HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 02-16-2016 - 6-a - Minutes ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: February 16, 2016
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:
Correction Sheet December 7, 2015 Regular Meeting Minutes
January 21, 2016 BOCC Regular Meeting
January 29, 2016 BOCC Annual Retreat
BACKGROUND: In accordance with 153A-42 of the General Statutes, the Governing Board
has the legal duty to approve all minutes that are entered into the official journal of the Board's
proceedings.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: NONE
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board approve minutes as
presented or as amended.
Attachment 1
CORRECTION TO THE 12/7/2015 APPROVED MINUTES:
5. Consent Agenda
f. Amendment to the Orange County Code of Ordinances Regarding Massage Regulation
The Board 1) adopted and authorized the Chair to sign the Resolution, which is incorporated by
reference, Amending Chapter 8, Article II of the Code of Ordinances of Orange County; and 2)
authorized staff to make any typographical or other non substantive corrections as may be
needed prior to and during the process of submission of the amended ordinance to Municode.
The Board deferred this item at the beginning of the 12/7/15 meeting under Changes/Additions
to the Agenda per the County Attorney(verbiage from page 2 of that meeting is below in
reference to this deferral):
"Chair McKee proposed a change in Item 6-f on the consent agenda, saying
Commissioner Price had some concerns with some of the wording. He asked John Roberts to
speak to this.
John Roberts said this ordinance was originally passed by the BOCC in 1985, and in
1998 the State passed the same legislation that was applicable to the entire County, including the
municipalities. He said he would suggest deferring this item so he can do more research. He
said he will likely recommend that the massage portion of this ordinance be repealed and
replaced by the addition of something regarding sexually oriented business licensing and
regulation.
A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Price to defer
Item 6-f for later discussion at a future meeting.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
1
1 Attachment 2
2
3 DRAFT MINUTES
4 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
5 REGULAR MEETING
6 January 21, 2016
7 7:00 p.m.
8
9
10 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, January 21,
11 2016 at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Building, in Hillsborough, N.C.
12
13 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair McKee and Commissioners Mia Burroughs,
14 Mark Dorosin, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich
15 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Barry Jacobs
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 Baker (All other staff members will be identified
19 appropriately below)
20
21 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
22 Chair McKee called the meeting to order at 7:09 p.m. He noted the following items at
23 the Commissioners' places:
24 - yellow sheet, for item 4-b: Extension of Tax Listing Period Resolution (approval)
25 - white sheet, PowerPoint presentation for item 4-b
26 - turquoise sheet, additional information for item 4-b: Historical Perspective— 2017 Revaluation
27 - email from Commissioner Jacobs containing questions for item 7-a
28 - white sheet, additional information for item 8-a
29
30 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
31 add a closed session for the purpose of:
32 "143-318.11(a)(3) To consult with an attorney employed or retained by the public body in order
33 to preserve the attorney-client privilege between the attorney and the public body, which
34 privilege is hereby acknowledged. In re Sloane."
35
36 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
37
38 Chair McKee said Commissioner Jacobs will not be in attendance tonight.
39
40 PUBLIC CHARGE
41
42 Chair McKee dispensed with the reading of the public charge.
43
44 2. Public Comments
45
46 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
47 NONE
48
49 b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
2
1 (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda
2 below.)
3
4 3. Petitions by Board Members
5 Commissioner Rich petitioned about voting information, noting it would benefit the
6 community to have more information about the new voting rules for 2016. She asked if the
7 communications team could partner with Board of Elections to educate the public.
8 Chair McKee asked if the County Manager would take the lead on this.
9 Commissioner Rich said she is hearing a lot about "The Barn" event center, and she is
10 concerned about not being able to give a response to the public on this issue. She said there
11 should be a one-voice response when inquiries are made.
12 Chair McKee said he had been invited to a community meeting about this item, and
13 asked if staff would lay out appropriate response options to share with the public.
14 Commissioner Dorosin said he has concerns about having one unified response, as all
15 Commissioners may not agree on a response due to a lack of information.
16 Commissioner Rich said she does not know what the Board's response should be, as
17 she is unsure as to what falls under the Board's purview.
18 Commissioner Dorosin suggested adding this topic as an information item on the next
19 agenda.
20 Chair McKee agreed with this suggestion, and said he will report this plan at the
21 upcoming community meeting.
22 Commissioner Burroughs said she is interested in learning more about the County's
23 relationship with Cardinal Innovations, and she requested a presentation regarding the County's
24 funding of, and relationship with, them.
25 Commissioner Burroughs said it is her understanding that the Town of Hillsborough has
26 withdrawn funding to non-profits this year, and requested more information on this.
27 Bonnie Hammersley said staff will be able to provide information about Cardinal
28 Innovations for the Board.
29 Commissioner Dorosin referred to an article from the NC Budget and Policy Center of
30 the NC Justice Center, regarding income inequality in North Carolina. He said statewide the
31 top 5% of earners take home nearly 27 times the average income of the bottom 20%, a 27 to 1
32 ratio.
33 Commissioner Dorosin said the counties that have the greatest disparities from top to
34 bottom includes Orange County. He said as the Board goes to its retreat next week, it is
35 important to keep in mind that income disparities within the County are a significant reality.
36 Commissioner Price said in response to Commissioner Rich that Democracy NC and
37 National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) have created brochures
38 about the new voting laws.
39 Commissioner Price said she too would like a presentation regarding Cardinal
40 Innovations and the Stepping Up Initiative. She said the My Brother's Keeper project has been
41 in effect for a year and hoped to have a progress report ready this month. She said the report
42 is not quite completed, but she will email it to the Board when it is, and asked if it could be
43 posted on the web.
44 Commissioner Pelissier had no petitions.
45 Chair McKee had no petitions.
46
47 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
48
49 a. Human Relations Month Proclamation
3
1 The Board considered officially proclaiming the month of February 2016 as "Human
2 Relations Month" in Orange County and authorizing the Chair to sign the Proclamation.
3 Rollin Russell, Human Relations Commission (HRC) member, introduced Desaray
4 Rockett, HRC Youth Ambassador, who read the proclamation:
5
6 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
7 HUMAN RELATIONS MONTH PROCLAMATION
8
9 WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of County Commissioners established the
10 Human Relations Commission in June 1987 with the desire to "encourage mutual
11 understanding and fair treatment of all citizens"; and
12
13 WHEREAS, the Orange County Human Relations Commission believes that in order to
14 achieve justice and equal opportunity for all Orange County residents, we must all strive to
15 create an atmosphere where people are valued and accepted rather than merely tolerated, and
16 therefore continue to promote the ideal of social justice for all; and
17
18 WHEREAS, the Orange County Human Relations Commission has diligently served
19 Orange County since 1987 and remains committed to promoting equal treatment, opportunity
20 and understanding throughout the community; and
21
22 WHEREAS, the Orange County Human Relations Commission enforces the County's
23 Civil Rights Ordinance which specifically prohibits discrimination based on an individual's race,
24 color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, veteran status and familial status; and
25
26 WHEREAS, the Orange County Human Relations Commission encourages Orange
27 County residents, as individuals, to take a stand against social injustice and continue to work
28 together to make freedom, justice, and equal opportunity available for all; and
29
30 WHEREAS, Orange County is committed to preserving the progress made thus far
31 towards equality and leading the challenge for equal opportunity using all the means at our
32 disposal;
33
34 NOW, THEREFORE, We, the Orange County Board of Commissioners, do hereby
35 proclaim February 2016 as "HUMAN RELATIONS MONTH" in Orange County and challenge
36 our residents to promote the ideology of social justice for all by celebrating and encouraging
37 multiculturalism in the County and encouraging all residents to embrace diversity and equal
38 access in Orange County.
39
40 THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2016.
41
42 A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Price for the
43 Board to adopt the Proclamation and authorized the Chair to sign.
44
45 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
46
47 b. 2017 Countywide Revaluation Update
48 The Board received an update on the Orange County Tax Office's administration of the
49 2017 countywide revaluation of real property.
50 Dwane Brinson, Orange County Tax Administrator, reviewed the following background.
4
1
2 BACKGROUND: North Carolina State Law, North Carolina General Statute (NCGS) 105-
3 286(a), mandates that counties conduct a countywide revaluation of real property at least once
4 every eight (8) years. Orange County's last revaluation took effect January 1, 2009. All current
5 property tax assessments in the County reflect each property's market value as of the last
6 revaluation date. The 2017 revaluation will capture eight (8) years of market changes, and it
7 will involve reviewing the most current market information available to produce an estimate of
8 market value.
9 Dwane Brinson made the following PowerPoint presentation:
10
11 2017 Revaluation
12 Item 4-b
13 January 21, 2016 BOCC Meeting
14 T. Dwane Brinson
15 Orange County Tax Administrator
16
17 What is a Revaluation?
18 • Revaluation is the process of updating all real property countywide to its current market
19 value as of a single appraisal date
20 • Real property includes both land and the attached improvements
21
22 Why Have a Revaluation?
23 • North Carolina General Statute 105-286 requires all counties to conduct a revaluation at
24 least once every eight years
25 • A primary goal in conducting a revaluation of all real property is to equalize the tax base
26 ➢ Over time most properties change in value, but they often do so at different rates
27 • Our last revaluation was effective January 1, 2009
28 ➢ 2013 delayed revaluation
29 ➢ 2015 delayed revaluation
30
31 What is market value?
32 • North Carolina General Statute 105-283 defines market value as "the price estimated in
33 terms of money at which the property would change hands between a willing and
34 financially able buyer and a willing seller, neither being under any compulsion to buy or
35 to sell and both having reasonable knowledge of all the uses to which the property is
36 adapted and for which it is capable of being used."
