidental Baker— Hillsborough
29 PHD - Hillsborough
30 Ceremony Salon — Carrboro
31 Tin Can Ventures — Cedar Grove
32 Grey Matter/Isis I.T. — Chapel Hill
33 The Depot— Hillsborough
34
35 Composition of Small Business Loan Application Review Committee
36 8 total members, currently comprised as follows:
37 ➢ 2 representatives from the Orange County banking community (Jim Evans —
38 Bank of North Carolina, Joanna Walton — BB&T)
39 ➢ 2 representatives from small business owners in Orange County (Tom Proctor—
40 Vacuum Cleaner Hospital; Sherry Gray—Yesterday and Today Frame Shop)
41 ➢ 1 representative from the Orange County Board of Commissioners
42 (Commissioner Mark Dorosin)
43 ➢ 2 representatives from Orange County Government (Acting Chief Financial
44 Officer Paul Laughton, and Orange County Economic Development Department
45 Director Steve Brantley)
46 ➢ 1 representative from the Orange County Economic Development Advisory
47 Board (Lori Eichel — Bank of North Carolina)
48
49 Small Business Loan Program
50 • Loan committee meets the third Thursday of every month
26
1 • Next meeting date is October 17, 2015
2 • Loan committee agreed on 9/17/15 to increase the maximum loan amount to
3 $100,000.00 (up from $50,000.00) and double the repayment term to 10 years (up from
4 5 years) in consideration of future loan applicants. Purpose is to increase the loan
5 activity.
6
7 Commissioner Rich asked if Steve Brantley could define a fun farm.
8 Chair McKee said he believes this farm is centered on children and educational
9 activities.
10 Commissioner Jacobs said there is an open planning meeting for the Agricultural
11 Summit on October 15.
12 Commissioner Jacobs asked if buildings are being built at Breeze Farm without a
13 Memorandum of Understanding.
14 Steve Brantley said no. He said it is a concept of how to get more value out of the
15 Breeze Farm. He said it is going the step beyond planting a row of squash and considering
16 how the produce could be brought closer to the market. He said historically Orange County's
17 agricultural efforts are somewhat dispersed between economic development, cooperative
18 extension, and parks and rec and agriculture. He said there is a good staff team which keep
19 lines of communication open between various groups and the County.
20 Commissioner Jacobs said a staff person reported to him being very pleased with all the
21 structures being built at Breeze Farm. He said he was surprised to hear of this happening.
22 Steve Brantley said there is a sense that North Carolina State University (NCSU) may
23 not be able to do too much more with Breeze Farm.
24 Commissioner Jacobs asked if the BOCC could receive minutes from the Economic
25 Development Board.
26 Steve Brantley said yes.
27 Commissioner Jacobs asked if there was an update regarding the hybrid vehicle
28 proposed by the State which was intended to replace the Department of Commerce.
29 Steve Brantley said the Department of Commerce still exits with several divisions
30 working on Community Development, Incentives, etc.
31 Chair McKee said he has visited the Breeze Farm location several times. He said a
32 wash station has been installed, as well as a small storage facility, a greenhouse, and some
33 fencing. He said these items are an integral part of insuring the people trying to make a go of
34 this project. He said he is unsure of the ownership of these items, and the Board should have
35 further discussion if larger amounts of funding should be need in the future.
36 Steve Brantley offered to provide a brief report to the BOCC in the next few days.
37 Commissioner Jacobs said this would be helpful, as well as determining NCSU's plans
38 for future involvement and research stations.
39 Bonnie Hammersley said she is in conversation with NCSU and the future of the Breeze
40 Farms. She said she would bring updates to the BOCC as they are available.
41 Commissioner Rich asked if all information is being shared with the Towns.
42 Steve Brantley said this can be done easily.
43
44 9. County Manager's Report
45 Bonnie Hammersley said Tuesday, October 13, is the next work session, and the Article
46 46 sales tax as well as the Rogers Road sewer items will be discussed. She said there would
47 also be an update on Solid Waste events.
48 Bonnie Hammersley said that tonight is the last required meeting for Paul Laughton as
49 Interim CFO. She applauded his excellent effort. She said Gary Donaldson will begin in his
50 new role as CFO on Wednesday.
27
1 Chair McKee echoed the sentiments of the Manager.
2
3 10. County Attorney's Report
4 NONE
5
6 11. Appointments
7 a. Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee—Appointments
8 The Board considered making appointments to the Adult Care Home Community
9 Advisory Committee.
10
11 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, and seconded by Commissioner Pelissier
12 to appoint the following to the Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee:
13 • Appointment of Daniel Hatley to a third full term (Position #2) At-Large DD/MR position,
14 expiring 10/31/2017.
