HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 10-17-2017 - 8-a - Minutes ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: October 17, 2017
Action Agenda
Item No. 8-a
SUBJECT: MINUTES
DEPARTMENT: Board of County
Commissioners
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Draft Minutes Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board
(919) 245-2130
PURPOSE: To correct and/or approve the minutes as submitted by the Clerk to the Board as
listed below.
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.
September 28, 2017 BOCC Joint Meeting with School Boards
October 3, 2017 BOCC Regular Meeting
FINANCIAL IMPACT: NONE
SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT: NONE
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board approve minutes as
presented or as amended.
1
1 Attachment 1
2
3 DRAFT MINUTES
4 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
5 CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO BOARD OF EDUCATION
6 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION
7 JOINT MEETING
8 September 28, 2017
9
10 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a joint session with the Chapel
11 Hill—Carrboro Board of Education, and the Orange County Board of Education on Thursday,
12 September 28, 2017 at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Building in Hillsborough, NC.
13
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Commissioners Mia Burroughs, Barry Jacobs, Earl
15 McKee, Mark Marcoplos, Renee Price and Penny Rich
16 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Chair Dorosin
17 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
18 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Deputy Clerk Travis Myren
19 and Clerk to the Board Donna S. Baker (All other staff members will be identified appropriately
20 below)
21 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Steve Halkiotis
22 and Board Members Matthew Roberts, Tom Carr, Tony McKnight, Michael Hood and
23 Superintendent Todd Wirt and Deputy Superintendent Pam Jones were also present.
24 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS ABSENT: Donna Coffey and
25 Brenda Stephens
26 CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO CITY SCHOOL BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS PRESENT:
27 Chair James Barrett, and Members Dani Rasi, Joal Broun, Pat Heinrich, Margaret Samuels and
28 Superintendent Baldwin, and Assistant Superintendent Todd LoFrese were also present.
29 CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO CITY SCHOOL BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS ABSENT:
30 Andrew Davidson
31
32 Vice Chair Rich called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.
33 Commissioner Rich said that Chair Dorosin would not be able to attend tonight's
34 meeting.
35
36 1. Welcome and Opening Remarks
37 Commissioner Rich and Commissioner McKee reviewed the history of the Whitted
38 Building.
39 James Barrett thanked the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) for the invitation to
40 meet this evening, and noted this is his board's first meeting without Annetta Streater, who
41 resigned from the board a few weeks ago. He said she is missed.
42 Steve Halkiotis also thanked the BOCC for the opportunity to meet, and introduced his
43 board. He said Donna Coffey is unable to attend this evening. He said he is concerned about
44 unfunded mandates being put on the schools by the state, plus the loss of impact fees. He said
45 he would like to set up a group of elected officials, plus superintendents, and County staff to
46 discuss the rapid growth that is occurring in their district. He said concerns have been
47 forwarded to the Town of Hillsborough, but have received no response. He said Orange
48 County Schools (OCS) have not been part of conversation, but OCS and the County bear the
49 burden to educate the children in the district, which are ever increasing. He said the Town has
50 no sense of how this affects the number of students in their schools.
2
1 Commissioner Marcoplos said he would like to discuss a few additional items.
2 Commissioner Rich said this could be done under Information Items.
3
4 2. Projected Impact of State Mandated Class Size Reductions
5 Both School systems have provided information on the impact of House Bill 13
6 regarding mandated class size reductions. See supplemental page 3 in the Chapel Hill-
7 Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS) information, and supplemental Attachment 1 in the OCS
8 information.
9 Dr. Todd Wirt said he wants to keep the BOCC up to date on HB 13, and noted there is
10 a one-page summary at the Commissioners' Places. He said OCS currently falls within the
11 required class size averages for 2017-2018. He said he will soon have to submit a report to the
12 Department of Public Instruction (DPI), which will include numbers for every school, grade level,
13 and class; teacher duties; the source of funds from which those teachers are paid; the number
14 of students in classes; the number of program enhancement teachers (art, music, PE) and the
15 source of the funds to pay for those teachers. He said all of this would have to be submitted
16 with an affidavit.
17 Dr. Todd Wirt said, based on current staff and enrollment numbers, OCS will need
18 5 additional teaching positions to meet the required average class size for 2018-2019. He said
19 this number is based on the desire to keep the average teacher to class size ratio in grades 4-8
20 at 1:25, and 1:32 in 9-12 grades.
21 Dr. Wirt said the General Assembly (GA) made the commitment to revisit the idea of
22 giving school systems a separate dollar amount for enhancement teachers in the future. He
23 said historically schools have had some flexibility to be able to use state funding for
24 enhancement teachers. He said the session does not begin until May 2018, which is in the
25 heart of the OCS budget season.
26 Dr. Todd Wirt said OCS has made some tough decisions already, and he feels confident
27 in what is being presented to the BOCC tonight. He said there is some flexibility in the class
28 size requirements in the dual language programs. He said a dual language program will begin
29 at New Hope Elementary next year. He said the five additional teachers would not cause major
30 facility implications at this time, but there is growth in both Mebane and Hillsborough.
31 Commissioner Rich asked if teachers were increased, will space also need to be
32 increased.
33 Dr. Todd Wirt said space needs are still being evaluated at this point.
34 Dr. Pamela Baldwin reviewed the following information:
35 A capacity analysis shared last year has been updated with current numbers, and in
36 accordance with the passage of House Bill 13. The Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools received
37 a waiver from class size requirements until 2020 due to Project ADVANCE being part of a state
38 teacher compensation pilot study. Unless the state makes revisions to the current law in 2018-
39 19 the district's level of service will exceed the threshold for when a new elementary school is
40 needed. The Lincoln Center project completion will create an additional 189 elementary school
41 seats and will provide a buffer should class size levels remain unchanged at the conclusion of
42 the pilot.
43
44 3. Cost Impact of Paying Living Wage for Service Contracts or Internalizing
45 Positions
46 Both School systems provided information on the cost impact of paying the Living Wage
47 for service contracts or internalizing positions.
48 Pam Jones reviewed the following information for OCS:
49 FY2016 continues to offer living wage to its employees as prescribed by Orange County. In
50 addition, the State's FY2018 budget included funding ear-marked for increasing bus driver
3
1 pay statewide. OCS received approximately $112,862 for its drivers. On September 11, the
2 Board of Education approved a salary schedule for bus drivers that increase driver pay by an
3 average of surrounding districts. With this change, all drivers exceed the current living wage
4 level and approximately 27% of drivers exceed $15 per hour. OCS currently contracts with a
5 private firm for custodial service at nine of its 13 schools. An Alternate Bid obtained during the
6 initial solicitation in 2016 would have increased the bid cost over $245,000 for the bidder to pay
7 all employees a wage commensurate with Orange County's living wage at that time. Funding
8 constraints prohibited the award of the Alternate Bid. Recent discussions have challenged
9 District staff to consider options to the contract service delivery model. Preliminary cost data
10 indicates a minimum of$500,000 additional funding would be required to support an all OCS
11 staff custodial service. County Commissioners are aware of the OCS Board of Education's
12 desire to continue to honor its employees through a living wage commensurate with that set by
13 the County. However, the Board of Education is concerned about the long-term viability of
14 meeting the $15/hour living wage intended for FY2018 given funding constraints anticipated in
15 the FY2018 budget.
16 Pam Jones said OCS has based its living wage on the County's previous living wage,
17 despite the fact that the Board of County Commissioners raised it to $15 this year. She said
18 OCS is unable to afford that wage.
19 Commissioner Marcoplos asked if the number of subcontractors who are local Orange
20 County residents is known.
21 Dr. Todd Wirt said 18 of 31 contracted employees live in Orange County.
22
23 Todd LoFrese reviewed the following information for CHCCS:
24 The Board of Education began paying a living wage in 2015-16 and formally adopted a living
25 wage policy in January 2017. All district employees are paid at or above the living wage rate.
26 The district requested an additional $700,000 expansion during the 2017-18 budget process to
27 pay a living wage for employees of contractors that have displaced or may displace district staff.
28 This was also a goal of our living wage policy. The district has two service contracts that fall into
29 this category, custodial evening cleaning services and our child nutrition program. In June 2017,
30 bids were opened for custodial cleaning services that included an option to pay a living wage.
31 As highlighted in the attached materials, the additional cost for paying a living wage was
32 approximately $300,000. We also conducted an analysis on the cost to internalize the positions.
33 That analysis required an even more sizable increase of over $1.6 million. Ultimately it was
34 decided that we could not proceed with either a living wage or internalizing positions as the
35 additional local funding received for 2017-18 was only sufficient to cover our continuation
36 expenses, not expansion requests.
37 Commissioner Jacobs asked if the living wage could be phased in over a period of time
38 to allow for more financial planning.
39 Todd LoFrese said this has not been discussed, but is something CHCCS could
40 consider.
41 Commissioner Rich asked if both schools systems would please consider this.
42 Steve Halkiotis asked if the number of Chapel Hill contracted employees that live in
43 Orange County is known.
44 Todd LoFrese said he does not know, but can research this.
45 Commissioner Marcoplos said he remembered a discussion about the added cost of
46 paying in house contractors would, in part, be due to more equipment and machinery.
47 Todd LoFrese said additional equipment would need to be purchased if contractors were
48 brought in house. He said the $1.6 million did not include this equipment, as it was just a wage
49 analysis.
4
1 Commissioner Price asked if the number of employees in the contracted services could
2 be identified.
3 Todd LoFrese said he does not know this number, but he said there are district custodial
4 staff that are in the buildings during the day. He said each elementary school has a full time
5 and a part-time employee; each middle and high school has three full-time employees.
6 Commissioner Price asked if all these employees receive the living wage.
7 Todd LoFrese said yes, and all full-time employees receive medical and retirement
8 benefits.
9 Commissioner Price asked if the difference between district and contracted custodial
10 staff could be clarified.
11 Todd LoFrese said there are custodians in the schools during the day, who are district
12 employees. He said the contracted employees clean the schools in the evenings.
13 James Barrett asked if OCS could explain how it handled school bus drivers in its
14 budget this year.
15 Pam Jones said the State's FY2018 budget included funding ear-marked for increasing
16 bus driver pay statewide. She said OCS received approximately $112,862 for its drivers. On
17 September 11, the Board of Education approved a salary schedule for bus drivers that
18 increased driver pay by an average of surrounding districts. With this change, all drivers exceed
19 the current living wage level and approximately 27% of drivers exceed $15 per hour.
20 Todd LoFrese said CHCCS also received those funds, but in a much smaller amount,
21 and CHCCS is in discussions with the State about this discrepancy.
22 Commissioner Rich asked if bus drivers are full-time employees with benefits.
23 Pam Jones said it depends on the number of hours, and some are eligible for benefits
24 and some are not.
25 CHCCS said this is the same in their district.
26
27 4. Status of School Bond Projects and Update on the Lincoln Center
28 Groundbreaking
29 Both School Systems have provided updates on the Bond Projects, approved as part of
30 the successful November 2016 Bond Referendum in their agenda packets.
31
32 CHCCS
33 Todd LoFrese said projected schedules for the Lincoln Center and Chapel Hill High
34 School projects are included in this evening's packet. He said bids opened today for the
35 Lincoln Center, which came in significantly over budget. He said the CHCCS Board will discuss
36 this in the coming weeks. He said the Chapel Hill High School project will go out to bid in late
37 spring, and go to construction shortly thereafter. He said there have been some questions
38 regarding a phasing plan for construction, given that students will still be at the school. He said
39 the plan is multi-phased, and specific details are forthcoming. He said the new addition will be
40 built first, and students will move into that addition so that the old building can be
41 deconstructed.
42 James Barrett said there had been some concerns from the teachers at Chapel Hill High
43 School about how the traditional lay out of the building will meet the needs of modern
44 education, and he said the School Board had a good discussion with these teachers. He said a
45 public ground breaking ceremony will be scheduled once contracts and schedules are finalized.
46 Commissioner Rich asked if CHCCS has a plan to keep the parents informed about the
47 building project at CHCCS.
48 Todd LoFrese said information will be shared once the process is further along, likely
49 starting in January or February 2018. He said the district will use multiple methods of
50 communication: using social media, newsletters, Connect Ed, meeting with the PTA, etc.
5
1 James Barret said to include parents at feeder schools as well.
2 Commissioner Rich asked if the BOCC could be kept informed as well, as parents often
3 approach Board members out and about in the County.