37
38 Applicable Laws
39 • Dillon's Rule state
40 ➢ NCGS 105 —283: Uniform Appraisal Standards
41 Property to be appraised at market value
42 • NCGS 105 — 286: Time for general reappraisal of real property
43 ➢ Must conduct revaluation at least once every eight years
44 • NCGS 105 — 287: Changing appraised value of real property in years in which general
45 reappraisal is not made
46 ➢ (b)(2) cannot adjust for economic changes (paraphrased)
47
48 Timeline
5
1 April 2014 -January 2016: Field visits to verify property record cards
2 January 2016: Mail summary description of properties with listing forms
3 January 2016 -April 2016: Initial field review of sales used in models
4 February 2016 - May 2016: Review grade, depreciation, etc. field reviews
5 April 2016 -July 2016: Development of new rates for Schedule of Values (SOV) and testing
6 July/August 2016: Finalize SOV
7 September 2016: Public hearing on SOV
8 October/November 2016: Adoption of SOV
9 December 2016: Final, holistic review
10 December/January 2017: Send out value change notices
11 January 2017 - March 2017: Informal appeals
12 April 2017 -June 2017: Board of Equalization and Review hearings
13
14 The Process
15 • Appraisers visiting properties, talking with residents
16 • Land being valued as if vacant
17 • Models being tested in the office
18 • Revaluation presentations in the community
19
20 Data Anomalies
21 • Field reviews/Data Correction Forms
22 > Property characteristic data changes for current year and future years
23 > Examples of exceptions: new home constructed that is not on tax records
24 (discovery), house fire resulting in total loss that is still being taxed (refund)
25
26 Current Tax Assessments
27 • Last appraisal date was January 1, 2009
28 > Adopted schedule of values for 2009 revaluation
29 > Current tax assessments reflect value as of that date
30 • Based on sales from 2007 and 2008
31 • Per NCGS 105— 287, cannot change 2009 tax assessments until date of next
32 revaluation, January 1, 2017
33 • Current sales ratio is .993, 1.007 in 2014 and 1.04 in 2013
34
35 Appeals
36 • Taxpayers may appeal their assessment every year
37 • Stage 1 - tax office review in-house with an appraiser
38 • Stage 2 — hearing with Orange County Board of Equalization and Review (third party
39 members)
40 • Stage 3— North Carolina Property Tax Commission
41 • Stage 4 —Appeal courts
42
43 Community Outreach
44 • 2017 Revaluation Partner Program
45 > Review of information on website
46 > Learn and Share revaluation video series (225 total views as of 1/19)-10-
47 question interactive, educational quiz on website--16 quizzes taken, average
48 score 93
49 > Certificate of Achievement
6
1 • Summary Description Mailing with 2016 listing forms
2 ➢ Partnering with the community to gather the most accurate data possible
3 ➢ 636 electronic forms returned, 2,100 hard copies
4 • Sales Bank/Appeals Process on website
5 ➢ Win-win appeals process
6 ➢ Sample adjustment grid
7
8 Commissioner Rich referred to the first slide in the PowerPoint presentation, and asked
9 if examples of attached improvements of real properties could be given.
10 Dwane Brinson said it is the house and its components and gave the example of a
11 detached garage.
12 Commissioner Rich referred to the yellow forms that were sent to residents, and asked if
13 the Tax office is relying on the community to come forward and provide information.
14 Dwane Brinson said asking residents for this information is new for this revaluation. He
15 said he is unaware of any other county doing this process.
16 Commissioner Rich said the information provided by citizens may correct previously held
17 information by the tax office. She asked if there is a plan in place to insure that citizens will not
18 get penalized for bringing forward new discoveries.
19 Dwane Brinson said when there is information that changes the property value, the tax
20 office is sending a change of value notice to the property owner. He said there are four people
21 in the tax office receiving these forms. He said all forms are reviewed individually and
22 responses are given when requested.
23 Commissioner Rich asked if residents are aware that the information they provide may
24 affect their 2017 tax bill.
25 Dwane Brinson said yes.
26 Commissioner Rich said she is concerned that residents understand that new
27 discoveries will affect the tax bill moving forward, but that they will not be penalized in arrears
28 for discoveries.
29 Dwane Brinson said the more information the tax office has, the better and more
30 accurate the revaluation will be.
31 Commissioner Rich said there must be trust built with the community.
32 Commissioner Price asked if the revaluation will impact properties that have undergone
33 absolutely no changes.
34 Dwane Brinson said property values are determined based on sales, and the valuation
35 of a house that has not sold in 25 years would be based on sales of similar properties. He said
36 notices of value will be sent out between December 2016 and January 2017 along with
37 information about the appeals process.
38 Commissioner Price asked if most property values are anticipated to rise.
39 Dwane Brinson said the sales that will be used for the revaluation have yet to occur and
40 will do so in 2016. He said there will be some properties that will drop in value.
41 Commissioner Dorosin asked if the presentation could be broken down into layman's
42 terms.
43 Commission Dorosin reviewed his understanding of the presentation: the tax office will
44 create a schedule of values based on all the sales in Orange County in 2016; categorize the
45 sales based on types of houses; tax staff will go to every neighborhood and assess the
46 properties without entering the homes.
47 Dwane Brinson said the tax office currently has construction grades on every house in
48 Orange County. He said the schedule of values will go a bit deeper than as described by
49 Commissioner Dorosin, but his general overview of the process is accurate.
7
1 Commissioner Dorosin asked if the County should return back to the four-year cycle for
2 revaluation.
3 Dwane Brinson said the Board adopted that resolution in 2013, with the next revaluation
4 being done in 2021.
5 Commissioner Rich said communication about this topic is vital. She asked if there is a
6 plan for how the County is presenting the revaluation, and not just the tax department. She
7 asked if the communication team and social media are being utilized.
8 Dwane Brinson said all media outlets are being pursued and will work with the County's
9 communication team.
10 Commissioner Rich said she is concerned about how this is presented, noting the
11 revaluation is important, and that the County is not trying to penalize anyone.
12 Commissioner Pelissier asked if there is a timeline for when the County will talk with the
13 public about the implications of the revaluation.
14 Dwane Brinson said the final product will be the tax bill.
15 Commissioner Pelissier said during the last revaluation, the public did not understand its
16 effects.
17 Dwane Brinson said this evening's presentation will evolve and will be available to
18 present to anyone and any group, along with answering questions. He said in the spring of
19 2017, the tax office will deliver the total tax base figure to County management, at which point
20 the tax rate will be determined.
21 Commissioner Pelissier said the concept of revenue neutral is what the public does not
22 understand.
23 Chair McKee said he has received more calls in the last week about the upcoming
24 revaluation, than he has received in the last five years. He said all the calls expressed concern
25 regarding possible penalties.
26 Chair McKee suggested extending the listing period for an additional 30 days, to give
27 the public more opportunities to correct their tax listing.
28 Chair McKee suggested the County put out a full force media blitz about the revaluation,
29 and also encourage people to update their listing.
30 Commissioner Rich said she has also spoken with several citizens, and asked if cases
31 that are outside of the box could be reviewed individually and excused for their penalties.
32
33 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier to
34 adopt the EXTENSION OF TAX LISTING PERIOD RESOLUTION below:
35
36 NORTH CAROLINA
37 ORANGE COUNTY
38 EXTENSION OF TAX LISTING PERIOD RESOLUTION (Approval)
39 Whereas, North Carolina General Statutes 105-307(b) allows the Board of County
40 Commissioners to extend the time during which property is to be listed for taxation for up to 30
41 additional days in a nonrevaluation year; and
42 Whereas, the Board has found it reasonable and prudent to extend this period for 2016.
43 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
44 COMMISSIONERS OF ORANGE COUNTY THAT the time during which property is to be listed
45 for taxation in 2016 be extended until February 29, 2016.
46 Upon motion duly made and seconded, the foregoing resolution was passed by the
47 following votes:
48 Ayes: Commissioners
49
50
8
1 Noes:
2 I, Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North
3 Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing has been carefully copied from the
4 recorded minutes of the Board of Commissioners for said County at a regular meeting of said
5 Board held on , said record having been made in the Minute Book of
6 the minutes of said Board, and is a true copy of so much of said proceedings of said Board as
7 relates in any way to the passage of the resolution described in said proceedings.
8 WITNESS my hand and the corporate seal of said County, this day of
9 , 2016.
10
11 Clerk to the Board of Commissioners
12
13 Commissioner Rich asked if there is a plan to inform the public about this extended
14 listing.
15 Bonnie Hammersley said she and the communications team would put out the
16 information.
17
18 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
19
20 5. Public Hearings
21
22 a. Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment— Recreational Land Uses -
23 Closure of Public Hearing and Action (No Additional Comments Accepted)
24 The Board received the Planning Board recommendation, closed the public hearing, and
25 voted on a decision on text amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) initiated
26 by the Planning Director to revise existing regulations governing the development of
27 recreational land uses.
28 Michael Harvey, Orange County Planning, said the Board of County Commissioners
29 (BOCC) will be receiving the Planning Board recommendation, and he would like to review what
30 this ordinance does and does not do.
31 Michael Harvey said this UDO amendment began in the spring of 2015, when staff
32 identified a need to revise the existing methodology by which recreation land uses are
33 classified. He said the existing ordinance was arcane, confusing, and very difficult to enforce.
34 He said this ordinance will provide a definitive line of demarcation between private recreational
35 amenities and recreational facilities. He said these types of activities are currently processed
36 through the review and approval of a Class B Special Use Permit (SUP), which are reviewed
37 and acted upon by the Orange County Board of Adjustment. He said this amended ordinance
38 is also an attempt to address long-standing issues with establishing development criteria for
39 certain identified recreational uses. He said the process and discussion was dominated by one
40 use specifically, which was the discharge of firearms from both a private and potential public
41 standpoint.
42 Michael Harvey said this ordinance eliminates the County's arcane and outdated
43 definitions; it establishes a more definitive methodology for staff to determine what constitutes
44 private and public recreation; it establishes guidelines for the discharge of firearms from both
45 private and public property; it establishes and incorporates regulations that were developed and
46 used by staff to address other recreational activities on private property, specifically motorized
47 go-carts; and it tries to provide a framework for individuals wishing to open and operate a public
48 recreational facility with definitive regulatory standards.
49 Michael Harvey said there are things that this ordinance does not do: it does not ban
50 shooting activities from private properties; it does not seek to regulate hunting; it does not
9
1 establish noise limits that are enforced through the land use administration process; and it does
2 not seek to regulate the caliber of weapon or bullet type. He said it is hoped that the ordinance
3 will be a reasonable attempt to allow for protected freedom while insuring that one's choice in
4 how to engage in a recreational activity on one's property does not have a negative impact on
5 adjacent property owners.
6 Michael Harvey noted that the Planning Board has recommended approval of the
7 amendment.
8 Commissioner Dorosin asked if the reason that firing guns on private property cannot be
9 eliminated is due to laws outside of the County.
10 Michael Harvey said yes.
11 Commissioner Dorosin asked if Michael Harvey could walk him through a hypothetical
12 situation if one hears gunfire while at home and is concerned.
13 Michael Harvey said there are two mechanisms to register complaints: the Sheriff's
14 office, who will do an independent investigation, and complaints to the Planning Department.
15 He said Planning Department staff will investigate the details of the complaint. He said one is
16 able to discharge a firearm on one's property not more than twice a month without creating a
17 zoning violation. He said if one is seeking to establish a target shooting activity, one must go
18 through the zoning compliance process to establish the backstop and required setbacks, and
19 receive authorization to proceed.
20 Commissioner Dorosin said his questions are for the benefit of the public to highlight the
21 difference between registering a complaint about the discharge of firearms versus the need for
22 the Planning Department to get involved in a land use violation.
23 Michael Harvey said this is an important distinction. He said the proposed amendment
24 seeks to provide a mechanism to insure that the activities are being conducted as safely as
25 possible.
26 Commissioner Dorosin asked if a municipality can regulate the discharge of a weapon
27 within the city limits.
