HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-19-1992V - --
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, MAY 19,
7:30 P.M.
OWASA OPERATION
400 JONES FERRY
CARRBORO, NC
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA
NOTE: BACKGROUND MATERIAL
1992 ON ALL ABSTRACTS
AVAILABLE IN THE
CENTER CLERK'S OFFICE.
ROAD
NOTICE TO PEOPLE WITH IMPAIRED HEARING: Audio
amplification equipment is available on request.
If you need this assistance, please call the County
Clerk's Office at 732 -8181 or 968 -4501.
I. ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE AGENDA
II. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
A. Matters on the Printed Agenda
(We would appreciate you signing the pad ahead
of time so that you are not overlooked.)
B. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
PUBLIC CHARGE
The Board of Commissioners pledges to the citizens of
Orange County its respect. The Board asks its
citizens to conduct themselves in a respectful,
courteous manner, both with the Board and with fellow
citizens. At any time should any member of the Board
or any citizen fail to observe this public charge,
the Chair will ask the offending person to leave the
meeting until that individual regains personal
control. Should decorum fail to be restored, the
Chair will recess the meeting until such time that a
genuine commitment to this public charge is observed.
III. ITEMS FOR DECISION -- CONSENT AGENDA
(Any item may be removed for separate consideration)
A. Budget Ordinance Amendment #13
B. 1991 -92 Audit Contract
C. Settlement of Dispute with Prime Income
Partners -- Franchise Tax
D. North Chatham Fire Department Contract'
E. Historic Inventory Grant -- -Phase II
.__
IV. RESOLUTIONS PROCLAMATIONS
A. Access to Potential Landfill Sites
B. Non - Acceptance of Outside Waste at Orange County
Landfill
C. Proposed Resolutions for NCACC Annual Conference
V. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
VII. REPORTS
A. Final Report from the Task Force for the Future
of Human Services
B. Emergency Communications Coverage Improvements
VIII. ITEMS FOR DECISION -- REGULAR AGENDA
A. Voluntary Agricultural District Designation- -
Walters Farm
B. 1992 -97 Capital Improvement Plan
C. Consideration of OWASA - Related Issues (April 1
Assembly of Governments Meeting)
IX. BOARD COMMENTS
X. COUNTY MANAGERIS REPORT
XI. APPOINTMENTS
X11. MINUTES
XIII. EXECUTIVE SESSION
XIV. ADJOURNMENT
( *) Indicates items that need immediate attention.
1
APPROVED 6 -29 -92
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 19, 1992
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in Regular Session on
Tuesday, May 19, 1992 at 7:30 p.m. in the OWASA meeting room on Jones Ferry
Road in Carrboro, North Carolina.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Moses Carey, Jr., and
Commissioners Alice M. Gordon, Stephen H. Halkiotis, Verla C. Insko and Don
Willhoit.
COUNTY ATTORNEY PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill
STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr., Assistant County
Manager Albert Kittrell, Economic Development Director Ted Abernathy, Deputy
Clerk Kathy Baker, Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe, Finance Director Ken
Chavious, Planning Director Marvin Collins, Purchasing Director Pam Jones,
Budget Director Sally Kost, Recreation and Parks Director MaryAnne Moore and
Fire Marshall Mike Tapp.
I. ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE AGENDA
Two additional names were added to the Appointments.
A resolution was added changing the place of the May 21st Special
Meeting to Superior Courtroom.
Item 8 -A was deleted
A request to support H916 introduced by Representative Anne Barnes
was added as item 4 -D.
11. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
A. MATTERS ON THE PRINTED AGENDA
Chair Carey stated that those citizens who have indicated a desire
to speak on an item on the printed agenda will be recognized at the
appropriate time.
B. MATTERS NOT ON THE PRINTED AGENDA
Bruce Kohorn read a prepared statement from citizens against site
eleven. In summary the letter stated that they are dissatisfied with the
search process for Orange County's next landfill. They ask for an
investigation of the voting process which led to the selection of landfill
sites 11, 2, 9 and 17 for geotechnical drilling. They feel the sites were
chosen by a process heavily influenced by an angry public and not by sound
public policy and scientific reasoning. They do not understand why site 3
or even part of site 3 was eliminated. They feel that site 3 should not be
eliminated until the fate of the airport is determined. They want the
selection process to be scientifically sound and politically just. They are
against spending $60,000 to drill four sites. The asked that site 17 be
drilled and if not suitable drill one more site.
PUBLIC CHARGE
2
Chair Carey read the public charge.
III. ITEMS FOR DECISION - CONSENT AGENDA
Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner
Halkiotis to approve those items on the consent agenda as stated below:
A. BUDGET ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 113
The Board approved the following amendments to the 1991 -92 Budget
Ordinance:
GENERAL FUND
Source - Intergovernmental $ 4,270
Appropriation - Human Services 4,270
(To budget for additional State - related
Health Department revenues)
Source - Intergovernmental $150,505
Appropriation - Human Services 150,505
(To budget for additional State funding
for Child Day Care and the JOBS programs
in the Department of Social Services)
Source - Intergovernmental $ 5,739
Appropriation - Miscellaneous 5,739
(To budget for Emergency Food and Shelter
funds)
Source - Intergovernmental $ 144
Appropriation - Contributions to Outside 144
Agencies
(To budget for additional CBA funds for
Project Attend)
Source - Intergovernmental $ 1,050
Appropriation - Contributions to Outside 1,050
Agencies
(to budget for Chapel Hill Motel Tax grant
awarded to the Orange County Arts Commission)
Source - Intergovernmental $ 3,739
Appropriation - Human Services 3,739
(To budget additional Title IIIB funds for
the Department on Aging)
Source - Miscellaneous $ 1,500
Appropriation - Human Services 1,500
(To budget for donations for the Department
on Aging)
Source - Intergovernmental $ 7,800
Appropriation - Human Services 7,800
(To budget for Medicaid reimbursements for
the Department on Aging)
Source - Intergovernmental $ 500
Appropriation - Human $ervices 500
(To budget for award from the Chapel Hill
Service League for the Dept. on Aging)
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND:
Source - Intergovernmental $ 32,975
Appropriation - Human Services 32,976
(To budget for NCDOT match for replacement
vehicles)
B. 1991 -92 AUDIT CONTRACT
The Board approved the contract with Deloitte & Touche to develop
the audit for fiscal year ending June 30, 1992 for a fee of $47,000.
C. SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTE WITH PRIME INCOME PARTNERS - FRANCHISE TAX
For the years 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1991, Prime Cable Income
Partners paid Orange County 3% of the Carolina Cable gross receipts for its
Orange County operations. The County's Cable Television Ordinance was
amended in 1987 to require the payment of a 5% fee effective with Prime's
fiscal year beginning after the amendment. Prime has paid Orange County
$50,000 in full settlement of the disputed fees for these four years. The
executed settlement agreement and a copy of the acceptance of the document
by Warner Cable Communications, Inc. of the Carolina Cable franchise are made
a part of these minutes by reference.
D. NORTH CHATHAM FIRE DEPARTMENT CONTRACT
The Board approved the proposed contract with North Chatham
Volunteer Fire Department, as to general form and content, and authorized the
Chair to sign the contract, based on final review and subject to minor
revisions by the County Attorney.
E. HISTORIC INVENTORY GRANT - PHASE II
The Board authorized the County Manager to sign the Memorandum of
Agreement and provide certification of matching funds for a $17,000 Survey
and Planning Grant from the State Historic Preservation Office for the
purpose of conducting an inventory of historic sites and structures in the
remaining unincorporated portions of Orange County.
VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA: UNANIMOUS
IV. RESOLUTIONS /PROCLAMATIONS
A. ACCESS TO POTENTIAL LANDFILL SITES
This resolution and interlocal agreement between Orange County and
the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill authorizes the Town of Chapel Hill to
act on behalf of the jurisdictions comprising the Landfill Owners' Group in
exercising the statutory authority granted to each jurisdiction to conduct
testing of potential sites for a landfill.
Commissioner Gordon asked for an update on the landfill search
process before this resolution is considered by the Board.
Commissioner Halkiotis made reference to a report received from
4
Reggie Gillespie in which land was devastated by the heavy equipment used to
do the soil test borings. Trees were cut and vegetation was cleared.
Commissioner Halkiotis prefers that this authorization remain with the Board
of County Commissioners instead of with another group.
Commissioner Insko agreed with Commissioner Halkiotis adding that
she has questions about the process that need to be answered. Chair Carey
agreed.
Reggie Gillespie, Counsel to Randolph D. Fox, stated that Mr.
Fox's property is located near the intersection of St. Mary's and New Sharon
Church Roads and constitutes approximately 78% of the land area that has been
designated as Site OC -11. This property is the largest single tract that has
been targeted for the possible landfill. He asked that the Board reject or
delay any action on the proposed resolution. A copy of his statement is in
the Permanent Agenda File in the Clerk's Office. His main concern is the
destruction of property when the soil test borings are done. He feels that
an effort should be made to narrow the search process.
Mark Marcoplos thanked the Board for looking into the process.
He asked that the testing be postponed. He feels that the landfill is going
to last longer than 1997 which will give the County adequate time to have a
recycling plan in place. He feels the drilling is not necessary since it is
not known how large a landfill will be needed. Things are going to change.
Packaging will change and 70% less will be thrown away. He feels a solid
waste management plan needs to be in place so that the size of the landfill
can be determined.
The County Attorney clarified that the authority to go on the land
is the authority of Orange County, Chapel Hill and Carrboro. Joyce
Engineering will go on the property and do the testing under their contract
with the LOG. The reason why the resolution and the agreement includes all
three entities is that it is assumed that Chapel Hill will continue to run
the landfill.
Commissioner Halkiotis asked about the statement that Joyce
Engineering would ultimately be running the landfill. He asked that
information be obtained on how many landfills Joyce Engineering run elsewhere
in the United States. He also asked for information on the size of the test
pit excavations.
Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner
Halkiotis to request a report on the landfill process and on the impact of
the soil test borings and /or the test pit excavations on the land.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Commissioner Insko questioned why the sites were so large. She
has questions she would like answered about two sites which may not be
suitable. She feels that the worst thing they can do is to let the process
continue when it may not be working. Commissioner Gordon agreed with this
statement.
It was decided that questions would be forwarded to the Board, the
Manager or the Clerk.
5
B. NON - ACCEPTANCE OF OUTSIDE WASTE AT ORANGE COUNTY LANDFILL
Commissioner Willhoit indicated that landfilling of waste from
outside the County has not been approved by the Board. There was a regional
effort at one time but that has been abandoned. In order for recycling to
be feasible, it may be necessary to do it on a regional basis, but that is
yet to be determined. One of the concerns of recycling is that there must
be markets and usually this is done on a regional basis.
Commissioner Insko emphasized that the implication of approving
this resolution is that the County's waste would not be sent elsewhere.
Commissioner Halkiotis asked about out -of- county people dumping
in the County's green boxes and Commissioner Willhoit stated that he has
asked for cost figures to move immediately to a system of securing all green
box sites. He plans to address this during the budget session.
Commissioner Willhoit answered various questions about the
disposal of hazardous waste in the area.
The Board decided to change the name from Regional Landfill to
Orange County Landfill.
Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner
Halkiotis to approve the resolution as stated below:
RESOLUTION
PROHIBITING ACCEPTANCE AT THE ORANGE COUNTY LANDFILL
OF SOLID WASTE GENERATED OUTSIDE ORANGE COUNTY
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the Orange County Board of Commissioners and
the Landfill Owners' Group not to knowingly accept solid waste at
the orange County Landfill that is generated by individuals or
organizations residing outside the geographical boundaries of
Orange County and that portion of the Town of Chapel Hill located
within Durham County, and
WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners recognizes the need to
reduce and manage solid waste responsibly now and in the future,
and
WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners is committed to a good
solid waste management plan and to preserving natural resources,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Orange County Board of Commissioners
reaffirms the policy that to the extent permitted by law, the
existing Orange County Landfill, as well as any successor thereto,
shall be designated to accept solid waste generated exclusively
by residents, businesses, and other institutions located in Orange
County and that portion of the Town of Chapel Hill located within
Durham County.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
C. PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS FOR NCACC ANNUAL CONFERENCE
Chair Carey asked for any resolutions that the Board of County
Commissioners would like to have drafted for the NCACC Annual Conference.
After a brief discussion on several topics, it was decided that
there were no resolutions at this time. Concern was expressed about abused
children. Marti Pryor -Cook will give a report at a later meeting on whether
51
families should be kept together where parents are drug users. It was
decided that this may be a topic that an established Board, Commission or
Agency could study and develop a report.
D. SUPPORT OF HB916 - DISTRIBUTION OF LOCAL REVENUES
__. Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner
Willhoit to support HB916 introduced by Representative Anne Barnes and direct
the Chair to write a letter to the appropriate legislators.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
To increase the emphasis of their support, Commissioner Willhoit
suggested that each Commissioner write a letter.
E. CHANGE OF-MEETING LOCATION FOR MAY 21, 1992
Motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Commissioner
Halkiotis to approve the notice of change of place of meeting for the May 21,
1992 meeting as stated below:
COUNTY OF ORANGE
NOTICE OF
CHANGE OF PLACE OF MEETING
OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WHEREAS, N.C.G.S. 153A -40(a) requires the Board of County
Commissioners to fix the time and place of its meetings; and
WHEREAS, this Board desires to change the place of the special meeting
scheduled for May 21, 1992 at 6:00 p.m.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners
that the May 21 Special Meeting scheduled for 6:00 p.m. will be held in the
DSS Conference Room instead of the Food Lab as originally scheduled.
This notice is provided pursuant to N.C.G.S. 153 -40.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
V. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS - NONE
VI. PUBLIC HEARING AND A DECISION - NONE
VII. REPORTS
A. FINAL REPORT FROM THE TASK FORCE FOR THE FUTURE OF HUMAN SERVICES
In the first section of this final report, the Task Force
described the types of information - sharing and coordination efforts that are
in place in the human service system and identified areas that could be
improved. The second section of the report contained the proposal for the
creation of a coordinating council with representation similar to that of the
task force. This Council is not intended to take the place of existing
boards or advisory groups. Instead, it provides a forum to enhance
communication and coordination among those who fund and provide human
services. The third section of the report contained "A Snapshot Report of
Human Services in Orange County" which gives a glimpse of the current state
of the human services system.
Motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by
7
Commissioner Willhoit to endorse the creation of a coordinating council and
receive the report as information.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
B. EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS COVERAGE IMPROVEMENTS
For a number of years, emergency service providers in orange
County have worked with a radio communications system that has provided
inadequate radio communication capabilities in some parts of the County. Last
summer, the County retained RF Projects Corporation to study the problem and
to provide recommendations on options available to achieve satisfactory
communication capabilities throughout the County. A subcommittee of the
Orange County Chiefs' Council has worked with the consultant to provide
preliminary recommendations on possible solutions. Additional work remains
to be completed in identifying the exact locations for the towers before
consideration by the Board of any bids on radio equipment and installation.
The Board received this report for information.
VIII. ITEMS FOR DECISION - REGULAR AGENDA
A. VOLUNTARY AGRICULTUM DISTRICT DESIGNATION - WALTERS FARM
This item was postponed to a later date.
B. 1992 -97 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Discussion ensued on the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP).
Outstanding items for further discussion include the swimming pool project
and the school projects in the CIP.
Susan Waldrop, Chair of the Recreation and Parks Advisory
Committee, stated that the Committee unanimously voted to support the
swimming pool project. She feels this is a unique and wonderful opportunity
for all the citizens in the County. This will provide the teens a safe place
to go.
Sam Bratton, landowner who may provide the land for the center,
stated that there are a lot of benefits this facility will provide to the
citizens of Orange County.
Mr. John Howerton, organizational consultant with Burroughs
Wellcome, stated he is involved with the Chapel Hill- Carrboro swim teams and
president of the Chapel Hill summer swim league. The pools in Chapel Hill
are maxed out. They need more pools. They are only allowed a minimum amount
of time at pools in the area. As a taxpayer, coach and citizen he supports
the pool. He emphasized that there are enough people to support the pool
every minute of every day.
Commissioner Insko spoke in support of a swim program where all
children would learn to swim either in elementary or middle school.
John Link stated that both school superintendents expressed
support for the pool and would like to be involved. They are willing to
share operational cost and having the pool in the central part of the county
would not be a problem. Also the Town of Hillsborough indicated they would
be supportive of the pool and willing to reduce the charge or have no charge
for the water.
Commissioner Gordon stated she feels the pool is needed but she
is not sure the County can afford it. She is worried about the passing of the
8
school bond issue in November.
John Link explained that the most reasonable option is where the
County pays a flat $400,000 a year - $200,000 for the lease and $200,000 for
operational costs. The organization would staff the pool and the County
would share in the profits. The option whereby the County would receive 50%
of the profits would reduce the County's debt obligation.
Commissioner Insko asked for financial information after the first
five years of operation.
Chair Carey hopes the County can move ahead with this project.
If not, he suggests that a committee be formed to study the issue.
Commissioner Halkiotis stressed that the kids do not have any
place to go. Kids would pay for a place to skate for something as simple as
skateboarding. He feels the County needs some healthy outlets for the kids.
Commissioner Willhoit would very much like to see the pool
approved. He questions to what extend the County can get the community
behind this and if Can matching funds or contributions be solicited in some
sort of challenge. He would like to see the commitments that Triangle
Hocking has received.
Susan Waldrop stated that many organizations are waiting to see
the level of County support for this project before making a commitment.
John Link feels that if the County approves this project in the
CIP that it will provide a challenge to the group to raise the remainder of
the money.
Chair Carey noted that the County will never be able to afford a
Pool by using only County monies because of the other capital projects that
will take priority.
Commissioner Gordon referred to the student - teacher ratio and
asked if the Board would support the basic education goal of 22 or 23 for
Chapel Hill - Carrboro City Schools.
Neil Pederson noted that if the school system reduced their
elementary class size, they would need to hire more teachers and they have
no space for these teachers.
John Link suggested and the Board agreed that for fiscal year 92-
93 only, the county's recurring capital would be paid from sales tax revenue
instead of property tax revenues. No projects will be hurt by this process.
C. CONSIDERATION OF OWASA- RELATED ISSUES APRIL 1 ASSEMBLY OF
GOVERNMENTS MEETING
This item will be considered at the June 1, 1992 meeting.
IX. BOARD COMMENTS - NONE
X. COMY MANAGER'S REPORT - NONE
XI. APPOINTMENTS
PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL
Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Chair Carey to
appoint Gloria Williams and Kathy Lafone to three year terms and Marti pryor-
Cook to a two year term and Jenny Bryant to a term yet to be decided.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
9
Motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Commissioner
Halkiotis to appoint Rachel Lynch -Gaya and Bobbie Vaughan to terms yet to be
decided.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
ABC BOARD
Motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Commissioner
Halkiotis to reappoint George Prillaman to a three -year term ending June 30,
1995.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
PERSONNEL ADVISORY BOARD
Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner
Halkiotis to reappoint Carol Cantrell to a three year term ending June 30,
1995.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
ADVISORY BOARD ON AGING
Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner
Halkiotis to reappoint George Snowden, Louise Clayton, and Norm Gustaveson
to three year terms ending June 30, 1995.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
Motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Commissioner
Halkiotis to reappoint Tom Roberts as the Hillsborough representative for a
term ending June 30, 1995.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
NURSING HOME COMMUNITY ADV. COMMITTEE
Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner
Halkiotis to appoint Susan Greganti to the Nursing Home Community Advisory
Committee for a term ending June 30, 1995.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
DURHAM CHAPEL HILL WORK GROUP
Motion was made by Commissioner Insko, seconded by Commissioner
Halkiotis to appoint Alice Gordon as the Board's representative on this work
group.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
TASK FORCE ON REDUCING VIOLENT CRIME AND DRUG USE
Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner
Halkiotis to appoint Moses Carey as the Board's representative on this task
force.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
XII. MINUTES
Motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner
Halkiotis to approve the minutes for the April 21, 1992 Regular Meeting as
amended.
10
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
XIII. EXECUTIVE SESSION -NONE
XIV. ADJOD'RNMENT
With no further business for the Board to consider, Chair Carey
adjourned the meeting at 11 :20 p.m. The next regular meeting will be held
on June 1, 1992 at 7:30 in the courtroom of the Old Courthouse in
Hillsborough, North Carolina.
Moses Carey, Jr., Chair
Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Action Agenda
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Item No .ZtT -A
Meeting Date: May 19, 1992
SUBJECT: Budget Ordinance Amendment #13
-----------------------------
DEPARTMENT Budget PUBLIC HEARING YES NO X
-----------------------------
ATTACHMENT(S) INFORMATION CONTACT
Proposed Budget Amendments Budget Office, Extension 2450
TELEPHONE NUMBER
Hillsborough 732 -8181
Chapel Hill 968 -4501
Mebane 227 -2031
Durham 688 -7331
PURPOSE: To approve proposed budget ordinance amendments.
BACKGROUND: (1) The Orange County Health Department has received
notification of "Jordan Adams" allocations from the
State in the amount of $752. In addition, it has
also received notification of additional funding for
the Preventive Health and Health Services Block
Grant in the amount of $3,518. The following
programs will be benefit from these additional funds:
Epidemiology ($353); Child Health ($23); Adult Health
($159); Health Promotion ($2,142); and, Management
and Vital Records ($1,593). No additional County
funds are required.