4
5 OCS
6 Pam Jones reviewed the Bond Projects update:
7 o Orange High School Geothermal HVAC project
8 Reece Noland and McElrath, Inc. has been retained to design the project
9 • Test wells are in process to determine conductivity of soils
10 • Multi-year project
11 o Cedar Ridge High School Classroom Wing
12 • Corley Redfoot Architects, designed the original school building and has been retained
13 to also design this classroom addition.
14 • Project design is on-going.
15 • Occupancy anticipated for beginning of school year August 2020.
16 o Acquisition of Eno River Academy Charter School
17 o Other bond projects related to infrastructure replacement are reflected on the attached
18 schedule in their agenda packet in the year in which commencement is expected.
19 o Bond projects are aligned with planned bond sale cash flow requirements.
20
21 5. Review of the Use and Purpose of School Resource Officers
22 Both School Systems have provided information regarding the use and purpose of having
23 School Resource Officers in the schools. See supplemental pages 23-106 in the CHCCS
24 information, and supplemental Attachments 3 and 4 in the OCS information.
25
26 Todd LoFrese said OCS and CHCCS have a joint video, which was showed to the
27 BOCC.
28
29 CHCCS
30 Todd LoFrese said CHCCS is proud of its SRO program, and reviewed the following
31 information:
32 During the budget process a question was raised by a Commissioner on whether the separate
33 School Resource Officer (SRO) and Nurse funding should be included in the ADM funding, to
34 allow districts more flexibility to pay for other identified needs, instead of using the money for
35 SROs. Ultimately the BOCC approved keeping the funding structure the same, but committed
36 to an additional discussion at the joint boards meeting. District administration is in strong
37 support of SRO program and supports the current funding structure. We have discussed our
38 program at Board meetings in May and September 2017, shared a variety of resources
39 including our professional development efforts, school incident data, and information about our
40 first SRO program summit. Board packets from both meetings are included with this
41 memorandum.
42
43 OCS
44 Dr. Todd Wirt reviewed the information below:
45 OCS has a long-standing relationship with the Orange County Sheriffs office to provide SROs
46 in all of its schools. The current agreement with Orange County to fund such services is
47 attached (Attachment 3). SROs in each school partner with the school administration to provide
48 a safe campus. They maintain full certification as a law enforcement officer while assigned as
49 an SRO and may provide law enforcement duties as appropriate and called for on the school
50 campus. SROs: serve as positive role models for parents and students and are called upon to
6
1 assist in a variety of interactions with both groups. They are an integral part of the school
2 community fabric. District OCS staff periodically holds sessions with staff and SROs to
3 enhance this relationship and ensure clear understanding of roles.
4 Steve Halkiotis said he wished he had SROs when he was a principal. He said the
5 SROs have been welcomed at their schools by the parents, and he praised both systems for
6 their SRO programs.
7 Commissioner McKee said he sees SROs as having a calming effect in the schools, and
8 not as a police entity. He said when he was a student at Orange High School, there were riots,
9 and a student died. He said an SRO may have been able to deescalate such a situation.
10 Steve Halkiotis said this history is important, as the student was a young white man from
11 a rural family who ran to defend an African American Assistant Principal. He said there were
12 good people back then, and there are good people now.
13 Commissioner Marcoplos said he appreciated these perspectives on SROs. He said he
14 brought this up as it related to budgets, and wondered if funds were tight would schools rather
15 have more teacher assistants or keep the SROs.
16 Commissioner Marcoplos said the SRO program stared in the 1990s, and asked if an
17 SRO has ever fired a gun in either district.
18 OCS and CHCCS both said never.
19 Commissioner Marcoplos asked if there is a reason for an SRO to carry a gun.
20 Steve Halkiotis said SROs are law enforcement.
21 Commission Marcoplos said they are also teachers.
22 Dr. Pamela Baldwin said the gun is part of their uniform, and she would not ask an
23 officer or a soldier to change their uniform, so she would not ask an SRO do that either.
24 Commissioner Marcoplos said he can understand that, and he just questioned the
25 usefulness of a displayed gun in schools.
26 Steve Halkiotis said there was an active shooter at Orange High School a few years
27 ago, and the school was fortunate to have two retired Highway Patrolmen as Drivers' Education
28 teachers. He said the Highway Patrolmen got to the shooter before the SROs did, and their
29 skill and training came in handy that day. He said mental health is a huge piece of this puzzle.
30 Rani Dasi referred to Commissioner Marcoplos question of using SRO funds for
31 teaching assistants, and said it is not such a simple trade. She said classroom support comes
32 first, and SROs are part of this picture. She said school leadership identifies the need for
33 SROs. She said the guns carried by SROs are not for the children, but rather to protect the
34 campus from possible outside threats. She said many of the schools have open campuses that
35 are not up to current safety standards. She said SROs can be a child's first introduction to this
36 kind of authority, in a safe way and positive way. She said CHCCS has greatly involved the
37 community around the issue of SROs, and created a memorandum of understanding. She said
38 data is reviewed on a regular basis, and there has been a significant decline in incidences.
39 Commissioner McKee said he is greatly impressed by the way the two districts have set
40 up the SROs program; the gun is not the focus but the person of the SRO is.
41 Commissioner Price agreed with Rani Dasi and Commissioner McKee, and said the
42 benefits of the SRO certainly outweigh the cons.
43 Matthew Roberts shared related stories.
44 Commissioner Burroughs shared some historical data on SROs in the CHCCS. She
45 said one other element is the adults, who are involved in the lives of students: teachers, as well
46 as parents, guardians, etc. She said sometimes the adults are the ones with the mental health
47 needs, which can come into the school directly and indirectly. She said the staff and SROs
48 work together closely to handle these sensitive, and often confidential situations. She said she
49 supported SROs.
7
1 Dr. Pamela Baldwin said this discussion is an excellent example of the partnerships
2 between the schools and the County, and an opportunity to explain the SRO program so all are
3 on the same page.
4 Commissioner Rich said SROs are part of the schools' policies, and the Board of
5 County Commissioners cannot tell the schools what to do. She encouraged both districts to
6 share this information with parents.
7
8 6. Mental Health Collaboration between the Schools and the County
9 Both School Systems and the County have provided information regarding Mental
10 Health collaboration between the Schools and the County.
11
12 Mental Health Collaboration between the Schools and the County
13
14 Travis Myren said the Board of County Commissioners authorized funding for a
15 Behavioral Health Systems of Care Analysis in the FY2017-18 Budget. The funding will be used
16 to hire a consultant to prepare the analysis and make recommendations on system
17 improvement and will focus on services available to residents up to 25 years old. A Request for
18 Proposal (RFP) has been developed to solicit proposals from consultants with three primary
19 deliverables:
20
21 1. Create an inventory of existing resources for mental health, substance abuse, and
22 intellectual and developmental disabilities in Orange County serving ages 0-25.
23 2. Create a systems map of the existing mental health (including substance abuse,
24 intellectual and development disabilities) resources for residents ages 0-25, identity
25 areas of strength and weakness, and make recommendations for improvements to gaps
26 in services, access to care, quality of care, ease of referral, etc.
27 3. Work with both the Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS) and Orange County
28 Schools (OCS) in developing Behavioral Health Systems of Care assessments and
29 scheduled implementation of programming as deemed necessary by the assessments
30 over a multi-year time frame. The implementation phase could be piloted in the Family
31 Success Alliance zones 4 and 6 in Year 1 of the program.
32
33 In developing the RFP, the County engaged both school districts to review and provide input on
34 the RFP document in early September. The proposals are due back on October 3rd and school
35 district staff(Janet Cherry— Systems of Care Director for CHCCS and Sherita Cobb— Director
36 of Student Support for OCS) have been invited to serve on the proposal review committee.
37
38 Outside of the RFP process, the Health Department has also worked with representatives from
39 both districts on the Cardinal Innovations Mental Health Collaborative where school based
40 mental health has been a priority focus this year. The agencies partnered on direct mental
41 health service provision at A.L. Stanback for children and families using Family Success
42 Alliance funding and non-profit providers such as El Futuro and Boomerang and on
43 coordinating care for children of immigrant patients attending CHCCS schools who were
44 experiencing bullying, language barrier issues, and bus safety concerns
45
46 Janet Gerry, CHCCS System of Care Director, reviewed the following information:
47 The district has been engaged in a review of our mental health services. Our focus has been to
48 develop and implement strategies to promote awareness, ensure we are identifying students
49 early, being clear about what individual supports are needed, and to removing barriers for
50 mental health services and treatments. The district recently developed a request for proposals
8
1 (RFP) for co-located mental health services to provide onsite support to our students. Service
2 providers have been selected and the district is moving forward with agreements. The RFP and
3 draft agreement are included, along with an overview of co-located mental health services.
4
5 Commissioner McKee referred to the opioid crisis, and asked both districts if there has
6 been an increase in opioids in their schools.
7 Sherita Cobb, OCS Student Support Services Director, said OCS has not seen an
8 uptick, but have offered courses to OCS staff, including social workers, counselors, and nurses.
9 She presented the following information:
10 • As with any school system, OCS experiences challenges with supporting the mental
11 health needs of its students and school community. While there is much work to be
12 done in this area, students are currently supported through:
13 Contract with LCSW: Orange County Schools' contract with a Licensed Clinical Social
14 Worker. The social worker's role in the district is as follows: provide therapeutic support
15 to the 3 Special Education classes for students with behavioral concerns, provide staff
16 development for social workers and school counselors and work with students/school
17 teams on strategies for managing behavior effectively
18 • School Based Mental Health: Within the next month, OCS will enter into an MOU with a
19 new vendor partner. This provider accepts clients on Medicaid as well as some private
20 services providers (BCBS is one of insurers accepted). Additionally, this new agency
21 has providers that can provide substance abuse counseling if the district wants to
22 engage in that service as well. In addition, parents are provided a handbook with
23 comprehensive service providers and service descriptions as prepared by Mental Health
24 of America of the Triangle for Orange, Person and Chatham Counties.
25
26 Steve Halkiotis praised Ms. Cobb for the work that she does in OCS, and Ms. Gerry in
27 CHCCS, since this type of work was not done in schools years ago.
28 James Barrett said he appreciated Ms. Gerry, and all she does.
29 Commissioner Burroughs echoed support for the wrap around model of service
30 provision. She said the opioid issue is real, and while numbers are down overall, the schools
31 are still facing this issue.
32 Commissioner Price asked if the funding for mental health services is divided up in a
33 particular way. She said there is great need for these programs, and the need is likely to
34 increase. She asked if the funding sources are secure.
35 Dr. Pamela Baldwin said funding is from state and local grants, and the need is a high
36 priority for CHCCS, who will shift funds as needed to support students. She agreed that needs
37 are increasing.
38 Janet Gerry said the co-located mental health services agencies have been awarded a
39 memorandum of agreement, so there is no cost there. She said if a child has insurance of any
40 kind (private or Medicaid), the agency will bill the insurance.
41 Sherita Cobb said this is the same in OCS.
42 Janet Gerry said one out of ten students seen is a non-payment slot.
43 Commissioner Price asked if the districts feel overloaded now, and whether more staff
44 will be needed in the future.
45 Janet Gerry said there is one counselor in each elementary school, two in middle
46 schools, and four at the high school level. She said social workers and nurses likely feel
47 overloaded, but the schools are partnering with community agencies to provide the best service
48 possible.
9
1 Rani Dasi said there are increasing mental health needs and she is glad to be having
2 this collaborative discussion, to assess the current status and adjust as necessary to plan for
3 the future.
4 Commissioner Rich asked if OCS and CHCCS collaborate on this issue.
5 Janet Gerry said she used to work with Sherita Cobb, which has laid the groundwork for
6 an increasingly collaborative relationship.
7 Commissioner Rich asked if parents are being made aware of these services.
8 Janet Gerry said this will be forthcoming on their school websites, and the point of
9 contact will be the social workers.
10 Sherita Cobb said OCS has a brochure of mental health services, which is shared in
11 many ways with students and parents.
12
13 7. Information Item:
14 • North Carolina School Boards Association —2017 Legislative Summary
15
16 Commissioner Marcoplos said he has heard a lot of discussions about
17 reviving/increasing vocational education classes around the country, and he would love to see
18 more, well trained young tradespeople out there. He asked if this is a part of local
19 conversations.
20 James Barrett said one of the most popular classes in CHCCS is their bio-medical
21 classes. He said CHCCS also has a fire academy.
