Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 10-06-2015 APPROVED 11/5/2015 MINUTES BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING October 6, 2015 7:00 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, October 6, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Building, in Hillsborough, N.C. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair McKee and Commissioners Mia Burroughs, Mark Dorosin, Barry Jacobs, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley and Deputy Clerk to the Board David Hunt (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) Chair McKee called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda Chair McKee asked for a moment of silence to recognize the recent tragic events in Oregon. He noted the following items at the Commissioners' places: - pink sheet - letter for item 5a: Class A Special Use Permit for the Emerson Waldorf School -white sheet - letter for item 7a: Additional discussion regarding a November 2016 Bond Referendum. - PowerPoint for item 8a: Report on Small Business Investment Grants, Agriculture Economic Development Grants, and Small Business Loan Program - Report from Planning and Inspections PUBLIC CHARGE Chair McKee dispensed with the reading of the public charge. 2. Public Comments a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda b. Matters on the Printed Agenda 3. Announcements and Petitions by Board Members Commissioner Dorosin had no announcements or petitions. Commissioner Price said she received an announcement from the National Association of Counties (NACo), stating that President Obama has declared October to be National Cyber Security Awareness month. She said this information has been forwarded to Jim Northrup, who identified several efforts being made locally in this arena. Chair McKee said there is a team in Orange County working on cyber security. He acknowledged the efforts of this team. Commissioner Pelissier had no announcements or petitions. Commissioner Rich congratulated the Community Home Trust Board on their fundraiser. Commissioner Rich reiterated her previously made petition about the creation of a women and children's safe house in Orange County. She said she hopes this conversation will move forward into action soon. Commissioner Jacobs said the Sheriff is very committed to such a shelter. Commissioner Jacobs asked if there is a status update regarding the payment in lieu system for parks and open space from development. He said a master plan for parks has been adopted, and he understands a payment in lieu system should now be possible. Commissioner Jacobs referenced a petition he made about a month ago, asking the Planning Department to create a development analysis for new projects being built inside Town limits and their impact on the County. He asked if this could be completed prior to the Town of Hillsborough meeting to discuss Collins Ridge and Waterstone. Commissioner Jacobs said several citizens had contacted Commissioners about fireworks, and the Orange County noise ordinance. He asked if the Planning staff, the Sheriff's Department and the County Manager could ascertain the specific concerns and determine the best way to address them. Chair McKee said he would refer this to Planning, the Manager, and the Sheriff. 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/Special Presentations a. Arts & Humanities Month —2015 Piedmont Laureate James Maxey The Board was introduced to, and heard a brief selection from, Hillsborough resident and speculative fiction author James Maxey, the 2015 Piedmont Laureate, during National Arts & Humanities Month (October). Martha Shannon, Orange County Arts Commission Director, presented the following background information: BACKGROUND: The 2015 Piedmont Laureate Program is co-sponsored by the Orange County Arts Commission, the City of Raleigh Arts Commission, the Durham Arts Council, and United Arts Council of Raleigh and Wake County. Now in its seventh year, the primary goal of this program is to promote awareness and heighten appreciation for excellence in the literary arts throughout the Piedmont region. The Arts Commission participates so that Orange County writers can apply and Orange County sites can host the Piedmont Laureate free of charge. The Piedmont Laureate is contracted for 20 events (readings or workshops at schools and public sites) and at least 5 media appearances throughout the three-county area during calendar year 2015. The 2015 application process was open to all speculative fiction authors residing in Orange, Durham or Wake counties who met the guideline criteria. In addition to the program sponsors, the selection panel included Samuel Montgomery-Blinn (Publisher, Bull Spec Magazine), Mur Lafferty (speculative fiction author) and Tony Daniel (Editor, Baen Publishing Enterprises). Two finalists were selected by the panel and interviewed by the program sponsors. James Maxey was chosen. As a free Halloween offering, Mr. Maxey will be reading his ghost story "Silent As Dust" at the Burwell School Historic Site in Hillsborough from 7-8 pm on Friday, October 30, 2015. James Maxey read a paragraph from one of his short stories, and reviewed his work history. A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to recognize James Maxey as the 2015 Piedmont Laureate. VOTE: UNANIMOUS b. Resolution Recognizing Evelyn Lloyd for Service on the Historic Hillsborough Commission The Board considered a resolution recognizing Evelyn Lloyd for her service on the Historic Hillsborough Commission, and authorizing the Chair to sign. Commissioner Jacobs read the resolution: ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING EVELYN LLOYD FOR HER SERVICE ON THE HISTORIC HILLSBOROUGH COMMISSION WHEREAS, the Historic Hillsborough Commission was created by an Act of the North Carolina General Assembly in 1963; and, WHEREAS, the Historic Hillsborough Commission was created to serve in cooperation with the Hillsborough Historical Society, the elected officials of Hillsborough and Orange County, and appropriate public agencies; and, WHEREAS, the Historic Hillsborough Commission has the power to preserve and restore the Town of Hillsborough, and its immediately adjacent area, as a living, functioning, educational, and historical exhibit of North Carolina's early life and times; to acquire and to dispose of property, real and personal; to repair, restore, or otherwise improve such properties; and to write, compile, publish, or sponsor historical works as may pertain to the town and area; and, WHEREAS, the Historic Hillsborough Commission shall consist of not fewer than 25 members appointed by the Governor and, in ex officio capacity, the Mayor of the Town of Hillsborough, the Chair of the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, the Orange County Register of Deeds, the Orange County Clerk of Superior Court, and the Secretary of Cultural Resources or designee; and, WHEREAS, the Historic Hillsborough Commission owns and operates the Burwell School Historic Site, sharing this significant historic resource with the greater Orange County community and beyond; and, WHEREAS, Evelyn Pauline Lloyd was appointed by the Governor of the State of North Carolina and was inducted into the Historic Hillsborough Commission on September 4, 1974; and, WHEREAS, she has served continuously for 41 years on the Historic Hillsborough Commission, longer than any other member of the Commission; and, WHEREAS, her term of office on the Historic Hillsborough Commission will conclude in October 2015; and, WHEREAS, Evelyn Pauline Lloyd has been a lifelong resident of Hillsborough, and she and her family have a long record of service to the Town where she has served with distinction and dedication despite the burdens on running a service-oriented small business and has also served for 24 years as a Town of Hillsborough Commissioner; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Orange County Board of Commissioners does hereby recognize Evelyn Pauline Lloyd for her service and commitment to the preservation of local history in the seat of Orange County and does hereby wish her well in the future endeavors she undertakes with her customary determination, thoroughness and warmth. This the sixth day of October, 2015. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Rich for the Board to approve and authorize the Chair to sign the attached resolution recognizing Evelyn Pauline Lloyd for her service on the Historic Hillsborough Commission. VOTE: UNANIMOUS c. Proclamation Naming Fairview Park Ballfield for James Stewart The Board considered a proclamation naming the existing baseball/softball field at the County's Fairview Park for the late Mr. James "Junebug" Stewart and authorizing the Chair to sign. David Stancil, Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks and Recreation (DEAPR) Director, presented this item. He said Fairview Park was constructed in 2010-2011, through combined local and State funding. He said the idea for this park started in the late 1980s, and while waiting for an official field, Mr. Stewart created an informal field at this location, called the "Field of Dreams", to allow neighborhood children to participate in sports leagues. Commissioner Price read the proclamation. PROCLAMATION ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Recognizing JAMES "JUNEBUG" STEWART Whereas, James Stewart and his neighbors in a predominantly African-American neighborhood waited nearly two decades for playing fields for the children of the Fairview community; and Whereas, James Stewart, a self-employed mason, overcame personal trials and tribulations and took the initiative along with family and friends to construct a full-fledged baseball field atop a closed and abandoned public landfill; and Whereas, the ball field, known locally as the "Field of Dreams", opened in the summer of 1999; and Whereas, James Stewart, a lifelong resident of Fairview, was the inspirational force behind the Fairview Youth Baseball Group, also known as the Fairview Eagles; and Whereas, the Hillsborough/Orange County Chamber of Commerce awarded the 1999 Ed Riley Helping Hand Award to James Stewart for constructing the Field of Dreams; Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved, that the Orange County Board of County Commissioners hereby proclaims that the baseball field at Fairview Community Park of Orange County shall be named in honor of the late James "Junebug" Stewart, as a memorial to him, his love for the people of his community and his "Field of Dreams". This 6th day of October 2015. A motion was made Commissioner Jacobs, by seconded Commissioner Rich for the Board to approve and authorize the Chair to sign the attached proclamation naming the ballfield at Fairview Park for James "Junebug" Stewart, and authorized staff to work with the Board to schedule and plan for a dedication ceremony to be held in October/November 2015. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Commissioner Jacobs said $800,000 of the funds for the building of Fairview Park came from the 2001 bond referendum for Parks and Open Space. 5. Public Hearings a. Class A Special Use Permit— Schools (Elementary, Middle and Secondary) Public and Private) for the Emerson Waldorf School (Receipt of Planning Board Recommendation — No Additional Public Comment or Testimony Allowed) Chair McKee read the following, and declared the public hearing reconvened. He added that the hearing is solely for the purpose of receiving the Planning Board recommendation and allowing new information previously submitted in writing to be entered into the record. The Board shall receive the Planning Board recommendation, close the public hearing, and make a decision on a Class A Special Use Permit (hereafter `SUP') application submitted by the Emerson Waldorf School located at the intersection of New Jericho and Millhouse Roads in Chapel Hill Township. The applicant is proposing revisions to the school's current SUP and requesting approval of a Master Plan outlining the long-term expansion of the school's facilities and infrastructure in accordance with Section 2.7 Special Use Permits and Section 5.8.4 "Schools: Elementary, Middle and Secondary" of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). Patrick Mallet, Current Planning, reviewed the abstract and attachments and asked that they be entered into the record, along with the pink attachment at the Commissioners' places. He said the attachments are: 1. Vicinity map, outlining the various properties owned by the Emerson Waldorf School and governed by the SUP 2. July 1, 2015 Planning Board Abstract 3. Expert of the approved minutes from the May 26, 2015 Quarterly Public Hearing 4. Expert of the approved minutes from the July 1, 2015 Planning Board Meeting 5. Planning Board recommended findings of fact and conditions of approval 6. Script for acting on the findings of facts 7. Agreement and acceptance from the Emerson Waldorf School, regarding the findings of fact and conditions of approval SCRIPT FOR ACTING ON EMERSON WALDORF SCHOOL AT THE INTERSECTION OF NEW JERICHO AND MILLHOUSE ROADS CLASS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION: October 6, 2015 BOCC meeting NO TIE Il1lue text denotes l:30 CC Chalir/Meirnlbeir irequliired action 1. Chalir wlillll exp14in the Ipurpose of the liteirn is to irecelive the Rlannling Il3oaird recommendation. For the project, the purpose of the meeting is as follows: To receive the Planning Board recommendation, close the public hearing, and make a decision on a Class A Special Use Permit(hereafter`SUP) application submitted by Emerson Waldorf School proposing a revised SUP with a Master Plan to allow for the long- term expansion of school accordance with Section 2.7 Special Use Permits and Section 5.8.4 "Schools:Elementary, Middle and Secondary"of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). 2. Chalir wlillll decllaire the IpuIblllic heairling ire convened foir the Ipurpose of irecelivling the Rlannling Il3oaird recommendation and ask staff to make theliir presentation. NOTE —The re-convening of a hearing is solely for the purpose of receiving the Planning Board recommendation and allowing any new information, previously submitted in writing, to be entered into the record. The hearing is not intended to solicit additional input from the public or the applicant. While the BOCC may ask staff questions related to the review of a given item, comments from the public or the applicant shall not be solicited. The accepting of additional public comments at this stage of the review (i.e. the reconvened hearing) would constitute a violation of the UDO. 3. Staff will review the abstract and ask it be entered into the record. Staff will review the Findings of Fact (Attachment 5) for the Special Use component of the project. 4. Questions will be asked of staff. 5. A imotion was irnade Iby Coirnirnlisslioneir Il3uriroughs„ and seconded Iby Coirnirnlisslioneir (Rich to chose the IpuIblllic heairling. Vote: Unanliirnous NOTE — once this is done, Planning Staff cannot answer questions or provide additional detail 6. The BOCC will first need to take action on the Special Use Permit findings of fact. The findings of fact have been organized per relevant UDO section to aid in making motions to approve or deny. The cadence on taking action should be as follows a. A imotion was irnade Iby Coirnirnlisslioneir (Rich, seconded Iby Coirnirnlisslioneir I[)oiroslin finding the j�IC II ca nt 11 coirnpIlIed wiith the Ipirovlislions of Section(s) 2.2 and 2.7.3 of the Orange County Unliilied IDevellolpiment Oirdlinance as detalilled Iby the llindlings contalined wlithlin Attachment 5 of the abstract Ipackage. VOTIE: UINAINIIIfVIIOUS NOTE — if the motion is to reject the individual making the motion will need to provide some explanation justifying the finding that the applicant has not established, through competent material and substantial evidence, the project is in compliance with Section(s) 2.2 and 2.7.3 of the UDO. b. A irnotlion was irnade Iby Coirnirnlisslioner (Rich, seconded Iby Coirnirnlisslioner IPirlice llindling the jj[.I ca nt 11 coirnlp�IlIed With the Ipirovlislions of Sectlion 2.7.5 of the Orange County Unliilied IDevellolpiment Oirdlinance as detalilled Iby the llindlings contalined wlithlin Attachment 5 of the abstract Ipackage. VOTIE: UINAINIIIfVIIOUS NOTE — if the motion is to reject the individual making the motion will need to provide some explanation justifying the finding that the applicant has not established, through competent material and substantial evidence, the project is in compliance with Section 2.7.5 of the UDO. c. A irnotlion was irnade Iby Coirnirnlisslioner (Rich, seconded Iby Coirnirnlisslioner IPelllisslieir llindling the a. ..p.INi ,n.;�.....h With the Iprovlislions of Sectlion 5.3.2 (II:3) of the Orange County Unliilied IDevellolpiment Oirdlinance as detalilled Iby the llindlings contalined wlithlin Attachment 5 of the abstract Ipackage. Second. VOTIE: UINAINIIIfVIIOUS NOTE — if the motion is to reject the individual making the motion will need to provide some explanation justifying the finding that the applicant has not established, through competent material and substantial evidence, the project is in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (B) of the UDO. d. A irnotlion was irnade Iby Coirnirnlisslioner (Rich, seconded Iby Coirnirnlisslioner IPirlice llindling the appIlIcant ha s. coirnpIlIed With the Iprovlislions of Sectlion 5.8.4 of the Orange County Unliilied IDevellolpiment Oirdlinance as detalilled Iby the llindlings contalined wlithlin Attachment 5 of the abstract Ipackage. VOTIE: UINAINIIIfVIIOUS NOTE — if the motion is to reject the individual making the motion will need to provide some explanation justifying the finding that the applicant has not established, through competent material and substantial evidence, the project is in compliance with Section 5.8.4 (B) of the UDO. e. A irnotlion wlillll need to Ibe irnade iregairdling coirnpIlIance With Sectlion 5.3.2 (A) (2) of the Oirdlinance as follllows NOTE —Whomever makes the motion will have to cite the `evidence' in the record utilized justifying the motion to approve or deny. Attachment 5 contains the recommendations of the Planning Board including the evidence utilized to reach the conclusion. This `evidence' must be spelled out explicitly by the Commissioner making the motion. If the motion is to deny then the Commissioner making the motion will have to spell out explicitly the evidence within the record utilized to justify a negative finding: i. A irnotlion was irnade Iby Coirnirnlisslioner (Rich, seconded Iby Coirnirnlisslioner IDoiroslin Ilindling elitheir lhei.r. li . sufiliclient evlidence In the irecoird the Cpiroject coirnpIlIes wlith Sectlion 5.3.2 (A) (2) (a) of the UIDO In that the use wlillll irnalintalin and Ipromote the Ipulblllic heallth„ safety and geneirall wellfaire„ If located wheire Iproposed and devellolped and operated accoirdling to the Cplan as sulbirnlitted. This irnotlion Is (based on competent irnateirliall and evlidence entered Into the irecoird of these Iproceedlings„ linclludling: NOTE —the following represents the findings of the Planning Board. If the motion is to find there is sufficient evidence in the record to find compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (a) this list must be read verbatim so it is in the record. • Application package and testimony including: • Biological Inventory completed by The Catena Group; • Forest Stewardship Plan completed by Kelly Douglass; • Impact Analysis completed by Everett `Vic' Knight • Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) completed by SEPI Engineering • State Clearinghouse comments on how the project complied with the UDO. • Staff testimony and abstract package