(2) The Orange County Department of Social Services has
received notification of additional state funding for
the Child Day Care ($143,082) and JOBS ($7,423)
programs. The total allocation for Day Care for this
fiscal year will increase from $522,863 to $665,945
-while the total allocation for JOBS will go from
$751,142 to $758,565. No additional County funds
are required.
(3) Orange County has received an award notification for
Emergency Food and Shelter funds for this fiscal
year. No County match is required for the $5,739
grant.
(4) Orange County has received an additional Community
Based Alternatives (CBA) allocation for the Orange
County Schools "Project Attend" program. These funds
total $144 and do not require additional County
monies.
Fa
(5) The Orange County Arts Commission has received a
grant from the Town of Chapel Hill. This grant,
funded with Orange County Hotel -Motel Tax proceeds,
will-be used to print directional maps of Orange
County and Chapel Hill. These maps will list arts -
related facilities located within the County and
will be distributed to hotels, motels, and
information agencies. No additional County funds are
required.
(6) The orange County Department on Aging has received
additional Title IIIB funds for the Senior Center
Outreach program. These funds, totalling $3,739,
will be used to pay for Neighborhood Advisors in this
program. No additional County funds are required.
(7) The In --Home program in the Department on Aging has
received donations over the amount that was
anticipated during the 1991 -92 budget planning
process. Duke Power has contributed $896 to purchase
electric fans for low- income elderly citizens. Other
donations received, $604, will be used to
construct /install mobility aids for the elderly.
(8) The Care Management program in the Department on
Aging has received Medicaid reimbursements from EDS.
These funds, which were not anticipated during the
1991 -92 budget planning process, will be used to
cover personnel costs for the part -time Care Manager
who generates the reimbursable services.
(9) The Chapel Hill Service League has awarded the RSVP
program for the department's Literacy Project. These
funds will be used to purchase books and tapes for
this project. No additional County funds are
required.
(10) In order for the CAT program to receive two
approved mini -vans, NCDOT has asked orange County
to--pay the dealership directly for the full cost of
the vehicle and be reimbursed for 80% of the cost.
The County match for the purchase of two mini -vans
was included in the 1991 -92 budget for the Equipment
Replacement Fund. This amendment will budget the
reimbursement amount anticipated from the State with
no additional County funds required.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board of
Commissioners adopt the proposed Budget Ordinance
Amendments.
M
3
ORANGE COUNTY
PROPOSED
1991 -92 BUDGET AMENDMENTS
The 1991 -92 Orange County Budget Ordinance, as amended, is amended as
follows:
BEFORE
AFTER
AMENDMENT
AMENDMENT AMENDMENT
(1)
GENERAL FUND
Source:
Intergovernmental
$ 7,604,855
$ 4,270
$ 7,609,125
Appropriation:
Human Services
12,436,872
4,270
12,441,142
To budget for additional State - related
Health
Department revenues.
(2)
GENERAL FUND
Source:
Intergovernmental
$ 7,609,125
$150,505
$ 7,759,630
Appropriation:
Human Services
12,441,142
150,505
12,591,647
To budget for additional State funding
for Child Day Care and the
JOBS programs in the
Department of
Social Services.
(3)
GENERAL FUND:
Source:
Intergovernmental
$ 7,759,630
$ 5,739
$ 7,765,369
Appropriation:
Miscellaneous
720,620
5,739
726,359
To budget for Emergency-Food and Shelter
funds.
(4)
GENERAL FUND:
Source:
Intergovernmental
$ 7,765,369
$ 144
$ 7,765,513
Appropriation:
Contributions to
Outside Agencies
2,081,033
144
2,081,177
To budget for additional CBA funds
for Project
Attend.
IN
H
(5) GENERAL FUND:
Source:
Intergovernmental -
$ 7,7651513 $
1,050
$ 7,766,563
Appropriation:
Contributions to
2,081,177
1,050
2,082,227
Outside Agencies
To budget for Chapel
Hill Hotel Motel
Tax grant
awarded to the
Orange County Arts Commission.
(6)
GENERAL FUND:
Source:
Intergovernmental
$ 7,765,563 $
3,739
$ 7,770,302
Appropriation:
Human Services
12,591,647
3,739
12,595,386
To budget additional
Title IIIS funds
for the
Department on
Aging.
(7)
GENERAL FUND:
Source:
Miscellaneous
$ 143,010 $
1,500
$ 144,510
Appropriation:
Human Services
12,595,386
1,500
12,596,886
To budget for donations for the Department
on Aging.
(8)
GENERAL FUND:
Source:
Intergovernmental
$ 7,770,302 $
7,800
$ 7,778,102
Appropriation:
Human Services
12,596,886
7,800
12,604,686
To budget for Medicaid reimbursements for
the Department on
Aging.
(9)
GENERAL FUND:
Source:
Intergovernmental
$ 7,778,102 $
500
$ 7,778,602
Appropriation:
Human Services
12,604,686
500
12,605,186
To budget for award
from the Chapel
Hill Service League for the
Department on Aging.
i r
(10) EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND:
Source:
Intergovernmental $ 0 $ 32,976 $ 32,976
Appropriation:
Human Services 58,373 32,976 91,349
To budget for NCDOT match for replacement vehicles.
BUDGET AMENDMENT #13
61
I ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1
I y
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 19, 1992
SUBJECT: 1991 -92 Audit - Contract
DEPARTMENT: Finance
ATTACHMENT(S):
Action Agenda
Item No._Z1r_-8
PUBLIC HEIRING YES: NO: k
INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken Chavious
Ext 2453
Contract TELEPHONE NUMBER -
Engagement Letter Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Chapel Hill - 968 - -4501
Mebane - 227 -2031
Durham - 688 -7331
PURPOSE: To consider awarding a contract to develop the audit for the
fiscal year ending June 30, 1992.
BACKGROUND: Local governments are required by G.S. 159 -34 to have an
annual audit of their financial records by an independent
auditor. The audit for 1991 was performed by Deloitte and
Touche, an international accounting firm with an excellent
reputation in the field of Governmental Accounting and
Auditing.
Deloitte & Touche has proposed a contract to perform the 1992
audit for a fee of 547,000. This fee reflects no increase
over the previous year. The containment of the audit costs is
a result of the Finance Department's efforts in the areas of
statement and schedule preparation, many of which had
previously been done by the auditors. The audit costs consist:
of $30,500 for the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and
Certification of tax levy and $16,500 for the Single Audit of
Grant funds.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board approve the contract
with Deloitte and Touche for the 1992 audit and authorize
the Chairman to sign.
Deloifte &
buche
/\ Suite 1800, First Union Capitol Center Telephone: 191 9) 546 -8000
150 Fayetteville Street Mall Facsimile ,919) 833 -3276
P.O. Box 2778 Telex; 4995716
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 -2778
March 30, 1992
The Board of County Commissioners
Orange County, North Carolina
Ladies and Gentlemen:
We are pleased to serve as independent accountants and auditors for Orange County, North
Carolina. Mr. Rex Price will be responsible for all services we perform for you.
It will be the responsibility of Mr. Price to make sure that your management receives quality
service. He will, as considered necessary, call upon other individuals with specialized
knowledge, either in this office or elsewhere in our firm.
While auditing and reporting on your annual financial statements is to be the recurring basic
service we provide, we would also like to assist you on issues as they arise throughout the
year. Hence, we hope you will call Mr. Price whenever you feel he can be of assistance.
Audit of Financial Statements
The purpose of our engagement to audit the County's financial statements for the year ending
June 30, 1992, is to evaluate the fairness of presentation -of the statements in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles, in all material respects.
Our audit will be conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards which
involves obtaining an understanding of the internal control structure, including the control
environment, the accounting system and the control procedures established by management.
Based on our understanding, we will design our audit to provide reasonable assurance of
detecting errors and irregularities that are material to the financial statements.
Membe!
W. International
3
The Board of County Commissioners
Orange County, North Carolina
Page Two
However, because of the characteristics of irregularities, particularly those involving forgery
and collusion, a properly designed and executed audit may not detect such items. Therefore,
an audit conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards is designed to
obtain reasonable, rather than absolute, assurance about the financial statements. An audit
includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the
financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation.
The objective of our audit is the expression of an opinion on the County's financial statements.
Our ability to express that opinion, and the wording of our opinion, will, of course, be
dependent on the facts and circumstances at the date of our report. If our auditors' report
requires modification, the reasons therefore will be discussed with you prior to its issuance.
Management's Responsibility
We direct your attention to the fact that the financial statements are the responsibility of
management. In this regard, management has the responsibility for designing effective
internal controls, for properly recording transactions in the accounting records, for making
appropriate accounting estimates, for safeguarding assets, and for the overall accuracy of the
financial statements.
Other Communications Arising from the Audit
In connection with the planning and the performance of our audit, generally accepted auditing
standards require that we communicate to the Board of County Commissioners, to the extent
that they come to our attention, irregularities and illegal acts that are clearly not
inconsequential, and reportable conditions. Reportable conditions are significant deficiencies
in the design or operation of the internal control structure that could adversely affect the
County's ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data consistent with the
assertions of management in the financial statements.
We may also have other comments for management on matters we have observed and possible
ways to improve the efficiency of your operations or other recommendations concerning the
internal control structure.
With respect to these other communications, it is our practice to discuss all comments, if
appropriate, with the level of management responsible for the matters prior to their
communication to senior management and /or the Board of County Commissioners.
Assi,ztance to be supplied by your personnel, including preparation of schedules and analyses
of accounts, will be discussed with the appropriate personnel. Timely completion of this work
will facilitate the conclusion of our audit.
4
1.CC.205 (itev. 1/Itl`?92) CONTRACT TO AUDIT ACCOUNTS
File in Triplicate. ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
of.
Governmental Utut
30 day.of March 19 92 Deloitte & Touche
On this Auditor
Post Office Box 2778, Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 -2778
Meiling Addrm
, hereinafter referred to as
Board of
Countv Commissioners Of Orange Count hereinafter referred
the Auditor, and Governing Board Governmental Unit
to as the Governmental Unit, agree as follows:
1. The Auditor shall audit all statements and disclosures required by generally accepted accounting principles and
additional required legal statements and disclosures of all funds and/or divisions of the Governmental Unit for the period
beginning Julv 1 1 19 91 , and ending June 30 , 19 92 . The combining, indi\•idual fund,
and account group financial statements and schedules shall be subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit
of the combined financial statements and an opinion will be rendered in relation to the combined financial statements
taken as a whole. The audit will have no scope limitations except:
2. The Auditor shall conduct his audit and render his report in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. The
audit shall include such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as are considered by the Auditor
to be necessary in the circumstances, except as follows: (See Item 12.)
3. It is agreed that generally accepted auditing standards include a review of the Governmental Unit's system of internal con-
trol and accounting as same relates to accountability of funds and adherence to budget and laws requirements applicable
thereto; that the Auditor will make a written report, which may or may not be a part of the written report of audit, to
the Governing Board setting forth his findings, together with his recommendations for improvement. All matters defined
as "reportable conditions" in AU 325 of the AICPA Professional Standards will be communicated to the Governing Board
in writing. The Auditor shall file a co v of all re orts with the Secretary of the Local Government Commission.
4. After completing his audit, the Auditor shall submit to the Governing Board a written report of audit. This report shall
include, at least, the financial statements and notes thereto prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, combining and supplementary information requested by the client or required for full disclosure under the
and the auditor's opinion on the material presented. The Auditor shall furnish 1 copies of the report o' audit
to the Governing Board as soon as practical after the close of the accounting period. The Auditor shall file three
copies of said re ort of audit 1 co iif no sin le audit is r uired with the Secretary of the Local Government Commission.
5. It is agreed that time is of the essence in this contract. All audits are to be performed and the report of audit submitted
by
October 31 '19 92 •
6. Should circumstances disclosed by the audit call for a more detailed investigation by the Auditor than necessary under
ordinary circumstances, the Auditor shall inform the Governing Board in writing of the need for such additional investiga-
tion and the additional compensation required therefor. Upon approval by the Secretary of the Local Government Com-
mission, this agreement may be Varied or changed to include the increased time and compensation as may be agreed upon
by the Governing Board and the Auditor.
7. The Auditor shall perform a compliance audit for all federal and State financial assistance programs in accordance -,+,ith
the Single Audit Act of 1964 (Pub. L. No. 98 -502 and G.S. 159 -34). The Auditor will file three copies of all re )orts
required under the Federal and State Sin le Audit Acts with the Secretary of the Local Go %,ernment Commission. (This
includes the report required in Item 3.) (See Items 15 and 18.)
S. In consideration of the satisfactory performance of the provisions of this agreement, the Governmental Unit shall pay to
the Auditor, upon approval by the Secretary of the Local Government Commission, a fee which includes any cost the
Auditor may incur from work paper reviews by third parties (Federal and /or State agencies) as required under the Federal
and State Single Audit Acts: CAFR and Certification of Tax Levy $30,500;
Single Audit of Grant Funds $16,500
9. All local government and public authority contracts for annual or special audits, financial statement preparation, finance -
related investigations, or any audit - related work in the State of North Carolina require the approval of the Secretary of
the Local Government Commission. Invoices for services rendered under these contracts shall not be paid by the Govern-
mental Unit until the invoice has been approved by the Secretary of the Local Governme,it Commission, (This also includes
any progress billings.) All invoices should be submitted in triplicate to the Secretary of the Local Government Commission,
copy be returned to the Auditor. Approval is not required on contracts and invoices for system
The original and one
improvements and similar scn•ices of a non - auditing nature.
10. The contract should be executed and submitted in triplic-atc to the 5r;rc'ar of tltc Loco! Goycrnr lent Cnmr,ti"i :>
North Salisban Strect, Raleigh, forth Carolina 603 -13Sh.
I I. Upon approval, the original contract will be returned to the Goyc7'=,cntal Unit, a copy will bc forwarded to the .4ur'.itor,
and a copy retained b% the Secretan •of the Local Government Commission. The audit should not be started before the
contract is approved.
12. This contract contemplates on unqualified opinion being rendered. Atni limitations or restrictions in scope which u nu]d
lead to a qualification should be fully explained in an attachme,tt to this contract. Contracts v,ith such limitations will
not be approved unless satisfactory c.,Tlanation is made,
13. If an approved contract needs to be varied or changed, the change must be reduced to writing, signed by both parties,
and submitted to the Secretary of the Local Government Commission for appro. al. No change shall be effectil c unless
approved by the Secretary of the Local Government Commission., the Governing Board, and the Auditor.
1.1. A separate contract should not be made for each division to be audited or report to be submitted. The scope of the aiddit
and the fee for the audit should be clearly stated. Stated fees include any cost the Auditor max i-kir from work gape-
or peer reviews or an% other quality assurance program required by third parties (federal and State agencies or other
organizations).
15. Three copies (one copy for units not having a single audit) of the report of audit and an other.yrittcn report b} the Auditor
shall be filed ,with the Secretary of the Local Government Commission when (or prior to) submitting the invoice for tl c
sen•ices rendered no later than four months after the close of the fiscal year (for fiscal years ending June 30 this woulc'.
be October 31). The report of audit, as filed with the Secretan -)f the Local Government Commission, becomes a matter
of public record for inspection and review in the offices of the S,crctan' bN �.,: Y interested parties. These reports are used
in the preparation of Official Statements for debt offerings as m-cl! as by tn;: iicipal bond rating sen•ices.
16. There arc no special proyisiorns except:
See engagement letter attached
Ii. Whenever the Auditor uses an engagement letter with the client, Item 16 sho::id be completed by referencing ti , enrage-
men, letter and attaching a copy of the engagement letter to the contract to in,o- porate the engagement lettc: :r;tc ti:"
contract.: case of conflict between the terms of the er._agcmcnt letter and the terms of this contract, the term of thi,
contract will control. Engagement letter terms are deemed to be void unless the conflict.-,,, terms of this contract arc .c ific�ll.
dcl^_t,2d in Itcm 21 c: this contract.
1S. A Governmentai Unit not haling a single audit on federal and State funds would list Item - in Item 21 of the
as being a deleted provision.. An cx lariat, r_must be gi•.en in Item °_1 for ar,y GO\ernmcntal Unit not receising a sin2ic
audit on federal and Statc funds (e.g., a single audit is not required under the Federal and State Single Audit .Acts al-'d
is not bcinb performed).
19. If this audit engagement is subject to the standards for audit as defined in the Government .Auditing Standards, issued by
the Comptroller General of nie United States, then the Auditor .yarrants by accepting this engagement that hc`shc ,vill
meet the requirements for an external quality control review specified in the Go,errtiment Auditing Standards. Copics o:
array -ritten communications that are a result of an external quality control review ,gill be made avai'.Ible to the Sccrctz:-"
of the Local Government Commission upon his request.
20. There are no other agreements between the parties hereto and no other agreements relative hereto that shall be enforccablc
unlc;s entered into in accordance -with the -procedure sc., out herein and approved by the 5ecrctary of the Local Go crr.-
mcnt Commission.
1. All of the above paragraphs are understood and shall apply to this agreement, except the fullosying
numbered paragraphs
shall be deleted: (See Items 17 and 16.)
Deloitte & Touche
Audi- Firm
B, Re:: Price, Partner
(Please t) [ yA or prim(
(SiFnaturej
Approved by the Secrctnn• of the Local Cc".-crnment
Commission as provided in Article 3, Chapter 159 of the
General Stat.:tcs or Article 31, fart 3, Chapter 115C of
the General Statutes.
FM
C�-ange County, North Carolina
co'vrn:new.! Ulm
rope or print name and a ;lc)
(Signature' of M4vor or Chwri,erron of governing Gard;
This instrument has been preauditcd in the manner re-
quired by The Local Government Budget and Fiscal Con-
trol Act or by The School Budget and Fiscal Control Act.
For the Secretare. Local Co,enement CommWion Covernmen:al Unl: Finale ofhotr
(Si —
• (StFnorun:
I�atc • - ° - -- 7
(Plraee npv or .. - ::,:,
5
4
A
OP.AidGE COUNTY
BOARD OF -- ,-2,1
_ Acticn Agenda
t-M
ACTI -ON AGEN -a ITEM ABSTRACT
?Meeting Date: May 19 1
S--BJ ECT: SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTE WITH PRIME INCOME PARTNERS - FRANCHISE TAX
DB ��RTM�iENT' T County Attorney - --
P---- - ---- -- i-- ^_YES--------
--- - --
- __..___ -_- ___.�_______--
- - ----
11;FORMATION CONTACT:
Geoffrey Gledhill,
A - -AC M�ENT(S).
County Attorney
Settlement Agreement
and Release
TELEPHONE ng4BER-
732 -2196
of Claims
Hillsborough
- 732 -6181
Acceptance by Warner
Cable
Chapel Hill
-- 963 -4501
Communications, Inc.
of Carolina
Mebane
-- 227 -2031
Cable Franchise for
Oragne County
Durham
- 603 -7331
PURPOSE: To receive a report from the County Attorney regarding the
settlement of a dispute between Orange County and Prime Cable Income
Partners, L.P., over the payment of Orange County cable television privilege
taxes.
BACKGROUND: From April 1, 1988 'through December 31, 1991 Orange County
received approximately $150,000 in fees from Prime Cable Income Partners,
L.P. for the privilege of operating ,a cable television system in the
unincorporated areas of Orange County. The.fees were calculated by Prime on
the basis of 3% of the Carolina Cable gross receipts for its Orange County
operations. The County's Cable Television Ordinance was amended in 1987 to
require the payment of a 5% fee effective with Prime's fiscal year beginning
after the amendment. Had privilege fees been paid at the rate of 5 %, the
County would have received approximately $100,000 more money. Prime's
position is that it does not owe the increase in fees. Orange County's
position is otherwise. Prime contends that the fees it must pay are dictated
by its franchise or more exactly by the. fact that the fees were 3% at the
time of the franchise it now owns was granted to Village Cable and that they
cannot be increased without Prime's consent. Orange County's view is that
the privilege fees -are- assessed by the County.through its Cable Television
System Ordinance and are not a part of the franchise agreement between the
County and the franchised cable company. Federal law capped the fees at 3%
at the time of the original franchise. and permitted them to increase to 5%
thereafter. The County's Cable Television Ordinance was amended in 1987
consistent with the federal authorization.
During an executive session held, by the Board of County Commissioners
at its meeting on March 24, 1992, the Board authorized the County Attorney
to negotiate with Prime and to accept an offer to settle the franchise fee
dispute generally consistent with the settlement agreement that is an
enclosure with this agenda abstract. This has been accomplished. Prime has
paid Orange County $50,000 in full settlement of the disputed fees for the
years 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1991. 'Warner Cable Communications, Inc., on
behalf of Cablevision of Durham, Inc., in its acceptance of the transfer of
the franchise approved by the Board on March 24, 1992 has. acknowledged its
responsibility to pay Orange County franchise fees at the rate of 5% per year
effective January 1, 1992. The fees will be calculated on the basis of gross
4
2 t
receipts from the cable television franchise operations within the
unincorporated areas of Orange County. For the year ended December 31, 1991
those gross receipts were $1,726,000. Assuming the same amount of revenue
for the year ending December 31, 1992, Orange County is likely to receive
approximately $86,000 in franchise fees. This represents approximately
$35,000 more revenue in one calendar year than would have been collected had
the fees remained at 3 %. The benefit to the County of the settlement of this
fee dispute will likely increase as years go by. This is so because the
revenues from the Carolina Cable operations have increased remarkably in
recent years. Revenues of Prime for the one -year period April 1, 1987
through March 31, 1988 were approximately $780,000. Its revenues for the
year ended December 31, 1991 were $1,726,000, more than double its annual
revenues only three years earlier.