28 John Roberts said cities have specific authority to enforce such regulations within the
29 city limits, but the County does not have that type of authority. He read from GS 153-A129
30 giving a county's specific abilities to regulate the discharge of firearms.
31 Commissioner Dorosin asked if the BOCC wanted to adopt an ordinance that prevented
32 the discharge of firearms, could it do so.
33 John Roberts said the BOCC can put restrictions on the discharge of firearms and gave
34 several examples.
35 Michael Harvey said this proposed text amendment is not designed to affect or regulate
36 hunting activities.
37 Commissioner Rich said her concern is about enforcement and the safety of staff
38 enforcing the UDO. She clarified that the Sheriff would be called first, and then a follow up from
39 zoning staff to make sure that all is in accordance with the ordinance.
40 Michael Harvey said the ordinance does not state that the Sheriff will go out first. He
41 said Planning and the Sheriff work closely together, but the ordinance does not mandate that
42 the Sheriff go first.
43 Commissioner Rich said she is concerned for the safety of County employees that are
44 charged with enforcing these codes.
45 John Roberts said it is his recommendation to pull this shooting activities section out of
46 the UDO, and put it in the General Ordinances. He said it can be left as it is or added to. He
47 offered an example from Lenoir County. He said if an investigation occurs while firearms are
48 still being discharged, it may be prudent to have a trained law enforcement officer present. He
49 said if this is the Board's desire, he could bring it back at the second meeting in February.
50 Commissioner Rich said she agrees with John Roberts' recommendation.
10
1 Chair McKee clarified that there can be incidental shooting on a property no more than
2 twice a month.
3 Michael Harvey said yes.
4 Chair McKee asked if enforceability is realistic, given that people hunt or may just fire
5 guns randomly.
6 Michael Harvey said there must be a willing participant to submit a complaint and supply
7 enough specifics for the Sheriff or the Planning Department to follow up. He said if one is
8 hunting, then there is no land use violation. He said if one is engaging in incidental shooting in
9 excess of the twice monthly maximum, the County would speak with the property owner about
10 the zoning compliance process and establishing the appropriate backstop.
11 Chair McKee expressed concern about the safety of County staff, and agreed that law
12 enforcement should be involved with any type of follow up.
13 John Roberts referred back to Commissioner Dorosin's question about one shooting
14 randomly from one's porch. He said the County can ban such activity, but the County has
15 additional restrictions that it cannot interfere with, such as hunting.
16 Commissioner Dorosin clarified that John Roberts is advising that the BOCC could
17 adopt regulatory general ordinances, and enforcement would be separate. He said he would
18 be interested in developing this and looking at some different alternatives.
19 Michael Harvey said from a land use standpoint there is case law addressing what the
20 County can and cannot do. He said the idea being discussed is the adoption of a police power
21 regulation which is enforced by the Sheriff's office. He said the proposed amendment is a
22 reasonable regulatory standard that could be enforced. He said determining who does the
23 enforcement is the issue at hand.
24 Chair McKee asked if there is a technical procedure to remove part of the amendment
25 and pass the rest of the recommendation.
26 John Roberts said yes, the Board must be clear in what is being removed and can then
27 pass the rest of the ordinance as recommended.
28 Michael Harvey said shooting regulations are contained on page 43 of the text
29 amendment, in section 5.7.1 a2a. He said this is for private recreational activity. He said
30 regulatory requirements on recreational facilities are found page 45, and regulations governing
31 shooting ranges are found on page 46.
32 Michael Harvey said a commercial shooting range is only allowed with the issuance of a
33 SUP, where the applicant has the burden to provide competent material evidence and sworn
34 testimony to prove they meet with the standards of the UDO.
35 Commissioner Dorosin said he would prefer not to carelessly pull items out of the
36 proposed amendment, and is willing to have staff to review and bring it back in February.
37 Michael Harvey said the BOCC could approve the Statement of Consistency as
38 contained in Attachment 8, and then approve the Ordinance amendment revised as Attachment
39 9 by eliminating the provisions dealing with private recreational shooting facility regulations or
40 eliminating both private and the recreational provisions.
41 Commissioner Dorosin asked if eliminating a portion will remove the ability to regulate
42 one who wants to set up a shooting range.
43 Michael Harvey said he recommends keeping the commercial portion intact and to
44 eliminate the private recreational portion, having the County Attorney bring that back in a future
45 amendment packet to go into the general code of ordinances.
46 John Roberts said he would recommend removing section 5.7.1 a2a found on page 43.
47 Michael Harvey said he has no problem removing this.
48 Chair McKee asked if the Board chooses to do this is, it then able to discuss putting it
49 into general ordinances and also to incorporate the language from Lenoir County.
50 John Roberts said he can work on this for the February meeting.
11
1 Commissioner Burroughs asked if the very last line of the shooting activities could be
2 reviewed regarding allowing two days of incidental shooting. She said the wording may not
3 reflect the actual desire of that which the County seeks.
4 A motion made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Dorosin to adopt the
5 Statement of Consistency as contained in Attachment 8 and to adopt the revised UDO
6 amendment package as contained within Attachment 9 consistent with the recommendation of
7 the County Attorney's office. The revised UDO amendment eliminates the proposed language
8 currently contained within Section 5.7.1 (A) (2) (a) establishing land use regulations governing
9 the discharge of firearms on private property. The Attorney's office will be incorporating
10 regulations governing the discharge of firearms on private property within a future amendment
11 to the General County Code of Ordinances to be enforced by the Sheriff's Office to be
12 presented at the February 2, 2016 regular meeting for consideration.
13
14 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
15
16 6. Consent Agenda
17
18 • Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
19
20 • Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
21
22 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Price to
23 approve the remaining items on the Consent Agenda.
24
25 Bonnie Hammersley said under 6-g there was an error, and the abstract should have
26 stated both Commissioner Price and Commissioner Pelissier for this item.
27
28 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
29
30 • Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
31
32 a. Minutes
33 The Board approved the minutes from November 23 and December 15, 2015 as submitted by
34 the Clerk to the Board.
35 b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds
36 The Board adopted of a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release motor vehicle
37 property tax values for six (6) taxpayers with a total of six (6) bills that will result in a reduction
38 of revenue, in accordance with the NCGS.
39 c. Property Tax Releases/Refunds
40 The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release property tax
41 values for eleven (11) taxpayers with a total of fourteen (14) bills that will result in a reduction of
42 revenue, in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 105-381.
43 d. Applications for Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion
44 The Board approved untimely applications from eight (8) taxpayers for exemption/exclusion
45 from ad valorem taxation for thirty-five (35) bills for the 2015 tax year.
46 e. Fiscal Year 2015-16 Budget Amendment#5
47 The Board approved budget ordinance amendments for fiscal year 2015-16 for the Health
48 Department, and Animal Services.
49 f. Request for Road Addition to the State Maintained Secondary Road System
12
1 The Board made a recommendation to the North Carolina Department of Transportation
2 (NCDOT), and the North Carolina Board of Transportation (NC BOT), concerning a petition to
3 add Crabapple Lane in Birchwood Lake Estates Subdivision to the State Maintained Secondary
4 Road System.
5 g. Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard) Policies and Procedures
6 The Board approved a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, amending OUTBoard
7 Policies and Procedures to add a seventh (7th) at-large position to encourage membership with
8 expertise or interest in Public Health.
9 h. Unified Development Ordinance Amendment Outline and Schedule — Mailed
10 Notification Requirements
11 The Board approved process components and schedule for an upcoming government-initiated
12 amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) regarding mailed notification
13 requirements.
14
15 7. Regular Agenda
16
17
18 a. Unified Animal Control Ordinance
19 The Board considered voting to approve the proposed Unified Animal Control Ordinance
20 ("UAO") and adopting of the Resolution of Amendment "Amending Chapter 4 of the Orange
21 County Code of Ordinances".
22 Bob Marotto, Orange County Animal Services Director, said at its December 15, 2015
23 meeting the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) considered adopting the proposed UAO.
24 He said after a lengthy discussion, the BOCC requested that based on the discussion staff
25 make several changes to the proposed UAO. He said staff has made the changes to the
26 proposed UAO.
27 Annette Moore, County Attorney, reviewed the changes below:
28
29 1. Section 4-31 Authority and Purpose (Page 3). The Board requested that a "purpose" be
30 added to the UAO. The following language was added to Section 4-31:
31
32 "The purpose of this Ordinance is to protect the health, safety and welfare of Orange County
33 residents and the animals residing within the County and to regulate and control the conduct,
34 keeping and care of those animals."
35
36 2. Section 4-37 Definitions (Page 7). The BOCC requested further clarification of an act
37 defining Cruel and Cruel Treatment found in Section 4-37(j) of the proposed UAO. The term
38 "outdoor" was added to the phrase:
39
40 "confining in a closed vehicle without functioning air conditioning or ventilation whenever the
41 ambient outdoor temperature exceeds seventy (70) degrees Fahrenheit."
42
43 3. Section 4-41 Mistreatment of Animals (Page 14). To be consistent with Section 4-37(j) the
44 term "outdoor" was also added to Section 4-41(h) as follows:
45
46 "It shall be unlawful for any person to transport an animal in the closed trunk of a vehicle, or
47 closed compartment on a vehicle or trailer when the ambient outdoor temperature in the vicinity
48 of the vehicle or trailer is greater than or equal to 70 degrees Fahrenheit."
49
13
1 4. Section 4-45 Public Nuisance (Page 22). The BOCC requested further clarification of the
2 term "odor" found in Section 4-45(b)(2). The following sentence was added Section 4-45(b)(2):
3
4 "For purposes of this subsection odor shall include, but is not limited to, a distinctive or
5 particularly unpleasant smell of animal urine or feces, that is lingering or lasting in nature."
6
7 5. Section 4-53 Appeals (Page 27-28). The BOCC requested a number of changes to the
8 appeal process including providing the Board with a separate policy governing the appointment
9 of pool of members to serve on an appeals panel. Staff has made the changes to the Section
10 4-53 of the proposed UAO as follows:
11
12 Sec. 4-53. -Appeals.
13 Except as provided herein any appeals provided by this Chapter shall be to a three member
14 hearing panel comprised of two members of the Orange County Animal Services Hearing Panel
15 and one member of either Carrboro, Chapel Hill or Hillsborough so designated by the
16 respective Town or a member of the public designated by the Board of County Commissioners
17 for this purpose within 5 days of the final decision made in the action.
18 (a) A person who has been found to be in violation of this Chapter may appeal the final decision
19 made by the Animal Services Director to the appeal board by filing a notice of appeal containing
20 a concise statement of the reason for the appeal and delivering it to the Animal Services
21 Director within five (5) days of receipt of the final decision.
22 (b) A hearing shall be scheduled within ten (10) days of the receipt of notice of appeal.