from May 26, 2015 quarterly public hearing. • Planning Board packet from July 1, 2015 regular meeting. AND • A lack of competent material evidence in the record demonstrating the applicant did not comply with the UDO. If the motion is to find there is insufficient evidence in the record to find the project is in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (a), the Commissioner making the motion will have to specifically denote what is absent and explain what, if any, evidence is in the record disputing the claims of the applicant that they are in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (a). V ..I..II: U ll'�W''�i II IIS U S 1l1. A irnotlion was imade Iby Coimimllsslloneir Rich, seconded Iby Coimimllsslloneir Pirllce fin6ngl h e i.r..e li..s. suffil6lent evlldence lin the irecoird the IC project coimp�I�Ies With Secfion 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b) of the UIDO lin that the use W!lH mallntalln the vallue of configuous Iprolperty. "FNIs irnotlion lis (based on competent irnateirliall and evlldence entered unto the irecoird of these pirocee6ngs, lncllu6ng: NOTE —the following represents the findings of the Planning Board. If the motion is to find there is sufficient evidence in the record to find compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b) this list must be read verbatim so it is in the record. • Application package and testimony including: o Impact Analysis completed by Everett `Vic' Knight on how the project complied with the UDO. • Staff testimony and abstract package from May 26, 2015 quarterly public hearing. • Planning Board packet from July 1, 2015 regular meeting. AND • A lack of competent material evidence in the record demonstrating the applicant did not comply with the UDO. If the motion is to find there is insufficient evidence in the record to find the project is in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b), the Commissioner making the motion will have to specifically denote what is absent and explain what, if any, evidence is in the record disputing the claims of the applicant that they are in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (b). VOFC: UI'�W'�flHMOUS 1l1l1. A irnotlion was imade Iby Coimimllsslloneir Rich, seconded Iby Coimimllsslloneir P&IlIsslleir fin6ng 1bgfp is' suffil6lent evlldence lin the irecoird the IC project coimp�I�Ies With Secfion 5.3.2 (A) (2) (c) of the UIDO lin that the use lis lin hairimony With the airea lin wNich lit lis to Ibe (located and the use lis lin coimp�I�Iance With the IpIlan -foir the Iphyslicall dev&lopiment of the County as eimbo6ed lin these iregullatlions and lin the Corr pirehensllve Rlan. "FNIs irnotlion lis (based on competent irnateirliall and evlldence entered unto the irecoird of these pirocee6ngs, lncllu6ng: NOTE —the following represents the findings of the Planning Board. If the motion is to find there is sufficient evidence in the record to find compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (c) this list must be read verbatim so it is in the record. • Application package and testimony including: • Biological Inventory completed by The Catena Group; • Forest Stewardship Plan completed by Kelly Douglass; • Impact Analysis completed by Everett `Vic' Knight • Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) completed by SEPI Engineering • State Clearing House comments on how the project complied with the UDO. • Staff testimony and abstract package from May 26, 2015 quarterly public hearing. • Planning Board packet from July 1, 2015 regular meeting. AND • A lack of competent material evidence in the record demonstrating the applicant did not comply with the UDO. If the motion is to find there is insufficient evidence in the record to find the project is in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (c), the Commissioner making the motion will have to specifically denote what is absent and explain what, if any, evidence is in the record disputing the claims of the applicant that they are in compliance with Section 5.3.2 (A) (2) (c). V ..FE: U ll'�W''�fl M O U S .7. A irnotlion was irnade Iby Coirnirnlisslioner (Rich, seconded Iby Coirnirnlisslioner IPelllisslieir to ,P,,Pi[Py ,the SIpecliall Use IPeirirnlit. If the irnotlion Is to aIppirove the SIpecliall Use IPeirirnlit„ thus irnotlion wound allso need to incllude (language lin6catling the l:30CC liar poses the recommended condlitlions as detalilled wlithlin Attachment 5 of the abstract Ipackage. VOTIF: UNANIMOUS 6. Consent Agenda • Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda Item g by Commissioner Price • Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Rich to approve the remaining items on the consent agenda. VOTE: UNANIMOUS • Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda Item g: North Carolina Department of Transportation Rural Operating Assistance Program (ROAP) Grant Application for FY 2016 The Board considered approving the annual FY 2016 ROAP grant application for funds totaling $168,933 and authorized the County Manager and County Finance Officer to sign the certified statement. Commissioner Price said Bret Martin, Transportation Planner II, would be leaving Orange County, and going to Wake County in October. She publicly thanked and recognized Bret as an exceptional employee. A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to approve the annual FY 2016 ROAP grant application for funds totaling $168,933 and authorized the County Manager and County Finance Officer to sign the certified statement. VOTE: UNANIMOUS a. Minutes The Board approved the minutes from September 1, 2015 as submitted by the Clerk to the Board b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release motor vehicle property tax values for twelve (12) taxpayers with a total of fourteen (14) bills that will result in a reduction of revenue in accordance with NCGS. c. Property Tax Releases/Refunds The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release property tax values for twenty (20) taxpayers with a total of thirty-three (33) bills that will result in a reduction of revenue in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 105-381. d. Applications for Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion The Board considered sixteen (16) untimely applications for exemption/exclusion from ad valorem taxation for sixteen (16) bills for the 2015 tax year. e. Fiscal Year 2015-16 Budget Amendment#2 The Board approved budget ordinance amendments for fiscal year 2015-16 for Solid Waste, Animal Services/Spay and Neuter Fund, Department on Aging, Library Services, and Social Services. f. Application for North Carolina Education Lottery Proceeds for Orange County Schools (OCS) and Contingent Approval of Budget Amendment#2-A Related to OCS Capital Project Ordinances The Board approved an application to the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI) to release proceeds from the NC Education Lottery account related to FY 2015-16 debt service payments for Orange County Schools (OCS), and approved Budget Amendment #2-A (amended School Capital Project Ordinances), contingent on the NCDPI's approval of the application and authorized the Chair to sign. g. North Carolina Department of Transportation Rural Operating Assistance Program (ROAP) Grant Application for FY 2016 The Board approved the annual FY 2016 ROAP grant application for funds totaling $168,933 and authorized the County Manager and County Finance Officer to sign the certified statement. h. Consideration of an Amendment to the 2015 Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Technical Advisory Committee (SAPFOTAC) Report The Board approved amendments to the 2015 Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Technical Advisory Committee (SAPFOTAC) Report. i. Authorization to Declare Item Surplus The Board declared a skid steer as surplus and authorized the AMS Director to affect the sale of the item through GovDeals. j. Acceptance of Vehicles From Second Family Foundation and Approval of Budget Amendment#2-113 The Board accepted three vehicles from the Second Family Foundation to be used by temporary employees at the Department of Social Services (DSS) to transport foster and other at-risk youth to employment sites and to other services and enrichment activities, and approved Budget Amendment#2-B. 7. Regular Agenda a. Additional Discussion Regarding a November 2016 Bond Referendum and Possible Consideration of a Preliminary Resolution To Set Bond Purposes and Amounts The Board continued a discussion regarding a November 2016 Bond Referendum and considered adopting a preliminary resolution to set bond purposes and amounts. Chair McKee referred this item to Bonnie Hammersley. Bonnie Hammersley referred the Commissioners to the memorandum on the CIP. She introduced the Bond Counsel Bob Jessup. Bob Jessup said this evening is another procedural step toward putting a bond on the ballot in November 2016. Bob Jessup gave an overview of process, saying there are five steps: 1) Preliminary resolution 2) Set maximum parameters 3) Purposes and maximum amounts 4) LGC application 5) Public hearing He said after these five steps there would be a final vote and a resolution setting the referendum details. He said currently the November 2016 election date is being considered Commissioner Jacobs asked if the Manager could please elaborate on the memo at the Commissioners' places. Bonnie Hammersley said the CIP is a 10-year plan, and she referenced the memo below: MEMORANDUM October 6, 2015 TO: Board of Orange County Commissioners FROM: Bonnie Hammersley, Orange County Manager RE: Capital Investment Plan (CIP) Related to Bond Referendum Discussion As part of the bond referendum discussions, Commissioners have asked about alternative financing packages that express the priorities of the Board of Orange County Commissioners while maintaining an overall bond amount of$125 million. Tonight, the