RECOIMNDATION; Receive as information and direct that this agenda
abstract, the executed settlement agreement and a copy of the acceptance of
the document by Warner Cable Communications, Inc. of the Carolina Cable
franchise be made a part of this meeting's minutes.
3
COUNTY OF ORANGE
AGREEMENT AND
STATE OF NORTH .CAROLINA RUZAR OF CLAMS
THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE OF CLAIMS is made
and entered into the 2 4th day of Apr i 1 , 1992, by and between PRIME
CABLE INCOME PARTNERS, L.P., a Delaware limited',partnership doing business in
Orange County, North Carolina as Carolina Cable ( "Prime ") and ORANGE COUNTY,
I
NORTH CAROLINA, a political subdivision of the State of North Carolina (the .
"County ").
II
WHEREAS, Prime owns and operates a cable tele ision system in Orange
County, North Carolina pursuant to a franchise granted by the County (the
"Franchise "); and
WHEREAS, the terms of he Franchise require Prime to pay a percentage of its
gross revenues to the County as a tax for the privilege of rating a cable television
system in the County (the "francl l se fees "); and
WHEREAS, a dispute has; arisen between Prime and the County concerning the
percentage of franchise fees to b paid by Prime and the amount owed to the County;
and
WHEREAS, Prime has requested approval from the County to transfer the
Franchise to American Television & Communications Corporation ( "ATC") and such
request is pending approval from :the Board of County Commissioners; and
WHEREAS, the parties hove agreed to resolve the dispute on the terms and
i
conditions set forth in this Agree pent;
i
4
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed as follows
1. No AdMission Of Liab flity Or Fault This Agreement shall not constitute
j
an admission of fault, wrongdoing or liability of any kind aid is made for the purpose of
resolving the dispute between Prime and the County in an amicable fashion on the
i
terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement
2. EMqnt S Prune. Prime agrees to pay and the County agrees to accept
in full settlement of all outstanding amounts due the Count as compensation from
I
Prime under the Franchise for any period prior to January I, 1992, the sum of FIFTY
THOUSAND AND N01100 DOLLARS ($50,000.00) as additional franchise fees for
I
such period.
3. F'titnre FraagWse Fees. Prime hereby agrees to pay franchise fees at the
annual rate of FIVE PERCENT (5%) of gross revenues fof the period January 1, 1992
until the e f f e c t i v e date of the transfer of the F r a n c h i s e to i �M. ATC has represented
to Prime and to the County that it will agree to pay franchise fees at the rate of FIVE
PERCENT (5%) when it assumes'the obligations of the
4.
I
(a) &kM Counly. The County, for i lf, its successors, and
assigns, does hereby foreve� discharge and release P�ime, its partners, members,
stockholders, trustees, of5ccrs, directors, repro
I
heirs, successors, and assigns, from any and all
I
demands, actions, or causes' of action of any kind or
whether at law or equity, whether known or unknow
may have ever had, now have or may now have arisi
the payment or nonpayment of franchise fees arising
I
2
ves, employees, agents,
4 lawsuits, liabilities,
,haracter whatsoever,
i, which the County had,
ig out of or on account of
out of the cable television
Ip
5
i
franchise held by Prime in Orange County or the Orange County Cable
Television System Ordinance, except for the obligations contained in this
Agreement.
(b) eleggc 13v. Prime, for itself, its officers, directors, trustees,
shareholders, partners, representatives, heirs, successors, and assigns, does hereby
forever discharge and release the County, its officers, representatives, employees,
agents, successors, and assigns, from any and all claims, lawsuits, liabilities,
demands, actions, or causes of action of any kind or character whatsoever,
whether at law or equity, whether (mown or unlmowa, which Prime had, may
have ever had, now have or may now have arising oft of or on account of the
payment or nonpayment of .franchise fees arising out of the cable television
franchise held by Prime in Orange County or the Orange County Cable
Television System Ordinance.
S. Transfer Approval A& Conditi2U_Q AgM&Me&. This Agreement and the
obligations contained herein are eVressly conditioned upon approval by the County of
the pending request by Prime to transfer its Franchise to A�C. Prone agrees to pay the
i
amount due under this Agreemen# to the .County within thirty (30) days of the approval
of the transfer of the Franchise. the event that the er request is not approved
i
9 Pp
by the County, this Agreement shall be null and void and sail be without prejudice or
effect whatsoever on the rights or ;responsibilities of the pa� es under the Franchise.
I
3
i
This the 2 4 th day of Apal 1942.
PRIME CABLE
By: PRIME ti
general pi
[9680.0w.pxrWmw]
0
ORAr
By
Title
i
I
U �
[E PARTNERS, L.P.
LE 1, INC:,
f
LC
7
ACCEPTANCE BY WARNER CABLE COMMUNICATIONS INC,
QE CAME VISION FRANCHISE DRANOE MUM
Warner Cable Communications Inc., a Delaware corporation and subsidiary of
Time Warner, Inc,, ( "Warner Cable "), effective as of the date written below accepts and
agrees to be bound by the cable television franchise (the "Franchise ") from Orange
County, North Carolina, as set forth in the Ordinance adopted by the Orange County
Board of County Commissioners entitled "An Ordinance Granting A Franchise To
Village Cable Of Orange County, Inc, To Construct And Maintain A Cable Television
System Within The Unincorporated Areas Of Orange County, North Carolina" as
amended and subsequently transferred with County approval to Prime Cable Income
Partners, L.P., and subsequently amended by ah Ordinance entitled "An Ordinance
Amending A Franchise To Prime Cable Income Partners L.P." adopted on June 16,
1987, and approved on second reading on July 6, 1987, and as further amended' by an
Ordinance entitled "Ordinance Amending A Franchise To Cablevision Of Durham, Inc.
To Construct And Maintain A Cable Television System Within The Unincorporated
Areas Of Orange County, North Carolina," adopted March 24, 1992. By Resolution
passed on March 24, 1992, .the Board of Commissioners of Orange County approved the
transfer of the Franchise from Prime Cable Income Partners L.F. d/b /a Carolina Cable
to Cablevision of Durham, Inc., American Television & Communications Corporation
(" ATC'), or any affiliated entity under the control of ATC's parent corporation, Time
Warner, Inc,
With its acceptance of the Franchise, Warner Cable acknowledges and accepts its
obligation to pay the franchise privilege tax to Orange County at the rate of Five
Percent (5 %) per year effective January 1, 1992.
8
Warner Cable has executed and delivered this Acceptance as of this day of
1992.
WARNER CABLE COMMUNICATIONS INC.
By
ATTEST: Name:
Title:
(Corporate Seal)
l [722211b104.ravAhe]
i
2
1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Action Agenda
Item No = -D
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 19, 1992
SUBJECT: North Chatham Fire Department Contract
DEPARTMENT Emergency Management PUBLIC HEARING YES NO X
ATTACHMENT(S)
Proposed Contract
INFORMATION CONTACT
Mike Tapp, ext 3030
TELEPHONE NUMBER
Hillsborough 732 -8181
Chapel Hill 968 -4501
Mebane 227 -2031
Durham 688 -7331
PURPOSE: To approve the general form and content of a contract for
fire protection services between Orange County and the North Chatham
Volunteer Fire Department.
BACKGROUND: For many years, fire protection services in the Damascus
and Southern Triangle Fire Districts in Orange County have been
provided by the North Chatham Volunteer Fire Department. In recent
years, these services have been provided by the department based on
appropriations from the County of approximately $50,000 annually.
These appropriations have been funded through fire district taxes
levied on property in the two districts.
Last fall, the Board of Commissioners approved a standardized contract
for use between the County and the respective volunteer fire
departments providing service to Orange County residents. Staff
have held discussions with representatives of North Chatham concerning
the renewal of contractual arrangements using a slightly modified
version of the standardized contract. The recommended change includes
a provision that North Chatham will provide fire protection services
to the Damascus and Southern Triangle Fire Districts in return for an
annual appropriation of $50,000, reduced by any payments received
by the department from municipalities as a result of annexation
of former fire district territory.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board approve the
proposed contract with North Chatham volunteer Fire Department, as to
general form and content, and authorize the Chair to sign it, based on
final review and subject to minor revisions by the County Attorney.
2
i�
NORTH CAROLINA
CONTRACT AND AGREEMENT
K�14 Tel31K+1•10119
THIS CONTRACT AND AGREEMENT, made and entered into this the
day of 19928, by and between the COUNTY of
ORANGE, hereinafter referred to as County and the North Chatham
Volunteer Fire Department,. Inc., hereinafter referred to as Fire
Department;
W I T N E S S E T H:
THAT WHEREAS, North Carolina General Statutes 69 -25.5
provides that counties may provide for fire protection in a fire
district by contracting with an incorporated nonprofit volunteer or
community fire department; and
WHEREAS, Damascus and Southern Triangle Fire Districts are
special tax districts created pursuant to Chapter 69 of the North
Carolina General Statutes; and WHEREAS, Fire Department is a
nonprofit corporation organized for fire protection
purposes; and
WHEREAS, County has elected to provide fire protection and
fire prevention services and optional first responder services
authorized by North Carolina General Statutes 69 -25.7 (hereinafter
"services "), within the boundaries of the Damascus and Southern
Triangle Fire Districts, by contracting with Fire Department to
provide services; and
WHEREAS, Fire Department has the ability to provide and is
willing to be the contract provider of services within the
boundaries of Damascus and Southern Triangle Fire Districts; and
C
3
WHEREAS, County levies and collects the taxes and is
responsible for appropriating said funds for the use of the
citizens in the Damascus and Southern Triangle Fire Districts; and
WHEREAS, County desires to establish a renewable contract
to enable Fire Department to make long -range plans;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants
and premises herein contained, the parties hereto contract and
agree as follows:
1. Each fiscal year, the County will cause to be levied
a special tax not exceeding 15 cents ($0.15) per one hundred
dollar valuation of all real and personal property subject to
taxation in the Damascus and Southern Triangle Fire Districts
unless otherwise limited by law and /or a vote of the people; and
will collect said tax as a part of the ad valorem tax collections
of the County. The amount levied annually shall be based on a tax
rate approved by the Board of County Commissioners following
review of the needs projected in the budget estimate submitted to
the County by the Board of Directors of the Fire Department and
shall be sufficient -to provide an appropriation to Fire
Department of Fifty Thousand and No /100 Dollars ($50,000.00) less
the amount equal to all payments received by Fire Department from
any municipality pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. 160A -31.1, 160A -37.2
and 160A -49.2 (proportionate share of debt service) and N.C. Gen.
Stat. 160A -37.1 and 160A -49.1 (contract between munici - pality and
rural fire department for fire protection service).
2. That a special revenue fund shall be maintained for
each fire district by the County for funds collected as a result
of said special tax in which fund appropriations will be based on
the budget estimates approved by the County Commissioners.
Unappropriated amounts remaining in the revenue fund shall be
carried over to the next fiscal year for fire department use.
3. That all appropriations established by the County
Commissioners will be remitted to the Fire Department in quarterly
payments by the 15th day of the first month of each quarter for
the first three quarters beginning in July and ending on March 31,
and the final quarterly payment will be made based on the County.
Finance Director's estimate of overall tax collections through the
fiscal year end not to exceed the appropriation amount. All late
listing penalties and interest on delinquent taxes associated with
collections will be retained by the County as cost of collections.
4. The Fire Department shall provide the necessary
equipment, personnel, and other resources as determined by the
North Carolina Department of Insurance, Fire and Rescue Service
Division, and the "Insurance Service Office for all property
located within the Damascus and Southern Triangle Fire Districts,
will strive to achieve and maintain at least a 9S insurance
rating, and will furnish services free of charge to all persons
and individuals within the Districts.
5. That all funds paid to the Fire Department by the
County shall be used exclusively by the Fire Department to provide
' � 1
P
5
services within said Districts, and to pay other legitimate
expenses. The Fire Department may provide a first responder
program, if it is provided under the guidelines provided by Orange
County Emergency Management and under the direction of the
Emergency Medical Services Medical Director to provide basic
emergency medical care to citizens within the fire districts.
6. The Fire Department shall operate in compliance with
all applicable state and local laws and regulations including the
Local Emergency Planning Committee Hazardous Materials Training
requirements and North Carolina Fire Incident Reporting System,
for which reports shall be submitted to the Fire Marshal's Office
on a monthly basis. The Fire Department further agrees to
annually file with the Fire Marshal's office a current list of its
Board of Directors and a roster of its members with addresses,
telephone numbers, social security numbers; an annual training
report; and a list of fire apparatus including pump and tank size,
and specialized fire suppression equipment, no later than July 31.
7. The County may inspect all books and accounts of the
Fire Department at any time, upon reasonable notice. The Fire
Department will present to the County within 90 days of the close
of each County fiscal year (July 1 -June 30), an accounting of how
public funds have been expended on the forms provided by Orange
County Finance Department.
8. The Fire Department will comply with County budgeting
procedures and other procedures provided for by State Law and
C1
agrees to submit annual budget estimates and a supporting letter
of request for a proposed tax rate signed by the Board President
upon approval by the Board of Directors of the Fire Department.
The Emergency Management Office will provide the standard forms
used by county departments for presentation to the Board of
Commissioners, in accordance with established County budget
timetables. The Fire Department will use standard line items for
accounting devised or consented to by the County Finance office.
9. The Fire Department will file with the County Fire
Marshal a true copy of the Articles of Incorporation, existing
Bylaws, Standard Operating Procedures, and any changes made
thereto from time to time. Further, the Fire Department agrees to
amend and adopt its charter and bylaws as necessary to meet all
minimum legal requirements for a North Carolina nonprofit
corporation, as allowed in G.S. 55A -1 through 55A -43, with or
without voting members which charter and bylaws have provisions
enabling citizens of the community to have input in the affairs of
the corporation at least at an annual meeting as described by
G.S. 55A -30 and vesting in the Board of Directors the authority to
manage the affairs of the corporation.
10. This contract shall renew automatically each fiscal
year on the 1st day of July, and shall continue in effect until
terminated by either party hereto, upon three hundred sixty five
days (365) written notice to the other party. Any contracts
between the County and the Fire Department now in effect, with
ro
respect to the subject matter contained herein, are superseded
upon the effective date of this contract.
11. This contract was written with the laws of the State
of North Carolina in mind. It shall be construed consistent with
and interpreted pursuant to the laws of the State of North
Carolina.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the County has caused this
instrument to be executed by the chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners and attested by the Clerk to the Board of County
Commissioners, and the Fire Department has caused this instrument
to be signed in its name by its President, attested by its
Secretary, and its corporate seal hereto affixed, all by order of
its Board of Directors duly given.
ATTEST:
(Clerk)
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
BY:
(Chair)
(Fire Department)
ATTEST:
(Secretary)
BY:
(President, Board of Directors)
t
,r.
O R A N G E C O U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 19, 1992
Agenda Abstract
Item #�
SUBJECT: HISTORIC INVENTORY GRANT - PHASE II
I
DEPARTMENT: Planning PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No
ATTACHMENTS:
5/1/92 Notification Letter
Memorandum of Agreement
Grant Application
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Planning Director X2592
PURPOSE: To consider accepting a $17,000 Survey and Planning
Grant from the State Historic Preservation Office
with-which to conduct an inventory of historic sites
and structures in the remaining unincorporated
portions of Orange County.
BACKGROUND: At its January 21, 1992 meeting, the Board of
Commissioners authorized the County Manager to apply
for up to $15,000 from the Survey and Planning Grant
Program administered by the State Historic
Preservation Office. The amount would be used to
conduct an inventory of historic sites and
structures in the remaining unincorporated portions
of Orange County. Refer to the attached application
for a complete project description.
At the suggestion.of the State Historic Preservation
Office, a grant of $17,000 was requested. The
Planning Director was notified on May 1, 1992 that
the application had been approved. To receive the
grant, the County must sign the attached Memorandum
of Agreement and provide certification of matching
funds. This must be accomplished by May 31, 1992.
The County share would consist of $15,000 cash and a
$15,000 in -kind contribution. Professional services
funds requested as part of the Planning Department's
FY 1992 -93 budget would be used to cover the cash
match. The in -kind contribution includes supplies
and equipment expense, and Planning Department staff
time on the project. Personnel and operating
expenses will be covered in the FY 1992 -93 Planning
PHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough
732 -8181
Mebane
227 -2031
Durham
688 -7331
Chapel Hill
967 -9251
PURPOSE: To consider accepting a $17,000 Survey and Planning
Grant from the State Historic Preservation Office
with-which to conduct an inventory of historic sites
and structures in the remaining unincorporated
portions of Orange County.
BACKGROUND: At its January 21, 1992 meeting, the Board of
Commissioners authorized the County Manager to apply
for up to $15,000 from the Survey and Planning Grant
Program administered by the State Historic
Preservation Office. The amount would be used to
conduct an inventory of historic sites and
structures in the remaining unincorporated portions
of Orange County. Refer to the attached application
for a complete project description.
At the suggestion.of the State Historic Preservation
Office, a grant of $17,000 was requested. The
Planning Director was notified on May 1, 1992 that
the application had been approved. To receive the
grant, the County must sign the attached Memorandum
of Agreement and provide certification of matching
funds. This must be accomplished by May 31, 1992.
The County share would consist of $15,000 cash and a
$15,000 in -kind contribution. Professional services
funds requested as part of the Planning Department's
FY 1992 -93 budget would be used to cover the cash
match. The in -kind contribution includes supplies
and equipment expense, and Planning Department staff
time on the project. Personnel and operating
expenses will be covered in the FY 1992 -93 Planning
2
Department budget. No increase in staff /operating
expenditures will result from the inventory project.
The-.'Historic Preservation Commission will meet in
special session prior to the May 19, 1992 Board of
Commissioners meeting to prepare a recommendation on
acceptance of the grant award. The Historic
Preservation Commission's recommendation will be
presented at this meeting.
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that the County
Manager be authorized to sign the Memorandum of
Agreement and provide certification of matching
funds.
1
M
a
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
Office of the Secretary
James G. Martin, Governor
May 1, 1992
Mr. Marvin Collins, Planning Director
306 F. Revere Road
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Re: Orange County Inventory, Phase II
Grant Amount: $ 17,000
Dear Mr. Collins:
3
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
Thank you for your application for 1992 grant funds made available to the State
Historic Preservation Office (HPO) of the North Carolina Division of Archives
and History. These funds come from the Historic Preservation Fund (HPF)
administered by the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service
(NPS). A total of sixteen grant applications were received from eligible
applicants, requesting $113,650 in matching federal assistance.
Your application is one of seven that have been selected from the group of
excellent proposals for possible funding. Among the factors considered in the
evaluation of potential projects were the character of the resources to be
studied, the number of work products in relation to the amount of money
invested, and degree and quality of support (administrative and financial)
provided by the applicant.
The enclosed Project Notification, approved by the National Park Service, is a
brief report of anticipated project activities and costs based on your grant
application. A more detailed project description will be developed after your
review of the Project Notification, acceptance- -of the grant and certification
of matching funds. To convey your agreement with the enclosed project outline
and grant award, please sign both copies of the enclosed Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) and return them with your Certification of Matching Funds by
May 31 to: Ms. Lloyd D. Childers, grants administrator, State Historic
Preservation Office, Division of Archives and History, 109 East Jones Street,
Raleigh, NC 27601 -2807. If you have questions, you may contact Ms. Childers at
(919) 733 -4763.
109 EastJones Street * Raleigh, North Carolina 27601 -2807
(919) 733 -4867
n
Mr. Marvin Collins
Page Two
May 1, 1992
Included among the materials accompanying this letter is information about a
Grants Workshop to be held in Raleigh on Thursday, June 11, 1992. The meeting
will include an orientation to the grants program by the grants administrator,
as well as the opportunity to meet with staff specialists assigned to your
project. At the beginning of the afternoon session, I will have the privilege
of presenting grant award certificates to those project representatives who
attend the workshop. Certificates will be mailed to those who cannot attend.
I hope that you or your designee will be able to join us in this ceremony and
take advantage of the workshop.
Thank you again for participating in the historic preservation program in North
Carolina. We look forward to working with you through the successful
completion of your project.
Sincerely,
41a��4�
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
Department of Cultural Resources
PD:ro
Enclosures
cc: The Honorable
The Honorable
The Honorable
The Honorable
The Honorable
The Honorable
Kenneth C. Royall, Jr.