22 Tony McKnight said OCS has been working with the North Carolina Department of
23 Commerce to connect students with registered apprenticeships, and OCS hopes to expand this.
24 Dr. Todd Wirt said OCS has a comprehensive offering in this area, with a fire academy
25 class having been added recently at Orange High School and a criminal justice program at
26 Cedar Ridge High School. He said both of these programs feed into the EMT program at
27 Durham Tech, which also offers a lot of trade programs as well.
28 Tony McKnight said he has been to East Chapel Hill High School, and he is interested in
29 going back.
30 Commissioner Price reinforced what Commissioner Marcoplos was talking about, noting
31 the connection between knowing a trade and successfully gaining employment.
32 Commissioner Rich said it may be beneficial to have a follow up discussion during
33 budget season.
34 Commissioner Marcoplos said there is growing knowledge about the perils of football
35 and brain damage. He asked if there has been any discussion of doing baseline studies on
36 children, who are playing football, and if there has been any medical testing or diagnoses; and if
37 so he asked if students can take this medical information with them. He said this topic must be
38 talked about.
39 Steve Halkiotis said he read that participation in high school football across the country
40 is falling. He said OCS has two nationally certified medical trainers at its high schools; board
41 policies regarding concussions; and reports submitted on an annual basis to monitor the issue
42 closely.
43 James Barrett said the CHCCS board reviewed a concussion policy last week, and
44 noted that it is not just a question of returning to play the sport, but being able to return to learn.
45 He said CHCCS is also monitoring this issue closely.
46 Joal Broun said the UNC team studying the concussion issue is a voluntary program,
47 and is testing soccer players.
48 Commissioner Jacobs said after football, soccer is the number one sport for
49 concussions for boys, and soccer is the number one sport for girls.
10
1 Dr. Todd Wirt said last year in OCS, lacrosse was the sport with the most concussions.
2 He said OCS partnered with the UNC study over a year ago, and has helmets from them. He
3 said some of the helmets have probes in them to track data.
4 Commissioner Rich said this could be another follow up item.
5 Commissioner Burroughs said there was an argument a while back that some kids
6 attend school in order play football, and may stop attending if football is taken away.
7 Dr. Todd Wirt said OCS has not had a discussion about dissolving football. He said
8 there is much more training for high school football coaches now than years ago.
9 Dr. Pamela Baldwin said CHCCS has not had in depth discussions, except to the extent
10 of what is occurring naturally. She said she has spoken with coaches about the connection that
11 sports can create with students who may not otherwise be excited about school.
12 Commissioner McKee said there are a lot of kids for whom sports gives an extra push to
13 do better in school.
14 James Barrett recognized Commissioner Price and other school board members that
15 attended the Pre-K conference.
16
17 8. Closed Session
18
19 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner McKee
20 seconded by to go into closed session at 8:51 p.m. for the purpose below:
21
22 "Pursuant to G.S. § 143-318.11(a)(3) "to consult with an attorney retained by the Board in order
23 to preserve the attorney-client privilege between the attorney and the Board."
24
25 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
26
27 RECONVENE INTO REGULAR SESSION
28
29 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner McKee to go
30 into regular session at 10:10 p.m.
31
32 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
33
34 ADJOURNMENT
35
36 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner McKee to
37 adjourn the meeting at 10:10 p.m.
38
39 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
40
41 Penny Rich, Vice Chair
42
43
44 Donna Baker
45 Clerk to the Board
46
47
48
49
1
1 Attachment 2
2
3 DRAFT MINUTES
4 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
5 REGULAR MEETING
6 October 3, 2017
7 7:00 p.m.
8
9 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, October 3,
10 2017 at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Building, in Hillsborough, N.C.
11
12 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Dorosin and Commissioners Mia Burroughs,
13 Barry Jacobs, Earl McKee, Mark Marcoplos, Renee Price and Penny Rich
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Deputy County Manager
17 Travis Myren and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other staff members will be identified
18 appropriately below)
19
20 Chair Dorosin called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
21 Chair Dorosin said that Commissioner McKee will be late this evening.
22
23 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
24
25 DEFERRED: 11a -Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee—Appointments
26
27 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Price to
28 defer this item - Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee appointments to a later
29 meeting.
30
31 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
32
33 ADDED:
34 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to add
35 this item to the agenda: 8-j-proposed-Approval of Ownership of Transfer/Purchase of Cedar
36 Valley and Efland Properties
37
38 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
39
40 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Price to
41 add an additional closed session item to the agenda:
42
43 "To discuss matters related to the location or expansion of industries or other businesses in the
44 area served by the public body, including agreement on a tentative list of economic
45 development incentives that may be offered by the public body in negotiations," NCGS § 143-
46 318.11(a)(4).
47
2
1 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
2
3 The following items were noted at the Commissioners' places:
4 - PowerPoint for Item 6-a
5 - PowerPoint presentations for Item 6-c
6 - PowerPoint for Item 6-d
7 - Copy of Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) calendar for Item 6-e
8
9 PUBLIC CHARGE
10 Chair Dorosin dispensed with the reading of the public charge.
11
12 2. Public Comments
13
14 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
15 NONE
16
17 b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
18 (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda
19 below.)
20
21 3. Announcements, Petitions and Comments by Board Members
22 Commissioner Burroughs had no comments.
23 Commissioner Rich had no comments.
24 Commissioner Marcoplos said he went to the International Bluegrass Musicians
25 Association (IBMA) event this past weekend, where he heard an artist named Molly Tuttle, who
26 was the first female IBMA guitarist of the year. He said her guitar of choice was a pre-war
27 guitar made in Hillsborough.
28 Commissioner Price petitioned the Board to consider a draft resolution in the next month
29 or so in reference to a PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING DECEMBER 6, 2017 AS ABOLITION
30 DAY.
31 Commissioner Price asked if the Planning Department could provide maps to insure
32 consistency in various meetings, like SWOT analysis.
33 Commissioner Jacobs said he and Commissioner Price attended the Greenways
34 Conference this past Sunday, and a report will be released this week about the benefits of
35 greenways and open spaces. He said he spoke with someone from the Virginia Department of
36 Recreation and Open spaces, who said the ratio of spending to return is 60 to 1. He said he
37 will forward the report to the BOCC once he receives it.
38 Commissioner Jacobs said he and Commissioners Marcoplos and Rich met yesterday
39 for a discussion to review possible County transportation projects, both proposed and possible,
40 in time to submit them for the October DCHC MPO meeting, which is scheduled for
41 Wednesday, October 11th. He said they would do this with an eye toward establishing a
42 regular process for advancing Orange County priorities, and gaining funding for same. He said
43 the idea is to begin meeting periodically to anticipate planning deadlines for both the DCHC and
44 Burlington-Graham MPOs, and determine what are Orange County's preferences and priorities
45 at a more collaborative level. He said beyond that, we can discuss important concepts, plans
46 and concerns for other processes and venues including the quarterly meetings with DOT staff.
47 He said follow up reports would be provided from time to time to the entire BOCC.
48 Commissioner Jacobs said next Monday there will be a meeting in response to a petition
49 from Commissioner Marcoplos about the JPA anniversary, and staff invited planners from
50 Chapel Hill and Carrboro to attend.
3
1 Chair Dorosin had no comments.
2
3 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
4
5 a. Endorsement of Proposed National Register of Historic Places Nomination for the
6 Efland Home (NC Industrial Home for Colored Girls)
7 The Board considered the Historic Preservation Commission's recommendation that the
8 historic property known as the Efland Home be submitted for listing in the National Register of
9 Historic Places, and to authorize the Chair to sign the attached Elected Official Comment
10 Letter.
11 Peter Sandbeck, Cultural Resources Coordinator, made a PowerPoint presentation of
12 photographs, and reviewed the following information:
13
14 BACKGROUND:
15 The process for listing a property in the National Register of Historic Places includes a provision
16 allowing the BOCC to offer an opinion for or against the listing of a particular historic property
17 within its jurisdiction. The owners of the Efland Home initiated the National Register Nomination
18 process for their property as part of their long-term effort to protect the property and ensure that
19 its important history is documented and shared. The Historic Preservation Commission
20 undertook this project to prepare the National Register Nomination as one of its program goals
21 for 2017. Funding was provided through the County's Lands Legacy Program, which includes
22 as one of its priorities the protection of"lands of historic, cultural, or archaeological
23 significance".
24
25 The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) fully supports the nomination of this property to
26 the National Register. The Commission held an informational meeting and received public
27 comment about this National Register Nomination at its regular meeting on September 27,
28 2017. A letter from the HPC Chair in follow-up to that meeting is provided at Attachment 3.
29
30 The National Register is an honorary designation that carries no local regulatory burden but
31 does provide a federal and state process for protection in the case of projects receiving federal
32 or state funding, or projects that require some form of federal or state permit or license.
33 Examples include highways, pipelines, wetland disturbance and cell towers.
34
35 The attached excerpt of the National Register Nomination document provides a detailed
36 discussion of the history of the Efland Home. The information details its statewide significance
37 as North Carolina's first reform institution for African American girls when it opened in 1925.
38 The project was spearheaded by Dr. Charlotte Hawkins Brown, a nationally recognized black
39 educator and social reformer. Funds to build and operate the Efland Home were raised by black
40 women across the state under the auspices of the NC Federation of Colored Women's Clubs.
41
42 Commissioner Jacobs said he thought the significance of the home was known at the
43 time that the solar installation was put in next door.
44 Peter Sandbeck said the home was known of, but it was not on the historical register.
45 He said federal law only protects a property once it is on the register.
46 Chair Dorosin asked if an historical marker can be secured.
47 Peter Sandbeck said he talked with the owners, and they are shy about doing this, and
48 are also concerned about vandalism, but he said he will continue to pursue this. He said the
49 home can also be a County landmark, which would entitle it to a property tax benefit, and some
50 additional protections.
4
1 Chair Dorosin asked if the owners' permission would be needed in order to place a
2 marker on Route 70. He said he would like there to be a marker.
3 Peter Sandbeck said he would consult with the owners, and he would be best to let
4 them know, but their permission is not needed.
5 Commissioner Price said the owners do have reservations about a marker by their
6 house, but hopefully they will consider a marker on Hwy 70. She said she appreciated the
7 Historic Preservation Commissioner bringing this forward.
8
9 Commissioner McKee arrived at 7:26 p.m.
10
11 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Price for
12 the Board to endorse the National Register Nomination of the Efland home and authorized the
13 Chair to sign the Elected Official Comment Letter (Attachment 4).
14
15 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
16
17 5. Public Hearings
18 NONE
19
20 6. Regular Agenda
21
22 a. Interlocal Agreement Between Orange County and the Town of Hillsborough for
23 Construction and Operation of Water and Sewer Facilities in the Hillsborough
24 Area Economic Development District of Orange County
25 The Board reviewed and considered approving the interlocal agreement with the Town
26 of Hillsborough that sets forth conditions of utility installation and operation with associated land
27 use consistency with prior cooperative planning efforts and authorized the Chair to sign.
28
29 BACKGROUND:
30 Orange County and the Town of Hillsborough have been coordinating planning efforts around
31 the common interest land fringes of the Town of Hillsborough since 2002. These efforts led to
32 more a formalized 2007 acceptance of an area `Strategic Growth Plan' and the pursuit of an
33 interlocal agreement that proposed additional implementation steps by both local governments.
34 The Interlocal Agreement between Orange County and the Town of Hillsborough for
35 construction and operation of water and sewer facilities in the Hillsborough Area Economic
36 Development District of Orange County was presented at the May 2, 2017 Board of County
37 Commissioners meeting.
38
39 Following this meeting, the attorney for the Town of Hillsborough suggested modifications to the
40 agreement to further define how the determination of capacity is made by the Town. This
41 includes consistency with Hillsborough's adopted Future Land Use Plan for the specific area in
42 the southwest quadrant and further limits connections to "industrial and commercial". In
43 addition, the word "only" was deleted from Section 4 which allows the consideration of"other
44 aspects outlined herein" (such as land use, reservation period, etc.) to be operative instead of
45 "only" a capacity determination. This agreement does not include proposed expansions to the
46 WASMPBA primary area, if approved, which were primarily (over 80%) in the southeast
47 quadrant. The proposed agreement is included in Attachment 1. The agreement was presented
48 and approved at the Hillsborough Board of Commissioners meeting on September 25, 2017.
49
5
1 Craig Benedict, Planning Director, said this has been a project involving many County
2 departments and the Town of Hillsborough. He said this item was in front of the Board of
3 County Commissioners (BOCC) on May 2nd when the BOCC approved it, and it subsequently
4 went to the Town, who wanted more specific language to be consistent with the joint plan. He
5 said the addition of the changes included that this has to do with non-residential development;
6 there is a capacity of 108,000 gallons; and the agreement lasts for five years.