15 • Appointment of Max Mason to a second full term (Position #4) At-Large position,
16 expiring 06/30/2017.
17 • Appointment of Anthony John Vogt to a second full term (Position #5) At-Large position,
18 expiring 10/31/2017.
19
20 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
21
22 A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, and seconded by Commissioner Rich to
23 appoint the following to the Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee:
24 • Appointment of Steven Bank to a one-year training term (Position #1) At-Large, expiring
25 10/06/2016.
26 • Appointment of Danielle Mosley to a one-year training term (Position #9) At-Large
27 position, expiring 10/06/2016.
28
29 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
30
31 b. Arts Commission —Appointment
32 The Board considered making an appointment to the Arts Commission.
33
34 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Dorosin to appoint the
35 following to the Arts Commission:
36
37 • Appointment of Jennifer Shelton to a partial term (position #3) At-Large position,
38 expiring 03/31/2017.
39 • Appointment of Andrea Riley to a partial term (position #10) At-Large position, expiring
40 03/31/2017.
41
42 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
43
44 c. Jury Commission —Appointment
45 The Board will consider making an appointment to the Jury Commission.
46
47 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to
48 appoint the following to the Jury Commission:
49
28
1 Appointment of Bob Hall to (position #1) "At-Large — BOCC Appointee" expiring
2 06/30/2017.
3
4 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
5
6 Commissioner Dorosin asked for clarification regarding any further existing vacancies
7 on this board.
8 David Hunt said he would follow up on this via email.
9
10 d. Nursing Home Community Advisory Committee —Appointments
11 The Board will consider making appointments to the Nursing Home Community Advisory
12 Committee.
13
14 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
15 appoint the following to the NHCAC:
16
17 -Appointment of Martha Bell to a one year training term (Position #1) At-Large position
18 expiring 10/06/2016.
19 -Appointment of Jerry Schreiber to a partial term (Position #4) "At-Large" position
20 expiring 06/30/2017.
21
22 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
23
24 12. Board Comments
25 Commissioner Jacobs had no comments.
26 Commissioner Rich said she attended the Advanced Leadership Program at the School
27 of Government, which she greatly enjoyed. She said while at this program, she had the
28 opportunity to discuss the flow of work sessions. She said the BOCC is not conducting work
29 session properly, in that work sessions should be free flowing conversations. She said it would
30 be led by Chair McKee, but would be more of a dialog than is currently had.
31 Chair McKee said he is open to being more informal, as long as the conversation affords
32 everyone the opportunity to speak.
33 Commissioner Rich thanked Steve Brantley for taking some of the BOCC on a tour of
34 the new Morinaga plant.
35 Commissioner Pelissier said last week that she, Bonnie Hammersley and Deputy
36 County Manager Travis Myren visited Durham County's Criminal Justice Resource Center. She
37 said it was a very informative visit. She said she attended a Community listening session for
38 the community health assessment this afternoon. She said there was good public attendance
39 and discussion.
40 Commissioner Price said the jury commission sheet says that one citizen appointment is
41 made by the BOCC, one by the Senior Resident Superior Court Judge, and one by the Clerk of
42 the Superior Court.
43 Commissioner Price said she and Chair McKee went to the Efland Cheeks Community
44 Center to attend an emergency preparedness meeting. She said the meeting was well
45 attended from across that community.
46 Commissioner Burroughs had no comments.
47 Commissioner Dorosin had no comments.
48 Chair McKee said he was glad that Commissioner Rich mentioned their Morinaga visit.
49 He said the formal grand opening will happen soon. He said this Thursday there will be a
50 ceremony to unveil a Historic marker to which the BOCC are invited.
29
1
2 13. Information Items
3
4 • September 15, 2015 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List
5 • Tax Collector's Report— Numerical Analysis
6 • Tax Collector's Report— Measure of Enforced Collections
7 • Tax Assessor's Report— Releases/Refunds under $100
8 • Memorandum — Orange County Construction & Renovation Project Oversight Policy
9 • BOCC Chair Letter Regarding Petitions from September 15, 2015 Regular Meeting
10
11 14. Closed Session
12 NONE
13
14 15. Adjournment
15 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Price to
16 adjourn the meeting at 10:54 p.m.
17
18 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
19
20 David Hunt, Deputy Clerk
21
22
23 Earl McKee, Chair
24