Russell G. Walker
Ralph A. Hunt
Howard N. Lee
Joe Hackney
Anne C. Barnes
H
I
5
PROJECT NOTIFICATION
TITLE: Orange County Architectural Survey, II
GRANT NUMBER: 37- 92- -70031
AREA AFFECTED BY PROJECT
(counties): Orange TOTAL PROJECT COST: $47,000
FEDERAL SHARE: 17,000
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT: 4 NONFEDERAL SHARE:
30,000
TYPE: NEWS REVISION =
I. SUBGRANTEE: County of Orange, 106 E. Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 2727E
2. NONFEDERAL NIATCIIING SHARE:
Donor. Orange County
Source: Local funds
Kind: Cash
Amount: $15,000
3. BUDGET:
Personnel $27.500
1,80Q
1,800
7,250
Office, phone 1,600
Travel & per diem 2,500
Supplies, maps, mist. 1,650
Film & developing 2,900
4. PURPOSE: $47,000
Donor. Orange County
Source: Local services and goods
Kind: In kind
Amount: $15,000
The purpose of the project is to complete the architectural survey of Orange
County outside of the cities /towns of Chapel Hill and Hillsborough. The
survey of one township, Chapel Hill township, was funded in FY 1991. Findings
of FY 1991 and FY-1992 surveys will be incorporated immediately into the Orange
County Planning Department landuse data base. The project will be accomplishe
under the supervision of the State Historic Preservation Office, and both SHPO
supervisory staff and the Principal-Investigator will meet'36CFR61 qualificatio
Survey methodology and evaluation will meet the Secretary's Standards for Ident
fication and Evaluation. The work will consist of completing survey forms, maps
and a survey report for an estimated 600 properties, using NCSHPO survey forms,
methodology, and survey handbook.
Products: Survey forms (est. 600) , completed maps, photos, files, survey report.
Project Notification
Orange County Architectural Survey,, II
Page Two
5. Beginning /Ending Dates: June 1, 1992 - September 30, 1993
6. An Environmental Certification is attached.
7. No program income will be generated.
S. Certification:
As the duly authorized representative, I certify that this
project /subgrant will be administered and work will be
performed in accordance with the Nationgl-R-goiZL2L Programs
Manual and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and
Guidelines for Identification and Evaluation. All
documentation required by the MaDWal . will be maintained on
file for audit and State program Approval purposes. All
proposed costs for personal compensation charged to the
Federal or nonfederal share of this subgrant are within the
maximum limit imposed by Chapter 13, Section B.39.e. of NPS-
49. These costs have been assessed by knowledgeable SHPO
staff and found to be within the normal and customary range
of charges for similar work in the local labor market and
appear to be appropriate Charges for the product to be
achieved with grant assistance.
Q
Davi3 Brook, Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer
V
Date
I
STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
FOR
HISTORIC PRESERVATION FUND GRANTS
This Memorandum of Agreement is herein entered into this 18t day of Mav
199 2 by the Division of Archives-and-History. hereinafter known as the Division,'
and the Count of Orange
the Grantee, for and in consideration of a federal grant in the amount of seven-
teen thousand ($ 17,000 ) dollars, for the purpose of conductinE an
architectural survey of Orange County outside of Chapel Hill and Hillsborough.
or a total project cost of at reast $34,000 and ending by September 30, 1993.
The Grantee agrees to match such grant with funds, or donated property, equipment,
and services from nonfederal sources within the grant period, and to use such
grant and matching funds, or donated property, equipment, and services for the
purpose hereinabove specified, and to furnish such reports and documentation,
financial or otherwise, as may be specified by the North Carolina Department of
Cultural Resources, Division of Archives and History. Project activities shall be
performed according to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Archaeology
and Historic Preservation *, under the guidelines and professional supervision of
the Archaeology and Historic Preservation Section.
Lob� with Appropriated Funds: Historic Preservation Fund (NPS) grants must
conform to provisions of 18 USC 1913: "No part of the money appropriated by any
enactment of Congress shall, in the absence of express authorization by Congress,
be used directly or indirectly to pay for any personal service, advertisement,
telegram, telephone, letter, printed or written matter, or other device, intended
or designed to influence in any manner a Member of Congress, to favor or oppose.
by vote or otherwise, any legislation or appropriation by Congress, whether before
or after the introduction of any bill or resolution proposing such legislation or
appropriation: but this shall not prevent officers or employees of the United
States or its Department or agencies from communicating to Members of Congress on
the request of any Member or to Congress, through the proper official channels,
requests for legislation or appropriations which they deem necessary for the
efficient conduct of the public business."
Certification of Matching Funds and Method of Reimbursement: The Grantee will
certify matching funds either by a statement of deposit from a local bank or by a
statement from a county or municipal official. The Division agrees to reimburse
the Grantee up to 50% of all expenditures for project as described. Upon request,
the Division may advance the Grantee twenty —five percent (25 %) of the Division's
share of the project cost. After satisfactory documentation of this advance,
including an equal amount of matching share, two additional advances may be
requested. However, the final twenty —five percent (25 %) will be reimbursed only
after satisfactory project completion.
t
Method of Accounting and Documentation of Project Costs: The Grantee agrees to
maintain accurate records of all expenditures related to the project. Copies of
invoices and either canceled checks or computerized print —outs will be used to
substantiate expenses. Expenditures for salaries, materials, travel and per diem,
and printing costs must be documented by canceled checks or print —outs and
substantiated with references to hours worked, type of materials, amount of
travel, etc., as applicable. - Donated services and materials must-be documented
through time and attendance records or by a statement of justification of value
for materials. Overhead costs require specification of location and justification
of costs based upon a standard negotiated cost form or a statement establishing a
reasonable rate for overhead.
GRANTEE DIVISION OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY
DEPARTMENT OF CULTURAL RESOURCES
(Typed Name and Title)
bignature
Date
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
to
J° Published in the Federal Register, 9129183, Vol. 48, No. 190, Part IV.
ri
1
1992 SURVEY AND PLANNING GRANT APPLICATION FORM
State Historic Preservation Office
North Carolina Division of Archives and History
I. PROJECT INFORMATION -(Please type or print with black ink)
Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures
Project t i t l e:. Orange_ County, *7C - Phase II
Project Type: Archaeological Survey: Architectural Survey: Y
National Register Nominations: Other (specify):
Local Matching Funds: (non -- federal) Attach separate list if necessary
Donor: County of OranGe
Source: General Fund
Date Available: Available now but also on 7/1/92
Kind (cash /other): Cash Amount: $15,000
II. APPLICANT INFORMATION
Contact Person: !4arvi.n Collins Title: Planning Director
Address: 306F Revere Road, Hillsborough, 11C 27278
Telephone: 919/732 -8181 Extension 2592
Applicant Organization or Agency: County of Orange
Local Project Coordinator: Sarre as Contact Person
Address:
Telephone:
SIGNATURE A_ \D TITLE
�bhn ?!. LiH , C6(mty *tanager 1 /23/92
tficer of Sponsoring.Organization
DATE
Ill. ABSTRACT OF PROPOSED PROJECT:
On a separate sheet, please describe in one well developed paragraph exactly
what will be accomplished with the grant and matching funds, including in-
kind contributions. Applications for architectural surveys should include
an estimate of the number of acres and properties to be surveyed. Historic
Preservation Office staff are available for assistance in developing the
project description, including an estimated budget.
The Project Abstract may also include one or two additional paragraphs
describing methods to be employed or information on how the proposed nrojecc
fits intc an overall plan of preservation activities for your.community.
For example, if this is Phase II of a four -phase action plan, what was Phase I
and when was it completed, and how will Phases III and I\7 build on Phases I
and II? PLEASE LIMIT THE ABSTRACT TO THREE DOUBLE SPACED TYPEWRITTEN PAGES.
s
' 1992 SURVEY AND PLANNING GRANT APPLICATION FORM 9
Page Two
VI. BUDGET: AN ESTIMATE QF PROJECT COSTS
(2)
Line Items
Grant Funds
Cash Match
In —Kind Match
Total
Principal Consultant/
$ 14,750
$ 12,750
S
27,500
Investigator
Secretary
$
1,800
$
11800
Project Coordinator
$
3_1800
S
1,800
Other Personnel (specify)
$
7,250
$
7,250
Staff Planner /Intern
Office Space
$
1,200
$
1,200
_ - Telephone
$
400
$
400
Travel and Per Diem
9,910 miles @ .225 /mile
$ 3_,115
S 2",115
$
2,230
5 days @ 55 /day
$ 135
$ 135
$
270
Film and Developing
$ 1,000
$ ?_1000
$
900
S
2,900
Office Supplies /maps
$
250
S
250
Advertising Costs
Camera (purchase /rental)
$
400
$
400
Printing and Copying
$
700
$
700
Other (specify)
S
300
$
300
Postacge
TOTALS $
17,000
$ 15,000
S
15,000
$
47,000
Budget Notes: (1) Cash funds must be available for payment of salaries, travel,
film and developing. Be sure that grant funds are matched with sufficient non-
federal cash match to meet this requirement. (2)t In —kind contributions could
include office space, telephone costs, photocopying, supplies, indirect costs
and project coordination, provided they are essential to the project and
properly documented. Matching funds must constitute 50% of actual costs.
Send by 1/31/92: (jriLh Eaual Opportunity Statement) to:
Lloyd Childers, State historic Preservation Office.
N.C. Division of Archives and History, 109 S. Jones, Raleigh, NC 27601 -2807
io
4
III. ABSTRACT OF PROPOSED PROJECT:
Planning and Survey Grant Funds are being requested to conduct an
inventory of historic-sites and structures in all unincorporated
portions of Orange County except Chapel Hill Township. The survey area
consists of six townships - Bingham, Cheeks, Hillsborough, Eno, Little
River, and Cedar Grove - with approximately 700 structures built in 1940
or earlier. Excluding muncipalities, the total survey area encompasses
approximately 305 square miles. Field surveys along identified 1891
transportation routes have indicated that most structures are located in
the unincorporated community of Efland, in areas adjacent to the Town of
Hillsborough, and in rural crossroads clusters such as the Cedar Grove
community. The use of multiple listing forms by the consultant as well
as pre - inventory staff work will expedite the survey of these areas.
Using Orange County's Land Records System, computer print -outs will be
prepared showing the location, age, ownership, address, and structural
characteristics of the buildings. Field surveys will then be conducted
to verify computer- generated location information, and structures will
be mapped on USGS quad sheets.
The proposed inventory is the second of a four -phase project.
The first phase is currently underway, involving a similar inventory of
Chapel Hill Township. Excluding the towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro,
the township is comprised of 71.5 square miles. Of the seven townships
in Orange County, the township is the most urbanized and populous,
containing almost'70 percent of the county's approximately 94,000
residents. The township has also been the focal point of joint planning
efforts by Orange County and the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro, as
well as efforts by a coalition of farmers, developers,
environmentalists, and preservationists to develop strategies for
11
preserving the rural character of the area surrounding the two
communities.
The current inventory project was begun in December, 1991, and by
the end of January, 1992, the consultants will have completed inventory
work in one of three survey target areas. The first target area
represents approximately one -third of the total survey area and extends
south from N.C. Highway 54 and the Chapel Hill - Carrboro city limits to
the Chatham County line. Based on preliminary information from the
consultants, the area contains 60 structures of significance. The
project is scheduled for completion by the end of June, 1992.
In conjunction with the historic sites inventory, Orange County
will be focusing on another aspect of historic preservation in Chapel
Hill Township. Data layers will be created for historic, archaeological,
environmental, landscape, topographic, ownership, and transportation
elements as part of the Planning Department's geographic information
system (GIS) then combined to identify historic rural landscapes.
Completion of the database design for the GIS project is anticipated by
the end of January, 1992, and digitizing of the historic structure
attributes will commence mid - February when files from the initial target
area are complete. All historic structures should be entered into the
system by mid -June.
The GIS system developed as a part of the Phase I inventory will be
expanded to encompass the remainder of the county in Phase II. The
system will be updated in the third phase as` preparation of a more
detailed inventory of archaeological sites is undertaken. Phase III will
also include the publication of a county --wide inventory, and Orange
County will seek the SupDOrt of municipalities and private interests to
publish the inventory. A consultant will be sought to undertake the
archaeological inventory.
12
The final phase will consist of preparing an Historic Preservation
Element as part of the Comprehensive Plan and nominations for the
National Register of-Historic Places. The GIS system will be.used by the
Planning Department to prepare the Historic Preservation Element,
including the identification of historic rural landscapes, districts,
and properties. A consultant will be sought to prepare the National
Register nominations.
All phases will be subject to local funding approval as well as the
availability of Planning and Survey Grant Funds.
E
.
t STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE 2-3
DIVISION OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY
NORTH - CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CULTURAL RESOURCES
Addend -um to Sub rant Applications
-EQUAL OPPORTUNITY STATEMENT
THE NORTH CAROLINA HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM
RECEIVES FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR
IDENTIFICATION AND PRESERVATION. OF HISTORIC
PROPERTIES. UNDER TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT
OF 1964 AND SECTION 504 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT OF
1973, THE UNITED STATE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
PROHIBITS DISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF RACE,
COLOR, NATIONAL ORIGIN, OR HANDICAP IN ITS
FEDERALLY- ASSISTED PROGRAMS. IF YOU BELIEVE YOU
HAVE BEEN DISCRIMINATED AGAINST IN ANY PROGRAM,
ACTIVITY, OR FACILITY, AS DESCRIBED ABOVE, OR IF YOU
DESIRE FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE WRITE TO: OFFICE
OF EQUAL OPPORTUNITY, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
THE INTERIOR, WASHINGTON, DC 20240.
Signed : ahri M. Link /
T i t e: orange County ?lanaaer
Date o f Signing January 23, 1992
P -- o i e c t Lnventory of £itist:oric Sites and Structures
Orange County, NC - Phase II
Note: acknowledgement of the Equal Opportunity
Statement above shall accompany each application for
federal funding. Receipt of this signed and dated
statement will fulfill this requirement.
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 19, 1992
SUBJECT: Access to Potential Landfill Sites
DEPARTMENT County Manager
ATTACHMENT(S)
Proposed Resolution
Proposed Interlocal Agreement
5/4/92 Letter from Joyce Engineering
NCGS 40A -11
1
Action Agenda
Item No =�V L4
PUBLIC HEARING YES NO X
INFORMATION CONTACT
County Manager, ext 2300
TELEPHONE NUMBER
Hillsborough 732 -8181
Chapel.Hil1 968 -4501
Mebane 227 -2031
Durham 688 -7331
PURPOSE: To consider a resolution and interlocal agreement between
Orange County and the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill that authorizes
the Town of Chapel Hill to act on behalf of the jurisdictions
comprising the Landfill Owners' Group in exercising the statutory
authority granted to each jurisdiction to conduct testing of potential
sites for a sanitary landfill.
BACKGROUND: The Landfill Search Committee has identified four
potential landfill sites - OC -2, OC -9, OC -11, and OC -17 - that will
require subsurface testing for further evaluation of the suitability of
each site . The results of this testing would permit development of
preliminary engineering plans and cost estimates. These would allow
the LSC to compare alternative sites along the lines of social
implications, capital and operating costs, and environmental effects.
The attached letter from Joyce Engineering outlines the status of
efforts made to gain permission for access to potential landfill sites
from owners of property-"located within the boundaries of the four
landfill sites under active consideration. Although entry upon
each parcel may not be necessary, it is essential that access to all
properties be available so that questions can be answered concerning
matters such as depth to bedrock, subsurface water and direction of
flow, soil types, and the like. In that not all property owners have
voluntarily granted access, staff recommend that the County use its
authority under GS 40A -11 to enter upon lands specified for the purpose
of making surveys, borings, examinations and appraisals as may be
necessary or expedient in selecting a site for a future landfill.
Property owners can receive compensation for damages that occur as a
result of required testing.
2 ,
The Town of Chapel Hill adopted a similar resolution on May 11, and we
expect that the Town of Carrboro will also consider a similar
resolution at its May 19 meeting. The attached resolution would
authorize Orange County to exercise its statutory authority under GS
40A -11 and authorize the County Manager to sign the attached interlocal
agreement allowing the Town of Chapel Hill to carry out this activity
on behalf of all three jurisdictions.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board adopt the
resolution.
3
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXERCISE OF ORANGE COUM t S )kUTRMTY
To ENTER UPON PRIVATE LANDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING SURVEYS,
BORINGS, EXAMINATIONS AIM APPRAISALS TO ASSIST IN TIM SB.LS 109 OF
A SITE FOR A NEW LANDFILL TO SERVE ORANGE COUNTY AND AMOV'NG AN
INTERLOCAL AGRF.MaNT FOR THE EXERCISE OF THAT AUTHORITY
WEIEREAS, Orange county is a member of the Landfill owners' Group
and is a part owner of the present orange County Landfill; and,
WHEREAS, the Orange County and the two other owners of the present
landfill, the Town of Chapel Hill and the Town of Carrboro have
appointed a citizens' Landfill Site Search committee to consider
sites for a new landfill for Orange County and the Towns of
Carrboro and Chapel Hill; and,
WHEREAS, the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill and Orange County
have appointed representatives to the Landfill Owners' Group which
is considering issues related to the operation of the present
landfill and possible location of a site for a future landfill;
and,
WHEREAS, as part of the process of evaluating potential sites for
a future landfill for Orange County and the Towns of Carrboro and
Chapel Hill it is necessary to enter upon properties which have
been identified as possible sites for a future landfill; and,
wHEREAS, under North Carolina law (N.C.o.S• 40A -11), Orange County
as an agency with the authority to exercise the power of euinent
domain, may enter upon lands for the purpose of making surveys,
borings, examinations and appraisals as may be necessary or
expedient in carrying out and performing its powers of ealuent
domain, specifically in this case to select a site for a sanitary
landfill to serve orange County;
Now, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Coolissioners
that the Board hereby approves the exercise of the County's
authority under a.S. 40A -11, to enter upon the lands described in
Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein, for the purpose
of making surveys, borings, examinations and appraisals as may be
necessary or expedient in selecting a site for a future landfill
to serve orange County;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of County camaaaissioners
authorizes the County Manager to execute the attached interlocai
agreement on behalf of Orange County with the Town of Chapel Mill
and the Town of Carrboro, whereby the Town of Chapel bill is
designated to exercise said authority on behalf of Orange County
and the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill, and ratifies said
agreement.
4 "'
NORTH CAROLINA
ORANGE COUNTY
INTERLOCAL AGR19ZM U
THIS INTERLOCAL AGREE made and entered into thisi the
day of , 1992, by and between the County Of Oran" -77
North Carol na political subdivision, the Town of Garxxlorcl, a North
Carolina municipal corporation, and the Town of Ch�e7l Rill, e
North Carolina municipal corporation, pursuant to unapter 1 §0A,
Article 20, Part 1, North Carolina General Statutes.
WHEREAS, Orange County, the Town of Carrborc and this Town of
Chapel Hill own and operate jointly a landfill located in orange
County to serve their respective jurisdictions and the fesidento
thereof; and,
WHEREAS, Orange County, the Town of Carrboro and the Town of
Chapel Hill, desire to exercise jointly each agency+''# iedividual
authority under N.G. General Statute 40A -11 to enter upon private
lands for the purpose of making surveys, borings, emmoLnations and
appraisals as may be necessary or expedient toward tte selection
and possible acquisition of a site for a future landf III
NOW, THEABFCRE, it in hereby agreed by Oraaga Cogntj► and the
Town of Chapel Hill and Carrboro as follows:
1. The Town of Chapel Hill is hereby authorised sndI iirected
to exercise the authority given under G.S. 40A -11 behalf of
orange County, and the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Dill for the
purpose of considering possible future sites for a landfill to
serve the three respective governmental agencies and their
residents.
2. All casts associated with the authorised pxe Giae of
authority under G.S. 40A -11„ including, but not limited to, Costs
of surveys, borings, and examinations, shall be born* by the
Present Landfill Fund administered by the Town of Chad Hill.
3. This Agreement shall be for the period begiqniqg an the
date of execution first above written and extending to June 300
1993.
4. This Agreement may be extended or modified by afteeemeat
of the parties.
5. Any party may withdraw fray this aarq w t! upon 30 dalr
Written notice to the remaining parties.
ORANGE COUNTY
by
County Manager
by
Town Manager
TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL
by
Town Manager
Attest
C er
Attest
clerk
Attest
Cleft
5
6
W%"M Nn�
FOem YI.BYIM�
3�ONawin�
• �a14, i�0�g1NO 21df
TM l► 0"
May 4, 1992 `W tV19)
Orange Regional Landfill Owners Group
c/o Town of Chapel Hill
Public Works Department
1099 Airport Road
Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27516
Attn: Mr. Gayle Wilson
Solid Waste Administrator
Reference: Surnrnary of Property Owner's' Responses
Request for Access for Geotochnical Investigations
Sites OC -2, OC-A, 00-11, and OC -17
Orange County Landfill Site Search
JEI Project No. 229.00
Gentlemen:
On April 9, 1992, Joyce Engineering sent a letter via certified mail to each prgwly a~
having land within the boundarlea of OC 2, OC -9, OC -11 and OC -17. The letters requested
permislon to enter the poperdes to perfbrrn activities associated with . prolirnlnery
geotechnical Investigations. A sample copy of that letter Is attached, A suMmary of the
responses received from the owners is shown on Table 1. A list of Indivlduall responw
and copies of the authorization sheets are also attached.
Mr_ Gayle Wilson
May 4, 1992
Page two.
Table i - Responses to Access Requests for
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigations
Number of Responses
$1% Area
Site Total Area by Category
Appeved for
(acres)
Acoss (ecru)
Yes No No Response
OC -2 818 4 5 2'
OC -9 824 52 1 0
T58 (61236)
OC -11 1643 5 11
aC -17 853 9 1 2
8$9 (8736)
Total Responses 23 18 9
Notes: 1. The two properties are owned by the some person.
2. Includes one verbal response to Gayle Wilson (309 ),
3. Includes one letter that was not picked up at the post�4y
(O.T4 acm).