7 Craig Benedict said there was previous consideration of expanding the water and sewer
8 boundary agreement. He said the County approved this expansion, contingent upon
9 Hillsborough's approval. He said Hillsborough has not yet approved this item, and so this does
10 not affect or include a larger area. He said this can be amended at a later date if needed.
11 Craig Benedict said this does not mandate annexation into the Town, but a resident who
12 wanted water and sewer agreement would sign a voluntary annexation agreement to be acted
13 upon by Hillsborough at such time in the future.
14 Commissioner Rich asked if the residential annexation could be clarified.
15 Craig Benedict said there would have to be a voluntary annexation agreement, which is
16 a signed document that does not cause the process to begin, but Hillsborough would have it in
17 hand, and could act upon it at a later date.
18 Commissioner Rich asked if there are other examples of where this has happened.
19 Craig Benedict said this would also occur in the Eno Economic Development District
20 (EDD), and Mebane annexation zones.
21
22 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Rich for the
23 Board to:
24 1. Receive the interlocal agreement between Orange County and the Town of Hillsborough
25 as detailed in this abstract and contained in Attachment 1; and
26 2. Authorize the Chair to sign the interlocal agreement with County Manager approval for
27 outlined aspects of the agreement pending County Attorney review.
28
29 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
30
31 b. Expansion of the Role of the HOME Program Review Committee and Renaming
32 the Committee as the "Orange County Local Government Affordable Housing
33 Collaborative"
34 The Board reviewed and considered an expanded scope of the HOME Program Review
35 Committee. The expanded scope would allow for broader discussions about, as well as seek
36 collaborative solutions to affordable housing issues in the County. In addition, the expansion
37 serves as a response to community input shared during discussions on the 2016 Affordable
38 Housing Bond as it relates to intergovernmental collaboration.
39
40 BACKGROUND:
41 The Orange County HOME Program Consortium was formed in 1992 to receive federal HOME
42 Program funds. Partners in the Consortium include the Towns of Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and
43 Hillsborough, as well as Orange County. In 2000, several elected officials from the participating
44 jurisdictions expressed an interest in having more involvement in the evaluation of funding
45 applications and development of the annual HOME Program Plan. Thus the Orange County
46 HOME Program Review Committee was approved by all participating jurisdictions in the
47 Consortium. Initially the Committee met on a quarterly basis. In recent years, the Committee
48 has met during the budget period to evaluate funding applications.
49
6
1 At a recent Assembly of Governments Meeting, elected officials indicated an interest in having
2 the staff and HOME Program Review Committee expand its scope to include broader
3 discussions about the County's affordable housing issues, as well as seek to create
4 collaborative strategies and solutions. Furthermore, during discussions regarding the 2016
5 bond for affordable housing, members of the community stressed the importance of
6 intergovernmental collaboration as a way to maximize public funds used for affordable housing
7 purposes.
8 Sherrill Hampton, Housing, Human Rights and Community Development Director, made
9 the following PowerPoint presentation:
10
11 Expansion of the Role and Renaming of the HOME Program Review Committee
12 October 3, 2017
13
14 Decision Points
15 • Review and consider revisions to the HOME Program Review Committee's role
16 o Expand the Committee's role to include the following:
17 a.) strategize about funding options
18 b.) provide updates on projects and affordable housing efforts, as well as code or
19 policy changes
20 c.) develop shared targets and goals for affordable housing preservation and
21 development and track progress over time
22 d.) tell the story of the impact of the County's affordable housing initiatives
23 e.) serve as advocates (elected officials) for affordable housing in Orange
24 County
25 f.) Continue to provide guidance on the administration of HOME Program
26 activities as required by the US Department of Housing & Urban Development
27 (HUD) and other resources.
28
29 • In light of the proposed expansion of the Committee's role, the Committee would be
30 renamed the "Orange County Local Government Affordable Housing Collaborative".
31
32 Background
33 • Orange County HOME Program Consortium formed in 1992 to receive federal HOME
34 Program funds.
35 • HOME Program Consortium members include the Towns of Carrboro, Chapel Hill,
36 Hillsborough and Orange County.
37 • In 2000, based on elected officials interest in having more involvement in the evaluation
38 of funding applications and the creation of the annual HOME Program Plan, the Orange
39 County HOME Program Review Committee formation was approved by the participating
40 jurisdictions
41
42 Current Function of the Committee
43 • To provide guidance on the administration of the HOME Program activities as required
44 by the US Department of Housing & Urban Development, including the following:
45 — recommend priorities and criteria for HOME Program funding
46 — annually evaluate applications for HOME funding and provide a
47 recommendation to the elected bodies of each jurisdiction in the Consortium
48
49 Rationale for the Proposed Revisions
7
1 • Members of the Orange County community expressed, during the 2016 Affordable
2 Housing Bond discussions, the importance of intergovernmental collaboration as a way
3 to maximize public funds for affordable housing purposes.
4 • Elected officials at a recent Assembly of Governments Meeting indicated an interest in
5 having the staff and HOME Program Review Committee expand its scope to include
6 broader discussions about the County's affordable housing issues, as well as seek to
7 create collaborative strategies and solutions as it relates to affordable housing issues.
8 Recommendation for Consideration
9 Approve the resolution in Attachment 1 to expand the scope of the HOME Program Review
10 Committee's role and form the "Orange County Local Government Affordable Housing
11 Collaborative" to allow for broader discussions on the County's affordable housing issues,
12 including the creation of collaborative strategies and solutions.
13
14 Commissioner Price said this is a consortium, and asked if the consortium can review
15 the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds.
16 Sherrill Hampton said this could be included in the broader discussion.
17 Commissioner Price asked if data could be compiled on the amount of local and other
18 dollars that are leveraged when using federal dollars.
19 Chair Dorosin clarified that the committee is now staffed by Orange County Housing,
20 and has one representative from the Towns and the County.
21 Sherrill Hampton said yes. She said the Carrboro elected official position is currently
22 vacant, but the Assistant Town Manager participates.
23 Chair Dorosin asked if the four elected members are the voting members.
24 Sherrill Hampton said she believes staff makes recommendations, and the committee
25 votes. She said she will verify this information.
26 Chair Dorosin said this is a great idea, and he believes the consortium is underutilized.
27 He said this is a structure that is already in place to address issues, and defining more structure
28 and specific outcomes is good.
29 Chair Dorosin said he spoke to one of their colleagues in Carrboro, and suggested
30 adding an Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA) board member and staff member to
31 this group. He asked for the Board's feedback on this suggestion.
32 Commissioner Price agreed with this suggestion, especially if the group is going to be
33 looking at CDBG funds. She asked if Hillsborough water should also be included.
34 Chair Dorosin said the Town of Hillsborough oversees that water, and its existing
35 representative in the group is likely sufficient.
36 Commissioner Marcoplos clarified whether the BOCC is saying it wants an OWASA
37 representative, or if the BOCC is asking OWASA to consider being part of the group.
38 Chair Dorosin said he would like the BOCC to invite OWASA to be a part of this group.
39 Commissioner Jacobs said OWASA has repeatedly resisted this position, and he would
40 support inviting OWASA to participate, leaving the choice to OWASA.
41 Commissioner Jacobs said Hillsborough water is intertwined with the Town.
42 Commissioner Marcoplos said it would be good to invite OWASA to participate.
43 Commissioner Jacobs said one way to initiate a conversation is to ask OWASA to
44 present to the BOCC at some point.
45 Chair Dorosin suggested inviting OWASA, and asked Sherrill Hampton on how to
46 proceed.
47 Sherrill Hampton said she would recommend that staff speak to the other staff, as well
48 as the Chair send a letter to other elected boards suggesting this invitation. She said if
49 OWASA does not want to participate, it could present updates to the BOCC periodically.
8
1 Bonnie Hammersley said there is a meeting tomorrow morning with the affordable
2 housing managers and staff from the various jurisdictions, and staff will bring it up and work
3 towards bringing OWASA in.
4
5 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Rich for the
6 Board to approve the resolution in Attachment 1 to expand the scope of the HOME Program
7 Review Committee to form the "Orange County Local Government Affordable Housing
8 Collaborative" to allow for broader discussions on the County's affordable housing issues,
9 including the creation of collaborative strategies and solutions.
10 Commissioner Price said to add that the consortium will look at CDBG funding, and
11 keep track of leveraging dollars.
12 Commissioner Rich asked if this needs to be in the motion, since it was suggested to
13 bring this up as they move forward.
14 Sherrill Hampton said staff will capture that information in future discussions and
15 reports, whether it is part of the motion or not.
16 Commissioner Price suggested adding this since Chapel Hill receives and oversees the
17 CDBG funding for everyone.
18 Chair Dorosin suggested amending the second bullet point to state, "provide guidance
19 on administration of the HOME program activities, and other affordable housing resources in
20 the County."
21 Commissioner Price said this would be acceptable.
22 Commissioner Jacobs and Commissioner Rich withdrew previous motion.
23
24 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs seconded by Commissioner Rich for the
25 Board to approve the resolution in Attachment 1 to expand the scope of the HOME Program
26 Review Committee to form the "Orange County Local Government Affordable Housing
27 Collaborative" to allow for broader discussions on the County's affordable housing issues,
28 including the creation of collaborative strategies and solutions, and provide guidance on
29 administration of the HOME program activities, and other affordable housing resources in the
30 County.
31
32 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
33
34 c. Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization 2045
35 Metropolitan Transportation Plan Alternatives Analysis
36 The Board received a presentation from Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro (DCHC)
37 Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) staff on the 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan
38 (MTP) Alternatives Analysis, and considered potentially endorsing comments from the Orange
39 Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard).
40
41 BACKGROUND:
42 The DCHC MPO, which is responsible for long-range transportation planning for Durham
43 County and parts of Orange and Chatham counties, is updating its MTP. The MTP, which is
44 required by Federal law, recommends major transportation projects, policies and strategies
45 designed to maintain existing transportation systems and serve the region's future travel needs.
46 The Plan must be fiscally constrained, which means that projected revenues must cover the
47 anticipated costs. Projects must be in the 2045 MTP to receive any state and federal
48 transportation funding through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). Projects
49 are drawn from the MTP and put forward to the State's prioritization process for inclusion in the
50 STIP, which is a 10-year funding program.
9
1
2 Alternatives Analysis
3 An Alternative is a combination of a transportation network, which includes a set of highway,
4 transit and other transportation improvements, and a land use scenario that depicts the
5 distribution of population and employment for the year 2045. These Alternatives are then
6 analyzed using the Triangle Regional Model (TRM) which forecasts future travel statistics based
7 on assumptions concerning the highway network, transit service and other transportation
8 facilities. It is very unlikely that one of the Alternatives in its entirety would be advanced as the
9 Preferred Option. Most likely, the final MTP will be a combination of the various Alternatives.
10 Due to the length and depth of the Alternatives Analysis, staff has prepared a presentation
11 (Attachment 1) that summarizes some key areas of interest to Orange County. Greater detail
12 on the Analysis and other process components can be found on the DCHC MPO website:
13 http://www.dchcmpo.org/programs/transport/2045mtp.asp#tabs71
14
15 Attachment 2 is a list of Orange County (including municipal) major highway projects in the
16 Alternatives Analysis. Any specific comments on the list are welcome at this time and may
17 assist with the selection of highway projects to be included in the Preferred Option (draft 2045
18 Plan). The MPO staff has identified the projects least likely to be included in the draft 2045 Plan
19 at the bottom of the first page and continuing to the second page of Attachment 2. In October,
20 the MPO Board will decide on the list of projects to be included in the draft 2045 MTP that gets
21 released for public comment. Transit, bicycle and pedestrian project lists are not yet available
22 from the MPO. However, it is expected that the Orange County transit projects, which are to be
23 funded through a combination of state, local, and federal funds, will be taken from the Orange
24 County Transit Plan (2017).
25
26 Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard)
27 Comments The OUTBoard received a presentation from MPO staff at its September 20, 2017
28 meeting. Its comments are summarized in Attachment 3. Comments collected from the
29 OUTBoard and any added by the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) will be conveyed to
30 the DCHC MPO Board, which also has a representative and alternate from the Orange County
31 BOCC.
32
33 MPO Next Steps
34 The Alternatives Analysis has been released for public comment. Over the next few months, the
35 DCHC MPO Board will use comments collected from the public and local governments to direct
36 the development of a Preferred Option. The Preferred Option is the draft 2045 MTP which will
37 be released in October 2017. The final 2045 MTP is scheduled to be adopted by the MPO
38 Board in December 2017.
39
40 Review of Projects Currently Funded
41 Attachment 4 provides a list of the County's transportation projects considered during the last
42 prioritization process (SPOT 4.0) and indicates, with shading, the five projects currently funded
43 in the 2018-2027 STIP. During SPOT 3.0, only one of Orange County's projects from its original
44 list was funded in the 2016-2025 STIP. This project was the Hillsborough Train Station, which is
45 scheduled for construction in 2021. Each STIP includes a schedule of the work type (activity)
46 that is to occur each fiscal year for purposes of tracking a project through Project Development
47 and Environmental Analysis, Design, Property Acquisition, and Construction. Following is a link
48 to a new online tool developed and maintained by NCDOT for viewing STIP projects:
49 https://connect.ncdot.qov/projects/planning/paces/state-transportation-
50 improvementprogram.as x
10
1
2 Orange County Transportation Planning staff developed project tracking flowcharts during the
3 SPOT 4.0 process that it used to share information with the BOCC and public. However, the
4 flowchart did not and does not include tracking of County projects from the previous SPOT 3.0
5 process or the SPOT 5.0 process, which has just begun. Over the course of the next several
6 weeks, Transportation Planning staff will be working to expand upon its flowchart concept in
7 hope to provide a more sophisticated project tracking tool that includes the County's projects
8 submitted over multiple SPOT/STIP cycles with linkages to the specific work type and schedule
9 that is provided in each STIP.