23 (c) Neither a party nor the Department shall be represented by an attorney. A party alleged to
24 be in violation of this Chapter may be accompanied by an individual of their choosing. Such
25 individual may be an attorney and may communicate with the party but the attorney may not
26 participate in the appeal.
27 (d) The chair of the hearing panel shall administer oaths to all witnesses and make any ruling
28 necessary to preserve fairness, order and proper decorum.
29 (e) A person appealing a decision may present competent, relevant and material evidence or
30 testimony, cross-examine witnesses, inspect documents, and offer evidence or testimony in
31 explanation or rebuttal.
32 (f)Any member of the hearing panel may call as a witness and question any interested party
33 who has competent, relevant and material comments about the matters contained within the
34 appeal.
35 (g) Members of the hearing panel may exclude and not factor into their decision any evidence,
36 testimony, or statements deemed incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial or unduly repetitious and
37 therefore fail to reasonable address the issues before the hearing panel.
38 (h) Within seven (7) days of the hearing the hearing panel shall issue a decision and cause that
39 decision to forward to the person making the appeal and all other interested parties.
40 (i) Appeal under Section 4-42 of this Chapter (Vicious Animals and Dangerous Dogs) shall be to
41 a three member hearing panel consisting of one member of the Animal Services Advisory
42 Board, who shall serve as Chair, and two members drawn from the remainder of the pool. At
43 least one member of the panel shall be from either the Town or County where the incident
44 occurred.
45
46 The Animal Services Advisory Board may make additional rules Board of County
47 Commissioners shall adopt a policy, which may be amended from time to time, governing the
48 appointment of appeals panel members and any additional processes necessary to carry out
49 appeals in fair and equitable manner. The Towns of Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Hillsborough
14
1 may appoint one person from their respective jurisdictions to serve in the pool of prospective
2 hearing board members. (Does not apply in the Town of Carrboro)
3
4 In addition to the changes made above, a separate document was created entitled
5 "Animal Services Appeal Board Policies and Procedures" (see attached) to include changes
6 made by the BOCC.
7 The Resolution of Adoption proposes an effective date of March 1, 2016 for the
8 proposed UAO. This timeframe allows for implementation of the public awareness plan in all of
9 the jurisdictions in which it would apply. A revised timetable for the public awareness plan is
10 attached.
11
12 Commissioner Dorosin referred to the section about the appeals panel, and asked for
13 clarification regarding what happens after the hearing. He asked if the person allegedly in
14 violation of the chapter can appeal to the District Court if need be.
15 Annette Moore said a dangerous dog complaint could be appealed to the District Court.
16 Commissioner Dorosin asked if there are other appeals heard by this panel would, that
17 would not have this provision.
18 Annette Moore said a nuisance issue or a kennel issue would not have the provision to
19 appeal to District Court.
20 John Roberts said if citizens wanted more relief, an injunction could be filed with the
21 court.
22 Commissioner Price referred to the appeals panel and expressed concern regarding the
23 consistency of decisions. She asked if the member of the Animal Services Advisory Board
24 (ASAB) serving on the appeals panel would remain the same for an extended period of time.
25 Annette Moore said all members of the appeals panel will receive the same training, and
26 there is more than one person from the ASAB that can sit on the panel.
27 Bob Marotto said on the current potentially dangerous dog appeal board, there is an
28 annual appointment to this board from members from the ASAB with primaries and alternates
29 chosen. He said there is consistency across the board, and he is sure this would be the same
30 for this new panel.
31 Commissioner Price referred to the issue of the sole discretion of the director and asked
32 if it is possible that an investigating officer, or an attorney, can sign off on decisions. She said
33 she is concerned with one person being solely responsible for this.
34 Annette Moore said that is why the appeals process exists. She said the director is
35 highly trained, and the animal control officers are under his/her direction. She said the director
36 is in the best position to make a decision. She said if an appeal is filed and the appeals panel
37 reaches a different conclusion, the director's decision can be overturned.
38 Bob Marotto said the director makes no decisions until a thorough investigation has
39 been completed. He said any conclusions drawn from investigations are reviewed several
40 times before the director makes a final decision. He said the nature of communication at Animal
41 Services, along with the appeals process, allows for great accountability and transparency.
42 Commissioner Price asked if the investigation report contains a recommendation from
43 the investing officer.
44 Bob Marotto said yes.
45
46 PUBLIC COMMENT:
47 Susan Elmore said she is a member of the ASAB, and the work on the revised
48 ordinance is for the Board's approval tonight. She said she wanted to remind the Board that the
49 original goal of this ordinance was to merge the three existing ordinances with the towns, to fill
50 any gaps, and to clarify legal language as needed. She noted that stakeholders have been
15
1 consulted throughout this process. She said she serves as Chair of the current appeals board,
2 and gave the example of an appeal of decisions regarding a dangerous dog citation from
3 Chapel Hill and Orange County. She said citizens do not understand why they have two
4 documents, and that is because the current system does not make sense. She said it is
5 extremely confusing, and the system is broken. She said it is unfair to citizens, and the ASAB
6 is looking forward to the new ordinance, noting it is not perfect but it is a living document.
7 She said the ASAB did have a concern about adding additional people from the townships, but
8 this is no longer a concern.
9 Maureane Hoffman is a new member of the ASAB, and she wanted to emphasize to the
10 Board how diligent the ASAB has been to meet its responsibilities. She said the ASAB is
11 advisor to the Board of County Commissioners as well as Animal Services.
12 Mike Stewart said five hearings were held in December, with another one expected this
13 week, and deep pools of volunteers will be needed to supply the appeals panel.
14 Commissioner Rich expressed thanks for all the work put into this project, but she still
15 has some concerns about page 28, which says attorneys can attend appeals but cannot be part
16 of the process. She said she is still not clear about this issue, asking if an attorney cannot be a
17 part of the process, why would one bring an attorney.
18 Annette Moore said a commissioner asked for the inclusion of this language, as it is
19 similar to the personnel ordinance requirements. She said an attorney can advise, but the
20 dynamics change when an attorney gets involved in the conversations.
21 Commissioner Pelissier said she is not clear about the description of the appeals panel,
22 asking if all members of the panel are residents of the County, why include the language that
23 says there will be a resident of the municipality or the County present.
24 Annette Moore said the goal is to have a panel member who is a citizen of the area
25 where the alleged incident occurred. She said this goal arose from the desire of the towns to
26 have representation of one who understands the town, and its values and culture.
27 Commissioner Pelissier asked what will happen if a person is not available from the
28 particular municipality. She asked if multiple people from each town would need to be available
29 to insure that one can serve in a timely fashion, or if using representatives from another town
30 may suffice.
31 Annette Moore said having a provision that allows for a resident of another town to serve
32 may be beneficial, allowing for an urban representation on the appeals board when the incident
33 has occurred in an urban setting.
34 Commissioner Pelissier asked if a member of Carrboro's panel could be available to
35 serve creating a greater pool of urban representation.
36 Annette Moore said it may not be wise to tell Carrboro from where they must pick a
37 person to serve. She said Carrboro wants to remain separate at this time, with the potential for
38 working together in the future.
39 Commissioner Pelissier said she would only propose adding in the last sentence of her
40 memo: "in the event that the representative of the Town in question is not available to serve
41 within the required period of time, a representative of one of the other towns will be selected."
42 Commissioner Dorosin asked if the intent is for the BOCC to adopt both the ordinance
43 and the panel policy this evening.
44 Annette Moore said yes.
45 Commissioner Dorosin referred to page 88 and suggested upping the numbers of the
46 pool. He said 12 members are currently listed, with the townships each appointing one
47 member, and three at-large members. He suggested that the townships each appoint three
48 people, and have six-at-large representatives.
49 Commissioner Dorosin said he is less persuaded about having an attorney attend an
50 appeals process, if the attorney cannot participate. He said as an attorney represents the
16
1 panel, thus the resident who is appealing should also be allowed representation. He would be
2 willing to open this up, and if it is determined that doing so undermines the process then the
3 decision can be revisited.
4 John Roberts said the panel is advised on procedure, but counsel does not represent
5 the department.
6 Commissioner Dorosin said if there is a Board of Adjustment (BOA) or a quasi-judicial
7 hearing, the applicant requesting a decision to be made is represented by an attorney, as is the
8 County. He said this example seems to be more analogous to tonight's discussion.
9 John Roberts said in a BOA hearing, the BOA has an attorney present to advise on
10 procedure. He said the Planning Department and the applicant may elect to hire an attorney to
11 pursue their interests.
12 John Roberts said the appeal hearings, under review this evening, are just
13 administrative and not quasi-judicial.
14 Chair McKee said since Commissioner Jacobs could not attend, he submitted the
15 following questions:
16 7a. Page 2, Appeals
17 • b) To be clear about the 5 days to appear and the 10 days to schedule a hearing, can
18 we make those business days?
19 • d) Can we please see the oath folks are asked to take, and does this have any real legal
20 value?
21 • i) Very inexact language, suggesting multiple counties might be involved, and leaves out
22 Mebane. I suggest : "At least one member of the panel shall be either from the town
23 where the owner resides, or from the non-municipal portion of Orange County, as
24 appropriate."
25 Annette Moore said if the language was changed to say business days, a new section
26 would have to be created in the ordinance for dangerous dog appeals versus the County's
27 appeals.
28 Chair McKee asked if changing the wording would have an adverse effect on the
29 County.
30 Annette Moore said the wording could not be changed for dangerous dog appeals as
31 the general statute sets that timetable.
32 Chair McKee said Commissioner Jacobs questioned if there is a reason why Mebane is
33 left out of the list of municipalities.
34 Annette Moore said Mebane has its own animal control.
35 Bob Marotto said the townships that are included in the policy are ones to whom his
36 department provides services. He said Mebane Township does not utilize services and
37 declined the invitation to participate in this current process.
38 Chair McKee said Commissioner Jacobs asked if the oath has any legal value.
39 John Roberts said the oath makes the process more formal, and it is a general oath to
40 tell the truth.
41 Annette Moore said the oath is included at the request of a commissioner.
42 Chair McKee said he is concerned about the attorney issue, noting that the entire
43 process is already adversarial. He suggested that this section be tweaked, and the wording be
44 "accompanied by a person of their choosing who may represent the person." He also
45 suggested including in writing the ability to appeal to the court.
46 Commissioner Pelissier asked if the Board could vote on each of the proposed
47 suggestions.
48 John Roberts said this would be acceptable.
49
17
1 A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
2 amend section 4-53c on page 31 to read, "a party alleged to be in violation of this chapter may
3 be represented by an individual of their choosing, including an attorney."
4
5 VOTE: Ayes, 4 (Chair McKee, Commissioner Dorosin, Commissioner Rich, Commissioner
6 Burroughs); Nayes, 2 (Commissioner Pelissier and Commissioner Price)
7
8 MOTION PASSES
9
10 A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs
11 to amend section IV— 1 c, on page 88, and to the corresponding ordinance (453i) to read, "In
12 the event that a representative of the town in question is not available to serve within the
13 required period of time, a representative of one of the other towns will be selected."