Given the above responses, we cannot process with the geoteehnigal Ihvlstloaftris as
planned. As such. Joyce Engineering is requesting assistance from V* LOG in obtNhing
access to properties where permission to enter the property was not "led, ploe"
contact us when a schedule is decided and /or if you have aryr queues regarding this
letter,
Sincerely.
JOYCE ENGINEERING, INC.
Mark A. TayIc1r. P.E.
Project Manager
cc: L.E. Joyce, Jr., P.E.
Bain. Palmer 8 Associates
I
7
ust of Individual Responses to
Access Request Letters
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigations
Orange County Landfill Site Saarch
property owners of "Active' sites
(OC- 2. OC•a, ac -11, OC-17)
qb
Access
CIMBW
t et s (Acreal
Land Ovmet
NO
6.23.3 (1.0 AC)
Thomas York Tear
l Ac4d
Ghape NO 21615
NO
6.23.3A (1.0 AC)
SAME AS ABOVE
YES
6.23.4C (215:99 AC)
Joyce N. Standard
87VO
ch"alm NC 31618
YES
6.23.10 (908 AC)
Garland A. Cates
I iCC 27215
NR
6.23.13 (1.37 AC)
Leta Cheek 1"eer
"M
�1d
NR
6,23.14 (1.02 AC)
SAME AS ABOVE
NO
6.23.15 (223.3 AC)
Teer Farms Inc.
8222 ��
Ch per. , 21619
NO
6.26.1 (49.18 AC)
Ake" P. Wilson
26 , 1 N
YES
6.26.2 (8322 AC)
Mamie S. Pickett
80i 1 W Rand
ChtMpel 29114
NO
6.26.3 (923 AC)
Jahn J. 6 Helene A. Dbcan
4915 �Y 44 W
Chapel MM, 2951 d
YES
6.26.5 (142.8 AC)
Buck Mountain Development
Co. Partnership
040116. 29514
NR = No Response
i."_:
p 4
O
Ust of Individual Responses to
Access Request Letters
Preliminary Ceow chnicai Investigations
Orange County LandM Site Search
Property Owners of'AcdW Sites
(OC- 2. OC•9, OC- 11. OC -17)
Access
NO
5.8.31 (13.61 AC)
Nancy J. & Ronald R. Beauvais
NO
5.8.31A (47.00 AC)
Aleut Watkins Heirs
YES
5.0.318 (7.71 AC)
Kaye & Paul F. Fendt
YES
5.8-31C (0.19 AC)
SAME AS ABOVE
YES
5.8.310 (3.S7 AC)
SAME AS ABOVE
YES
5.8.31 E (3.02 AC)
SAME AS ABOVE
NR
5.812 (93.02 AC)
Dathene Hawkins, at at
NO
5.8.328 (1.79 AC)
Ames & Warren S. Summay. Sr.
NO
5.8.32E (1.83 AC) -
Wanda & Warren S. Summey, Jr.
NR
5.8.36 (4.51 AC)
Harold V. & Barbara 9umrney
NO
S. 13.1 (35.12 AC)
Laura Lwise Watkins
& Alex Watkins Hair:
NR = No
Response
__``--
Rarte 4 �x 360
HiMbpnuV4 1+10 27US
Raft 4 fau aka
HM@bo"h. t#C 27276
14100 PAnd
0#0 X674
71p7 vt� ironw
C410191, W =I
122 OONM**" So"
HSaboaok *C SWO
2701 MGr Rgad
�1. *c antra
Route 4 I�x
MMMOM40. qC 2M
1312 Mari >3hOM Chumb Mod
Hftbao"h. NC V273
10
9
List Of Individual ROOM"" 10
Aces Request L.dttem
Preliminary Gewschntcal Inveswailli"
Orange County Landfill Ske S4&fM
Property dwners,of •Active Saes
(OC -2, OC•9.00•11, QC -17)
gib.
Access
Granted
�
Add�lw6
YES
4.1.8.27 (59.0 AC)
Cora E. & Robert 0. Hancock, Jr.
9647 Rod
at al
G�pC 2" 1
YES
4.2.1 (139.49 AC)
Marvin Phelps
YES
4.2.2 (114.0 AC)
Kim Im Nan Staley
110 Avenue
F4
NO
4.2.10 (65.35 AC)
Helen N. & LwW J. Miller
2111 21M
1�
YES*
4.9.14 (309,19 AC)
Champlpn Realty Corp.
MolrMOr+ U TAN
YES
4.4.6 (143.04 AC)
J. J. Freeland Hairs
mftwvjqh. NO 2IVa
• Verbal response reported to Mr. Gayle Wilson, Town of Chapel Hill Pd ft Works 01parlAWK
SRI QQ-1 1
Arxess
Wow t_er a UWM
NO 5.13.18 (16.0 AC)
List of Individual Piasponsss I*
Access Request Letters
Preliminary Geotechnical Immestlgations
Orarps County Landfill -Site Sarah
Property Owners of'Active" Slip
(OC -2, OC- 9. OC-11, OC-17)
Laura Louise Watkins
A Alex Watkins Maim
NO
5.13.1A (55.23 AC)
Silly W. 8 Cam" F. Sprinkle
NO
S. 13-10 (313.14 AC)
Frederick V. Miller. Sr.
NO
5.13.10A (1225 AC)
Froderkk V. Miller, Jr.
NO
S. 13.108 (11.71 AC)
Jesse L. Miller
NO
5.13.14 (1268.67 AC)
Randolo Dudley Fox
NR
5.14.1 10.61 AC)
Sue Thompson Johnson
NR
5.14.3 (0.53 AC)
Cal* Roosevelt Mayfield S
=
Mable Uwq
YES
5. 14.4 (0.50 AC)
Alvin I.3 Leda S. Gbwre
NR'
5.14.4A (0.74 AC)
Dwan V. Johnson
NR = No Response
Notice given by Roxboro Post Office but letter never picked up
&MMI
1313 M* bran *wM NOW
, ML 16!rM� Ne 37272
687 VWf* Strive!
oum.m,MMc 7'9'41
I= N* s4rap Gwira Amw
11■.borr�rplr. � 27278
1360 a wro Road
''"nor rp�•M"'� mre
1123 Ns n 0060 Owrd ftW
HM*Omo^"C 2M9
270 Me, SUN 102
CwhatN
28th S i a"
11Msbmojl6M, 2M$
P.O. ,!
1 mwxw40 , 27278
2$16 St. "a a Read
14110basoMik "Cl 27270
1315 5 taw 00%0 RON
Ruh—, KIM
ZM
11
List of Individual Responses to
Access Requesst Letters
Pmliminary Geotechnical Invent 0bns
Orange County Landfill Site Search
Property Owners of "Active" Sites
(OC- 2. OC•9.00 -11, OC-17)
YES
7.18.27 (8.08 AC)
Regina W. 3 Woodrow W. Seller's, et ol
SM Rlad
DurhMm►1d
YES
7.18.27] (13.8 AC)
Lbson R. Johnson
108 Sao bm*rlt Skeat
Chapel * NC1 2MI4
NR
7.18.27E (42 AC)
Ida Strowd Pendergrass, et al
451' V rive
D4t1w
P" W"
YES
7.18.27F (282 AC)
Bernice Blvina & Doris Farmer, et ol
X12 ft*WO' Avenue
SM& W! 104"
YES
7.19.24 (83.80 AC)
E.M. Blackwood
an IRI*d
Chapel1 2710'10
YES 7.19.24F (10.01 AC) SAME AS ABOVE
YES 7.19.248 (3.0 AC) Ruth sit Troy S. Sluder, Jr.
NR 7.19.24C (10.0 AC) Dr. David Paydertar
NO 7.19.240 (10.Ot AC) Wendy D. & Walker A. Long
YES 7.20.7A ($57.71 AC) Ouke University School Of For+asty
YES 7.20.8 (25.0 AC) Mary C. Stokes, et al
YES 7.20.9 (25.0 AC) Martha B. Kirkman
NR = No Response
100 Lowd Hill Ckdle
Chapel H4 NCI 27014
2291A d *fVK Apt 1
Carerbrl� 0,2130
Z8 vtled
mrapal
0mce d Catrneel
Dtrrh@M 40 070
0
Chok".;
2310 To Cvw't
Cherlolta, 202111
L
IS.-
12
r
V f 4OA -11. Right of entry prior to C*n46MM lx JCMa
Any condemnor without having filed a petition or cost t,
depositing any sum or taking any other action provided br in this
Chapter, is authorised to enter upon any lands, but not
to make surveys, borings, examinations, and W E
* t, neoweary or expedient in carrying out and perf i
duties wader this Chapter. The condemnor steal! ve
in writing to the owner at his last known address snd the p
possession of the land of the intended entry authorised by t
Entry under this section shall not be deemed a troop MI at ialione
within the meaning of this Chapter, however, the condemnor
make reimbursement for any damage resulting fmni stash acfgivi
wW the owner is entitled to bring an action to recover br the
a If the owner recwvm damages of twenty -five ppeereertt (25%1 the amount offered by the condemnor for reunbtieaemsttc its
activities the court, in its discretion, may award reasonable
fees -to the owner. (1981, c. 919, s. 1.)
13
1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda
Item No z'V- 8
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 19, 1992
SUBJECT:
.. -Nonw Acceptance -of- outside - Waste -at- Orange -County - Landfill
- - --
DEPARTMENT w Public Works--- - - -r -r PUBLIC- HEARING r YES - - -_ NO X
- -- --
ATTACHMENT(S) INFORMATION CONTACT
Proposed Resolution Wilbert McAdoo, ext 2625
TELEPHONE NUMBER
Hillsborough 732 -8181
Chapel Hill 968 -4501
Mebane 227 -2031
Durham 688-7331
PURPOSE: To consider a resolution formally establishing the policy of
the orange County Board of Commissioners not to accept at the
Orange County Landfill solid waste generated by individuals or
organizations outside of Orange County.
BACKGROUND: The policy at the Orange Regional Landfill is not to
knowingly accept solid waste generated by out -of- county users. A
number of citizens have approached the Landfill Owners Group and the
Board of Commissioners about taking action that would establish this
practice as written policy. Staff have drafted the attached resolution
that would formally implement this policy. A similar resolution is
expected to be presented in the near future for consideration by the
Landfill Owners' Group.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board adopt the
proposed resolution.
z
PROHIBITING ACCEPTANCE EATL THE OORANGE COUNTY LANDFILL
OF SOLID WASTE GENERATED OUTSIDE ORANGE COUNTY
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the Orange County Board of Commissioners
and the Landfill Owners' Group not to knowingly accept solid waste at
the Orange Regional Landfill that is generated by individuals or
organizations residing outside the geographical boundaries of orange
County and that portion of the Town of Chapel Hill located within
Durham County, and
WHEREAS, the orange County Board of Commissioners recognizes the need
to reduce and manage solid waste responsibly now and in the future, and
WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners is committed to a
good solid waste management plan and to preserving natural resources,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Orange County Board of
Commissioners reaffirms the policy that to the extent permitted by
law, the existing Orange Regional Landfill, as well as any successor
thereto, shall be designated to accept solid waste generated
exclusively by residents, businesses, and other institutions located in
Orange County and that portion of the Town of Chapel Hill located
within Durham County.
This, the 19th day of May, 1992.
N
n
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Action Agenda
Item No. =V -C...
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: MAY 19, 1992
SUBJECT: PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS FOR NCACC ANNUAL CONFERENCE
DEPARTMENT: COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
---------------------------------
ATTACHMENT(S): YES - PROPOSED
POLICY STATEMENTS
PUBLIC HEARING YES: NO: X
----------------------------------
INFORMATION CONTACT: MOSES CAREY,JR.
TELEPHONE NUMBER -
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Chapel Hill - 968 -5401
Durham - 688 -7331
Mebane - 227 -2031
PURPOSE: To consider the proposed policy statements which will be
submitted to the Resolutions Committee at the NCACC Annual Conference in
Charlotte on August 13, 1992 and consider submission of other resolutions.
BACKGROUND: The Constitution of the North Carolina Association of County
Commissioners provides that resolutions may be submitted for consideration
to the Resolutions Committee at the Annual Meeting of the Association in
one of the following ways:
1. By official action of a member board of county commissioners;
2. By official action of a standing or special committee of the
Association;
3. by official action of an affiliate organization of the
Association; or
4. by motion of a member of the Resolutions Committee.
All resolutions or proposed changes to the Policy Statements must be
submitted to the Association office no later than Friday, July 17, 1992.
RECOMMENDATION(S): As the Board decides.
a, = v u C-= tz cn 2 7•�� C
o•SO wc 41 ` -'`r m C-) >o
EV
C r`j rUi. V V pp U
GpUC �`�` O v O U ° U v 0�� r C O r G U C? c u.�
_
T`^ C-) cue p t-0�SZ
_u � .0 •G' U� �•`� v = v 3 u'� � r.-0.c v � �- � •"' c � v � 'c
U h c "G C ea C p U 3 G y C� eo y C Tw
U U _ U. •C U ` C GO `j v. v O G-0 41 7-�'M 0 U
— V U CAS v .� n C Z r .`7 " w a U U U U r U •� u G U cC rq T� GD
r.rE,,• — w
U� y [) v E �'pq O CC6- O 'E G v �; U'� G G U v O
c�E'G Gov =U� ytij.� CUUGyin.EUC y�CG U •v EeaUCa a
C S U U U a U E O 7,...v_` �""— C �•- T+C V U EL C c�j "y cn G U m 3
rU0r ��. -CCed C� —•� KaG eOQr� ca Up UisG- vU
_U tc " v v= C v a�'r T U c C =vim. v ,�.� U v° ,0 O v v ti� v C
U U U � rU, C. C U '� '� _ y_ C C-0 p
a OeCC Da O U OU C; L
C�r .v�' v ~ U�Fy v.�C yyp R �U � .LE: ' ��C �rci , •=p ' ' �C e �v ° y�o G Z U 2 C; en i w. E
r v v U v ^�r7 :Uv OU a�'^ � 0R 2 T
�Ura v.�u rXr C. Ceceea -" CUh. C vVi a G: C u
•G .^. z r Z) rJ „OU, •V v y •y 3 r-.2
xx >,
U U U
to v C n= - C C _� v c�5 U a �.
L
2-- C ,c Ty rC.) r c r) U G C r� O �� (ii U r v U vG• C U-
U U
�-- C EC�7 u � �”' C � �� = v•E� C c., ~,— v.� 3 -��'.� 7C � �— � � U � ^� c•� - � :� r.
U V T .0 C •- •C i.% C V r C'L G U y V ~ U y v w- u v ~
- � a, r ^ � G U C �; �-- � U v, U •C w U r _ .� � v: c� � C G • J _ 7 -- Gp
v ,..., � _ oc � G � U U � C � e5 • C � ... u; • cr. .�j '- U Ce '-� y C r.. � U ..
C.O.= .,r 1^.r p V r (� G .. U U • U C «. o-• eC w
J U C^ C >,C C �_ v v,• :_ v.� �._ �— C� "G ^ �• c U 9 C U �'C .. J C
vTUU r= UyaO z�.� ^rTGNU
9 C ' GG.
'6 � ruUG� r;UGE ev.Ur3 U C p52�C'" -.+ Ur � Gry."- c c-Gea
U U C U—•, U j
C U
U C C
Q` V
L=
• _ C
ryhh a r f•-1 ee cC r — r Ci G V lC
V1 O U �y _
en
� � V C K � •G. T. — �' Ti U
C
y UO V1 •� wUU o. U. CC
IC �.0 GS Ua w C�- 3c 3
0 U i i1] V
�! Q UC: Urr ° U4p Uc rr Ou_p
Q D o � � r-0 ° � 't� � 3 [n e_)
e°~
EL
� C es u v GO G. C � � •C
,.= � V C v E y C v , U
CL
vw > cc C Cd
GD u U
° r-
41
cd Z 3 t E 7=. '7u CU E
C 4 Up • • • • U U a
C w �U
� r
Z U) U U
F
c
v
� =CG:
^� C-0y•3
u
•C � 4 p,C
UE$2
� U
Div OBE
Z
oc�.�ra
y�cFa.
uCdE
C CAA 0. C U
to
V1 O •O
UQ�00
U U U Cj �7r
u V E -
" a G
yUU CCU
>`p C v r toE
C= cA=—
eOG eC C U .- T U .•.,
7 U.> r U C C C
o
cUpEv�cc. •�r
U U V U � U U r •U
G �U �•h rn ce � U G
r.pE�UUf=
•E U v �.c '''`' � T C U
F 0
c�3`�c sec
•U v4.. �
V y 0 U Cd
.0 UTS
�• C
oy U E= U C � C •� 3
to �j •7 U'a C T � U
C U T•V U U U
U cc U U � v. � C • �, U rr.
Gam—. = U4•• ^` cC �4.
F6Z
2.
vn
'Ci
r
3•
rid w C C �G �� �� A C — O o
O �� t G - �= U e"i-C °ma x .0 `°
-- C 0. R y
a� c
°E" 57,0 �� C >
'yj m U u� a c Q� W row_ � -`-' C :t to E� °_ o �'' U `
Cc, Ew o. �� �. ^ARE E� = °.oc�c °�'c� 0 c> ara�,;
7,b
eC .� w. .0 '0 O R A R w'- E 7-.� r y y y 4 Vf UO y .0 .0 C
c E a E.8 e w M
U¢ a y M .0 C R 0. TTX O� �10 O C¢'E< VA G•E O 7 ` �� C C
7 o C y y 0 .w 0. �v C U A -G GCC' U C U T m E > C h 7 0
w•� U C U U` 9 c a� El; C y C C 0 U C� A `e C po _ _A c
�� y a0._ U U� �. E ` U vi C'� v y ` 41 �� G U
GC 7, U 7 v, W._ � E U �-. �' U �¢ C V vi ti
Q 0. C G v�� Q — y C b C O �7 CJA a> 4C e> d 0 rUA
.0 G G a.a c U `—° a Qbb �� ei� C '2 h ea �.n E C too �° o
GCU R U w 7 of C_ C)•_ G_ V
R %:.. G A C O v U U C. U _ C U M v p„ U> 3 C ca C
•G R.0 eUj •}' 4, O y /UA w,�?' U 7,� C •MME C G uu Q0 C01y, ,o ".. a y.j T •�.
Q C 5 G w U•_ '�C1 '+•+ O tC ' VJ �J y 7 M r A a C) G `n =) 0 ",' p" U C1 V7 _ M L1 p a
Q, G G 6J vyi O .�. y v 'U 41 4w.• G�— U• Z3,0 a C O r = o ... •=
Vf U ..J ` C9 G • _ V • N R rn r T R -
�0a �¢� c U REc.- R c UU u� p
Q a U y C U 0.0 E C � —0 U -- � to � -.r C '... O� 'C
Q °pc r� n°'i ��a o E o 4 U a~ c y o ." •�' p Up F y y°
a�� v CU �C ��Ucyiyc�r� C C .}'i upO.p a� s �p �R�y A
•v •U C y tip+ Cv'C 7� G A �� 3 -� U C`C � •_ G U C w w E.w a' �•a y w 6Cj y U a
yuca r GO y °e.8 RbRT y E C yC ej C �c E Bea
�� .._ v :. U �. R 7'� yp ee C R a� 7,o E �� � V 8 0-0 7 � y E
O yyy a C `' U u " 3 iii C O cA vUs CAt:_ C `�' U C �O y U v� �a y� y_� '� j E F e� y yl V 3 C
e.) c4 C a� C C U Q C R O U O y z-- J CrKO.— y^ •� 7 -q U C Z7 y C Q y G y
Uov>; F; R 2 tb vGC�� v �OO•C SEC t._. t�T'"G, vm R W.. U�, C
•v�� G a` o.C� C U c.�V "E y v CC C Ty 3 C y
C —
p. A� C Q�c.EC y� �•Eo+c E :2.2 ac x �.��;�� co moo. w�c 8 G
�� _ a
y. -.0 c'� �.� :..� y o
CCCC`" C GCU7� b�Q7.C. rCEwCy� �•C` J C�V8 = �C.�U�vyv UOU Q U
0.G w V C E R U cCc3 U-. V V c U C- x y U�
E E �' �v 0.Q.«, �-. U w C) C m M F. 95
U V' =
���U
C U 7,
^ C y TR y
EU
`
�~
.C� �'
Ci U C y U 0 C) >,
'L"
UA^
°
y,`-
c c
c_y 0 0
E^
C R
U E �UU v
G v
^�
y C v
C
R y G, w C U Ty G
y U Q
y
U� G =�
E'
U
r
C ��
C=
U
C�
u. v=
U
G
C -3-^:
E o
E.E
�= °GCS
RZ
��cE
�_
v,
U U
:_` E U
x. �•r R
v
v
O
O �?^ v cav v�
F-
G.yc
O R
E• 3
�u
R
E
"C n C_
c� C-0 E C-
�C�c_
—�
O CC E O
1..
C.
_p�c
-UCej0
7. U E a G
v
U
�_._�
`" N
to~
G v
U yCpk
C
`^y
C. v
A v
cCe ea
V ��` y�r C U
v
U R h
U v 0
V
_T�
acr R w G C GC
y �w
U O UA V
0
a,�A
-ECG
U .0 Ct. e�
O
O O.4U
eaCrUn_CT�
rte+ u� •q •L .�C
G C
y.0 vUi
'C O.