10
11 Craig Benedict made the following PowerPoint presentation:
12
13 New Transportation Funding Formulas passed in 2013
14 o STI (Strategic Transportation Investments)
15 • Implemented through a SPOT
16 • Strategic Prioritization Office
17 • Process every two years creating a 10 year program of multiple projects
18
19 Each 2 years SPOT cycle is known as SPOT X.X
20 o SPOT 2.0 2014-2023 (adopted)
21 o SPOT 3.0 2016-2025 (adopted)
22 o SPOT 4.0 2018-2027 (almost adopted)
23 o SPOT 5.0 2020-2029 (starting 2 year process)
24 SPOT is primarily driven by data at different levels
25 • State— 100 points
26 • Regional— 70 points
27 • Division— 50 points
28
29 What is the 2045 (MTP) Process? (chart)
30
31 Orange County— Population/Employment Projections (graph)
32
33 Regional Travel Times (map)
34
35 Steps for Prior Submitted Projects and New Projects in New SPOT Cycle
36 o Add prior SPOT funded(1st five years) projects
37 o Add prior SPOT developed(2nd five years)
38 o Add prior unfunded projects (past 10 years)
39 o Add new or amended projects (limited number)
40
41 Adopted 2018-2027 STIP SnapShot (photo)
42
43 Transportation Decision Making Process SPOT 5.0 (chart)
44
45 SPOT to STIP (chart)
46
47 Chair Dorosin said a more basic primer is needed, as this whole process is trying to get
48 projects funded by DOT. He said the County does not build roads, and does not contribute
49 funding.
11
1 Craig Benedict said the County can contribute 20% to bike and pedestrian projects, and
2 some of the data driven scoring criteria can evolve if local governments can acquire right of
3 ways or help with design work.
4 Chair Dorosin said the options to get things done in Orange County is to take steps to
5 enhance scores through this process, or fund projects with County funds.
6 Commissioner Jacobs said they did talk about sidewalks and pedestrian access, and
7 whether this should be part of the budget process with matching funds. He said a lot of these
8 projects are not in the County's jurisdiction, and DOT will not allow a sidewalk in their right of
9 way in rural areas, nor will they maintain it.
10 Commissioner Jacobs said DOT members attend MPO meetings, but the County does
11 not have a policy about sidewalks, rather everything is ad hoc. He said they also talked about
12 projects that are not high in the queue, and looking at County plans over the last 10 to 15 years
13 that propose transportation improvements that have totally fallen off the radar.
14 Commissioner Jacobs said Orange County is getting the short end of the stick at both
15 MPOs, and this needs to improve.
16 Commissioner Rich agreed.
17 Commissioner Price said there are four counties involved with Triangle Area Rural
18 Planning Organization (TARPO), and there was an agreement to split up projects so each
19 county gets some projects. She said they also need to work with DOT staff.
20 Commissioner Jacobs said, when rural planning organizations were formed over 10
21 years ago, Orange County decided not to let the Durham-Chapel Hill MPO take the entire
22 County as the rural interests would fall to the bottom of the list. He said Orange County is
23 involved with TARPO, DCHC MPO and the Burlington-Graham MPO.
24
25 Andy Henry, DCHC MPO, made the following PowerPoint presentation:
26
27 Today's Objective
28 Understand role of Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Plan Organization (DCHC MPO).
29 Understand role of Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) and how to review it.
30 Provide any feedback to DCHC MPO and Orange County staff.
31
32 What is the DCHC MPO?
33 **Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization
34 - Responsible for long range transportation planning in Durham City and County, and
35 Parts of Orange County and Chatham County.
36 - Federal mandate— MPO must plan and approve use of federal transportation funding
37 - Policy Board -- Composed mostly of local elected officials from member jurisdictions
38 and counties:
39 Commissioner Jacobs — Member
40 Commissioner Rich —Alternate
41
42 What is the DCHC MPO? (map)
43 - Most funding designated in cooperation with NCDOT, but some discretionary funding
44 is distributed based on the MPOs policy framework.
45 - All urbanized area must be in the MPO planning boundary.
46
47 Transportation Planning Framework- chart
48
49 What is the 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP)
12
1 - Lists highway, transit and other transportation projects to address future transportation
2 deficiencies through year 2045.
3 - Assumptions — based on future land use, population and employment.
4 - Fiscal Constraint—Anticipated revenues must cover anticipated project costs.
5 - Funding -- Projects must be in MTP to receive state and federal funding (via
6 Transportation Improvement Program —TIP)
7 - Used for Planning
8 e.g., In development review, use LRTP to reserve right-of-way for future highway and
9 fixed guide way projects
10
11 What is the 2045 (MTP) Process
12 1. Goals and Objectives
13 2. Socioeconomic Data (population and employment forecasts)
14 3. Deficiency Analysis
15 4. Alternatives Analysis- We Are Here!
16 5. Preferred Option- Oct. Dec 2017
17 6. Final MTP- Dec. 2017
18
19 What is the Alternatives Analysis?
20 - A combination of a transportation network, which includes a set of highway, transit
21 and other transportation improvements, and a land use scenario that depicts the
22 distribution of population and employment (2045).
23 - Alternatives run in the Triangle Regional Model (TRM) to produce metrics that
24 describe how well Alternatives meet future travel demand.
25 - Final 2045 MTP expected to be a combination of projects and policies from the
26 various Alternatives.
27
28 What are the Alternatives?
29 *2045 Land Use Scenario + Transportation Network=Alternative
30
31 Land Use--SE Data Guide Totals* Chart
32
33 What Information is Available?
34 -Triangle Regional Model Output
35 • Performance Measures
36 • Travel lsochrones
37 • Travel Time
38 • Congestion Maps (V/C)
39 •
40 2045 No-Build —Congestion Map
41
42 Key Conclusions from Alternatives Analysis
43 Demographics
44 • Orange County will continue to experience population and employment growth
45 • Orange County employers will continue to attract commuters from outlying counties
46
47 Congestion
48 • Alternatives show significant improvements in travel time over the no-build scenario
49 • Travel times will increase even with roadway improvements that are beyond the budget
50 Rail and Land Use
13
1 • Light rail and other transit investments significantly increase non-motorized modes in
2 those corridors
3 • Higher density and mixed land uses in rail station areas increases non-motorized modes
4 and improves travel time
5
6 Sample Projects- Highways
7 I-40: widening and interchange improvements
8 1-85: widening and interchange improvements
9 US 15-501: widening, super streets and intersection/interchange improvements
10 NC 54: superstreet and intersection improvements
11 S Churton St: widening
12
13 Sample Projects- Transit
14 • Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit (D-O LRT) between Chapel Hill and Durham.
15 • Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) North-South corridor in Chapel Hill.
16 • Expanded fixed-route and express bus service.
17 • Funding for vehicle and bus facilities.
18 • Funding for park-and-ride lots, transit centers, bus stop improvements, and transit
19 emphasis corridor.
20
21 OUTBoard Comments
22 Commissioner Marcoplos referred to bullet 3 on Attachment 3, and asked if it is possible
23 to be more vigilant with technology
24 Andy Henry said it is important to just to be cognizant of such things as autonomous
25 vehicles (AV) and communicating vehicles (CV). He said they are not sure about the impact of
26 these, thus it is not in their model yet, but there will be a report that will discuss these new
27 technologies.
28 Commissioner Price said these issues are coming since monies are being put into these
29 types of research.
30 Commissioner Rich said if the Board endorses this, can there be changes made down
31 the line.
32 Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor, said it is fine to submit the OUTBoard
33 comments as they are, and this is not the final stage, and additional comments will be
34 accepted. He said there will also be a public hearing.
35 Commissioner Marcoplos referred to number 18 under the 4.0 funded projects,
36 Operation Improvements Orange Grove Road to Old Fayetteville Road, which is listed as a
37 2023 completion. He asked if this is the one with which Carrboro had a problem.
38 Commissioner Jacobs said yes.
39 Commissioner Price said DOT wanted to widen Highway 54 from Carrboro to Alamance,
40 but Carrboro did not want this area widened in its jurisdiction, and would rather pursue
41 "modernization" such as buses, lights, etc.
42 Commissioner Marcoplos said this item seemed to reflect those concerns.
43 Chair Dorosin said these are general comments, and the Board can revise them as
44 needed before final draft.
45
46 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner McKee to
47 endorse the OUTBoard comments (Attachment 3) as written or modify as appropriate to reflect
48 BOCC comments for staff to convey to the DCHC MPO Board.
49
50 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
14
1
2 Alternative comments
3 Commissioner Jacobs said it would be helpful having maps for each recommended
4 improvement, to better see that which is being discussed, and the vision. He said he would like
5 to look at #10: the intersection of Hwy 86 and 70. He asked if this includes the slip lane south
6 of highway 70 on North Churton Street before the intersection, and to have an illustration of this
7 area.
8 Andy Henry said he can make this change with a comment.
9 Commissioner Jacobs said an illustration would be most helpful.
10 Andy Henry directed the BOCC to the MPO webpage, 2045 MTP, where there are maps
11 with all of these projects as they are proposed in the plan.
12 Commissioner Jacobs asked if staff would include these into agenda abstracts going
13 forward.
14 Chair Dorosin echoed this suggestion.
15
16 d. Proposed Projects for Golden LEAF Foundation's Community Based
17 Grantsmaking Initiative
18 The Board reviewed and considered selecting up to three grant proposals, totaling no
19 more than $1.5 million for all three proposals, and authorize the County Manager to submit by
20 October 20th to the Golden LEAF Foundation's FY2018 Community Based Grantsmaking
21 Initiative.
22
23 BACKGROUND:
24 The Golden LEAF Foundation is North Carolina's designated tobacco settlement trust agency
25 that makes grants to 501(c)(3) nonprofits and governmental entities across North Carolina.
26 Approved grants focus on three core priorities: agriculture, economic development job growth
27 and retention, and workforce preparedness. Projects that focus on other opportunities to
28 support and develop economic strength in tobacco-dependent, economically distressed, and/or
29 rural communities are considered. The Foundation's mission is to transform the economy of
30 rural, tobacco-dependent and economically distressed areas of the state. In calendar year
31 2016, the Golden LEAF Foundation Board of Directors awarded over $105 million in grants.
32
33 On August 7th County staff attended a presentation by Golden LEAF Foundation President Dan
34 Gerlach, who outlined the agency's "Community Based Grantsmaking Initiative" for FY 17-18
35 that is now focusing on the 15-county North Central Region of the North Carolina. The 1
36 presentation is attached for review. Orange County is included in the designated region, which
37 the State of North Carolina calls the North Central Prosperity Zone. For the North Central
38 Region, Golden LEAF has budgeted $11 million for the initiative, and anticipates it may see
39 total grant requests rise to $22.5 million if all 15 regional counties each receive a maximum
40 grant capped at $1.5 million per county.