14
15 Commissioner Rich asked if this change would need to be taken back to the towns.
16 Annette Moore said staff would notify the towns about the change.
17 Commissioner Dorosin asked if a corresponding change to the ordinance would be
18 necessary.
19 Annette Moore said to add that same sentence to the end of section 453i as well.
20 Commissioner Pelissier said she would add this to her motion as well.
21
22 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
23
24 A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Price to
25 amend the policy, section 3b, on page 88 so that B1 reads that the animal services hearing
26 board is composed of 18 members (from 12); and amend section B2a to read that each of the
27 towns to have 2 members; and amend section B2d to read 6-at-large representatives, three of
28 which reside in the unincorporated.
29
30 Commissioner Burroughs said she understands it is challenging to find people to serve
31 in these roles, and asked if increasing the numbers will increase the burden.
32 Bob Marotto said the challenge is not finding people, but that many of the people are
33 employed full time and finding a time when all can meet is sometimes difficult.
34 Commissioner Pelissier said she has that same concern, but assumes if there are not
35 enough people willing to serve, the process would function with those who are willing to serve.
36 Annette Moore said yes.
37 Commissioner Rich asked if the balance will be affected, if all spots are not filled.
38 Bob Marotto advocated moving forward with the applicants that come in and review and
39 revise as necessary.
40
41 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
42
43 A motion was made by Chair McKee, seconded by Commissioner Price to add another
44 sentence to section 4-53, stating that any decision of the appeal panel may be appealed to the
45 District Court, or Superior Court of North Carolina, sitting in Orange County, or appealed as
46 otherwise provided by law.
47 John Roberts requested the ability to tweak the language of the motion, if necessary, to
48 accomplish the intent.
49 Chair McKee said his main concern is that this be a progressive, step-by-step
50 procedure, which insures that the ability to appeal to the court system is never prohibited.
18
1 Annette Moore said the language could be similar to that in the general statute
2 regarding dangerous dog appeals; thus the avenue to appeal is the same, regardless of that
3 which is being appealed.
4 Chair McKee said this is satisfactory.
5
6 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
7
8 Commissioner Rich asked if any changes are made to the ordinance in the future, will it
9 be brought to the Board of County Commissioners.
10 Annette Moore said if changes are necessary, community partners would be consulted
11 first, followed by the Board of County Commissioners, and then the Board of County
12 Commissioners would vote on any changes.
13 Commissioner Rich agreed and said this allows for ongoing positive relationships
14 between all stakeholders.
15
16 A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
17 adopt the proposed Unified Animal Control Ordinance with previously approved amendments
18 above, and approve the Resolution of Amendment "A Resolution Amending Chapter 4 of the
19 Orange County Code of Ordinances".
20
21 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
22
23 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Pelissier
24 to approve the Animal Services Hearing Panel Pool Policies and Procedures, with suggested
25 changes.
26
27 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
28
29 b. Mountains-to-Sea Trail — Master Plan for Segment 11
30 The Board considered a proposed process for the planning and identification/creation of
31 the Mountains-to-Sea Trail (MST) "Segment 11," from Occoneechee Mountain to the Alamance
32 County Line and providing input on the proposed plan for identifying, securing and building the
33 MST Segment 11.
34 David Stancil made the following PowerPoint presentation:
35
36 Proposed Process for "MST Segment 11"
37 January 21, 2016
38
39 Mountains to Sea Trail (MST)
40 Mountains to Sea Trail-
41 -Part of the N.C. State Parks System
42 -NC/TN Border to Outer Banks
43 Some MST Segments (mainly State and federal lands, city greenways) Currently Exist
44 Eastern Piedmont Segment— Challenging
45 • Moderate to Heavily-Populated
46 • Cross-Country Segments, Crossing River Basin Ridges
47
48 MST "Segment 11"
49 • Begins at Alamance/Orange Line (Haw River)
50 • Ends Occoneechee Mtn State Natural Area
19
1 • Would connect Haw River Trail to Hillsborough Riverwalk and Eno River State Pk
2
3 The Phases of Building a Trail (from the MST Master Plan)
4 • Visioning (completed)
5 • Planning
6 • Design and Construction
7 • Opening
8 • Maintenance and Operations
9
10 The Task Before Us
11 TRAIL PLANNING
12 Identify/refine corridor
13 Solidify partnerships
14 Involve the community
15 Identify funding strategies
16 DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION
17 Refine alignment/design
18 Work with landowners
19 Acquire permits and approvals
20 Construct the trail
21
22 The Proposed Process
23 Invite stakeholders and public to series of community meetings to:
24 Learn about what the MST is/isn't
25 Discuss the task and identify issues/challenges
26 Map a route (or alternative routes)
27 Complete a plan and move to construction
28
29 Who Should Be Involved
30 • Landowners Along the Corridor
31 • Interested Residents
32 • OWASA
33 • Friends of the MST (FMST)
34 • State Parks
35 • NC DOT
36 • County Departments (DEAPR, Planning, ES, Sheriff)
37
38 Possible Next Steps
39 • Complete information gathering
40 • Notify stakeholders
41 • Schedule first community meeting (February?)
42
43 PUBLIC COMMENT:
44 John Silva read the following letter:
45
46 Orange County Commissioners Thursday January 21, 2016
47 Opposition to the Mountain-to-Sea Trail through the Cane Creek Watershed
48
20
1 If a motion is being considered this evening for segment 11 of the Mountain-to-Sea Trail, which
2 would go through Bingham Township, the Thunder Mt. (TM), Mitchell Mt. (MM) communities in
3 the Cane Creek Watershed, I respectfully request a tabling of the motion.
4
5 The residents of TM and MM, the two communities in the township most impacted by such a
6 motion, did not know a motion was being considered, and did not have an opportunity to review
7 and discuss the motion. Just yesterday (January 21, 2016), Phil Duckwall and Brenda McCall
8 of MM and Christine and John Silva of TM became aware that a request to reconsider the Cane
9 Creek Watershed area has been initiated by a couple of individuals including one person who is
10 not even a resident of either TT or MM (a Mr. Green). This process was not done in a
11 democratic manner and was not open to TM and MM residents.
12
13 A few years ago a similar attempt to locate a Mountain-to-Sea Trail through the TM and MM
14 communities was vigorously opposed by the Citizens United to Protect the Cane Creek
15 Watershed and this group will once again vigorously oppose any attempt to run the trail through
16 the rural communities and the Cane Creek watershed. I am not opposed to the concept of the
17 Mountain-to-Sea Trail. I have personally hiked the Appalachian Trail from Northern Virginia to
18 Maine.
19
20 I propose that the Orange County Commissioners require the presentation of alternate trail
21 routes for segment 11 of the Mountain-to-Sea Trail that do not go through the TM and MM
22 communities. It is my understanding that one alternate option would allow Orange County the
23 immediate ability to put the Seven Mile Creek area (and points north and east) into service and
24 continue the Mountain-to-Sea Trail on its current route along 1-85. That brings immediate value
25 to Orange County residents and connects existing recreational areas and trails - including trails
26 into Hillsborough and to the Mountain-to-Sea statewide trail. I am sure other viable routes can
27 be determined that will be embraced by impacted residents or have minimal impact on sensitive
28 residential and watershed areas. Thank you.
29
30 Respectfully submitted,
31 John M. Silva
32 Thunder Mt.
33 35-year Orange County Resident
34
35 Christine Silva said she is a long-time Orange County resident, and she is opposed to
36 having the MST behind her neighborhood. She recognizes that there are people in her
37 neighborhood that do desire the trail, but she hopes all opinions will be respected. She
38 advocates for moving forward with the trail systems that already exist in Orange County, and
39 using potential MST funds for the many other needs that exist in Orange County.
40 Allan Green said he had sent a letter to Commissioner Dorosin in response to a
41 previous discussion regarding the MST. He said a group of local residents on Thunder Mt. met
42 to put together a plan for this section of the MST, but found out their plan is redundant in
43 comparison to the Department of Environment Agriculture Parks and Recreation's (DEAPR)
44 excellent plan. He asked them to support getting the master plan completed in the first half of
45 2016 and to being work on the trail by the end of 2016.
46 Allan Green referred to a document from Charles Gregory Smith at the November
47 meeting, which was a description of the support for the trail from some of the Thunder Mountain
48 residents. He noted that the five landowners closest to the proposed MST are in favor of it.
49 Kate Dixon is the Executive Director of the Friends of the MTS, and she appreciates the
50 Board's support for the plan. She reviewed the history and current status of the MTS.
21
1 Chair McKee noted that no decisions are to be made this evening rather this is an
2 opportunity for an update. He said no formal decisions are expected until May 2016.
3 Commissioner Price said asked if funds are currently available to move forward with the
4 trail.
5 David Stancil said funds for the acquisition of trail easements are available now, and he
6 said the current Capital Investment Plan (CIP) has the funding for construction in 2018. He
7 said this funding is being reviewed in preparation of the new CIP. He noted that the Friends of
8 the MST will do a lot of the construction.
9 Commissioner Pelissier said the stakeholders include landowners, and asked if all of the
10 landowners in the one-mile swath have been notified about the community meetings.
11 David Stancil said those residents, as well as many more outside of the one-mile swath,
12 will be notified of the community meetings.
13 Commissioner Pelissier asked if the landowners will get a specific letter.
14 David Stancil said yes.
15 Commissioner Pelissier asked if an individual does not want to donate land, will there be
16 any imminent domain.
17 David Stancil said no; the process is entirely voluntary.
18 David Stancil asked if the Board would like DEAPR to proceed as indicated.
19 Chair McKee said the Board is in support of this.
20 Commissioner Pelissier asked if more detailed maps can be provided.
21 David Stancil said yes.
22
23 c. Creation of a Criminal Case Assessment Specialist Position
24 The Board considered voting to approve the creation of a new 1.0 full time equivalent
25 (FTE) position titled Criminal Case Assessment Specialist to conduct mental health and
26 substance abuse assessments and treatment coordination for individuals in the jail and those
27 who are participating in jail alternative programming.
28 Travis Myren and Caitlin Fenhagen, Orange County Criminal Justice Resource
29 Manager, reviewed the following information:
30
31 BACKGROUND: In October 2015, the County appointed its first Criminal Justice Resource
32 Manager to manage and coordinate jail alternative programming. The vision for the new
33 Manager was to internalize jail alternative programming that had previously been contracted out
34 and to broaden opportunities for jail diversion and interventions intended to reduce recidivism.
35 The new office has recently completed its initial charge of internalizing the Pretrial and Drug
36 Court programs through the recruitment of two new County employees to administer those
37 programs.