Board of Orange County Commissioners (BOCC) will consider a resolution that establishes the maximum bond referendum amount and the purposes for which those bonds may be used. In addition to this financing mechanism, the Board may also consider amending the Capital Investment Plan (CIP) to address the needs that have been emphasized during the bond discussion. The CIP is a ten (10) year plan, with the first five (5) year projects with specific detail information and the remaining five (5) years (out years) with less detailed information about the projects. The CIP is reviewed and adopted by the BOCC on an annual basis with appropriated funds for the current year only. Including funding in the CIP has the advantage of limiting the overall bond referendum amount and provides additional flexibility to fund projects as they mature to the stage of needing to be financed as well as determining annual tax rate impacts. The difference between the two funding sources is the type of financing that is used to borrow the funds. The bond referendum allows the County to issue general obligation (GO) bonds, backed by the full faith and credit of the County, while the CIP would be funded with other types of borrowing, typically limited obligation bonds (LOB) or installments financing. Using the bond to finance all of the purposes typically has the advantage of being able to access lower interest rates. General obligation bonds almost always carry a slightly lower interest rate than limited obligation financing. In either case, the Davenport analysis indicates that the County can support a total financing package of up to $135 million without violating the County's debt policy for affordability or exceeding its capacity to issue debt compared to its peers. Although financing projects through the CIP will have higher interest rates, the Finance Department does not believe that those rates would be different enough to have a material impact on the overall costs to the County with respect to the tax rate, affordability and capacity benchmarks. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. Commissioner Dorosin asked if it is cheaper to borrow through the bond or through the CIP. Bonnie Hammersley said borrowing through the bond is cheaper, because the general obligations bonds are backed by the full faith and credit of the County. She added that as Orange County has a AAA bond rating, a favorable interest rate would be received. She said limited obligation bonds would probably receive a good interest rate as well. Commissioner Dorosin asked if a vote is taken tonight determining certain amounts for certain purposes, then moving forward the Commissioners could only reduce or eliminate funds, and no additional funds or purposes could be added. Bob Jessup said yes. Chair McKee said he would like to go to public comment on this item. PUBLIC COMMENT: Allan Rosen, the Project Manager for the Interfaith Council for Social Service, thanked the BOCC for its on going support for affordable housing. He said he supports bond funding for both schools and affordable housing, as good homes plus good schools equals great communities. He asked the BOCC to lead the development of a strategic plan for affordable housing and to assign at least $10 million bond funds to allow for the execution of such a plan. He said such funding could provide 500 housing units. Natalie Britt, Vice President for Rental Development at DHIC, said she supports bond funding for affordable rental housing in Orange County. Burnis Hackney said he supports bond funding for both schools and affordable housing. He said the two needs go hand-in-hand. He said he is also speaking on behalf of Saint Paul's Church which is committed to developing affordable housing. Marty Smith said he is from Tennons Woods Community in Efland, and he supports funding for affordable housing and the schools. Rose Snipes said she too is a member of Saint Paul's AME Church, and affordable and senior housing are the congregation's number one priorities, as well as educational development for children. Jane Kerwin said she attended the September 15, 2015 meeting and noticed that no one stepped forward to oppose a bond. She said it was even suggested that a larger bond be approved. She emphasized the great physical needs of the schools and that the schools must be safe and ADA compliant. Mark Marcoplos said he is here to ask that affordable housing be included in the bond in the amount of$10 million. He said he also supported funding for the schools and seniors. He also noted his appreciation for the public that has come out to speak at the two meetings and made the vital connections between safe, affordable housing and good schools. Jill Simon said she is speaking on behalf of the Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS) PTA Council and would like the full bond amount of$125 million for the schools, as well as additional funds for affordable housing. Joann Mitchell said she is a Habitat homeowner, and she supports funding for affordable housing in the bond. Jonathan Young, Community Empowerment Fund, said he supported bond funds for affordable housing. Donna Champointe said she supports funding for affordable housing in the bond. Commissioner Price thanked the community for their comments on the bond. Commissioner Dorosin applauded the organized advocacy of the public, and noted he had been pushing hard for affordable housing funding in the proposed bond. He said he previously felt that $5 million should be allocated to affordable housing, but now feels a higher amount may be possible based on updated information from staff. He said there will likely need to be a balance of getting funds from both the CIP and the bond. He said there is a compelling case for all needs to be funded, and he feels $10 million would be appropriate for affordable housing. Commissioner Rich said she agreed with Commissioner Dorosin. She also thanked the affordable housing community for working together to advocate on behalf of the needs of Orange County. She said that increasing the bond to allot $10 million for affordable housing seems very manageable and hopes that some of that money could be dedicated to seniors. Commissioner Pelissier said she is heartened to see the public recognizing the interconnection between the needs within the County. She said the schools need far more than $125 million. She said bond funds are not the only way to address capital needs, and she encouraged the public to stay involved as the BOCC goes through the CIP on a yearly basis. Commissioner Burroughs said the Poet Laureate set the tone for the evening. She said Democracy should be a process of working together to move the County forward. She said the bond funds would only meet half of the schools needs. She said she looked at the CIP and concludes that there are some flexible funds available to address other needs, but those funds appear to be in the out years. She said that may be too far away, and more discussion may be necessary to see how the CIP could provide more funds. She said she supports funding for both the schools and affordable housing through a combination of the bond and CIP, but is uncomfortable going to $135 million solely through the bond. Commissioner Jacobs said it has been really heartening to see so many people come forward to move the BOCC to include affordable housing in the bond package. He said he is hopeful that this will happen. He said this bond is the "goldilocks" package, it must be neither too hot nor too cold; it must be just right. He said the bond package must be as inclusive as possible. Chair McKee said the Board is trying to get it just right. He said the first bond discussion was held in 2013, and regardless of how the needs are addressed, they must be addressed and this will cost money. He said little money has been spent on the schools in the last 10 years. He said the bond conversation ramped up in early 2015 with a preliminary vote of intent to focus on the schools in April. He said the BOCC could have conducted a final vote at that time, but did not do so in order to include Commissioner Dorosin as well as give the public a chance to comment on the needs of the County. He said the BOCC has received several hundred emails, has listened to all public comments, and has considered the issues very carefully. He said he has been convinced of the need for both schools and affordable housing. Chair McKee said he has asked the Manager to put together a comprehensive master plan for the needs of seniors. He said he is uncomfortable going to $135 million for the bond. Commissioner Dorosin asked if$130 million would a possible option. Chair McKee said he would prefer to stay at $125 million. Commissioner Price proposed a big picture approach to the issue. She said there should be a $125 million bond that would be allocated as follows: • $120 million for the capital needs of OCS and CHCCS, allocating 40 percent to OCS and 60 percent to CHCCS. • $5 million for affordable housing based on a plan developed and administered by the Orange County Housing, Human Rights, and Community Development Department and approved by the BOCC, which plan shall include 35 percent of affordable housing for senior citizens and people with disabilities, including mental illness. Commissioner Price added that a companion proposal would be that $1 million per year, at a minimum, be committed from the CIP to schools to be divided 40-60 between OCS and CHCCS for at least the next five years; and that $1 million per year, at a minimum be committed from the annual operating budget to affordable housing, which may be used for non-capital needs, for at least the next five years. She said the implications of this formula will provide $125 million to schools over the next five to seven years, and $10 million for affordable housing over the next five to seven years. She said this plan could begin