41
42 Orange County is eligible to submit up to three projects totaling no more than $1.5 million for all
43 projects. The due date for the County's initial grant application to be submitted to Golden LEAF
44 is October 20, 2017, and a final decision will be made on April 5, 2018. Approved grant
45 applications require a 20% cash match at the local level. Grant applications that have the best
46 chance for approval and funding are those that address economic development, education,
47 workforce development, physical infrastructure (including health care infrastructure), and
48 agriculture.
49
15
1 Other factors that can influence Golden LEAF's favorable review of a grant application include
2 the following: • Description of need in the County • The County's process to select the project
3 being nominated for a grant, and how it is a direct fit with Golden LEAF's core priorities • The
4 County's past planning efforts, strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT)
5 analyses, and related studies that focus on the nominated projects • The County's and related
6 agencies' ability to conduct the work, achieve results, and manage all reporting documentation
7 requirements • Examples to show broad community support for the project • A description of the
8 20% local cash match by the County • Any previous Golden LEAF grants in the past (such as
9 Golden LEAF's funding assistance with the Piedmont Food & Agricultural Processing Center
10 (PFAP) food processing incubator) • The impact and potential outcomes, and population served
11 in the County by the proposed projects
12
13 Five potential projects have been submitted to the County Manager's office for consideration
14 and are summarized in Attachment 1. Orange County Proposals • Eno Economic Development
15 District (EDD) Gravity Sewer Extension • Buckhorn-Mebane EDD Gravity Sewer Extension •
16 Hillsborough EDD Water and Sewer Infrastructure Town of Carrboro Proposal • Old NC 86
17 Light Industry/Flex Park Piedmont Food &Agricultural Processing Center (PFAP) Proposal •
18 Regional Cold-Chain and Co-packing Initiative
19
20 Carrboro Mayor Lydia Lavelle has provided a letter at Attachment 3 in support of the Old NC 86
21 Light Industry/Flex Park grant requested by the Town. 2 Additional information on the grant
22 applications, provided as Attachment 4, is only available electronically at:
23 https://www.dropbox.com/sh/xof3dc6ovOcul ml/ Bp5axcgCzOID OUii6myoZa?d1=0
24
25 FINANCIAL IMPACT: The Golden LEAF grant application process requires a 20% cash match
26 for any grant proposal. The County's water and sewer projects are already budgeted with debt
27 service being paid through Article 46 funding. As a result, Article 46 funds would serve as the
28 match for those projects. The Town of Carrboro plans to utilize the US Department of
29 Agriculture Rural Economic Development Loan & Grant Program (USDA REDLG), administered
30 through Piedmont Electrical Coop, under which the town would pay back over a 10 year period
31 at 0% interest to cover its 20% local match requirement. PFAP would be seeking Article 46
32 funding to cover the 20% local match ($70,000.) If one of the County's sewer infrastructure
33 projects is selected and funded with grant funds, Article 46 funds dedicated to debt service may
34 be reallocated to other projects.
35
36 Steve Brantley, Economic Development Director, made the following PowerPoint
37 presentation:
38
39 Community Based Grantsmaking Initiative
40 October 3, 2017
41
42 Characteristics of Competitive Projects
43 • Will "do the most good for the most people"
44 • Demonstrate a timeliness of need and an ability to put grant funds to work quickly
45 • Focused on action, not planning
46 • Leverage additional funds —20% local Cash match
47 • Will leverage previous community planning processes
48 • Are sustainable
49 • Have strong support from variety of county citizens/organizations
50
16
1 CBGI — The Competition
2 • $11 million budgeted for this initiative
3 • Each county in the North Central Zone can submit 1-3 projects that total no more than
4 $1.5 million per county
5 • The counties in the North Central Zone are Chatham, Durham, Edgecombe, Franklin,
6 Granville, Harnett, Johnston, Lee, Nash, Orange, Person, Vance, Wake, Warren
7 and Wilson.
8 • Not all counties will have funded projects
9
10 CBGI Timeline - chart
11
12 PFAP Cold-Chain and Co-Packing
13 Regional cold-chain and co-packing
14 • $120,000 to expand the existing freezer capacity
15 • $160,000 to install the co-packing line and to hire and train staff
16
17 Hillsborough EDD-Water and Sewer Infrastructure
18 • Will serve up to 184 acres located along the Interstate 40
19 • Scheduled for completion in March 2019
20 • Grant funds will be utilized for design and construction work
21
22 Eno EDD-Gravity sewer extension
23 • 7,700 feet of gravity sewer infrastructure
24 • Will serve up to 150 acres located along the Interstate 40/85 and US 70 corridor
25 • Scheduled for completion in November 2018
26 • Grant funds will be utilized for construction work
27
28 Buckhorn-Mebane EDD-Gravity sewer extension
29 • 10,000 feet of gravity sewer infrastructure
30 • Will serve up to 281 acres located along the Interstate 40/85 corridor
31 • Scheduled for completion in December 2022
32 • Grant funds will be utilized for design and construction work
33
34 Old 86 Light Industry/Flex Park- Town of Carrboro
35 Infrastructure cost of a light industry/flex park
36 • 3500 foot extension of sewer to the site and needed road improvements
37 • Will serve up to 22 acres of town owned property located at 7917 Old 86, in a rural area
38 of Orange Co.
39 • Scheduled for completion in June 2019
40
41 Recommendations:
42 Submit three projects totaling $1.5 million
43 • Hillsborough Economic Development District water and sewer infrastructure - $400,000
44 • Town of Carrboro light industry/flex park - $820,000
45 • Piedmont Food & Agricultural Processing Center (PFAP) Proposal Regional Cold-Chain
46 and Co-packing Initiative - $280,000
47
48 Commissioner Burroughs referred to Carrboro's application, and asked if Carrboro has
49 already applied for the USDA funds.
17
1 Annette Lafferty, Carrboro Economic and Community Development Director, said no,
2 not yet, and this would be the next step, with the USDA making a decision in December.
3 Commissioner Price said three EDDs made a proposal, and asked if there was a
4 process to choose one.
5 Bonnie Hammersley said staff chose the EDD that would be ready the soonest, which is
6 the Hillsborough EDD.
7
8 PUBLIC COMMENT:
9 Jay Bryan reviewed the following comments:
10
11 October 2, 2017
12 To the County Commissioners
13 Re: Development of Carrboro owned property on Old 86 for industrial land uses
14
15 Since January, 2017, more than three months since Carrboro officials met with the County
16 Commissioners, the Northern Transition Area Advisory Committee (NTAAC) has asked the
17 town for specifics about the idea of creating an industrial zone for property it owns on Old 86.
18 The town has afforded the Committee few details of the plan, including its desire to apply for
19 grant funds for water and sewer. The Committee has stressed its interest in the details so it
20 could make a report and recommendation to the Commissioners, who represent the county
21 citizens in the Northern Study/Transition Area, and in particular, its concern for a public process
22 for allowing input about the idea of zone and review by the Committee and residents before any
23 final decision is reached. The NTAAC has not received any information about the public input
24 process, nor has a public hearing been held to allow residents to comment.
25
26 I do not personally support the idea of developing light manufacturing and maker's space at this
27 location. I am including the following list of reasons, based on my current knowledge, and
28 subject to the understanding that I may offer other reasoning if discussions of such an idea
29 continue. Committee members share my concerns but have felt as a body that without more
30 specifics, they cannot make a final recommendation to the Commissioners:
31
32 1. The town has not presented to the NTAAC and residents sufficient analysis which
33 supports the idea that the project is economically feasible or viable in terms of an
34 appropriate return for the town versus its negative features.
35 2. Based on information from the town, the project is not feasible without subsidy for
36 sewer, at a minimum, from the County, which money, at such difficult financial times for
37 county residents, is better spent on more pressing projects.
38 3. The location is fraught with challenging traffic conditions including but not limited to, an
39 entrance at the bottom of a steep hill and curve, poor sight distance to the south due to
40 a hill obscuring car driver vision, and a potential entrance across the location to the Twin
41 Creeks Park as well as a potential entrance/exit some three to four hundred feet south
42 on Old 86, each with sizeable traffic impacts and congestion. The traffic on Old 86 has
43 steadily increased, and the increase should be expected to only continue due to the
44 eventual opening of the Twin Creeks Park, the middle school and the development of
45 the Zinn property at the corner of Old 86 and Eubanks Road.
46 4. Upon information and belief, there has been at least one death and other motor vehicle
47 accidents along the approach to and from the existing entrance to the site.
48 5. Commercial development of any kind is not in keeping with the residential nature of the
49 surrounding community as well as with Twin Creeks Park.
18
1 6. The property would better serve the general residents of Carrboro as an altruistic
2 example with a low-impact use such as community gardens, like Anathoth Gardens in
3 Cedar Grove, which could continue the local trend in the county of farm to table local
4 consumers and children at Morris Grove and an anticipated middle school on the Twin
5 Creeks Park property.
6 7. Upon information, there are other properties in Carrboro, in the ETJ and in town, which
7 could be used for such development.
8 8. What uses would be allowed on the property in terms of manufacturing cannot be
9 guaranteed. If developed, the property should be on well and septic to assure limited
10 growth.
11
12 Thank you.
13 Sincerely yours,
14
15 Jay Bryan
16 Cc: Jeff Kleaveland and NTAAC members (by email)
17
18 Jay Bryan asked if the Board would delay its vote on this item.
19 Commissioner Rich asked if there is a timeline on this item.
20 Steve Brantley said the deadline for submitting bids for grants is October 20th at noon.
21 Commissioner McKee said Buckhorn was mentioned in the materials as the only EDD
22 with rail, and asked if further expansion of water and sewer in this area would enhance the
23 development potential of this area.
24 Steve Brantley said it is the largest EDD, and it is unique to have rail. He said it is
25 almost impossible to market the northern area of the EDD because there are no utilities, and at
26 the moment it is not ready to go.
27 Commissioner Burroughs asked if this opportunity will come around again in the future.
28 Steve Brantley said the state has seven or eight prosperity zones, and Orange County is
29 in the Central Piedmont one of 15 counties. He said Golden LEAF is staging its fund giving by
30 each calendar year, selecting one or two of them. He said he has not seen this come to
31 Orange County before.
32 Commissioner Rich clarified that this opportunity will not arise for another four or five
33 years.
34 Steve Brantley said he does not know the frequency, but he said Golden LEAF is an
35 option if there were an active industrial project outside of this grant cycle.
36 Chair Dorosin said Golden LEAF is designed to provide grants for the more distressed
37 counties, and Orange County is a Tier 3 county.
38 Steve Brantley said Golden LEAF liked the County's EDDs near to the interstates, and
39 neighboring Alamance County is a Tier 2 County, and Caswell County is a Tier 1 County, to the
40 north of Orange County. He said the labor draw, within one hour, to the EDDs is also
41 considered and valued. He said the Piedmont Food & Agricultural Processing Center (PFAF)
42 project left a favorable impression, and it does not cost the County anything to make a bid on
43 one to three events.
44 Commissioner McKee said it is important to pick projects that are shovel ready and laser
45 focused. He said these are agriculture monies, and Orange County use to be a major player in
46 tobacco. He prioritized the projects as follows:
47
48 - Piedmont Food & Agricultural Processing Center - $280,000. He said he would rank
49 this project as a number one priority.
50 - Hillsborough EDD- $400,000. He said it is critical to move this forward.
19
1 - Buckhorn EDD— he said he thinks it is critical to push this forward as fast as possible,
2 and infrastructure in this area is vital.
3 - Eno EDD— he said it is unclear what is needed and wanted here, and this is not ready
4 to proceed.
5 - Town of Carrboro- Light Industry/Flex Park- he said the BOCC received a presentation
6 last fall on this item, and has heard little since. He said there needs to be more of a
7 public conversation on this item.
8
9 Commissioner Jacobs agreed with Commissioner McKee's prioritizations, and he is
10 disappointed in the Carrboro project, finding the way that it has come forward to be
11 disrespectful. He said there has never been a public hearing on this project, which is
12 disrespectful to the public. He said the lack of a collaborative process is not good, and it has
13 been a year since the joint entities discussed this and asked questions, with no response from
14 Carrboro on anything. He reviewed minutes from the October 16th 2016 joint meeting with
15 Carrboro, and said the Town has completely failed to respond to any of the BOCC's concerns
16 and questions.
17 Commissioner Jacobs said the Town of Carrboro blew off Orange County, and he will
18 never support this project until the BOCC receives responses to their questions, and the public
19 is informed. He said he is disappointed that this project was even allowed to be included in
20 these proposals. He said the BOCC represents the residents in this area, not Carrboro.