/^C
1�
C�Oyea`'•
O O v r U w C
ea G Cis U
"�
C aw
r TU ` a g C
cc
A.^:
(;
ryji0
7 o U
U U.0 .` Y ej
Q
e0
V C
C C
R«
C/� �.0 p c� a
Lam... R L y R
_T
v C
t-0�
G--
° e�
0.�._.
V
O C eat 0 w
U 3 7A a &E
vf� rG
a- C•C�4=
eaa
�` O 3 C w V y
y U y
v-~ O
7 U
co G
R
cz
7 `a
O�
EZ R c
U U
Gq� F.
y
U��
S2 c'
u 3 7�
Q E c y
G U
O
v O� �+�
.fi�ry
c
U0.r, c
O� E O R
-
O
•�
C
E-=
C C.0
y
w
W
C
yoEe,`ayC�Oy
aaR`c
•�
UC
E �•—
Vim,?`
cy�,U�a"` -°
y•— c� ` 7 UA
C ^' EA O E
��`
C
O
ac?`
..-.
ca E.0
�'y-
U �y
C)
y
Q R � CJ� c? U
C O�
O
4. ESA y U
y•V
G
y
C
c ao� U 08 ea
C
C u7
V, w C ea
_ R
3 14 m
C
y
C
`
r
U ��•H es
e`z C
y rn
ed E`
C
e�
U U GC
O O TOE E U
C _
U.0
O cs U W
0
()
`� v4r E E '� c E c
.—
�
�
AVU0O�brj —>
C
U y eFC GCE
'AAU
�
%. G 7 u7 U of G em U
V•G U R U•Vi
uo C u E
w
��
R `,E"�
o v.'3
y`
� C a ^'cv N t�
H G C)
¢ a__
V E
U��
� 7
¢� G O
�
Q
�
a'C U 61 T7 R•O n~ ej
Z "Q C e �� 5 v
E =
w•- , a c E
G—
E
v�R,.
C 3 �p._A
ea
: c
c c.
C
a n 7 v o G
vA
yCca
V
ti-
Q UA
r a -- a
J C 7^.mmzF_P=
rr
--
L.CC.E"Ze�._
z G E
F
_� U•_
y C C U
E- cacaUU�cy..y
C\
9
^�c o O
ravv M. o�°��
Z a =E �wI' E�
00 —cci .E w 0
vb ��iv G.ti�U G O3E!2 u0
C C C C 7
C) -�3G �.o
r� w N
U <C t,••, �U L w a a
E _ e
U CC O ed C H.E?` ro =, cV C�
V > Q. � m O• E U C '"' U 6 Cr'
LOC wy� CUC.d T'C C• —O C
C. r= �
0 U_ U O
C r T G C T
i-1 v� Uf=1 Q C mss_ O �'3
Q �+I 7�� en E'� O �V .O v G
4J -0 q W W — G•
C �Q y� V,G y C
V3 M y w�U ��v daz
>
a` p 0 �_ cv_v
f) W3 w u C C C
F+IW r QC �Ccw c��1 �C esvcaU_
C V 1" U J '�•. r= C UV E V] w
��,v�cvcOrc
�, ecvp� R.'O�.o r•G
•� � ,nom• —,O .O
W¢ L U U y 61 V
.� ���3U�QUv
`" U cn U U G0
C. jv � cC�.`�.
O 3 >�= U C
U COd v 0_ a U CA 0 cc
U�
ce
rAOC� —wcUi
Cr U A v'Q e4� H eCe c
1 U
•-
� ca OU
C es
T.�yU��U U
U w U� U .� C
C 3e`�c�gav�c��
cu
V = z°�w��in'
U C� Cca��'G
ea —
,�
c� yA��yU.o
G E E
V `"
^ cc v C :a
zo
ce
w
U
.• GA � cC U C3
ro
Ul
c—' U
:n > w
o c
cb
r G tUj a w tn •�
Cm w U ea O
O C > CO O�
Z 4veo
CA
CL
nS `
v'b U p eGa y C O
C v CU C C
>
� � •C r". CC Vj �
•"' G U U
GoC C eV.TR C
cqs �pp y oro
5G•� eUSC TiR C
BUG �,�.....� O r
U C w U
wj ecs
4.
:-0 C p U v y 0� I ri, _' R ` C C U •� C.G U
c =U3 c c CU•rc c c
eo �, cv ._ U .: r K E U v �, a r O .
•a�� ^e3v.r - �eE�, o'er U y Oc .- O2C.GEuU E off__
�•� E,c� i c y K c y C c c E �<
cc' c�-� vav�ea}c.�ec� Uy��
C° E c E °�', ° Cj•V� E �U c �� U n v v U U_ c
C"E •= r r_ -- w ti E E y C c E O G r c E E r_ CCi7
0.O U v C ^— U— v C rr
U elU ;� C U��^ UGC ,� C-0�'•.0 C C t.Ov: C
C eCC 'G1.�.0 ^� U C vyC„ pw, cn¢,G C cn•r J
�'•� .` � .c�z •tC U C U] ,-• � ": — 7 T � 7-, G vi U '"' � � v: • � G U ti C U ._^_.
GGy U CC�cz L y.. .JU UU CCV
U'C r.0�� Cp
to ` h Ty ct: U r C w U CO C U C.0 H M U C
yd �•, C G U C C-0 C� r_. `,. G •p Z O cn U -'; U G w 3 C. .S ,U U
$ G v G (.]c rn0 C riou G p n V,O w� v- y� c y U y �U? cj �'" • y N7 G► W y w — '•' U 7, U cv • a ... • y C y ' 47 U
U a v ea C U U C ... E
cy� C U ,. cn
cy�U CtiOa Cw ee�alv �'eav� ��.Gn mcz U w�0'�. EOT`�E U Ucc°i�
C V w T C �, v E C ea ,E y � ti, C 'O v O '3 O cts u U w O V.
Cd C � y $ CC CC i � v CSC+ •� 4r — V �`Uj 'V '�'� U �
U C U w CA
U r U y Cy rr•...� •� U
CC
E ... � v � V w eti �'+ C U w V o w U w y .i U V V ��
E a U a �,00 `° E �c c.Q E U 3— E� v v �.c O �� O ��
C-0C U U R U� —'C.0 C3..H G r7 w o- U CO's C U G� Ww
O.C,. C,C U �CCa� —C 2eaO__U U a.� cy`"v.cv �a
4. 7•, u7� a —� U h y G U ,0.0 O..> G R O C b G vi `•1 C C r U)^ y O eC.0 cn
yin 0_�y� = � bx3��G �"�•� �- w�c; = :_°_ccio•3�nb
3 c R c c 0 >, cm
�U.O.c y U C3 N U a^h GE
y U hy. GOU w °E"�
A C-0'� T 'w y r U "' C __. T U � cC• w cc 3 7 gn U God w,U � U= ` th
yyr'O _��o CA. —cnm 3�
��J�r ey �Uav �'�e:.Ec °� U�G c
r. C cC O �{ ca cn .r of y U C �... C U G U "•�
w o_o vUi C= C�� U � -C p� ` m G = 3 c •E •c vwi `� c'a .0 ' ; ea i `y° c a v eUa
_ U r U U vi e7 r.+ en . eC C y e/7 A
m r '8 r..w•• •�Q > r- w— U vJ y`�•U �r -0 y7 � C''ttt,�JJJ .�^'y 'N '� i'" - -t/f y .T. E U y'� T.C.. >,
L7 w T. G3 _ Qy w. E t�1 w d E :,;.E 7 Ci IUi r F U Vl G ~ r 7 .r r R E i. E
"'u,a� =°�� U`EU •� Cy�c•v Cc3 'c � �' °wRxocu '�s'c;
3 rUa`r' cs �• y �_ Goy E E `-' �? G.�� v �c v E v.�' G o E a H=
C `O— C C'.. v U UGC— y :p U CAL o �w C e`n � coC C Cw
l7 3 o,c Ir ee C V: r VJ A m vs en QsQa U E r U U G eaL
r-+
U r _y 5 8�
~ '
U�~.. tAC-U U
p c°Qnc °." °ev,eap �"�U�,
8c E°' c� 030 oc5��
?3u HCa CLO
�. �xcC pnGOUC•
y' U
U O C U H �_ 4 C,C CO"
X p U T y C` U y p
W'UT viRw en
g•��vy 4 OrnC
UU^ry .' VnU
cd C C C J C ;n cn 7 ,� U en Q
v v U C3 C. UA� U U wee 3 U w
IS = C O h O U T a C p U U v U U
0 > >
L) E2t
..lt-0� •�a�_ � ��iUUU� 3ti.vC7.._.
U C- - p rte, cn < C
C U CA V O C V C.) C C U >> C C U G
C
C�,.O " E.v��c�r EEO OvC3
tz
vr�"� gCw`"U C OCr G — 5= 2:e
_ C-0... G
C v cs U C-0 U CA C4
C cn U
r ".5.5 E U�
E—O 0= - = r—cdr-= of
u m.72
U.ICS, 0 UyO..
r cyrf C 03.Ea
C C)
eC C•v TU
0 O
y y C U Cn
;-4
cz
>
W T C "!2 o
���yy ti C cn y O 0 C C
4J
�pvp 0 20cp,—
� OOA. V a ti V C C] y
O U
-
2 f:mOr
r' L) paGC�;
'V ycQRE ZUticCG
C ~ ~ ~
�•d C y,
C% v eC > C:. U E Q
d
yy/q� c
Vj .� U� r C r'•' 7 C �+ C'O
� -iJ
..Ut g COQ
G �^ >
a C U a w c:[aCr..= >v
0 tic-
wyO U - -5 CU ��
U CA eC �
v > L) - T
0 •"3�
+•+ � ee �n C �.
in r•-+.Q C �
� en es O
C 3
rn E • = � G
CA
U C U
U C Cti U J
U
a•_C.rU�
Cc/]
G
v:cczC-
U v 6 v c "U cyUi v U U C k C p U C U C cr W, y C U U vi T cn ;n T_c
`_ r A M J v V 3
~ U C G
00 ti vi 0.– O � V u >1 U
c C': _ C
ea
a C a C e> cc D `� r 4 O cn eye_ ••'i U C C z C.1 U
�>e , v c � r-0ei e�j C e c <'— U 3 UZ � v •3 i
� ` ;•>� � ee•C v �
e ¢ •E O E U-5 CA.– 0 •� � C ° �C
•^ �
❑. e� O CA r y cOi
cn
vp c G' - -rr X C� .-
U -U _>'` •v U GOd C Gr U cC y �, r u� rte, eC� 7� �^., C �'C V U U
U rii C1 '�
cn 0
> O .O U C T. O "� d U eC eUa O C U. Ca U
R� U v U G- G c"a E O` U V CAC CSC X .0 U U U v r cA cc u
ej
ei� y ear v ? t��� GU �C � �A TIC ' yJ �1.0 ea V C: O U C C U v c-Q
w C G 0 �� G �; u �� y m O U� _ _� ao� t7. o c .�' c cz �-Z
"o- U :" - U p U U 7 e� C CA U Un- •�? > G y r C
°y o -G� 3 Q0� cvi i 4 cc -0
U w y O� �� R �� ea e c y ,4 a v O t4 4 O� ��
p 4 cr i [ v> v.p M y'yQ h C �.c> �, .� 7 y•- y G y cp .4, O
CWd y 4 U .0 'O Vj U U O p b> ce Mr 0 1. e� v .r U G �... G
ti- O ti 7 v ti v G "v h U w O O v >>C •O y v T O �� C OC a� �U y c1 ] C= E v C.
•U r�`, T R y C C C Q U 3 y U cUa �•• H -7 "' 7 U' '� �„ U •� Q 4 U •� O pA r rr' U C
-0 ` TU E U U ~ �? �"+"[ EEO w U eOd�•C� cn Co TG V ^. 'p � �� U C.
C.
Z t 0 eC C ca 6- E `Z, E O pia 'U' U U� U exa.t?'C 0 �•�� La O ~ U eo G v Um C•=' U
v��uZcc. "i��o? o�Cp� U��c�i _yGG o =�� �� U� TE�c -a
c R � � 5d r, ` 3 0 0 0 v, c � �'" �'y a �a �5' �' � c 5 e° 0'� .0 �
tAti_ VJ U U y O v. C X x •� H h G �+ x p .- �� y C. C �+ U
X� c O� U V. y aTn ` ev U= y C cv E Q r G GG h� O C> c- U c3
T:r C C c� T T U O U etl u•� � Z cii R U O •....- >,
G m c U.2 =; U �. =>,> 3� y � C 3 O U h O U a .... _ � v C.0 •C �CG.AC L)
U U •- en �- C U rr, U U O rn 7 of id C y vi C ,= �^ C C n CA }'-7. C: M w
v ca•c y e G >� �'..� pa C O p U U v e w e� �..
O- cU m�U� > �-V O .,ry C." 0 > C: ties CU v G
ti. ee C n CE O U E U U CwC eC U �'C='r, ce C Qin n i O.� U O V cCi L7 v E C4 U.E R C CA
• � U
5.
N
O
N
-7m fi
It U
toe.) cn eG rC C y O ee e6 .U.. U O C
U� `�° EpKa E'er >� .0
Ur.AO Eve yQ�+— RcG.
7 Q C to
CO to ern -
c
�� ewes -� �C3`�° �cwi =-�= mow'- •�yCen �.
U
Ln C
cz
v 'Gr �•�w �e� �C ,.,ejw�a.� p
�V. 7 v 7 y O •� ° rii y U — O b G eC .w a
C A y 64 p V v r �-U. bC A �'� H w y GL
_ yy _
U C U Q G Q� C)
L. GbCo °C`° w.� yen eo Cd
C U C eQ UU V y eCi w•� r�_n C C ��� eyn Cp�p.p
O C 7 y` E v� �p C C C. ft.- CQ C C C O C
a w � �cv,• C' o'r��nw C
r- U yC� ea�sEp„ eCwre E'p... �Gwea'3��,E
r,,, ` w t�j U
°off- w b.��' wyww yw w
"ow��
G v w•v y w 3 v w
U
e dC ,� C G w cn ee
u
G 4 C 1 v C U G O rr c7i %. E x U C
O O,
r��
01.�
E nom— r - —
v =Oe;a a
cEG�• >2�
GD O C � U V ..•.
w�3w °yo
oE— in i'rJ
v �, -•� o
C O G G
O C O p
U7, G °7p.
R U �
w
—p � C vr,
E C j° y C
� G ,
G4.�'C7 O'G
•_
.. ea
CC KE CC
rip
to
ZI,
N
N
a,
0
i
O R A N G E C O U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 19, 1992
Action Agenda
Item # V= A
SUBJECT: Final Report from the Task Force for the
Future
of Human Services
DEPARTMENT: County Manager PUBLIC HEARING: Yes X No
ATTACHMENT(S):
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Albert Kittrell, Extension 2300
Final Report
Margaret Henderson, Extension 2315
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Durham - 688 -7331
Mebane - 227 -2031
Chapel Hill - 967- 9251/968 -4501
PURPOSE:
To present to the Board the findings and
recommendations from the Task Force for the Future of
Human Services.
BACKGROUND:
The Task Force for the Future of Human Services is an
ad hoc committee formed of representatives from the
Orange County Human Services Advisory Commission,
Chapel Hill's and Carrboro's Human Services Advisory
Boards, the United Way Board, and the Association of
Community Agencies. The Task Force began meeting
monthly in May, 1991, and will disband as its work is
completed this summer.
The charge of the Task Force was to:
(1) -- foster agreement on a..basic philosophy to govern
-- delivery of human services,
(2) promote the development of an information base
for planning and decision- making,
(3) develop a mechanism for identifying human service
priorities, and
(4) facilitate communication, coordination, and joint
action in responding to these priorities.
This Task Force represents the first time that
representatives from the five human service
provider /funder groups in the County have met
regularly to discuss common concerns. This final
report is physical evidence of the Task Force's work,
but these opportunities for communication have
2 It
produced other- less tangible benefits as well.
Contents of the Final Report:
In the-first section of the report, the Task Force
describes the types of information- sharing and
coordination efforts that are in place in the human
service system and identifies areas that could be
improved.
The second section of the report contains the proposal
for the creation of a Coordinating Council with
representation similar to that of the Task Force. The
functions of this Council would be:
(1) to develop an ongoing system to collect,
analyze, and share information relevant to
human serves,
(2) to produce an annual report to provide all
funders a common base of information for use
during the funding processes, and
(3) to encourage continued community problem -
solving efforts by identifying, staying
informed of, and, when possible, facilitating
the work of interagency task forces within
Orange County.
The Coordinating Council is not intended to take the
place of existing boards or advisory groups. Instead,
it provides a forum to enhance communication and
coordination among these funders and providers of
human services.
During its third year, the Coordinating Council will
conduct a self - evaluation to determine the value of
its accomplishments and assess whether it should
disband, maintain or delegate its functions, or expand
its work.
The third section of this report contains "A Snapshot
Repgrt_of Human Services in Orange County" which gives
a g-l-impse of the current state of the human services
system.
RECOMMENDATION: Manager recommends that the Board endorse the creation
of the Coordinating Council and receive the report as
information.
THE FINAL REPORT
C•1 4
THE TASK FORCE FOR THE FUTURE OF HU) N SERVICES
May, 1992
4
MEMBERS OF
THE TASK FORCE FOR THE FUTURE OF HUMAN SERVICES
The Association of Community Agencies:
Susan Worley
The Town of Carrboro:
Maribel Carrion
Jacquelyn Gist
The Town of Chapel Hill:
Robert Huntley
Julia Mack
Orange. County_
Ned Brooks
Albert Kittrell
Peggy Pollitzer
Jan Schopler
The United ,Way of Greater Orange:
Philip Prete
Sue Schroeder
Bob Ward
Beverly Foster, Ex- Officio Member
Margaret Henderson, Intern
1
•
A
4k
THE FINAL REPORT
C•)
THE TASK FORCE FOR THE FUTURE OF HUMAN SERVICES
contents:
I. Background and Introduction ..................... 1
II. Proposal for the Human Services
Coordinating Council ............................ 6
III. A Snapshot of Human Services
inorange County ............................... 11
5
6
BACKGROM
The Task Force for the.Future of Human Services was
created in May, 1991, as an ad hoc committee intended to
coordinate separate efforts being undertaken by the United
Way and the Orange County Human Services Advisory
Commission. The United Way had formed a committee to
conduct a county -wide needs assessment for human services.
At the same time, HSAC wanted to use the results of their
1990 Coordination Workshop to improve joint efforts to
coordinate, plan, and implement changes in the human
services system.
Members of the two committees merged into the Task
Force for the Future of Human Services, and they recruited
additional representatives from Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and
the Association of Community Agencies.
The Task Force for the Future of Human Services then
created its own four -part charge:
1. Foster agreement on a basic philosophy to govern
delivery of.human services in the county.
2.- Promote the development of an information base for
human services planning and decision - making.
3. Develop a proposal for a system for identifying
human services priorities that takes account of
county -wide needs and resources and that
emphasizes prevention, evaluation, and
coordination.
4. Facilitate communication, coordination, and joint
action in responding to human service priorities.
■
A
3
The first goal was accomplished primarily through the
work of HSAC as they drafted a mission statement for Orange
County human services. A copy of the mission statement is
included in the second section of this report as part of
the proposal for the Coordinating Council.
The remaining three charges have been addressed by the
work conducted by the Task Force and is represented by the
information condensed into the Snapshot Report and the
proposal for the Coordinating Council.
INTRODUCTION
The strength of the human services network in Orange
County may be traced to two facts: First, Orange County
residents demonstrate their support of human services
through their volunteer efforts, private contributions, and
tax dollars. Secondly, human service providers maximize
the benefits made possible by that community support by
coordinating their efforts across program lines.
Human service providers make regular efforts to
communicate and coordinate services in accordance with
organizational structure, around common issues, as a part
of service delivery, and in connection with employee
training:
F
O
- As an example of communication efforts within
organizational boundaries, directors of Orange
County human service departments hold biweekly
meetings as the Human Services Management Team for
the purpose of exchanging program information,
developing joint grant proposals, and taking on
other special projects.
- Whenever human service problems of common concern
are identified, providers voluntarily form
interagency work groups to create strategies to
address the issue, as demonstrated by the Child Care
Resources Task Force.
- Caseworkers in programs that are naturally linked,
such as the JOBS and Income Maintenance Programs,
may communicate on a daily basis.
- Programs also exchange information by making
education available for employees in other service
areas. For instance, the Rape Crisis staff provides
training for Department of Social Services, OPC-
Mental Health, and law enforcement personnel.
The Task Force learned that communication from
provider -to- provider is frequent, informal, and effective.
The Task Force's research did indicate, however, that the
county might benefit from opportunities for increased
communication from funder -to- funder and from providers -to-
funders. For example, members of municipal human service
advisory-boards may not 'be aware of funding decisions made
by the County Commissioners. No forum currently exists by
which these funders regularly exchange information. Also,
funders may not have access to pertinent information
generated by agencies or programs they do not support
financially. As an illustration, the United way Board of
I
t
Directors may be unaware of reports generated by Orange
County departments. In addition, volunteers on advisory
boards express frustration because they must make important
decisions with an incomplete picture of the complex human
service system within the county.
The Task Force verified that providers generate a
volume of data and reports that describe the services,
clientele, unmet needs, and general status of individual
sectors of the human service system. At present, no
single organization receives all of these reports for
analysis and dissemination. As a result, this volume of
information is not consistently available to everyone who
might benefit from it.