with the next fiscal year, as opposed to waiting until 2017 and the passage of the bond. She said this proposal would address housing and education needs, as well as provide employment through housing development projects. A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs for $120,000,000 for schools and $5,000,000 to address the capital needs for affordable housing. Commissioner Dorosin asked if voting on the motion would bind the BOCC to the rest of Commissioner Price's outlined proposal. John Roberts said no, and that changes can be made on how the money is divided once the amount is set. Bob Jessup agreed with John Roberts. Commissioner Rich said she wished that Commissioner Price's carefully prepared outline would have been shared with the entire BOCC prior to tonight's meeting. She said it was a lot of information to take and process on the spot, and it is unfair that half of the Board had the information while the other half did not. She said it is indicative of the entire bond process. A motion for a hostile amendment to Commissioner Price's motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to raise the bond to $130,000,000, with $117,000,000 to schools, $10,000,000 to affordable housing, $3,000,000 senior facilities; and find $8,000,000 in the CIP for schools, which in addition to the $117,000,000 from the bond, it would give the schools a total of$125,000,000. VOTE: Ayes, 3 (Commissioner Dorosin, Commissioner Rich and Commissioner Jacobs); Nays, 4 (Commissioner Burroughs, Commissioner Rich, Commissioner McKee, and Commissioner Pelissier) Motion failed. Commissioner Rich said she would like to make another hostile amendment, raising the bond to $130 million with $120 to schools and $10 million to affordable housing with $5 million coming from the CIP for the schools. Commissioner Jacobs said he is willing to support this amendment. He said it is unfortunate that the Board has not given enough attention to seniors. He said he does not have confidence that monies will be found within the CIP without having a clear plan. He added that groups of Commissioners are making decisions as majorities, without including the rest of the Board. Commissioner Burroughs said she understands the frustrations. She said she is frustrated as well, saying she spoke to each member of the BOCC throughout this process, and the record should reflect that fact. She said this is what Democracy looks like. She is saddened that the conversation has taken an unpleasant turn. Commissioner Dorosin said his concern for having $5 million for affordable housing in the CIP is that it is not binding during budget discussions. He said it is a statement of intent, but is not binding, whereas if the $10 million in included in the bond, the funds are guaranteed. Commissioner Jacobs supported Commissioner Dorosin's comments. He said a democratic process is made far more democratic when it is transparent in public, not when phone calls are made privately. Commissioner Pelissier said if the voters approve a bond for a certain amount the BOCC is not obligated to issue all the bond monies either. She said there would be an expectation that bond monies would be issued, just as there should be an expectation that a CIP vote would be honored. She said there is not a 100 percent guarantee either way. Commissioner Pelissier said Orange County has a serious issue with poverty, and she does not want all funds to go to capital needs. She said some rental subsidies might be needed. She said she does not want to commit without a housing plan and does not want to tie all funds to capital needs. Commissioner Price said these accusations, that she put together a proposal and lobbied Commissioners, are untrue. She said her goal was to pull something together that incorporated all that she has heard from the BOCC, staff, and members of the community. She said she has spoken several times with Commissioner Dorosin to reiterate her support of affordable housing. She said she seeks a plan that is not reckless and wants to set aside money in the CIP to allow school plans to move forward sooner rather than later, and to offer flexible spending options for affordable housing. Commissioner Rich clarified that the current motion on the table is her amendment for $120 million for schools and $10 million for affordable housing through the bond and with $5 million for the schools from the CIP. She said this is a friendly amendment. Commissioner Burroughs clarified that $130 million would come from the bond and $5 million from the CIP. Commissioner Rich said yes. Commissioner Burroughs said she feels there needs to be room for the Senior Centers. She said this is in the long plan, but she is not willing to commit up to $135 million in a combined amount as it stretches the County to its max financially. Commissioner Rich said she wants the amendment to be friendly. Commissioner Dorosin said he does not see a fiscal difference between Commissioner Price's and Commissioner Rich's motions, but he sees a great political difference between them. Commissioner Jacobs agreed with Commissioners Price and Pelissier regarding the difference between capital and operating spending. He said it is very important that any money given to affordable housing must be partially allocated for operational expenses. He said the BOCC has to come up with the money for the operating budget, rather than money that is borrowed for a bond. He said the operating budget has many competing interests. He feels his comments will hold no sway and that it would have been beneficial to have this conversation in a work session previously. He said the BOCC will work it out, but this process is a huge lost opportunity and has been frustrating. A motion for a second friendly amendment to Commissioner Price's motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to raise the bond to $130,000,000 with $120,000,000 to schools, $10,000,000 for affordable housing, and find $5,000,000 in the CIP for the schools. Commissioner Price declined this friendly amendment. Chair McKee said the Board is back to Commissioner Price's original motion of$120 million in the 2016 bond for the schools and $5 million for affordable housing. Commissioner Dorosin said he will vote for this motion because it seems to be the best that can be achieved for affordable housing, but he casts his vote begrudgingly. He said it is disappointing at best. Commissioner Rich said she agreed with Commissioner Dorosin. She said she wants to apologize to the public in attendance, the public that attended the September 15 meeting, and to Robert Seymour who is 91 years old and came to both meetings. She said the public deserved more. Chair McKee called for a vote on the original motion: A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs for a bond for 2016 in the amount of$120,000,000 for schools and $5,000,000 for affordable housing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Commissioner Rich asked if Bond Counsel could clarify the rest of the process. Bob Jessup said the bond portion of the evening is completed. He said the LGC process will move forward. He said in April 2016 there will be the introduction of the bond order, which is simply the formal consideration at a first meeting, without a vote, followed by a public hearing. Commissioner Rich asked if the bond referendum discussion was complete. Bob Jessup said yes. A second motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to put $1,000,000 per year to be committed from the Capital Investment Plan to schools to be divided per A.D.M. between the two school districts, Orange County Schools and Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools, respectively, for at least the next five years; and $1,000,000 per year, at a minimum, be committed from the Annual Operating Budget to affordable housing which may be used for non-capital needs for at least the next five years. Commissioner Rich asked if more than $1 million could be spent. Commissioner Price said yes, that is why the motion says "at a minimum". Chair McKee says the motion sets a minimum figure for schools and affordable housing funding from the CIP. Commissioner Rich asked if the funds would be split 40-60 between OCS and CHCCS. Chair McKee said yes, which roughly equates to A.D.M. Commissioner Rich asked if these percentages only apply to the CIP funds and not the bond funds. Commissioner Price said yes. Chair McKee clarified that the $1 million for affordable housing is an approximately $200,000 increase from the current CIP budget for affordable housing and is not an additional $1 million. Commissioner Rich said affordable housing currently receives $820,000, and asked if the proposal is to raise that to total $1 million, not to add an additional $1 million. Chair McKee said yes. Commissioner Price said this is at a minimum. Commissioner Jacobs said the $820,000 is for more than deferring impact fees. He asked if there is a reason that the motion says "at least" $1 million for schools, when the goal was to bring the total for schools to $125 million, when combined with bond funds. He said more than $1 million should not be needed because $125 million total was the goal. Commissioner Jacobs said it is a given that the schools will need more. He said the schools could come back and ask for more money. Chair McKee clarified that Commissioner Jacobs is requesting to remove the "at a minimum" wording as it pertains to the schools. John Roberts said the ADM is not exactly a 40-60 split. He suggested that the wording should be "per A.D.M." which would allow for annual fluctuations. A second motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to put $1,000,000 per year to be committed from the Capital Investment Plan to schools to be divided per A.D.M. between the two school districts, Orange County Schools and Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools, respectively, for at least the next five years; and $1,000,000 per year, at a minimum, be committed from the Annual Operating Budget to affordable housing which may be used for non-capital needs for at least the next five years. VOTE: UNANIMOUS. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Dorosin that to consider the likelihood we will face another bond issue in the near future to address schools and other community needs, the Board consider, no later than our retreat adopting a formalized, open and inclusive process for fashioning a bond package that is aligned with Commissioners' goal number two, promote an interactive and transparent system of governance that reflects community values. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Five minute break Commissioner Pelissier said the BOCC is committed to maintaining the facilities for senior services, and has asked the County to create a plan regarding all the facility needs. Commissioner Price said she hopes there will be ongoing support for affordable housing for seniors. Commissioner Jacobs says he looks forward to discussing these items in a work session shortly. b. Affordable Housing Fund Criteria The Board considered establishing a process and criteria to fund affordable housing projects using the FY 2015-16 Affordable Housing appropriation. Audrey Spencer-Horsely, Orange County Housing, Human Rights, and Community Development Department Director, reviewed the following information: BACKGROUND: The FY 2015-16 Budget includes $1 million to fund affordable housing alternatives. The Budget states that the purpose of this fund is to acquire aggregate parcels, improve existing County-owned properties for future residential development to address displaced manufactured homes, as well as affordable housing alternatives. According to the Five Year Consolidated Plan and FY 2015 Action Plan, the most significant housing need in Orange County is affordable rental housing. The Plan states that 28.4% of renter households contribute 50% or more of annual income to housing costs while 7.7% of owner households contribute the same proportion. If the percentage of income dedicated to housing costs is reduced to 30%, the proportion of renter households dedicating at least that amount to housing increases to 44.1%. The Plan further concluded through interviews and surveys that the lack of quality, affordable housing for rent is the largest unmet housing need in Orange County. To address this need, staff is proposing to prioritize the use of the $1 million affordable housing fund to increase or, at a minimum, maintain the supply of affordable rental properties in the community. Eighty percent (80%) of the fund would be used for rental property projects and up to twenty percent (20%) could be applied to homeownership activities. This effort would represent the first phase of an affordable housing plan that will address additional housing needs and identify other opportunities. Under this model, the County would solicit proposals through a competitive request for proposal (RFP) process to purchase rental properties. The RFP would not limit the type of property that could be purchased. Properties could range from multi-family apartment units to manufactured homes. The properties would then be dedicated to housing individuals or families with annual incomes of fifty percent (50%) or less of the local median income for rental and up to eighty percent (80%) median income for homeownership. Funding priority would be given to rental projects. The proposals would allow the County to either fully fund or partially contribute to the purchase of affordable rental housing. However, the properties would be managed and maintained by another party under a lease agreement or other type of contract. A staff team would use the following grading criteria to evaluate proposals and recommend funding: 1. The property must include one or more rental or homeownership properties. 2. The properties must be available to individuals or families with annual incomes of 50% or less of the local median income for rental and up to 80% median income for homeownership. 3. Priority will be given to individuals or families referred by County agencies or recognized non-profit partners. 4. The proposal must address how the property will be managed and maintained. 5. The properties must pass an initial inspection for safety, quality, and feasibility and must be maintained to safety standards, subject to inspection by the County. 6. The properties should be located in an area with access to transportation resources, or the proposer must include a plan to address access to transportation. 7. Additional consideration will be given to proposals that include contributions from other public or private sources or that leverage additional resources for affordable housing. 8. Additional consideration will be given to the speed with which the properties can be made available to tenants. 9. Additional consideration will be given for proposals addressing special needs populations, e.g. seniors, persons with disabilities, etc. Commissioner Price asked if the specific owners of the housing units could be identified. Audrey Spencer-Horsley said it would depend on the proposal. She said currently priority is being given to proposals where the properties are owned by a third party. Commissioner Price asked if the County could own the housing. Audrey Spencer-Horsley said it is possible, but it is hoped that proposals will come in that identify creative and innovative ways to meet affordable housing needs. She said County owned land could be one option. Commissioner Rich said when the million was proposed, it was her understanding that it was intended for the banking of some land to serve as a safety net for mobile homes. She said she sees no mention of mobile homes now. She asked if there is specific rationale behind the 80/20 split for the rental properties. She asked if a comprehensive needs assessment done in both the County and with the Towns. She said it is imperative to partner with the Towns in order to be successful at addressing affordable housing. Audrey Spencer-Horsley said mobile homes are included in the options for which proposals can be submitted. She said partnerships are being formed between all the jurisdictions, as well as the non-profit community and other stakeholders. Commissioner Rich asked if the Towns have gone through a needs assessment, as she wants to see the available monies be used as effectively as possible. Audrey Spencer-Horsley said the consolidated plan included the Towns, and participated in the assessments, giving a benchmark to look at needs. She said the discussion is now focusing on solutions and options. She said the land banking was intended as a safety net for mobile homes, but also to address immediate needs. Commissioner Jacobs applauded staff for being creative and proactive. He said it is long overdue. He said once everyone has spoken, he will make a motion to table this item until the work session next month. He said the Board made a determination in its vote that the $1 million was for land banking. He said if the monies are going to be used differently, there should be a conversation that will allow for questions, discussion and follow up. Commissioner Dorosin said he likes the ideas that he is hearing this evening. He said he is concerned about the general nature of the criteria, and he would like to see them be more specific in connection with the goals hoping to be achieved. He said he would like to identify areas that need to be targeted and find specific ways to target them. Audrey Spencer-Horsley said she appreciated that she has been able to see a broader picture than the Board has seen. She said the full picture has been studied, including mobile homes, properties near water and sewer, tiny homes, etc. and how all these areas may fit in best with Orange County's needs. She said the full scope of both the challenges and opportunities could be better discussed in a work session. Commissioner Dorosin said he appreciated hearing that the full picture is being considered. He said he would add considering the quality of the closest elementary school to the list of criteria, as well as demographics of neighborhoods. Commissioner Pelissier said the criteria were interesting to her. She said when the BOCC voted on land banking, it did not have the full set of information and perhaps mobile homes are not the biggest need. She said the Board needs to get full information so that it can prioritize the needs more effectively. Commissioner Rich said the Board has been asking for the mobile home park numbers for some time, and she hopes these numbers can be available for a work session. She added to Commissioner Dorosin's comments stating that it is imperative that affordable housing be along public transit lines. She asked if an apartment is designated as an affordable housing apartment and would it always remain as such. Audrey Spencer-Horsley said that would be a part of the award to negotiate the restrictions to preserve it as affordable housing. Commissioner Rich asked if an estimate of the number of people living in mobile home parks could be provided. Audrey Spencer-Horsley said as much data collection as possible has been gathered, and this can be shared with the Board. Commissioner Rich said she understands that flexibility is needed, but that should a mobile home park close, it will be important to have land available to accommodate people that need to move in a hurry. Commissioner Rich said there should be a dialog with Habitat and the Community Home Trust, as they have asked for flexibility with the land banking. She said the Board informed them that the money was not for Community Home Trust or for Habitat, but now alternatives are being considered. She said having transparent dialog is important. Audrey Spencer-Horsley said she has only shared little nuggets tonight. She said the goal is maximize available resources, and little funding is expected from the Home Choice Program. Commissioner Burroughs expressed hope for where the discussion is going. She said having more data will be helpful and agrees with tabling the discussion for a work session. Commissioner Jacobs said he would like to see more proactivity with mobile home park owners and operators, to determine what plans may be in place for their land, and ask for some advance notice if people are going to need to be relocated. Commissioner Price complimented the work already done. Commissioner Dorosin said he did not see land banking solely as a safety net for potentially relocated mobile home residents. He said there are a lot of issues in mobile home parks that may need addressing, and he could see the possibility of building new mobile home parks. Chair McKee said the Board is by no means criticizing the efforts to this point. He said housing needs are very difficult and complicated issues. He said he knows $1 million is not going to be sufficient in the long term. He said this is more of an urban project being close to sewer and water, transportation, etc. He said cost is a big factor as money goes much further in different parts of the County than others. He said having a broader and deeper discussion in a work session is crucial. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Rich to table this item until the November 13 work session. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Audrey Spencer-Horsley acknowledged all the County staff that has worked so well on this project, in conjunction with the non-profit sector, and noted that October is Housing America month. 8. Reports a. Report on Small Business Investment Grants, Agriculture Economic Development Grants, & Small Business Loan Program The Board received a report on the current status of three (3) grant and loan programs ("Small Business Investment Grant", the "Agriculture Economic Development Grant", and the "Small Business Loan Program") that are funded by the County's one-quarter cent sales tax for economic development (Article 46 funds) and administered by the Orange County Economic Development Department to support the retention and growth of small businesses, agriculture and food systems-related agriculture ventures throughout Orange County. Bonnie Hammersley said this is not a presentation on Article 46, but just a report on grants that have been awarded. She said Article 46 funds will be discussed at the next work session. Steve Brantley, Orange County Economic Development Director, said he will review three programs that positively affect the residents of Orange County. He presented the following information: BACKGROUND: Two of the intended uses of Article 46 funds for economic development Include the Small Business Investment Grant, and the Agriculture Economic Development Grant, which support the recruitment, retention and growth of small business development, plus farming & food systems related enterprises throughout Orange County. Although grant funds began to accrue in 2012 following the passage of the one-quarter cent sales tax in November, 2011, no grant activity immediately followed due to a delay in setting guidelines and application procedures. The two grant programs went "live" in 2015 after the Orange County Economic Development Department's Advisory Board in 2014 drafted recommended guidelines and applications, and following the BOCC's review, suggested amendments and approval of the two New grant programs in early 2015. The Small Business Loan Program is similar in to the new grant programs in the sense that the loan program also has an application review committee, guidelines and by-laws, is supported by Article 46 funding, and is also intended to support the recruitment, retention and expansion of small businesses in Orange County. The loan program seeks to assist small firms that may have difficulty accessing traditional banking financing due to small and start-up firms often having insufficient operating history, poorer credit history, etc. The County's loan program was created by the BOCC in 1999, received initial funds to lend in 2007, and became very active in 2011 following a transfer of additional funds to lend. Historic loans have been made up to $50,000.00 for a maximum of 5 years repayment terms. A current summary of activities is presented below regarding the Small Business Investment Grant program, the Agriculture Economic Development Grant program, and the Small Business Loan program. Steve Brantley presented the following PowerPoint presentation: (1) Agriculture Economic Development Grants (summary dated 9/21/15) • Program became active after being approved by the BOCC in March 2015. Marketing campaign began. • 7 initial agriculture grants totaling $57,987.00 were recently approved in the program's first quarterly round of applicant reviews. • 1 application was denied. • Grant program is funded by up to $60,000.00 annually from Article 46 proceeds (one- quarter cent sales tax for economic development). • $120,276.26 is available for future agriculture business grants. Agriculture Grant Recipients 7 GRANT RECIPIENTS: • Boxcarr Farms • COLORFIELDS • Dawnbreaker Farms • Four Leaf Farm • Smith's Family Fun Farm • sweet retreat ORCHARD • Taylor Fish Farm Approved Agriculture Grants (initial quarterly review) Use of Grants by Recipients: • Taylor Fish Farm (Valee Taylor—fish processing) • BoxCarr Farm (Austin Genke —fencing for milk goats) • ColorFields Farm (Kelly Morrison — greenhouses) • Four Leaf Farm (Tim McCaller— greenhouses) • Smith Family Farm (Dawn Denson —well for irrigation) • Dawn Breaker Farms (Ben Grimes — small on-farm poultry processing equipment) • Sweet Retreat Orchards (Aniko Redmon — irrigation system) New Proposed Agriculture Grants (scheduled for second quarterly review in Nov.) • 2 new completed applications have been received. • 6 additional applications are being completed by applicants. • $60,000 in total requested awards is forecast for the upcoming second quarterly review of new applications. • Initial marketing round included radio and newspaper ads; most recent marketing effort had 800 post cards mailed out during the week of September 7; several phone calls and e-mail inquiries have been received and indicate several more applications will occur. Agriculture Economic Development Grant Application Review Committee • 5 total members, currently comprised as follows: ➢ 2 representatives from the Agriculture Preservation Board appointed by the BOCC -Vaughn Compton & Noah Ranells. ➢ 1 agriculture sector representative from the Orange County Economic Development Advisory Board - vacant. ➢ Orange County Cooperative Extension Agent— Dr. Carl Matyac. ➢ Orange County Economic Development Department's agriculture economic developer— Mike Ortosky. • Board meets quarterly; next meeting date is November 18. Activity contributing to public awareness of the Agriculture Grant Program • Breeze Farm Master Plan - preparation for funding purposes. • Piedmont Food &Agriculture Processing Facility tenant activity. • Rural Food Aggregator/ Food Hub / and Piedmont Food & Agriculture Processing Center expansion concept planning. • Farmer and food business entrepreneurs meetings & assistance. • Recent workshop at Durham Tech on food system entrepreneurs. • Farm to Fork 2015 event planning. • Orange County Agriculture Summit 2016 planning. • Ongoing presentations to groups regarding agriculture economic development. • Meetings regarding a concept to establish a large food hub campus & food enterprise district. • Meetings with area county officials, consultants & residents regarding the formation of a regional food innovation cluster & an Orange County food council (2) Small Business Investment Grant Program Submitted Grants (initial quarterly review): 15 grant applications were submitted & reviewed: • 7 — Hillsborough • 5 - Chapel Hill • 3 — Carrboro Approved Grants: 8 grants were awarded: • 4 - Hillsborough $31,352.00 • 1 - Chapel Hill $10,000.00 • 3 - Carrboro $20,360.00 $61,712.00 Orange County's Small Business Investment Grant Recipients • Carrboro Community Acupuncture • MasterPeace Barber Shop - Hillsborough • Regulator Brewing Company, LLC - Hillsborough • Seal The Seasons - Hillsborough • The Accidental Baker - Hillsborough • Trill Financial, LLC — Chapel Hill • tempeh girl - Carrboro • WomanCraft - Carrboro Small Business Investment Grant Program Use of Grants by Recipients: Carrboro • Carrboro Community Acupuncture (Kim Calandra — business & marketing expansion) • Tempeh Girl(Beth May— sales expansion) • Woman Craft(Katherine Palomba — promotional activities) Chapel Hill • Trill Financial(Simon Jung — computer testing equipment) Hillsborough • MasterPeace Barber(Mark Holt— improvements to business) • Regulator Brewing (Anna McDonald Dobbs — marketing) • Seal The Seasons (Patrick Mateer & Will Collins —frozen food production) Small Business Investment Grant Program New Proposed Business Grants (scheduled for second quarterly review on Oct. 20, 2015) • 5 deferred applications — Chapel Hill $37,188.00 • 11 new applicants: ➢ 1 - Cedar Grove applicant $10,000.00 ➢ 4 - Chapel Hill applicants $23,000.00 ➢ 1 - Efland applicant $10,000.00 ➢ 5 - Hillsborough applicants $33,000.00 • Business Investment Grant Application Review Committee: ➢ 5 — 7 total subcommittee members from the Orange County Economic Development Department's Advisory Board. • Meets quarterly; next meeting date is October 20, 2015. Latest Activity (dated 10/5/15) New Proposed Business Grants (scheduled for second quarterly review ending September 30, 2015) • 5 deferred applications — Chapel Hill $37,188.00 • 29 new applicants: ➢ 1 — Cedar Grove applicant $10,000.00 ➢ 1 — Carrboro applicant ➢ 17 — Chapel Hill applicants $140,541.67 ➢ 1 — Efland applicant $10,000.00 ➢ 9 — Hillsborough applicants $73,000.00 (3) Small Business Loan Program • Article 46 includes a provision to provide up to $200,000.00 annually in additional lending flexibility to Orange County's existing Small Business Loan Program. • The Program's current loan portfolio is supported by a separate source of revolving funds previously authorized by the BOCC, and no Article 46 monies have been required, to date, to supplement the Program. • There are no loan delinquencies in the Program's activity. Small Loan Business Recipients Mystery Brewing Company— Hillsborough Seal the Season — Hillsborough MasterPeace Barbershop — Hillsborough Accidental Baker— Hillsborough PHD - Hillsborough Ceremony Salon — Carrboro Tin Can Ventures — Cedar Grove Grey Matter/Isis I.T. — Chapel Hill The Depot— Hillsborough Composition of Small Business Loan Application Review Committee • 8 total members, currently comprised as follows: ➢ 2 representatives from the Orange County banking community (Jim Evans — Bank of North Carolina, Joanna Walton — BB&T) ➢ 2 representatives from small business owners in Orange County (Tom Proctor— Vacuum Cleaner Hospital; Sherry Gray—Yesterday and Today Frame Shop) ➢ 1 representative from the Orange County Board of Commissioners (Commissioner Mark Dorosin) ➢ 2 representatives from Orange County Government (Acting Chief Financial Officer Paul Laughton, and Orange County Economic Development Department Director Steve Brantley) ➢ 1 representative from the Orange County Economic Development Advisory Board (Lori Eichel — Bank of North Carolina) Small Business Loan Program • Loan committee meets the third Thursday of every month • Next meeting date is October 17, 2015 • Loan committee agreed on 9/17/15 to increase the maximum loan amount to $100,000.00 (up from $50,000.00) and double the repayment term to 10 years (up from 5 years) in consideration of future loan applicants. Purpose is to increase the loan activity. Commissioner Rich asked if Steve Brantley could define a fun farm. Chair McKee said he believes this farm is centered on children and educational activities. Commissioner Jacobs said there is an open planning meeting for the Agricultural Summit on October 15. Commissioner Jacobs asked if buildings are being built at Breeze Farm without a Memorandum of Understanding. Steve Brantley said no. He said it is a concept of how to get more value out of the Breeze Farm. He said it is going the step beyond planting a row of squash and considering how the produce could be brought closer to the market. He said historically Orange County's agricultural efforts are somewhat dispersed between economic development, cooperative extension, and parks and rec and agriculture. He said there is a good staff team which keep lines of communication open between various groups and the County. Commissioner Jacobs said a staff person reported to him being very pleased with all the structures being built at Breeze Farm. He said he was surprised to hear of this happening. Steve Brantley said there is a sense that North Carolina State University (NCSU) may not be able to do too much more with Breeze Farm. Commissioner Jacobs asked if the BOCC could receive minutes from the Economic Development Board. Steve Brantley said yes. Commissioner Jacobs asked if there was an update regarding the hybrid vehicle proposed by the State which was intended to replace the Department of Commerce. Steve Brantley said the Department of Commerce still exits with several divisions working on Community Development, Incentives, etc. Chair McKee said he has visited the Breeze Farm location several times. He said a wash station has been installed, as well as a small storage facility, a greenhouse, and some fencing. He said these items are an integral part of insuring the people trying to make a go of this project. He said he is unsure of the ownership of these items, and the Board should have further discussion if larger amounts of funding should be need in the future. Steve Brantley offered to provide a brief report to the BOCC in the next few days. Commissioner Jacobs said this would be helpful, as well as determining NCSU's plans for future involvement and research stations. Bonnie Hammersley said she is in conversation with NCSU and the future of the Breeze Farms. She said she would bring updates to the BOCC as they are available. Commissioner Rich asked if all information is being shared with the Towns. Steve Brantley said this can be done easily. 9. County Manager's Report Bonnie Hammersley said Tuesday, October 13, is the next work session, and the Article 46 sales tax as well as the Rogers Road sewer items will be discussed. She said there would also be an update on Solid Waste events. Bonnie Hammersley said that tonight is the last required meeting for Paul Laughton as Interim CFO. She applauded his excellent effort. She said Gary Donaldson will begin in his new role as CFO on Wednesday. Chair McKee echoed the sentiments of the Manager. 10. County Attorney's Report NONE 11. Appointments a. Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee —Appointments The Board considered making appointments to the Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee. A motion was made by Commissioner Price, and seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to appoint the following to the Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee: • Appointment of Daniel Hatley to a third full term (Position #2) At-Large DD/MR position, expiring 10/31/2017. • Appointment of Max Mason to a second full term (Position #4) At-Large position, expiring 06/30/2017. • Appointment of Anthony John Vogt to a second full term (Position #5) At-Large position, expiring 10/31/2017. VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, and seconded by Commissioner Rich to appoint the following to the Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee: • Appointment of Steven Bank to a one-year training term (Position #1) At-Large, expiring 10/06/2016. • Appointment of Danielle Mosley to a one-year training term (Position #9) At-Large position, expiring 10/06/2016. VOTE: UNANIMOUS b. Arts Commission —Appointment The Board considered making an appointment to the Arts Commission. A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Dorosin to appoint the following to the Arts Commission: • Appointment of Jennifer Shelton to a partial term (position #3) At-Large position, expiring 03/31/2017. • Appointment of Andrea Riley to a partial term (position #10) At-Large position, expiring 03/31/2017. VOTE: UNANIMOUS c. Jury Commission —Appointment The Board will consider making an appointment to the Jury Commission. A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to appoint the following to the Jury Commission: Appointment of Bob Hall to (position #1) "At-Large — BOCC Appointee" expiring 06/30/2017. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Commissioner Dorosin asked for clarification regarding any further existing vacancies on this board. David Hunt said he would follow up on this via email. d. Nursing Home Community Advisory Committee —Appointments The Board will consider making appointments to the Nursing Home Community Advisory Committee. A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to appoint the following to the NHCAC: -Appointment of Martha Bell to a one year training term (Position #1) At-Large position expiring 10/06/2016. -Appointment of Jerry Schreiber to a partial term (Position #4) "At-Large" position expiring 06/30/2017. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 12. Board Comments Commissioner Jacobs had no comments. Commissioner Rich said she attended the Advanced Leadership Program at the School of Government, which she greatly enjoyed. She said while at this program, she had the opportunity to discuss the flow of work sessions. She said the BOCC is not conducting work session properly, in that work sessions should be free flowing conversations. She said it would be led by Chair McKee, but would be more of a dialog than is currently had. Chair McKee said he is open to being more informal, as long as the conversation affords everyone the opportunity to speak. Commissioner Rich thanked Steve Brantley for taking some of the BOCC on a tour of the new Morinaga plant. Commissioner Pelissier said last week that she, Bonnie Hammersley and Deputy County Manager Travis Myren visited Durham County's Criminal Justice Resource Center. She said it was a very informative visit. She said she attended a Community listening session for the community health assessment this afternoon. She said there was good public attendance and discussion. Commissioner Price said the jury commission sheet says that one citizen appointment is made by the BOCC, one by the Senior Resident Superior Court Judge, and one by the Clerk of the Superior Court. Commissioner Price said she and Chair McKee went to the Efland Cheeks Community Center to attend an emergency preparedness meeting. She said the meeting was well attended from across that community. Commissioner Burroughs had no comments. Commissioner Dorosin had no comments. Chair McKee said he was glad that Commissioner Rich mentioned their Morinaga visit. He said the formal grand opening will happen soon. He said this Thursday there will be a ceremony to unveil a Historic marker to which the BOCC are invited. 13. Information Items • September 15, 2015 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List • Tax Collector's Report— Numerical Analysis • Tax Collector's Report— Measure of Enforced Collections • Tax Assessor's Report— Releases/Refunds under $100 • Memorandum — Orange County Construction & Renovation Project Oversight Policy • BOCC Chair Letter Regarding Petitions from September 15, 2015 Regular Meeting 14. Closed Session NONE 15. Adjournment A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Price to adjourn the meeting at 10:54 p.m. VOTE: UNANIMOUS David Hunt, Deputy Clerk Earl McKee, Chair