38
39 The Criminal Justice Resource Manager has also conducted a needs assessment for future
40 programming. This research relied on best practices in other jurisdictions as well as interviews
41 with partners in the Orange County criminal justice system. The assessment revealed a need
42 to supplement and enhance assessment and treatment services for individuals in the system
43 that are experiencing mental health and substance abuse issues. This need is consistent with
44 a policy goal of the Board of County Commissioners as codified in a Resolution Supporting
45 "Stepping Up Initiative to Reduce the Number of People with Mental Illnesses in Jails" which
46 was adopted in September 2015. Through that Resolution, the Board signed on to a call to
47 action to reduce the number of people with mental illness in county jails and to share lessons
48 learned with other counties in North Carolina.
49
22
1 One of the strategies identified to satisfy the need for enhanced mental health and substance
2 abuse services in the criminal justice system is to create a position responsible for providing
3 these services. In an effort to promote pretrial release, the position would conduct evaluations,
4 assessments, and referrals for treatment for individuals awaiting trial or disposition of criminal
5 charges. These additional services would provide greater assurance to the judiciary that
6 individuals can safely remain in or return to the community while accessing necessary treatment
7 resources. Allowing an individual to remain in the community will increase employment stability,
8 avoid disruptions in treatment and education, preserve family stability, and as a result, reduce
9 the likelihood of re-arrest. For individuals participating in the pretrial release program, the
10 position will also provide case management support in treatment or diversionary programs with
11 the expectation that this higher level of therapeutic support will increase successful outcomes in
12 these programs and reduce recidivism.
13
14 Finally, this position will support inmates remaining in the jail with counseling for ongoing mental
15 health issues and will create discharge plans for those being released. The goal of these
16 efforts is to promote immediate engagement in community resources upon release in an effort
17 to reduce rates of recidivism.
18
19 Funding for this position will be supported through reimbursement from Cardinal Innovations.
20 Annually, the County provides maintenance of effort funding to Cardinal Innovations to support
21 selected mental health, substance abuse, and intellectual/developmental disability services. In
22 Fiscal Year 15-16, Orange County allocated $1.3 million to its maintenance of effort payment,
23 which includes a $107,500 reserve to support unforeseen needs. The County would use
24 $31,200 of this reserve to finance the costs associated with Criminal Case Assessment
25 Specialist. The position started in January as an un-benefited, temporary position but would be
26 converted to a full time, benefitted position upon approval by the Board of County
27 Commissioners.
28
29 FINANCIAL IMPACT: The expenses for the Criminal Case Assessment Specialist are
30 estimated to be $31,200. This includes funding for a temporary position for 60 days and
31 funding for a full time, benefitted position for the balance of the fiscal year. These costs would
32 be fully offset by reimbursement from Cardinal Innovations of$31,200, resulting in no net cost
33 to the County.
34
35 Commissioner Dorosin asked Caitlen Fenhagen if she could clarify how she and the
36 Criminal Case Assessment Specialist will interact.
37 Caitlen Fenhagen said this person will be in her office, and will be working to insure that
38 those with mental health needs within drug court and pretrial services do not get overlooked.
39 She added that this position will work closely with the jails, and has the full support of the jail
40 administrators to conduct limited mental health assessments when offenders enter the jail.
41 Commissioner Pelissier said all the stakeholders are very committed to these new
42 positions.
43
44 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Price for the
45 Board to approve the creation of a 1.0 FTE Criminal Case Assessment Specialist, and accept
46 revenue from Cardinal Innovations to offset the cost of the position.
47
48 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
49
50 8. Reports
23
1
2 a. Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice
3 The Board received a report and considered voting to approve the FY 2015-2020
4 Analysis of Impediments to fair housing choice, and authorizing the Manager to certify the
5 necessary documents.
6 Audrey Spencer Horsley, Orange County Housing, Human Rights, and Community
7 Development Department Director, reviewed the following information:
8
9 BACKGROUND: As the lead agency of the Orange County HOME Consortium, the County
10 administers funding allocated through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
11 Development's (HUD's) HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME). The County also
12 occasionally receives Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. As such, the
13 County is a Participating Jurisdiction (PJ). In addition to the allocation of these block grants, the
14 County's Housing, Human Rights and Community Development Department operates as a
15 Public Housing Authority (PHA) through its administration of the federal Housing Choice
16 Voucher program. All PJ's and PHA's are required to engage in activities that "affirmatively
17 further fair housing". To meet this long-standing obligation, the County completes and submits
18 an Analysis of Impediments (A.I.) to identify barriers to fair housing choice and for planning an
19 approach to take meaningful actions to overcome these barriers. This analysis is completed
20 every five (5) years, consistent with the County's quinquennial submission of its Consolidated
21 Plan for Affordable Housing.
22
23 The County's objectives parallel HUD's objectives to:
24 • Promote fair housing choice for all persons;
25 • Provide opportunities for inclusive patterns of housing occupancy regardless of race, color,
26 religion, sex, familial status, disability and national origin;
27 • Promote housing that is structurally accessible to, and usable by, all persons, particularly
28 persons with disabilities; and
29 • Foster compliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of the Fair Housing Act. A draft A.I.
30 was made available for public comment beginning Friday, August 14, 2015 and continuing until
31 5 p.m. on Monday, September 14, 2015. Electronic copies of the draft plan were available to
32 the public via the County's website. Hardcopies were made available at the County's
33 Department of Housing, Human Rights and Community Development, the Townships of
34 Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Hillsborough, the Chapel Hill Public Library and each branch
35 of the Orange County Public Library. In addition, a newspaper posting soliciting
36 comments was issued in the News of Orange, the Durham Herald Sun and La Noticia,
37 a Spanish bi-lingual newspaper. There were additional surveys returned by non-English
38 speaking community members and one public comment received. These surveys and
39 the public comment were inserted in the Final A.I., which is available on-line at the
40 following URL:
41 http://www.orangecountync.gov/departments/hhrcd/Final_Orange_County_2015_Al.pdf
42
43 Commissioner Pelissier referred to page 5 of the summary hand-out from Audrey
44 Spencer-Horsley, and asked why more than one person per room is considered a housing
45 problem.
46 Audrey Spencer Horsley said she can get the definition and reasoning for one person
47 per room and report back to the Board.
48 Commissioner Pelissier referred to impediment#5 on page 6, that notes a need to
49 improve public policies that affirmatively further fair housing, and asked if there are any
24
1 examples or ideas of what this may be for the County. She asked if this document covers the
2 towns as well as the County.
3 Audrey Spencer Horsley said the document does cover the towns as well. She said
4 flexible land use and zoning policies would be an example of addressing housing needs. She
5 said this summary does not contain many examples, but the full document does.
6 Commissioner Dorosin said there are two separate issues: providing affordable
7 housing, but also to affirmatively further fair housing. He said the summary is very troubling.
8
9 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
10 approve the Orange County 2015-2020 Analysis of Impediments, and authorize the Manager to
11 certify the same.
12
13 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
14
15 Bonnie Hammersley asked Audrey Spencer-Horsley if the numbers include students.
16 Audrey Spencer-Horsley said no.
17
18 9. County Manager's Report
19 Bonnie Hammersley said in the Board's agenda packet, under Information Items, is a
20 new budget schedule, including her presentation of the annual budget May 5th, which is two
21 weeks earlier than normal.
22
23 10. County Attorney's Report
24 NONE
25
26 11. Appointments
27
28 a. Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee—Appointment
29 The Board considered making an appointment to the Adult Care Home Community
30 Advisory Committee.
31
32 A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Price to
33 appoint the following to the Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee:
34
35 Appointment of Willian Lang to a one year training term (Position #9) At-Large expiring
36 01/21/2017.
37
38 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
39
40 b. Arts Commission —Appointment
41 The Board considered making an appointment to the Arts Commission.
42
43 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
44 appoint the following to the Arts Commission:
45
46 Appointment of Jen Rogers to a first full term (position #1) At-Large expiring 03/31/2018.
47
48 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
49
50 12. Board Comments
25
1
2 Commissioner Pelissier had no comments.
3 Commissioner Price had no comments.
4 Commissioner Dorosin had no comments.
5 Commissioner Burroughs complimented the Adult Care Home Community Advisory
6 Committee, noting she has recently experienced their excellent work firsthand. She hopes the
7 Board can advocate supporting this Committee and its work.
8 Commissioner Rich said Robert Seymour spoke at their Visitor's Bureau meeting, where
9 he shared many great ideas. She said the Visitor's Bureau is doing well.
10 Commissioner Rich asked if any follow up is done with citizens that share public
11 comments at meetings, and asked if they are informed when topics are going to recur in
12 agendas.
13 Chair McKee said he has asked staff to draw up an OpEd on the revaluation for media
14 blitz. He encouraged the Board to forward any other ideas for publicity of the revaluation to the
15 Manager.
16
17 13. Information Items
18 • December 15, 2015 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List
19 • Tax Collector's Report— Numerical Analysis
20 • Tax Collector's Report— Measure of Enforced Collections
21 • Tax Assessor's Report — Releases/Refunds under $100
22 • Memo from County Manager Regarding Budget Schedule Changes
23 • Memo Regarding Health in All Policies Pilot Project with Criminal Justice Resource
24 Office and Jail Alternatives Work
25 • BOCC Chair Letter Regarding Petitions from December 15, 2015 Regular Meeting
26
27 14. Closed Session
28
29 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Price to
30 go into closed Session at 10:45 p.m. for the purpose of:
31
32 "143-318.11(a)(3) To consult with an attorney employed or retained by the public body in order
33 to preserve the attorney-client privilege between the attorney and the public body, which
34 privilege is hereby acknowledged. In re Sloane."
35
36 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
37
38 RECONVENE INTO REGULAR SESSION
39
40 A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
41 reconvene back into regular session at 11:05 p.m.
42
43 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
44
45 15. Adjournment
46
47 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to
48 adjourn the meeting at 11:05 p.m.
49
50 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
26
1
2 Earl McKee, Chair
3
4 Donna Baker
5 Clerk to the Board
6
1
1 Attachment 3
2
3 DRAFT MINUTES
4 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
5 ANNUAL PLANNING RETREAT
6 TOP OF THE HILL GREAT ROOM
7 January 29. 2016
8 9:00 a.m.