The Task Force proposes to address these shortcomings
by establishing a Coordinating Council made up of
representatives from the five major funder /provider groups
in the county. The proposal is contained in the second
section of this report. This and other ongoing efforts to
enhance communication and coordination among human service
programs benefit not only the clients who receive services,
but also the employees who provide the services and the
citizens who fund the services.
The third section of this report contains the
Snapshot Report, which provides a condensed description of
the state of human services in Orange County. Although
9
0
there is always room for improvement, the human services
network in- Orange County offers an array of services in an
effective manner and may well represent one of the best
systems in the state.
Given the restrictions imposed by limited resources,
human service employees should be commended for both the
quality of work and variety of services they provide.
Given the competing demands for these limited resources,
the local governing boards who provide funding should also
be commended for the attention and financial support they
direct to human services.
11
THE TASK FORCE FOR THE FUTURE OF HUMAN SERVICES
PROPOSAL FOR
THE HUMAN SERVICES COORDINATING COUNCIL
IN ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Action Re ested:
I. The Task Force requests that the governing bodies of
the Association of Community Agencies, the Town of
Carrboro, the Town of Chapel Hill, Orange County, and
the United Way of Greater Orange formally endorse
this proposal to create a Coordinating Council for
the human services network within Orange County.
II. The Task Force requests that these governing bodies
encourage their staff and volunteers to participate
in the activities of the Coordinating Council.
III. The Task Force requests that each of these governing
bodies appoint two representatives to serve on the
Coordinating Council.
(Please send the names and mailing addresses for the
representatives to Margaret Henderson, Orange County
Manager's Office, P.O. Box 8181, Hillsborough, NC, 27278)
12�
i
THE TASK FORCE FOR THE FUTURE OF HUMAN SERVICES
,THE ROLE OF THE COORDINATING COUNCIL
IN THE HUMAN. SERVICES NETWORK
May, 1992
Statement of Pur2ose•
The overall goal of the Coordinating Council is to enable
the human services system to work towards making the human
services mission statement (see attachment) a reality.
This goal will be accomplished by improving the exchange of
information at the funder level and by creating an ongoing
environmental scanning process.
Structure of the Coordinating Council:
Each of the following organizations will appoint two
representatives to the Coordinating Council. The
representatives may include employees, volunteers, or
elected officials.
- The Association of Community Agencies
- The Town of Carrboro
- The Town of Chapel Hill
- Orange County
- The United Way of Greater orange County
In addition, the Assistant County Manager, the Director of
the United Way, and the Human Services Coordinator for the
Town of Chapel Hill_ will serve as ex officio members of the
Coordinating-Council if they are not appointed as
representatives.
The Council will select a Chair who will set the agendas
and lead the meetings. The Chair will also delegate to ex
officio members the responsibilities of taking minutes,
sending notifications, and providing other staff support.
The term of the Chair will last one year.
At a minimum, the Coordinating Council will hold quarterly
meetings.
13
Objectives of-the Coordinating Council:
The purpose of the Coordinating Council is to create a
mechanism for sharing information and identifying common
goals. The organizations who fund or provide human
services may then use this mechanism to enhance our service
delivery system.
For the first two years, the Council will work to
accomplish three tasks:
(1) Create a system to collect, analyze, and share
information pertinent to the human services
system.
(2) Produce an annual report on the state of human
services to provide a base of information for use
during the funding application processes. The
representatives will be responsible for sharing
the report with the advisory and governing boards
of their sponsoring organizations.
(3) Encourage community problem- solving efforts by
identifying the task forces and interagency
groups currently working to address human service
issues, staying informed of their activities, and
facilitating their work when possible. As new
concerns are identified, the Council could ask an
existing task force to add the issue to its
agenda or create a new work group to address the
issue.
The work of the Council, particularly the timing of the
release of the snapshot report, should be compatible with
the planning and budgeting processes of the participating
organizations.
By the beginning of the third year, the Coordinating
Council should evaluate its accomplishments to determine
whether it should disband, maintain or delegate its current
functions, or expand its work to include additional
planning or coordinating objectives. if the Council elects
to continue its work, it will develop a structure that
specifies the length of representatives' terms and how they
will be replaced.
14
The Agreement-,
The five funder and provider organizations endorse the
creation of the Coordinating Council and agree to work
together to enhance the human services network in Orange
County.
The Association of Community Agencies Date
The Town of Carrboro Date
The Town of Chapel Hill Date
Orange County Date
The United Way of Greater Orange County Date
THE MISSION STATEMENT FOR ORANGE COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES
The collective mission of the human service providers
and funders of orange county is to create a coordinated,
efficient, and effective network of public and private
resources that provides a continuum of preventative and
ameliorative services. These services should be client -
centered, accessible, offered at a minimum cost, and meet
the needs for human development and daily living of
individuals, families, and the community. This network
should embody the community's values of caring, respect,
diversity, economic opportunity, optimal health, safety,
and the enhancement of self -- worth. Services should be
supported by a citizenry that is informed and educated
about the issues of human services.
15
16 J
r
A SNAPSHOT OF HUMAN SERVICES IN ORANGE COIINTY
May, 1992
This report is a compilation of information collected
for the Task Force for the Future of Human Services. In
it, we attempted to highlight major issues and trends under
different categories of service. There were no specific
criteria that defined which issues would be included or
excluded.
This document is intended to be a quick glimpse of the
state of human services rather than a comprehensive
description of a complex field of activity. As such, we
struggled with the fact that every valuable program could
not be mentioned, and every unmet need could not be
addressed.
Readers who would like additional information should
obtain copies of the cited resources or contact personnel
in the related programs.-
A SNAPSHOT OF HUMAN SERVICES IN ORANGE COUNTY
ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES
During the fiscal year 1990/91, nonprofit agencies and
governmental departments spent $57 million to administer
and provide human services within Orange County:
Housing & Community
Development Programs ....................$ 6,089,916
Nonprofit Agencies ... ....................$19,528,329
orange County
Departmental Programs ...................$31,430,724*
* of the $31.4 million, approximately $10.1 million
represents the 1990/91 budgets of County departments.
The remainder represents federal or state programs
administered by County personnel and paid directly to
vendors and individual recipients in orange County.
These include $17.1 million in Medicaid benefits, $2.1
million in food stamp benefits, $1.5 million in AFDC
benefits, and $488,430 in special Assistance, Adoption
subsidies, Energy Assistance, and Aid to the Blind.
The Task Force studied the income sources of the
nonprofit human service agencies that received local
support and learned that most agencies have healthy,
diversified sources of revenue:
Thirty -one agencies have budgets under $1 million /year.
33% of their funding came from client or membership fees;
22% from state /federal funding;
17% from the County, the towns, and the United Way; and
16% from contributions..
12% came- from foundations, sales.,. investment, or other
income.
Six agencies have budgets over $1 million /year.
63% of their funding came from state /federal sources;
12% from client fees;
9% from contributions; and
4% from the County, the towns, and the United Way.
12% came from foundations, sales, investment, or other
income.
(Source: Research conducted by The Task Force for the
Future of Human Services)
17
18
Paralle1- service systems exist. The same type of
service may -be provided to different populations by
different agencies. The populations may be categorized by
age, disability, location, etc.
Although this may not be the most efficient means to
operate, duplication of services is actually minimal to
nonexistent when we identify the type of service, the
population served, and the geographical area served.
(Source: Interviews with human service providers conducted
as research for the Task Force for the Future of Human
services)
Service providers are growing more interdependent. No
single player has the resources, capacity, or control to
completely address an issue. This trend underscores the
need for communication, cooperation, and joint planning
efforts among funders and providers. (Source: Judith
Saidel, "Resource Interdependence: The Relationship
Between State Agencies and Nonprofit Organizations ")
Human service providers have developed an effective,
informal network of communication and coordination. As
they identify common issues or problems in service
delivery, they create task forces that meet regularly to
formulate solutions. (Source: Interviews with human
service providers conducted as research for the Task Force
for the Future of Human Services)
The Americans With Disabilities Act, which became
effective on January 26, 1992, has implications for
employment practices, transportation services, delivery of
public services, and telecommunications. (Source: The
Americans With Disabilities Act)
AGING
Chronological age is no longer a good indicator of
health status or functional capacity. The challenge is to
provide an array of services to meet the varied needs of
the frisky, the frail, and the fragile elderly population
and to provide all those services in geographically
accessible locations. (Source: Jerry Passmore, Department
on Aging)
Available resources do not meet the demand for Respite
Care and for Chore services. Not only do these services
satisfy the needs of clients who wish to remain at home,
but these' - services are also highly cost - effective when
compared with the cost of institutionalization. (Source:
The Department on Aging)
The Respite Care program currently serves 21 clients
and must turn away all other requests for help. The Chore
Program serves 32 clients and holds 45 people on the
waiting list. (Sources: Dee Turner, Department on Aging,
and Kim Lassiter, Department of Social Services)
During 1991, Charles House provided 1,397 adult day
care days of service. 80% of their clients were residents
of Orange County. They did not have a waiting list as of
February, 1992. (Source: Betty Bradford, Executive
Director)
A dependency ratio gives an indication of the number
of adults who could possibly support and care for the
elderly. It is the ratio of the population aged 25 -64 to
those aged 65 +. In 1990, the ratio in Orange County was
5.7 to 1. In the year 2000, the ratio will be 3.9 to 1,
and in 2010, 3 to 1. (Source: 1990 Census Data)
CHILD CARS
Estimates vary according to the age group of the
children considered, but between 63% and 70% of mothers of
young children are working in Orange County. (Source:
Nancy Park, Child Care Networks)
0 -4 years 5 -9 years
Number of children
in the group 5 331
age p 5,107
(Per 1990_Census).
Projected number 3,358 3,217
needing childcare.
(63% of total children)
There were only 2,181 spaces available for children ages
0 -4 in licensed child care facilities and registered day
care homes as of February, 1992. Other children are in
legal, unregulated child care, such as child care provided
in the child's home. (Source: Nancy Park, Child Care
Networks)
19
20
An average of 479 children /month were on the day care
subsidy waiting list for the orange County Department of
Social Services for the ten month period ending February,
1992. During the same time, an average of 256 children/
month received subsidized care. (Source: Deanna Shoffner,
Orange County Department of Social Services)
Day Care Services provides subsidies for children on
the DSS waiting list. In February, 1992, these subsidies
allowed 65 children to receive day care services. (Source:
Sue Russell, Day Care Services)
Child care costs more in Orange County than in any
other part of the state: an average of $403 /month for an
infant and $377 /month for a four- year -old. (Source: Sue
Russell, Day Care Services, quoting statistics received
from Child Daycare Section of the Division of Facility
Service.)
Depending on the age groups, costs for child care have
risen 57 -73% over the last six years. This is due to
increases in the cost of labor. (Source: Child Care
Resources Task Force: Status Report and Recommendations for
the Orange County Social Services Board)
A single parent earning $5.00 /hour and receiving
$60 /month in child support would have to spend 40 -45% of
her gross income for child care for one child. She would
be ineligible to receive a government child care subsidy.
(Source: Child Care Resources Task Force: Status Report and
Recommendations for the Orange County Social Services
Board)
Low wages drive people out of the day care field.
High turnover rates and a minimally educated teacher
population contribute to a lower quality of caregiving.
(Source:-"Working in Child Care-,in North Carolina ")
DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
People attending a community forum expressed the
desire to move towards a case management approach to
services. Existing programs that provide family support,
respite care, after - school and summer programs,
transportation services, and independent living programs
are inadequate to meet the need. No quantified
documentation of need is available. (Source: Orange County
Developmental Disabilities Forum)
r
There is a good variety of services available for the
developmentally disabled, but there is an unmet need for
each kind--6f service. (Source: Tom Maynard, OPC Mental
Health)
EDUCATION & TRAINING
The Literacy Council has 67 student /teacher matches in
the county and five people on their waiting list for
services. There are 47 matches in the new English as a
Second Language program. They have funding for five
matches in their Modified Family Literacy program.
In April, the Literacy Council begins their first in-
house literacy program in the UNC Hospital; they will train
hospital employees who will then teach other employees how
to read. (Source: Ruth Royster, Orange County Literacy
Council)
A goal of the Orange County Commissioners this year is
to establish a Training and Employment Center that would
house the JTPA and JOBS programs, Durham Tech G.E.D. and
Skills Training, the Literacy Council, and the Employment
Security Commission under one roof. (Source: Orange County
Commissioners' Goals, 1992)
During its first fifteen months of operation, the JOBS
program has served 129 families by coordinating education
and training, as well as by providing support services such
as transportation, day care, and referrals for other needs.
(Source: Gwen Price, Orange County Department of Social
Services)
HEALTH
The 1992 Orange - County Health Department Community
Diagnosis_- identifies the following health status problems
in order of priority:
1. Poor pregnancy outcomes
2. High number of unwanted pregnancies
3. Increasing numbers of communicable diseases
4. Increase in injuries due to motor vehicle
accidents
S. High number of AIDS cases
6. Cardiovascular disease as the leading cause
of death in Orange County
7. Cancer as the second leading cause of death
in Orange County
S. Increasing use of alcohol and drugs.
(Source: "Health Status Problems for Orange County, NC)
21
22
Patients of Orange- Chatham Comprehensive Health
Services express concern in three health - related areas: (1)
high cost.of. prescription drugs, (2) lack of affordable
dental care for low- income citizens, and (3) lack of
affordable eye care and glasses for the low- income.
(Source: Michael Eyster, OCCHS)
11% of the total population in Orange'County and 30%
of people below the poverty level have no medical
insurance. Over a third of the uninsured population are
employed. Minorities and women are disproportionately
likely to be uninsured.
The lack of insurance creates a financial barrier
between uninsured individuals and the health care system.
(Source: Center for Health Policy Research & Education at
Duke University, quoted in "Insurance Status of Orange
County Residents ")
HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS
Chapel Hill and Carrboro have identified 5,700
families in need of rental assistance in southern Orange
County. There are 1,190 units available, which meets 20%
of the need and leaves 80% of the need unmet. (Source:
"Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy for Orange
County ")
Approximately 850 Orange County families are on the
waiting list for Section 8 and Public Housing assistance.
(Source: "Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy for
Orange County ")
A family of four with income of 60% of the area
median, or approximately $26,000, can afford a monthly
payment of about $505,, which can support a mortgage of
$61,500. - -Very few homeownership opportunities exist for
such families, particularly in southern Orange County.
(Source: "Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy for
Orange County ")
The InterFaith Council's Community Shelter served 835
adults and 62 children during 1991. Seventy -four percent
of the people were there for the first time. In 1990, the
shelter served 468 guests. (Source: IFC Shelter Report -
1991)
23
The Shelter is challenged to accommodate a variety of
needs for- special populations.under one roof.
There-is little transitional housing available for
special populations or for people who don't have the $1,000
it takes to move into a standard rental unit in southern
Orange County. (Sources: Interview with Chris Moran and
"Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy for Orange
County, North Carolina)
IMMIGRATION TRENDS
The 1990 census counted 1,279 Hispanic residents.
Informal estimates project that the actual population is
three to five times the documented population. (Sources:
1990 Census. Interviews with Chris Moran, IFC Community
Shelter; Allan Archibald, Orange County Schools; Sonia
Bettez, graduate student in the UNC School of Social Work,
and others)
NOTE: Refer to attached census data. Also, the Asian/
Pacific Islander population increased 330% from 1980 to
1990.
Undocumented aliens do not qualify for most federally
funded programs; therefore, locally funded programs will
bear the burden of support for members of this population
who need human services. (Source: Research conducted for
the Task Force for the Future of Human Services)
INCOME ASSISTANCE
The number of families and individuals applying for
and receiving public assistance is rapidly rising. The
increase is due to expanded mandatory programs and negative
economic-factors.
Average Monthly Number of Cases by Fiscal Year
1987 -88 1989 -90
7/91 -11/91
Food Stamp
866
943
--
1,430
AFDC
347
478
742
Medicaid
603
1,032
1,622
(Source: Public
Assistance in Orange
County
- A signifi-
cant and Rapid Increase in Need)
24
InterFaith Council provided emergency assistance to
1,480 individuals in 1990 and 1,776 in 1991, a 20%
increase. Some of these clients received aid more than one
time. (Source: Jodi Flick, IFC Social Services)
Orange Congregations in Mission saw their Samaritan
Relief caseload increase 370% from 1,400 individuals in
1990 to 5,199 in 1991. They could not meet all requests
for assistance. (Source: Anita Langan, OCIM)
MENTAL HEALTH
The primary need for mentally ill adults is for an
increase in the number of case managers available to
provide support for problems in daily living.
There is an unmet need for transitional housing and
independent living programs.
Also, an inadequate supply of counseling services is
available for low /moderate income people. (Source: Tom
Maynard, OPC Mental Health)
SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Local law enforcement officials estimate that 50 -75%
of reported assaults involve at least one person using
drugs, usually alcohol. Many property crimes are related
to the need to acquire money to purchase more drugs. High
school students reported that alcohol abuse is often
associated with date rape.
The Task Force on Reducing Violent Crime and Illegal
Drug Abuse identified a need for more detoxification
services, a half -way house for men, a half -way house for
women with children, and transitional housing between detox
and residential treatment, as well as after the half -way
house experience. (Source: Report of the Task Force on
Reducing Violent Crime and Illegal Drug Use)
TRANSPORTA ION
With their central routing services,'the Coordinated
Agency Transportation system is enhancing both time - sharing
and ride - sharing services for a variety of agencies and
populations throughout Orange County. (Source: Jerry
Passmore, Coordinated Agency Transportation /Department on
Aging)
4
F
The primary populations in need of transportation
services are the elderly, the disabled, and people living
at or below the poverty level. (Source: Orange County
Transportation Development Plan Update)
Despite the fact that Chapel Hill Transit is at risk
of losing part of their federal funding due to program
changes, they do not expect any major changes in schedules
or fares for FY 1993. Changes in schedules and fares may
be necessary in FY 1994. (Source: Robert Godding, Chapel
Hill Transit)
Virtually all service providers name transportation as
being a crucial unmet need for their clients. (Sources:
Interviews conducted with human service providers as
research for the Task Force for the Future of Human
Services)
VIOLENCE
The Domestic Violence Coordination Project has been
successful in achieving its original goal of coordinating
and improving the network of services currently provided by
the criminal justice, law enforcement, and human service
systems. The Coordinator provided 1,690 victim contacts
during 1991. Due to the overwhelming demand for her
services, she has not been able to furnish a uniform level
of assistance for all victims. (Source: Advisory Board
Meeting for the Domestic Violence Coordination Project,
February 13, 1992)
Orange County women and children who are escaping
domestic violence have three options available:
- Rely on personal resources to move.
- Move into the Orange /Durham Coalition for Battered
Woman's Shelter in Durham,- -and further disrupt the
children's lives by transferring them out of Orange
Co. schools into Durham schools.
- Move into the Community Shelter in Chapel Hill, which
is challenged to provide for the needs of a variety of
special populations under one roof.
(Source: Meeting of the Task Force on Homeless Women and
Children, October 17, 1991)
Last year, the Orange /Durham Coalition served 544 men,
women, and children from Orange County through their
25
26
shelter and, counseling services. They have had to turn
people away.(number unknown) when the shelter is filled to
capacity.- (Source: Fred Stang, Orange /Durham Coalition
for Battered Women)
Date rape appears to be closely associated with the
use of alcohol and goes largely unreported. (Source:
Report of the Task Force on Reducing Violent Crime and
Illegal Drug Use)
THE WORKING POOR
In 1987, 44% of Orange County residents held jobs in
the service sector where wages are traditionally low,
employment is part -time or seasonal, and opportunities for
advancement minimal. (Source: Custom Data Package for
Orange County, Addressing Poverty in Orange County)
26% of the employed population makes up the class
called "the working poor." The four largest categories of
employment for the working poor are as follows: 8% are
employed by the state.or local government, primarily UNC;
7% are employed in retail sales; 3.5% are employed in
service jobs; and 2.5% are employed by financial services.
(Source: Custom Data Package for Orange County Commission
for women)
YOUTH
Lack of transportation negatively impacts service
accessibility and employment /training opportunities for
youth. (Source: Interviews with human service providers
conducted as research for the Task Force for the Future of
Human Services)
Elementary and middle school children with working
parents have a need for supervised activities after - school,
during holidays and the summer, and on teacher work days.
(Source: "Improving the State of the Adolescent in Orange
County ")
Youth need services both as individuals and as members
of families. At the caseworker level, human service
providers and school employees cooperate by meeting to
discuss common concerns. (Source: Interviews with human
service providers conducted as research for the Task Force
for the Future of Human Services)
F
27
State surveys indicate that students use alcohol and
tobacco at..high rates, with parents consistently under-
estimating the potential for their children's involvement
with drugs.
Twenty percent of all students in Chapel Hill - Carrboro
schools are projected to have or develop a problem with
chemical dependency serious enough to warrant intervention.
Of the 49 recommendations made by the Task Force on
Reducing Violent Crime, fifteen centered around increasing,
enhancing, or targeting human services for teens.
School and leisure -time places are identified as being
the location for alcohol and drug trafficking, abuse, and
rape. Authorities and youth point to easy access to
alcohol, parental negligence, and unenforced laws and
standards of conduct as the major contributing factors.