21 Commissioner Burroughs said she is torn with the Carrboro project, and one of her
22 concerns is that she is not sure this is a viable application since you have to have funds in hand
23 as a match, and the USDA funding decision may not come forward until December.
24 Bonnie Hammersley said she brought this project forward as a courtesy to the Town of
25 Carrboro and for her to have stopped it at her desk would not have been the right thing to do,
26 and thus it was brought forward to the Board of County Commissioners.
27 Commissioner Marcoplos said he agreed with Commissioner McKee's assessment, and
28 the Buckhorn EDD is a promising place to provide jobs, and should be looked as often as
29 possible. He said this is the first time he was involved in this process, but he did hear the
30 proposal from Carrboro last year, which could be a good project; but the community has not
31 been involved like it should be. He said the BOCC has a responsibility to the residents in that
32 area. He said he hopes the details will be pursued, but the project does not seem ready at this
33 time.
34 Commissioner Price said there is a difference in the minimum for the Buckhorn EDD
35 and the Carrboro project, and asked if this matters should the BOCC decide to swap out the
36 Carrboro project for the Buckhorn EDD.
37 Bonnie Hammersley said they would have to back in to the $820,000.
38 Chair Dorosin said they would submit less than the minimum that is listed.
39 Commissioner Price asked if this would work with $820,000.
40 Steve Brantley said Carrboro's estimate for total cost was $1.5 million, and he said the
41 original request by the Town was $1.25 million. He said when the Manager's office, and the
42 Economic Development Department, reviewed all five projects; the final recommendation was
43 to include the Carrboro proposal at $820,000.
44 Chair Dorosin said the question is if Buckhorn EDD is put in, and there is only $820,000
45 left, does this affect the proposal.
46 Bonnie Hammersley said it would not, and there are Article 46 monies allocated to that
47 EDD.
48 Commissioner Rich asked if this does get switched out, Carrboro can apply to the
49 County for Article 46 funds.
20
1 Bonnie Hammersley said all towns can request Article 46 funds from Orange County,
2 and she said the challenge with that is the debt service is being used with most of the Article 46
3 funds. She said staff would evaluate any requests as they come in, and weigh them against
4 the priorities of the BOCC.
5 Commissioner Rich asked if the percentage of Article 46 monies that have been spent
6 on the towns is known.
7 Steve Brantley said the EDD's infrastructure takes 60% annually, and the loan and grant
8 programs are almost exclusively in the Towns. He said some funds go to the LaUNCh program
9 in Chapel Hill.
10 Commissioner Rich said she is interested in funds that have gone to infrastructure.
11 Steve Brantley said some funds paid for a sewer line repair in Carrboro.
12 Bonnie Hammersley said there have been no other infrastructure projects in the urban
13 areas.
14 Steve Brantley said the original core use for Article 46 funds was debt service for utilities
15 in the EDDs. He said the use of the money, since the referendum was passed in 2011, has
16 essentially followed that intent. He said it is at the discretion of the BOCC to maintain or
17 change this intent as it sees fit.
18 Chair Dorosin said he thought Commissioner Jacobs' comments were unfair to the
19 Town of Carrboro, and if the BOCC is not receiving requested information, it should be
20 following up. He said this project is on the agenda for the BOCC's joint meeting with the Town
21 of Carrboro. He said the Golden LEAF opportunity came about very recently. He said he would
22 support the recommendation, but noted it is important to the Board's relationship with the Town
23 to move forward. He said residents' concerns should be heard and considered, but they are
24 under a tight timeline. He said he doubts that two EDD projects will be funded, and the
25 Carrboro project is valid and worth exploring further. He said he will not support a motion that
26 does not include the Carrboro project.
27 Commissioner Jacobs said he is not being unfair to Carrboro, and rather Carrboro is
28 being unfair to Orange County. He said Carrboro has had 12 months to get this information to
29 the County and the public, but Carrboro is not paying close attention. He said the BOCC would
30 be irresponsible to agree to put water and sewer in a rural area, without knowing the
31 consequences. He said the best way to limit its applicability to other parcels is to size it so
32 small that it will not be that effective to spend the money on it. He said if it is going to be big
33 enough for other development, then the BOCC must consider the consequences before signing
34 off. He said if Carrboro wanted to be inclusive, it could have asked to be put on the BOCC
35 agenda to provide information prior to the BOCC needing to make a decision.
36 Commissioner McKee said his intent is not to disparage any of the projects, but he finds
37 two are not fully cooked. He said all of this is a long shot, as Orange County is seen as a
38 wealthy county.
39
40 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs for
41 the Board to authorize the Manager to submit Letters of Inquiry to Golden LEAF for the
42 following three projects totaling $1.5 million:
43 1. Piedmont Food &Agricultural Processing Center (PFAP) Proposal Regional Cold-Chain
44 and Co-packing Initiative - $280,000
45 2. Hillsborough Economic Development District Water and Sewer Infrastructure - $400,000;
46 3. Buckhorn-Mebane EDD - $820,000; and
47
48 Chair Dorosin said it is not fair to penalize Carrboro because of the timing of the Golden
49 LEAF opportunity. He said there is a broader disagreement among the BOCC about extending
50 water and sewer generally.
21
1 Commissioner Burroughs said these projects have potential, but she wants to submit
2 the projects that are most likely to succeed in the application process. She said she does not
3 want to throw away money from Orange County.
4 Commissioner Price agreed, and has concerns with putting forth a proposal with
5 controversy and funding concerns. She said the Carrboro project seems like a valuable one,
6 but needs further discussion and information. She said there are other funding options that
7 could be pursued with Carrboro.
8 Commissioner McKee said the Buckhorn project is a larger acreage project, and gives
9 access to rail, which is why he proposed this financial break down. He said he understands the
10 Chair's concerns over the BOCC's partnership with Carrboro, and he shares that concern. He
11 said the Eno EDD will also require a larger discussion, and for that reason he did not propose
12 that project, just as he did not propose Carrboro. He said discussions should proceed, and he
13 sees no reason why the BOCC and Carrboro cannot be good partners.
14
15 VOTE: Ayes, 5 (Commissioner McKee, Commissioner Price, Commissioner Burroughs,
16 Commission Marcoplos, Commissioner Jacobs); Nays, 2 (Chair Dorosin and Commissioner
17 Rich)
18
19 Commissioner Rich asked Bonnie Hammersley if she would bring back a discussion on
20 how Article 46 funds are spent; the percentage of expenses spent on infrastructure in County
21 versus the Towns; and the revolving loans.
22 Commissioner Jacobs said he realized he was not being diplomatic in his comments,
23 but he feels very strongly about how this has been handled. He said his comments have no
24 bearing on whether he thinks it is a meritorious project.
25
26 e. Board of Commissioners — Discussion of 2018 Meeting Calendar
27 The Board discussed and considered approving the proposed meeting schedule for the
28 Board of County Commissioners for calendar year 2018.
29
30 BACKGROUND:
31 In accordance with 143.318.12 of the North Carolina General Statutes, a schedule of regular
32 meetings shall be filed with the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners. The schedule
33 must show the date, time and place of each meeting. The Board initially discussed the draft
34 2018 meeting calendar at its September 7, 2017 Work Session, and this item is a follow up to
35 that discussion.
36
37 Chair Dorosin said the BOCC previously discussed this item, and agreed to withdraw
38 the quarterly public hearings, and combine public hearings into regular meetings. He said all
39 meetings will begin at 7:00 p.m., unless otherwise noted.
40
41 Decision Items:
42
43 (1) Should the legislative breakfast be deleted from the calendar as a stand-alone morning
44 meeting? (This meeting has been proposed as an agenda item at a regular meeting.)
45
46 Chair Dorosin said he spoke with the three legislators, who all agreed that having this
47 meeting as part of the regular agenda would be acceptable.
48 Commissioner Jacobs said if this change is made, it will be important to hold the
49 legislative public hearing prior to that regular meeting.
50
22
1 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to
2 remove the Legislative Breakfast as a stand-alone meeting and to incorporate this into a regular
3 meeting agenda.
4
5 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
6
7 (2) Meetings with the Towns: should these remain stand alone, or be combined with a work
8 session. If combined, should the meeting start earlier than 7:00 p.m.?
9
10 Commissioner McKee supported leaving these as stand alone meetings.
11 Commissioner Jacobs agreed with Commissioner McKee. He said there are more
12 opportunities to chat with one another and go into more depth as a board, with stand-alone
13 work sessions.
14 Chair Dorosin clarified that Commissioners Jacobs and McKee are in favor of keeping
15 the Town meetings as separate days, and not combined with work sessions.
16 Commissioner Jacobs said yes.
17 Commissioner McKee said he would be fine with adding an item or two after a meeting
18 with a Town, if time permitted. He said face-time with the Towns is important and is respectful.
19 Commissioner Marcoplos echoed support for leaving these as stand-alone meetings as
20 these meetings only happen once a year. He said there should be no pressure to move these
21 meetings along due to later agenda items. He said it is a way to show respect to the Towns.
22 Commissioner Price agreed, and suggested making the meetings more substantive.
23 Chair Dorosin said a meeting with the Town could be allowed flexibility if followed by a
24 work session. He said he would never want to squash a conversation simply due to a
25 timetable, and a full work session could be added into the calendar, if needed. He said he has
26 been trying to make meetings with the Towns more like a work session with pertinent
27 discussion topics planned on an agenda in advance. He said he believes the BOCC could
28 achieve this.
29 Commissioner Burroughs agreed with Chair Dorosin, and believes the BOCC could
30 successfully combine Town meetings with work sessions, but it is seems the Board does not
31 want to do that at this time.
32
33 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to
34 approve leaving Town meetings as standalone meetings on separate dates.
35
36 VOTE: Ayes, 5 (Commissioner Rich, Commissioner McKee, Commissioner Price,
37 Commissioner Marcoplos, Commissioner Jacobs); Nays, 2 (Commissioner Burroughs and
38 Chair Dorosin)
39
40 (3) Staff Evaluations - starting at 5:30 p.m., before a budget work session. Manager on one
41 day, followed by Attorney and Clerk on another day.
42
43 Commissioner McKee is concerned about doing the Clerk and the Attorney on the same
44 night before a meeting.
45 Commissioner Price said she would prefer doing evaluations separately from other
46 meetings, and would be open to doing all three evaluations on the same day.
47 Commissioner Jacobs said he would like to hear input from the Clerk, Attorney and
48 Manager if they would mind the BOCC eating dinner during the evaluation process.
49 All said it would be fine for the BOCC to eat during evaluations.
23
1 Chair Dorosin suggested putting the evaluations before budget public hearings, as the
2 BOCC only listens during these, often shorter, meetings.
3 Commissioner McKee said he is concerned with starting at 5:30 p.m. and being able to
4 finish by 7:00 p.m., which would be necessary given the arrival of the public attending the
5 budget hearing.
6 Commissioner Price said she likes Chair Dorosin's suggestion.
7 Commissioner Burroughs said she is intrigued by the thought of doing the evaluations in
8 front of three separate meetings.
9 Commissioner Marcoplos agreed with Commissioner Burroughs.
10
11 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Chair Dorosin to move staff
12 evaluations before Budget Public Hearings with the Manager on May 10th, and the
13 Clerk/Attorney on May 17th, with the meetings starting at 5:30 p.m.
14
15 Commissioner Jacobs said he would consider this motion if the evaluations started at
16 5:00 p.m.
17 Commissioner Rich and Chair Dorosin accepted Commissioner Jacobs' friendly
18 amendment.
19 Commissioner McKee asked if the motion maker would accept a friendly amendment to
20 do the Clerk and the Attorney two separate nights.
21 Chair Dorosin said to vote on the existing motion.
22
23 VOTE: Ayes, 2 (Chair Dorosin and Commissioner Rich); Nays, 5 (Commissioner Jacobs,
24 Commissioner Marcoplos, Commissioner McKee, Commissioner Burroughs and Commissioner
25 Price)
26
27 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner McKee to
28 schedule the staff evaluations as follows:
29 Manager— May 3rd
30 Attorney— May 10th
31 Clerk — May 17th
32 Meetings to begin at 5:30 p.m.
33
34 VOTE: Ayes, 5 (Commissioner Price, Commissioner Jacobs, Commissioner Marcoplos,
35 Commissioner McKee, Commissioner Burroughs); Nays, 2 (Commissioner Rich and Chair
36 Dorosin)
37
38 The Clerk was directed to bring back the draft calendar with proposed changes at the
39 next meeting on the Consent Agenda.