9
10 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for their annual Board retreat on Friday,
11 January 29, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. at Top of the Hill Great Room in Chapel Hill, N.C.
12
13 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair McKee and Commissioners Mia Burroughs,
14 Mark Dorosin, Barry Jacobs, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich
15 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
16 COUNTY ATTORNEY 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.
19 FACILITATOR: Andy Sachs, Dispute Settlement Center
20
21 Department Heads: Gayle Wilson, Dwane Brinson, Janet Sparks, Janice Tyler, Tracy Reams,
22 Dave Stancil, Steve Brantley, Craig Benedict, Jeff Thompson, Greg Wilder, Jim Northup, Audrey
23 Spencer-Horsley, Brenda Bartholomew, Nancy Coston, Gary Donaldson
24
25 1. Welcome and Agenda Review
26 A subcommittee of the Board composed of Commissioner Burroughs, Commissioner
27 Pelissier, and Commissioner Rich developed the program for the retreat, supported by the
28 County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Deputy County Manager Travis Myren, County Clerk
29 Donna Baker, and facilitator Andy M. Sachs.
30 Andrew Sachs reviewed the agenda and desired outcome, which is for the Board of
31 County Commissioners to have goals and priorities to inform budget decisions for July 2016-
32 June 30, 2017.
33
34 Desired Outcomes:
35 Goals and priorities to inform budget decisions for July 1, 2016—June 30, 2017
36
37 Retreat Discussion and Decision Making Guidelines
38 Andy Sachs reviewed the guidelines for the day's retreat.
39 • Begin and end on time
40 • Listen attentively to each other
41 • One speaker at a time
42 • Stick to the tasks and topics that are on the agenda
43 • Share the floor with each other
44 • It is OK to disagree with each other...please do so respectfully
45 • Decide together
46
47 2. Administration's Strategic Initiatives
48 The first substantive discussion at the retreat addressed the County administration's
49 strategic initiatives. Prior to the retreat, Board members reviewed internal and external needs,
50 which had been identified by department directors through a process facilitated by the County
2
1 Manager's Office. Board members were asked to arrive at the retreat with any questions,
2 insights, concerns, or other thoughts regarding these results.
3 Commissioner Burroughs asked if the community colleges played a role in the
4 administration's strategic priorities for employment.
5 Travis Myren said a Durham Tech representative participated in the Human Services
6 and Education team. The team talked through some of the challenges that exist to accessing
7 Durham Tech, especially with regard to transportation (which is a huge barrier), and potential
8 job readiness work with which Durham Tech could help the County. Durham Teach already
9 operates classes on site with the County, and staff is hoping there will be more of that shortly.
10 The team also discussed a community college tuition scholarship program provided by Durham
11 County.
12 Commissioner Burroughs said that she was glad to hear that the community college is
13 being kept clearly in the administration's mind.
14 Commissioner Dorosin said that he appreciated the list of internal priorities in the
15 Manager's report. While the Commissioners are aware of internal issues, such as wage
16 compression and technology, the Board tends to focus its attention on external matters. He
17 said he is interested in thinking more about how internal priorities affect the external ones. He
18 said he is also interested in hearing how adequate, clear, and helpful the direction from the
19 Board is to the staff from the staff's perspective. He said he was pleased to see that quality of
20 work life was rated highly in the administration's priorities, and he is excited to see the creation
21 of cross-department teams. He said he is curious about where the Social Justice goals fit in.
22 Bonnie Hammersley said that it is new and important for the County to address internal
23 priorities in this strategic, cross-departmental manner, and that over time as the internal
24 priorities are addressed they will become more routine and stronger foundations for the external
25 priorities. She said she does quarterly information sessions with all employees. She said she is
26 seeing that the internal issues —the morale and compression issues —are strong. These are
27 the issues the Board has hired her to address. She said her goal for the organization is that
28 over time the employees will be even more focused externally; we are public servants and we
29 should be serving the public.
30 Bonnie Hammersley said in her last position in Michigan they had been implementing
31 across the board cuts since 2008, but when you do that over and over again you wind up
32 hurting the essential services of government. She said she used this strategic priority setting
33 process there to engage the department heads in the decision making process. She said as
34 she went through that for five years, she realized that this was a sustainable model that also
35 could be used in jurisdictions where cuts were not happening, because there never are enough
36 resources to do all the things you want to do.
37 Commissioner Dorosin said he hoped that in the same way the administration is asking
38 the staff to cross-silos in setting priorities that the internal and external silos will get crossed.
39 Bonnie Hammersley said that the model she is using is conducive to that. She
40 Hammersley added that the Board's social justice goals apply to the work of all of the functional
41 leadership teams.
42 Travis Myren said that Goal 4 could be thought of as a broad category into which many
43 of the internal concerns of the County government might be placed.
44 Commissioner Jacobs said that there are County priorities that are assumed, for
45 example, making government more accessible to the public, and raising and maintaining an
46 environmental awareness —which might be better served if made explicit. He said staff's work
47 has given us the integuments of what it is that we are, he said, and it is up to us now to flesh
48 that out.
49 Commissioner Pelissier asked if the department heads felt that the Board's current goals
50 are not clear.
3
1 Travis Myren said that the goals are wide ranging and broad, and it would be helpful to
2 the staff for the Board to identify prioritized policy initiatives through today's process.
3 Bonnie Hammersley added that she shares responsibility with the Board to provide that
4 sort of clear direction to the staff, and that this retreat process should help.
5
6 3. Brainstorm Board Priorities through June 30, 2016
7 • Prior to the retreat, at the request of the planning committee, Board members reviewed the
8 then-current set of Board goals and priorities (six goals with accompanying priorities
9 adopted September 2009 plus a set of five Social Justice goals adopted in September
10 2010,) and agreed to use those two sets of goals as the initial framework at the retreat for
11 generating new priorities.
12 • The Board worked in pairs and triads to flesh out ideas. The ideas were documented on
13 post-it notes and stuck to walls for the next step in process.
14
15 4. Clarify the Ideas
16 • The Board members approached wall(s) upon which post-its were affixed, read the ideas,
17 generated additional ideas on post-its if stimulated to do so, ask and answer questions,
18 cluster similar ideas together and/or under existing-goal headings.
19
20 • The Board then reconvened in full group for discussion:
21 o Make sure all Board members understand all the ideas in the same way.
22 o Any questions about any of the ideas?
23 o Anyone want to elaborate on any ideas?
24 o Any revisions needed to conform ideas to a one-year implementation timeframe?
25
26 • Discussion shifted to the analytical: identify relationships across the ideas and between
27 ideas and the current goals: Any contradictions? Any clear time-sequences? Any
28 redundancies? Any nesting/subsuming of ideas into others needed? Do all the ideas fit
29 under at least one of the current goals or might new goal statements be needed? Are there
30 ideas that do not need further prioritizing by the Board because Board already is committed
31 to it (e.g., it's in progress)?
32
33 5. Choose from Among the Ideas
34 • Each Commissioner lobbied for his/her top ideas (no numerical limit): "Why I think these
35 should be our priorities."
36 • A non-binding poll of group preferences was conducted (each person can choose up to n/3
37 priorities, where n = the number of ideas on the menu; no "passion-piling:" vote once per
38 idea). Poll for priorities, within one goal at a time.
39
40 Discussion points
41 Commissioner Rich suggested putting information on goals/priorities on web.
42 Commissioner Jacobs said there must be talk about land use with other governments.
43 Chair McKee said his concern that the Board is relying too heavily on Morinaga. He said
44 the Board should focus on a lot of issues.
45 Commissioner Burroughs said it is critical to support the values of Orange County and
46 that would be through economic development.
47 Commissioner Jacobs said agriculture could be added into the economic development
48 conversation. He said no one has mentioned affordability and how to pay for the social agenda,
49 which will require fiscal discipline.
4
1 Chair McKee proposed, and there appeared to be general agreement, that the Board
2 shall hold a work session in the future on economic development strategies. The following
3 points were recorded during the Board's discussion about the work session:
4
5 • Address land use with other governments
6 • Address agriculture
7 • Keep it at a high level of discussion; not too finely detailed
8 • Economic development is how we pay for all the other priorities we've identified today.
9 • Need for Board members to get on the same page regarding what we want with regard
10 to economic development
11 • Get a status update on the County's economic development districts
12 • Use the work session to appreciate the wide interests and different perspectives we
13 have with regard to economic development
14 • Use the work session to identify opportunities we have to work with other jurisdictions to
15 advance our economic development goal and priorities.
16
17 Choosing from the ideas continued...
18 • The Board revised the menu of options based on group discussion of first poll results, and
19 conducted a "binding" poll on that new menu (vote for n/3 again). The Board defined its
20 priorities under each Goal, according to the number of Commissioners in support of each
21 candidate priority (from 7 to zero).
22 • The Board developed the following policy priorities to inform the County Manager's
23 formulation of budget recommendations, initiatives, and work plans for coming fiscal year.
24 Commissioner Rich suggested that in the coming year Board agenda items be tied
25 explicitly to one or more of the Board's goals and priorities in the agenda abstract, so that the
26 goals and priorities are not forgotten.
27
28 Goal 1: Ensure a community network of basic human services and infrastructure that
29 maintains, protects, and promotes the well-being of all county residents.
30
31 AFFORDABLE HOUSING (5 VOTES)
32 • Decent, standard housing options for all residents regardless of household income
33 level.
34 • Funds to develop targeted number of units (set numerical goal).
35 • Especially rentals
36 • Develop explicit plan to inform bond expenditures and other BOCC affordable
37 housing funding.
38
39 FAMILY SUCCESS ALLIANCE (3 VOTES)
40 • Additional support to expand FSA
41 • All County departments coordinate with efforts of FSA
42
43 COMMUNITY CENTERS (3 VOTES)
44 • Decentralize community resources through community centers
45 • Provide food, hot meals, and essential services to residents in need.
46 • Complete Cedar Grove community center and look for ways to extend services into
47 all community centers.
48
49 NON-PROFIT FUNDING (1 VOTE)
5
1 • Review process and adequacy of dollar amount.
2
3 AGING/MENTAL HEALTH (1 VOTE)
4 • Convening including state legislators on serious gaps in quality and quantity of long-
5 term senior care, especially low-income seniors.
6 • Thorough review of services from Cardinal.
7
8 TRANSPORTATION (1 VOTE)
9 • Identify initiatives or ways to leverage current programs to help break cycle of
10 poverty
11 • Employment as articulated by staff(crossed with transportation as relevant).
12 • Survey of unmet transportation needs for education and employment needs of low
13 income residents, used to prioritize additional services.
14
15 Goal 2: Promote an interactive and transparent engaging system of governance that
16 reflects community values.
17 [The Board agreed to find a synonym for"transparent"because it is "buzzword." "Engaging"
18 appeared to be an acceptable substitute word for"transparent.7.
19
20 OUTREACH/INTERNET ACCESS (3 VOTES)
21 • Continue upgrades to IT and explore new outreach methods, including old school
22 methods, use of multiple language efforts.
23 • Expand internet access through County hotspots or incentives to private parties.
24
25 CLUSTER (2 VOTES)
26 • Human answering phone
27 • Rumor page— stop bad information flow
28 • Make the website functional
29 • Communicate what a County Commission does
30
31 INTERGOVERNMENTAL FUNDING FORMULA (2 VOTES)
32 Will save tons of staff time and political angst if accomplished.
33
34 INCREASE DIVERSITY ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS (0 VOTES)
35
36 Goal 3 —Implement planning and economic development policies which create a
37 balanced, dynamic local economy, and which promote diversity, sustainable growth, and
38 enhanced revenue while embracing community values.