40
41 7. Reports
42
43 a. Passmore Center Expansion Update
44 The Board received a report outlining the design and project schedule for the Passmore
45 Center Expansion Capital Project.
46 Angel Barnes, Asset Management Services, reviewed the following information:
47 BACKGROUND:
48 The Board of Orange County Commissioners (BOCC) appropriated capital funding of$550,000
49 in the FY2016-17 Capital Investment Plan (CI P) for a needed expansion of programming space
50 for the Passmore Center in Hillsborough.
24
1
2 The contemplated expansion area was to enclose the patio area at the back of the facility near
3 the Florence Gray Soltys Adult Day Health Center. During the initial design dialogues between
4 staff and the design consultant, CRA Associates, all agreed that a more useful programming
5 space is at the front entrance of the facility.
6
7 This renovated entry will provide a more accessible front desk area. The expansion also
8 provides a more flexible and comfortable expanded space where residents and patrons tend to
9 gather in the facility.
10
11 A representative of CRA Associates will be available to review the design. The attached
12 Passmore Center Site and Floor Plan Illustrative provides plans and elevations of the expanded
13 space. CRA Associates will provide the BOCC an overview of these plans and illustrative.
14
15 The proposed project schedule is as follows:
16 • Construction Bidding Phase, Agency Permitting: September to October, 2017
17 • Construction Contract Award: November, 2017
18 • Construction: November, 2017 to March, 2018
19 • Substantial Completion: April, 2018
20
21 Ken Redfoot, CRA Associates, made a brief PowerPoint presentation, which consisted
22 of photographs, site plans, and architectural renderings. He said the project will create a new
23 vestibule, a 1,200 square foot flexible area, and a reworking of the information desk.
24 Commissioner McKee said he has received calls about the proposed rendering not
25 having a covered portico, and he appreciated this idea being mentioned this evening. He
26 knows it will garner a lot of support.
27 Commissioner McKee said he receives reports from residents that there is some
28 difficulty accessing the Passmore center from the Sportsplex without going outside.
29 Ken Redfoot said there has always been an access door from the Sportsplex to the
30 Senior Center.
31 Commissioner McKee said he would go look at this for himself.
32 Commissioner Price said the feedback she has received is that this doorway is locked.
33 Jeff Thompson, Asset Management Services Director, said in the original design (2007)
34 this door was designed as an under roof pass thru between the two buildings, and staff at that
35 time did not utilize it; so it was locked. He said staff will be re-visiting this issue to use this door
36 as a pass through, if requested by users.
37 Commissioner McKee asked if there is a reason why this door would not be open and
38 accessible at all times.
39 Jeff Thompson said the door is in the lobby of the Sportsplex, but goes through into
40 office space in the Senior Center. He said staff will work to reconfigure this and make it a
41 public space, which can allow public access.
42 Commissioner Jacobs asked if anything will happen to the patio area in back.
43 Ken Redfoot said it will stay the same.
44 Commissioner asked if this is due to budgetary restraints, or the fact that more space is
45 not needed.
46 Ken Redfoot said the back patio was designed, but it was determine that a better use of
47 funds would be to amend the front of the building, due to the greater use of this space. He said
48 the concern in developing the back of the building is that it would go unused.
25
1 Commissioner Price said she has concerns about the limited use of the back patio, due
2 to the limited access to this space. She said there is only one way to get to the back patio due
3 to landscaping and the wall. She said if one wants to use the patio, one must be able bodied.
4 Ken Redfoot said a wheelchair bound person could access it, but all must come outside
5 the building to access the patio.
6 Commissioner Price asked if it is possible to access the patio from the living room.
7 Ken Redfoot said staff likes the patio, and wanted to increase its size.
8 Commissioner Price said that would be an option, and there could be a section of patio
9 that is level with parking lot grade, and another section that is level with the floor of the addition.
10 Ken Redfoot said this is a good idea, and he will look into it further.
11 Janice Tyler, Department on Aging Director, said the back patio was found space due to
12 an emergency exit being there.
13 Commissioner Price said her campaign is that everyone be able to get everywhere. She
14 said if this will remain a fire exit, then all do not need access through it; but should this change
15 then she would like all to have access.
16 Ken Redfoot said this will remain an emergency exit.
17
18 8. Consent Agenda
19
20 • Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
21 8-j by Chair Dorosin
22
23 • Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
24
25 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Price to
26 approve the remaining items on the Consent Agenda.
27
28 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
29
30 • Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
31 8-j: Chair Dorosin said he was not here for prior discussion on this topic. He referred to
32 the section that says the parcels will transfer under the "weed and seed initiative to a weed and
33 seed recipient, a private non-profit organization". He asked if the weed and seed recipient is
34 known, and who makes that decision.
35 Bonnie Hammersley said the recipient is not known, and the Board of County
36 Commissioners will decide whom that will be. She said some of the parcels will be connected
37 to the Cedar Grove Park.
38 Chair Dorosin suggested talking to affordable housing partners about applying for the
39 weed and seed grant.
40
41 A motion was made by Chair Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Rich to approve this
42 item, and for staff to speak to affordable housing partners about applying for this grant.
43
44 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
45
46 a. Minutes
47 The Board approved the minutes from September 5, 7, 11 and 19, 2017 as submitted by the
48 Clerk to the Board.
49 b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds
26
1 The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release motor vehicle
2 property tax values for two taxpayers with a total of two bills that will result in a reduction of
3 revenue, in accordance with the NCGS.
4 c. Property Tax Releases/Refunds
5 The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release property tax
6 values for six taxpayers with a total of six bills that will result in a reduction of revenue in
7 accordance with North Carolina General Statute 105-381.
8 d. Applications for Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion
9 The Board approved six untimely applications for exemption/exclusion from ad valorem taxation
10 for six bills for the 2017 tax year.
11 e. Resolution in Support of a One Percent (1%) Cost-of-living Adjustment for the Local
12 Government Employees Retirement System (LGERS)
13 The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, encouraging the Board of
14 Trustees of the North Carolina Local Government Employees Retirement System (LGERS) to
15 approve a one percent (1%) cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for LGERS members effective
16 July 1, 2018 and authorized the Chair to sign.
17 f. Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Amendment Outline and Schedule— Revisions
18 to Public Hearing Process
19 The Board approved process components and schedule for government initiated amendments
20 to the Unified Development Ordinance regarding revisions to the public hearing process.
21 g. County Attorney Employment Agreement Amendment
22 The Board amended the Employment Agreement governing the terms and conditions of the
23 County Attorney's employment and authorized the Chair to sign.
24 h. General Obligation Bond Sale
25 The Board approved a resolution providing final Board authorization for general obligation bond
26 sale issues: 1) two-thirds school bonds in the amount of$5,900,000; 2) voter-approved school
27 bonds in the amount of$40,000,000; and 3) voter-approved affordable housing bonds in the
28 amount of$2,500,000. This is the first issuance of school and affordable housing general
29 obligation bonds approved by the voters in the November 2016 election.
30 i. Changes in BOCC Regular Meeting Schedule for 2017
31 The Board approved changes to the County Commissioners' regular meeting calendar for 2017.
32 j. Approval of Ownership Transfer/Purchase of Cedar Valley and Efland Properties
33 The Board approved the ownership transfer/purchase of Cedar Valley and Efland Properties
34 and to:
35 o Purchase Parcel 2 not to exceed $95,000 from the Lands Legacy fund
36 o Purchase Parcel 4 not to exceed $80,000 from the Sheriff's Drug Forfeitures fund
37 • Instructed the County Attorney to contact the Assistant US Attorney in Greensboro to
38 coordinate the drafting of the necessary Memoranda of Understanding to transfer the properties
39 to their ultimate nonprofit recipients; and
40 • Authorized the Chair to sign the Memoranda of Understanding on behalf of the County subject
41 to final review by staff and the County Attorney to effectuate the transfer of Parcels 1-6.
42
43 9. County Manager's Report
44 NONE
45
46 10. County Attorney's Report
47 NONE
48
49 11. *Appointments
50
27
1 a. **Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee—Appointments
2 The Board will consider making appointments to the Adult Care Home Community
3 Advisory Committee.
4
5 DEFERRED
6
7 b. Commission for the Environment—Appointments
8 The Board considered making appointments to the Commission for the Environment.
9
10 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to
11 appoint the following to the Commission for the Environment:
12
13 • Appointment to a first full term (position #7) "At-Large" for Will Stanley expiring
14 12/31/2019.
15 • Appointment to a partial term (position #15) "At-Large" for Bradley Saul expiring
16 12/31/2018.
17
18 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
19
20 c. Hillsborough Planning Board —Appointment
21 The Board considered making an appointment to the Hillsborough Planning Board.
22
23 A motion was made by Commissioner Marcoplos, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to
24 appoint the following to the Hillsborough Planning Board:
25
26 • Appointment to a first full term (Position #3) "Hillsborough ETJ / County" position for
27 Chris Johnston expiring 05/31/2020.
28
29 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
30
31 d. Human Relations Commission —Appointments
32 The Board considered making appointments to the Human Relations Commission.
33
34 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to
35 appoint the following to the Human Rights Commission:
36
37 • Appointment to a partial term (position #1) "At-Large" for Anita Sue Kinzer expiring
38 06/30/2018.
39 • Appointment to a first full term (position #4) "Town of Chapel Hill" for April Chang
40 expiring 06/30/2020.
41 • Appointment to a second full term (position #5) "At-Large" for Marc Xavier expiring
42 06/30/2020. (see recommendation letter for attendance explanation).
43 • Appointment to a partial term (position #6) "At-Large" for Nora Spencer expiring
44 09/30/2019.
45 • Appointment to a first full term (position #8) "At-Large" for Ana Garcia-Turner expiring
46 06/30/2020.
47 • Appointment to a partial term (position #9) "At-Large" for Matt Case expiring 06/30/2019.
48 • Appointment to a partial term (position #16) "At-Large" for Nancy White expiring
49 06/30/2018.
28
1 • Appointment to a first full term (position #17) "At-Large" for Jacqulyn Podger expiring
2 06/30/2020.
3 • Appointment to a first full term (position #18) "Town of Carrboro" for Daniel Ryan
4 expiring 06/30/2020.
5
6 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
7
8 e. Orange County Housing Authority—Appointment
9 The Board considered making an appointment to the Orange County Housing Authority.
10
11 A motion was made by Chair Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Marcoplos to appoint
12 the following to the Orange County Housing Authority:
13
14 • Appointment to a first full term (position #5) "At Large" for Phil Venable expiring
15 06/30/2022.
16
17 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
18
19 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to
20 appoint the following to the Orange County Housing Authority Board:
21
22 • Appointment to a partial term (position #6) "Resident Member" for Paul Reynolds
23 expiring 06/30/2019
24
25 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
26
27 f. Orange Unified Transportation Board —Appointment
28 The Board considered making an appointment to the Orange Unified Transportation
29 Board (OUTBoard).
30
31 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
32 appoint the following to the OUTBoard:
33
34 • Appointment to a second full term (position #3) "Cedar Grove Township" for Ed Vaughn
35 expiring 09/30/2020.
36
37 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
38
39 12. Information Items
40
41 • September 19, 2017 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List
42 • Tax Collector's Report— Numerical Analysis
43 • Tax Collector's Report— Measure of Enforced Collections
44 • Tax Assessor's Report— Releases/Refunds under $100
45 • BOCC Chair Letter Regarding Petitions from September 19, 2017 Regular Meeting
46
47 13. Closed Session- two items
48
49 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
50 go into closed session at 10:33 p.m. for the purpose below:
29
1
2 "To discuss the County's position and to instruct the County Manager and County Attorney on
3 the negotiating position regarding the terms of a contract to purchase real property," NCGS §
4 143-318.11(a)(5).
5
6 "To discuss matters related to the location or expansion of industries or other businesses in the
7 area served by the public body, including agreement on a tentative list of economic
8 development incentives that may be offered by the public body in negotiations," NCGS § 143-
9 318.11(a)(4).
10
11 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
12
13 RECONVENE INTO REGULAR SESSION
14
15 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to
16 reconvene back into regular session at 11:15 p.m.
17
18 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
19
20 14. Adjournment
21
22 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to
23 adjourn the meeting at 11:15 p.m.
24
25 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
26
27 Mark Dorosin, Chair
28
29
30 Donna Baker
31 Clerk to the Board
32
33
34
35