39
40 PARTNERSHIPS (2 VOTES)
41 • Reinvigorate joint planning with neighbors
42 • Partnerships with other governments, staff, and residents.
43
44 CLUSTER (2 VOTES)
45 • Clarify what types of development are wanted and what infrastructure is needed
46 • Increase in the number of living wage jobs or opportunities for gainful employment
47 (salaried positions) and options.
48
49 CLUSTER (2 VOTES)
50 • Continue good work to fund priorities in other goals.
6
1 • Target small business loan/grant fund to identified needs (i.e., childcare).
2
3 REVISIT COUNTY FAIR (0 VOTES)
4 • also goes with Goal 6
5
6 Goal 4—Invest in quality County facilities, a diverse work force, and technology to
7 achieve a high performing County government.
8
9 HOUSING LIVING WAGE FOR ORANGE COUNTY STAFF (4 VOTES)
10
11 SUPPORT THE MANAGER'S INTERNAL STRATEGIC INITIATIVES TO ENSURE
12 QUALITY IMPLEMENTATIONN OF ALL KEY PRIORITIES (3 VOTES)
13
14 IDENTIFY DEFINITE FACILITY NEEDS OR CONSOLIDATIONS (0 VOTES)
15
16 HONOR HISTORICAL CONTEXT IN DECISIONS AND COMMUNICATION (0 VOTES)
17 [During discussion of this item, prior to the group's voting, the Manager committed to
18 implementing this idea when preparing agenda abstracts]
19 • Institutional memory (internal)
20 • County's cultural heritage
21
22 Goal 5 —Create, preserve, and protect a natural environment that includes clean water,
23 clean air, wildlife, important natural lands, and sustainable energy for present and future
24 generations.
25
26 INCLUDE LOCAL AGRICULTURE AS KEY TO UNMENTIONED "OPEN SPACE." (6
27 VOTES)
28
29 DEVELOP PLAN FOR RESIDENTS AND FARMERS AND BUSINESSES TO
30 PREPARE FOR AND ADJUST TO EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE (1 VOTE)
31
32 BEGIN PLANNING RE: WATER RESOURCES AS ORANGE COUNTY CONTINUES
33 TO GROW AND DEVELOP (0 VOTES)
34
35
36 Goal 6 —Ensure a high quality of life and lifelong learning that champions diversity,
37 education at all levels, libraries, parks, recreation, and animal welfare.
38
39 EDUCATION: AT-RISK CHILDREN (5 votes)
40 • Increase support to expand pre-kindergarten services
41 • Continue to close the achievement gaps and end the school to prison pipeline.
42
43 CONNECT STUDENTS TO COMMUNITY COLLEGES (4 VOTES)
44
45 MOVE TOWARD A JOINT EFFORT WITH TOWNS ON PARKS AND TRAILS
46 DEVELOPMENT (2 VOTES)
47
48 INCREASE COLLABORATION BETWEEN SCHOOL DISTRICTS (1 VOTE)
49
50 BOND (1 VOTE)
7
1 • Smooth bond process for educational facilities (and for affordable housing per goal
2 1)
3 • Identify criteria for bond referendum projects— schools and housing.
4
5 FUND K-12 AND COMMUNITY COLLEGES AT LEAST AT 2015-16 LEVELS (1 VOTE)
6
7 Social Justice Goals:
8 • Foster a community culture that rejects oppression and inequity.
9 • Ensure economic self-sufficiency.
10 • Create a safe community.
11 • Establish sustainable and equitable land use and environmental policies.
12 • Enable full civic participation.
13
14 CLUSTER (7 VOTES)
15 • More aggressive social agenda
16 • Bridge diverse cultural populations and values.
17
18 Other Priorities:
19 INTERNAL BOARD RELATIONS (4 votes)
20 • Communication and conflict resolution among Board members generally, including
21 how members' petitions are processed/move forward.
22
23 MORE EFFICIENT (SHORTER) BOCC MEETINGS (2 VOTES)
24
25 Connections Across the Goals
26 The Board members noted that substantive connections could be made across different goals,
27 and identified the following three crosscutting themes:
28
29 1. Aggressive Social Agenda — Board members said that Goals 1, 6, and the Social Justice
30 Goals contain the following priorities, which fit under this theme:
31 • Increase support to expand pre-kindergarten services.
32 • Continue to close the achievement gaps and end the school to prison pipeline.
33 • Additional support to expand FSA.
34 • All County departments coordinate with efforts of FSA.
35 • More aggressive social agenda.
36
37 2. Addressing Poverty— Board members said that Goals 1, 4, and 6 contain the following
38 priorities, which fit under this theme. Some of these priorities address poverty
39 prevention and some are intended to reduce the suffering that results from poverty.
40 • Decent, standard housing options for all residents regardless of household income
41 level.
42 • Funds to develop targeted number of[affordable housing] units.
43 • Especially [affordable housing] rentals
44 • Develop explicit plan to inform bond expenditures and other BOCC affordable
45 housing funding.
46 • Review process and adequacy of dollar amount.
47 • Convening including state legislators on serious gaps in quality and quantity of long
48 term senior care, especially low-income seniors.
49 • Thorough review of services from Cardinal.
8
1 • Identify initiatives or ways to leverage current programs to help break cycle of
2 poverty
3 • Employment as articulated by staff(crossed with transportation as relevant).
4 • Survey of unmet transportation needs for education and employment needs of low
5 income residents, used to prioritize additional services.
6 • Housing living wage for orange county staff.
7 • Connect students to community colleges.
8
9 3. Housing — Board members said that Goals 1 and 4 contain the following priorities that fit
10 under this theme, as follows:
11 • Decent, standard housing options for all residents regardless of household income
12 level.
13 • Funds to develop targeted number of[affordable housing] units (set numerical goal).
14 • Especially [affordable housing] rentals
15 • Develop explicit plan to inform bond expenditures and other BOCC affordable
16 housing funding.
17 • Housing living wage for orange county staff.
18
19 6. Wrap Up
20 Board members were asked to evaluate the retreat in their final thoughts before
21 adjourning:
22
23 Commissioner Pelissier said the pace of the day was good, and the voting process was
24 a very good method to clearly identify each Commissioner's thoughts, and allow for discussion.
25 Chair McKee said he liked this process a lot, as it helped him to focus. He said seeing
26 other Commissioners' ideas written down was informative. He added that the voting process
27 gave him a chance to see other's priorities without having to argue back and forth, or feel like
28 raising his hand would leave him as the outlier.
29 Commissioner Burroughs said she liked that the meeting began by meshing this process
30 with the staff process. She would recommend to next year's retreat committee that this be done
31 again, even more effectively. She said she liked the way the tasks were set up in advance, as
32 well as the on the spot facilitation; and she would like to see this again in the future.
33 Commissioner Jacobs said he did not find the pre-meeting instructions at all clear, but
34 thought that the meeting itself was fine. He thought the facilitator did a good job, and found
35 meeting space was acceptable but he wished that separately packaged creamers were not
36 used, which just increases the waste. He wished there had been a receptacle into which one
37 could place paper for recycling. He said he would have liked for there to have been a free-for-
38 all session, where the Board could bring up ideas that did not necessarily fit any of the goals,
39 and where the facilitator did manage the discussion, allowing for more of a human interaction.
40 Commissioner Rich said she like the meeting facility, as it allowed a change of scenery.
41 She also liked that the goals were change on the "fly". She said word-smithing would happen
42 later, and appreciated the updating of some of the goals. She said the Clerk did a great job
43 ordering food, and making sure that they were all taken care of. She liked the voting process,
44 but sometimes felt unsure as to which idea to put her sticker on. She agreed with
45 Commissioner Dorosin that ultimately priorities are not being eliminated, but rather put in a list
46 of those which received the most dots. There were some items with only one vote, but if these
47 items are easily accomplished, staff me complete them as well. She said overall, she thought
48 the retreat was good and she got a lot out of it. She thanked the facilitator.
49 Commissioner Dorosin said he hoped, and liked the idea, that coming out of the retreat
50 there will be specific, practical things. Goals are compelling but they are abstract. He thinks it
9
1 is critical that the Board prioritize. He understood that there will be things that will be easy to
2 accomplish, but wants to avoid returning in a year to learn that the items with one dot were all
3 accomplished, but the items with five dots were still being agonized over. He said it would be
4 unsuccessful, to do the easiest things. He hopes the Board will push itself today to prioritize,
5 and follow through in the upcoming year. He wants to be able to say to people, "This is what we
6 did this year," and to point to specific things, whether it is affordable housing, a scholarship fund,
7 or something else.
8 Commissioner Dorosin said he does not think the Board is effectively integrating the staff
9 into the retreat. It may be that the idea of this retreat is that it is just for the policy makers to
10 talk, noting that staff goals and strategies were really helpful. He would like to hear candidly
11 what the department heads think about what the Board is doing. He would like to know from
12 staff if the Board is giving good, positive and helpful guidance, or if it is sending staff down rabbit
13 holes that are unproductive. Maybe that is not something for the retreat: the Board will hear
14 from department heads during the budget process, but that is kind of formal. He would be open
15 to hearing from anybody, and said staff can email him with feedback. He would love to hear it.
16 Commissioner Dorosin said Board members must be more candid with each other, if
17 there are hurt feelings or grudges. Obviously, a lot of folks were unsatisfied with the way the
18 bond discussion went, and there was never a conversation about that. He said he talked with
19 Chair McKee separately, which was good. He said the Board should be candid with each other,
20 in order to be able to work efficiently and effectively. All Board members are grown-ups, and
21 can do this. Politically, Board members are all much closer in vision and ideology than is
22 realized, but sometimes there are undertones; Board members need to be candid about it to
23 resolve issues. He thought that kind of conversation is something that can be built into the
24 retreat process, in the way that Commissioner Jacobs suggested, or it can be a separate
25 conversation. All cards need to be on the table.
26 Commissioner Price said the Board needs the opportunity to have a conversation and
27 get its own ideas out, but it might be good for part of the retreat to include hearing from staff, as
28 has occurred in other retreats. Otherwise it felt like a fishbowl, and she has no idea what is
29 going on in the minds of staff, what may be realistic, and how it fits with the staff work plans.
30 Commissioner Price said these goals have existed for a while. They are very good, but
31 consider goal #6 for example, is it really effective now ten years after it was created? They
32 honed in today on education, and to some degree on parks, but libraries and recreation and
33 animal welfare are just not fitting there anymore. Maybe as Orange County is evolving our
34 goals need to evolve. Maybe the goals should be shifted around to address other issues that
35 get overlooked.
36
37 Adjourn
38 Chair McKee thanked the retreat committee, the Board, the staff and the facilitator for
39 their efforts today. The meeting was adjourned at 3:12 p.m.
40
41
42 Earl McKee, Chair
43
44
45 Donna Baker,
46 Clerk to the Board
47