(Source: Report of the Task Force on Reducing Violent
Crime and Illegal Drug Use)
By Townships:
Bingham
Cedar Grove
Chapel Hill
Cheeks
Eno
Hillsborough
Little River
Total orange County
By Race or
Hispanic origin:
White
Black
Asian /Pacific Isl.
Other
Hispanic origin*
ORANGE COUNTY POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS
Source: 1980 & 1990 Census Data
1980 Data 1990 Data
3,954
3,166
50,572
4,821
4,450
8,599
1,493
5,184
3,691
61,973
5,422
5,262
10,136
2,183
77,055 93,851
1980 Data 1990 Data
62,678
13,326
717
334
77,055
809
75,871
14,893
2,361
726
93,851
1,279
*Persons of Hispanic origin may be of any race.
By Age Groups: 1970
Under
5 years
4,357
5 to 9
years
4,459
10
to
14
years
4,429
15
to
19
years-
7,141
20
to
24
years -
11,505
25
to
29
years
5,387
30
to
39
years
5,944
40
to
49
years
5,151
50
to
59
years
3,992
60
to
69
years
2,883
70
to
79
years
1,741
80
and over
718
57,707
8090cens.ss
1980 1990
3,994
4,172
4,719
9,468
14,830
8,986
11,060
6,114
5,603
4,297
2,688
1,124
5,331
5,107
4,658
8,830
15,151
10,030
15,815
11,449
6,491
5,564
3,609
1,816
77,055 93,851
28
K
29
BIBLIOGRAPHY
The information contained in these resources varies from
the specific to the general and from the objective to the
subjective. The titles describe the content.
An Analysis of Statewide Needs, United Way of North
Carolina, January, 1990.
A Portrait of Young Adolescents i the 1990s: Im lications
for Promotin g Healthy Growth and Develo ment, by Peter
C. Scales, Ph.d., Center for Early Adolescence, 1991.
CBA Needs Assessment Survey, December, 1990.
Characteristics of the Population, 1990 Census of
Population and Housing.
Child Care Resources Task Force: Status Report and
Recommendations for the Oran a Count Social Services
Board, December 18, 1991.
Children's index 1991 A Profile of Leading Indicators of
the Health & Well-BelLiq of North Carolina's Children, NC
Child Advocacy Institute.
"Creating a Vision of the Future: Impacts on Human Needs
and Services ", New En land Journal of Human Services, by
Anne Adams, Aggie Sweeny, and Rick Weber, Volume VII,
Issue 2, pp. 26 -31.
Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy for orange
Couty, NC, Draft document, September, 1991.
Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy for orange
County, NC, Final Report, November 13, 1991.
Community Diagnosis County Data Book, Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, September,
1991.
Custom Data Package for Orange-County, NC; prepared by
Conference on.Poverty for "Addressing Poverty in Orange
County: A Forum-of Community Leaders, 1989.
Custom Data -Packa a for Orange Count Commission for Women;
prepared by Conference on Poverty, Nov. 21, 1990.
"Envision the Future ", by James Kou2es and Barry Posuer,
The Leadership Challenge (San Francisco: Jossey -Bass,
1987) pp. 85 -89.
Family Literac : Sharing the Responsibility, Report on a
Symposium, September, 1990.
Guide for a Community Diagnosis: A Re art for Local Health
Department-s, Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources, October, 1991.
Health Status Problems for Orange County. North Carolina,
Draft document, February, 1992.
30
Healthy People 2000, National Health Promotion and Disease
Prevention Objectives, September, 1990.
Human Services Advisory Commission, Orientation Packet.
Human Services Coordination:. Challenge for the 801s,
November, 1980.
IFC Shelter Report, Yearly Report - 1991.
Improving the State of the Adolescent in Orange County,
Final Report from the Symposium on Services for Youth,
November, 1988.
Information and Referral Guide, Orange County.
Insurance Status of Orange County Residents: Report to the
Orange County Board of Health, by Michele Brasure, June
27, 1991.
_Long Term Care - Choices for the 19901s, January, 1990.
Meeting Basic Human Needs: A Community Profile of grange
Counter, League of Women Voters, October, 1987.
Non -- Institutionalized Long -Term Care in orange County_, A
Report to the Department on Aging and the Long --Term Care
Advisory Board, April, 1991.
North Carolina CARES, Special Issue, June, 1990.
OPC Mental Health Center Annual Report, FY 1990.
Orange County Health Department Community Diagnosis,
February, 1990.
Orange County Conference on the .Delivery of Human Services,
October, 1977.
Orange County Developmental Disabilities Forum, Minutes of
the meeting on August 7, 1991.
Orange County Health Department, Goals Organization and
Services Summary, 1987.
Orange County Recreation and Parks Department Master Plan,
July, 1988.
Orange County TOMORROW:
Economic Development Strategic Plan, March, 1989.
Economic Developments, 1990 -1991 Annual Report.
orange County Statistical Abstract, August, 1991.
orange CoUnty County Trans ortation Development Plan U date Final
Renor-t, January, 1991 -.
Philantht= in the Triangle: A -study of Non rofit
Agencies in Wake Durham and O an a Counties North
Carolina, Greater Triangle Community Foundation, 1991.
"Population Projections Based on the 1990 Total Census
Count ", Orange County Planning Department, March, 1991.
Prevention of Low Birthwei ht Through Home Visiting: and
A Case St d Pro osal for LBW Reduction in Oran e
County, NC, by Joyce Hooley- Gingrich, July 17, 1991.
Public Assistance in Orange Count - A significant and
Rapid Increase in Need, February, 1992.
31
Public Health Study Commission: Re ort to the 1991 General
Assembl •of North Carolina, January, 1991.
Re ort of the Orange County Human Services Needs Assessment
Committee; Human Services.Advisory Commission, March,
1982.
Report of the Task Force on Reducin Violent Crime and
Illegal Drug Use, Town of Chapel Hill, October, 1991.
Re ort to the Communit : Povertv in Orancre Count ,
November, 1989.
Report to the 1991 General AsIsemblY of North Carolina,
Public Health Study Commission, January, 1991.
"Resource Interdependence: The Relationship Between State
Agencies and Nonprofit Organizations," Public
Administration Review
1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Action Agenda
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Item No
Meeting Date: May 19, 1992
SUBJECT: Emergency Communications Coverage Improvements
-------- w------------------- -- - --
DEPARTMENT Emergency Management PUBLIC HEARING YES NO X
wwwwwwwwww wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww .. w.r wiwwwwwwwwwwwwwww�.wwwwwwww wwwww
ATTACHMENT(S) INFORMATION CONTACT
Report from RF Projects Corporation Nick Waters, ext 3030
(under separate cover) TELEPHONE NUMBER
Hillsborough 732 -8181
Chapel Hill 968 -4501
Mebane 227 -2031
Durham 688 -7331
PURPOSE: To receive a progress report on efforts to improve emergency
communications system coverage in orange County.
BACKGROUND: For a number of years, emergency service providers in
orange County have worked with a radio communications system that has
provided inadequate radio communications capabilities in some parts of
the County. Variations in topography between the emergency
communications transmitter on Eno Mountain and some locations has
resulted in a number of "dead spots" where communications
capabilities between emergency service units and Orange Central are
weak or non - existent.
The Board of Commissioners began setting aside funds in the CIP several
years ago to address this problem. Last summer, the County retained RF
Projects Corporation to study the problem and to provide
recommendations on options available to achieve satisfactory
communications capabilities throughout the County. A subcommittee of
the orange County Chiefs' Council, consisting of Chiefs Jerry Lloyd of
White Cross, Frank Berry of Cedar Grove, and Bryant Walker of Caldwell,
has worked with the consultant to provide preliminary recommendations
on possible solutions.
The attached report presents the preliminary findings for the Board's
information. Additional work remains to be completed in identifying
the exact locations for communications towers, to include compliance
with pertinent land use regulations, before consideration by the Board
of any bids on radio equipment and installation. Staff and several
volunteer department chiefs will be available to respond to any
Commissioner questions on this subject.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board receive the
report for information only at this time.
I
O R A N G E C O U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 19. 1992
Agenda Abstract
Item # V= -A
1
SUBJECT: VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT DESIGNATION - WALTERS FARM
DEPARTMENT: Planning PUBLIC HEARING: Yes —X No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Applications Planning Director X2592
Vicinity Map -----------------------------------
Certifications PHONE NUMBERS:
- Soil Conservation Service Hillsborough 732 -8181
- Tax Supervisor Mebane 227 -2031
Staff Checklist Durham 688 -7331
5/6/92 Agricultural Districts Chapel Hill 967 -9251
Advisory Board Minutes
Proposed Conservation Agreement
Section V - Voluntary Farmland
Preservation Program Ordinance
PURPOSE: To consider the applications of Victor Carl Walters,
Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters for designation of
their farm on High Rock Road in Cedar Grove Township
as a voluntary agricultural district.
BACKGROUND: Section IV.D.2. of the Voluntary Farmland
Preservation Program Ordinance permits the
Agricultural Districts Advisory Board to review and
approve applications for qualifying farmland and
make recommendations concerning the establishment
and modification -of agricultural districts. The
official designation of - agricultural districts is
the responsibility of the Board of Commissioners.
Section V of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation
Program Ordinance contains the requirements for
inclusion in a voluntary agricultural district. To
be certified as qualifying farmland, a farm must:
1. Be participating in the farm present use -value
taxation program established by the N.C.
General Statutes, Sections 105 -277.2 through
105- 277.7, or is otherwise determined by the
County to meet all the qualifications of this
program set forth in the N.C. General Statutes,
Sections 105 - 277.3.
2. Be certified by the Soil Conservation Service
of the United States Department of Agriculture
as being a farm on which at least two - thirds of
the land is composed of soils that:
a. Are best suited for providing food, seed,
fiber, forage, timber, and oil seed crops;
b. Have good soil qualities;
C. Are favorable for all major crops common
to Orange County;
d. Have a favorable growing season; and
e. Receive the available moisture needed to
produce high yields for an average of
eight (8) out of ten (10) years;
OR be one on which at least two - thirds of the
land has been actively used in agricultural,
horticultural or forestry operations as defined
in the N.C. General Statutes, Section 105 -277.2
(1,2, and 3), during each of the five (5)
previous years, measured from the date on which
the determination must be made as to whether
the land in question qualifies.
3. Be managed, if highly erodible land exists on
the farm, in accordance with the Soil
Conservation Service defined erosion- control
practices as specified in the 1985 Food
Security Act.
The Orange Soil & Water Conservation District Office
and the Tax Supervisor have provided memorandum
which indicate that the Walters farm complies with
the above requirements. In addition, the Walters
farm is comprised of three separate tracts, totaling
-794.-50 acres. Thus,- the -acreage requirement of
Section V.B.l.b. is .satisfied, since the farm
consists of two or more contiguous tracts containing
at least 155 acres.
At its May 6, 1992 meeting, the Agricultural
Districts Advisory Board voted unanimously to
approve the certifi ' t'
a
ca on of the Walters farm as
qualifying farmland. In addition, the :"advisory Board
also voted unanimously to recommend that the farm be
designated as a voluntary agricultural district.
7_
2. Be certified by the Soil Conservation Service
of the United States Department of Agriculture
as being a farm on which at least two - thirds of
the land is composed of soils that:
a. Are best suited for providing food, seed,
fiber, forage, timber, and oil seed crops;
b. Have good soil qualities;
C. Are favorable for all major crops common
to Orange County;
d. Have a favorable growing season; and
e. Receive the available moisture needed to
produce high yields for an average of
eight (8) out of ten (10) years;
OR be one on which at least two - thirds of the
land has been actively used in agricultural,
horticultural or forestry operations as defined
in the N.C. General Statutes, Section 105 -277.2
(1,2, and 3), during each of the five (5)
previous years, measured from the date on which
the determination must be made as to whether
the land in question qualifies.
3. Be managed, if highly erodible land exists on
the farm, in accordance with the Soil
Conservation Service defined erosion- control
practices as specified in the 1985 Food
Security Act.
The Orange Soil & Water Conservation District Office
and the Tax Supervisor have provided memorandum
which indicate that the Walters farm complies with
the above requirements. In addition, the Walters
farm is comprised of three separate tracts, totaling
-794.-50 acres. Thus,- the -acreage requirement of
Section V.B.l.b. is .satisfied, since the farm
consists of two or more contiguous tracts containing
at least 155 acres.
At its May 6, 1992 meeting, the Agricultural
Districts Advisory Board voted unanimously to
approve the certifi ' t'
a
ca on of the Walters farm as
qualifying farmland. In addition, the :"advisory Board
also voted unanimously to recommend that the farm be
designated as a voluntary agricultural district.
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that the farm of
Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters
be designated as a voluntary agricultural
district and that the.Chair be authorized-to sign
the conservation agreement.
K _
,..ice.....;
x
- - -
- - - - �Aran e .�
_. ,,...: _Count _..
•A _
cu tural Dist
sory Board
r: =
T...
APPLICANI
.. . _.._. ON FOR CERTIFI - - - - - -
_.:.
AL1F'YIN
AND DESIGNATION AS AN ORANGE , . G „F���'
COUNTY
VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT RECEIVED APR 0 9 1(
INSMUC77ONS: Before completing the application, please review the provisions of the Orange County Voluntary Farmland
Preservation Program Ordinance, then fill out the form as accurately and completely as possible. Be sure to .
-sigri and data the form and
the orange County P
- .Road, Iiilu►borongh, N.C. 8 ld"m"g ?� Inspections Departure
return it to
nt, 3176F Revere
APPLICANT:
Name: Victor Carl Walters Jr & Elizabeth T. Walters
Address: 1 1 9 H z h Rock Rd .
City: E f l a n d State: NC ZIP Code: 2 7 2 4 3
Phone Number: (Home) 563-3842 (Work)
PROPERTY INFORMATION:
Property Location/Address: N / 0 1340
Township: 2 Tax Map: 4 2 Block: Lot: 1 1
Parcel Identification Number [PIN]: 9 8 3 6- 1 9 = 5 8 9 8
Number of Acres:
84. 19 Deed Book: 2 2 0 Page: 19 5
Does this land have a plan on file with the Soil Conservation Service or U.S. Forest Service?
Yes: x No: If "no ", please complete back of form.
Is this land listed for farm present use -value taxation with the Orange County Tax Office?
Yes: x Na: If-"110% Please complete back of form.
OWNER[S] CERTIFICATION:
L [We]; the applicant[s]," hereby certify that, to the best of my [our] ability, the foregoing
application is complete and accurate. ._
Signature: ! Date - - / f
Signature: Date: A j9
Please direct inquiries to:
Orange Soil & Water Conservation District
Cooperative Extension Service
orange County Planning & Inspections Department
"Olb"MO 7317r8181a0"d Mat 961- MIOD -b♦m US- McMeb®e 2z7-2MI
_7
_q T,—
w i. -Cou W_,�: - . -
1. '_!= � �W
- Orange
_7�7 7
VOW J.,
I D
itrcs Board :. A ricult r
AS QUALIFYING FARMLAND
FOR7CERTIRCATION
CATION. .. . ...... ..... �t-
AND DESIGNATION
As AN ORANGE cOUNTY-_-.`_ RECEIVEDF�
APR 0 9 199;
NOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL' DISTRICT
INSrRUCnONS: Before completing the application, please review the provisions of dw Orange County Voluntary Farmlanci
y and completely as possible. Be sure to
out the form as accuratel
Preservation Program
Ordinance, Om fill
sign and date the form return it to the Orange County Inspections DepatUnent, 306F Revere
and retu planning & In
Load, Hillsborough, N.C.
APPLICANT:
Name• ' Victor-Carl Walters,'Jr. & Elizabeth T.-Walters
Address: 7119 High Rock Rd.
City: Efland
Phone Number: (Home)
PROPERTY INFORMATION:
State: N C
ZIP Code: 27243
563-3842 (Work)
Property, Location/Address: 0 f f SR- 1346
Township: 3 Tax Map: I Block: Lot: 7
Parcel Identification'Number [PIN]: 9826-87-3901
Deed Book: 4 51 : Page: 5 01
Number of Acres:.::.. 8 8 9 8 4 2
Does - this t . and have a plan on file with the Soil Conservation Service or U.S. Forest Service?
Yes: X No: If "no", please complete back of form.
Is this land listed for farm present use-value taxation with the Orange County Tax Office?
Yes: X No-, If "no", please complete back of form.
OWNER[S] CERTIFICATION:
i- [We],- the applicant(s)2- -hereby certify that, to the best of my [our] ability, the foregoing
application is complete and accurate.
Signature: 4:1& Date �
Signature: Date:
Please direct inquiries to:
Orange Soil & water Conservation District
cooperative Extension Service
Orange County Planning & Inspections Department
HW&wm& 732-819100upd KX 967-MIODwbm 699-M-1 1 =7-2MI
..ar_•:—s.�..�,�rr -'?��� ��w eau- -- --� � --
_.......
AP� ICAT. ION FOR
1
CERTIFICATION AS QUALIFYING �-
AND DESIGNATION ub
CO
VOLUNTARY
AGRICULTURAL D ISTRICT
w-
;._... r �.
IN =
e" CO�►IPB application, please review the
-
. prrnnsl°ro of Fsnnla�ld - -- ... _ . .
fill out the
.. _... ,...�.':�:;. of the 'County as scam* and V � ...
�� form colnpletelq possy�btety wle 'to'= - -- .
Pioaervstion P1v �� then
form arld nedl to the Oeange
Road, Hlllabomugh, N.C._:
S D 3pg R
APPLICANT:-------,;
- -
�r
... . .
N
ame:
7119 Hi`h
- - dress' Rock Rd.
_. -
•V
ty
- Efla nd
-
_.. - State:. NC ZIP . ti.•.::: _ ...: �. .
Code: : 27243 _...:
Phone Number: (Home) 563-3842 (Work)
- -' _�nSe """•; 7 Isla m8 irl:pe ons Dcpeltnlent.. .
Hil66erwd+ 732 - 81 ,:.... _ ........ _ . - . .... ........ .
819ampel Dill 967- MlGDwh= 6W7MISMd6 227 -2pl
40.
:•;� , 0.
y.. -
C
i,l. -• I, � X41 ^\\ ` -
-`. �' fyE Ce6 i•I -E Ip.,f°i- - ,,. i ..-.., '* i �...,,, ,,, ___ •J
lk
•�• � .... �oeaa.c r I .. •.-� tae � . ^N I
" 'w �j p•
gym.
= .•a =. ,. iI K. G
OQ
�• � �rt O uO I
�F
1 \ �•• \ / : " <,,.; � -i" ,rte ...7f:.: ;;;n '
_ � Ig o,� ��lyr •J \ \I %�� i� �� � .F:• 2 '°°..l�ol. ":'1j_>•+
4C •--• -- -teas ,. _ _- ..•i -r.. _ ^..._I _ _. —�. _�;_v. :-c_:'
PLAT REFERVI_El - �CN� - -'• 3.:'.. _ . -. _:::.i -. •r:::-
-�:
. vs. - r•�1- ,,, �_ I. - -_ - - -_ - I,_.ie':. -? ..x Si r'.s= "�`}•;.: : °:Sii"c^:6,''
... :.Y:I lSA-e_,I� .; •• . e — :�1 a'`� .� - �� v :ii:�•i. —�=r� � l��u �, ..
ORANGE COUNTY TAX SUPERVISOR'S OFFICE 8
208 SOUTH CAMERON STREET
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278
KERMIT LLOYD
Tax supennmor
MEMORANDUM
TO: Marvin Collins, Planning Director
FROM: Kermit Lloyd, Assessoro�—
SUBJECT: Voluntary Agricultural District Application
for Victor and Elizabeth T. Walters
DATE: April 30, 1992
This is to verify that Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth
T. Walters are actively participating in the Present Use
Value Program.
t
' United States soil P.O. Box 8181
�`� Department of h NC 27278
Conservation H i 1 1 sboroug ,
Agriculture Service
732 -8181, Ext. 2751
May 1, 1992
TO: Marvin Collins, Planning Director
Aw
FROM: Gregory A. Walker, District Conservationist
SUBJECT: V. Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters Application
for Certification as Qualifying Farmland
Attached is certification for Carl and Elizabeth Walters as qualifying
farmland for the Voluntary Agricultural Districts Program.
Attachment
0 The Soil Conservation Service
is an agency of the
Department of Agriculture
9
1
United States Soil
Department of Conservation
Agriculture Service
This report serves to document how the proposed farm
qualifies for acceptance into the Voluntary Agricultural
Districts in Orange County.
I. Two — thirds
a. Be sui
timber
yes
no
Comments;
of the soils on the farm must:
ted for providing food, seed, fiber, forage,
and oil seed crops.
X
b. Have good soil qualities.
Yes
no
Breakdown of soil classes in percent:
Class I Classes I, II, III are
Class II _z Z_•�_
Class primarily used for cropland.
III _� (pw
Class IV _��— Classes III —VI are
C generally
Class V
------ best suited for pasture or
Class VI woodland.
Class VIII
Class: -V -III generally unsuited
for agricultural use.
Comments: Y =
Gn _ �'4• = a •/ % cis w
o. Be favorable for all major crops common to Orange
County. Major crops are corn, tobacco, small grain,
pasture, loblolly pines.
favorable ____ —`% unfavorable
OThe Soil Conservation Service
is an agency of the
Department of Agriculture
?.0
N
Page 2
d..Have favorable growing season. (YES)
-The growing season for Orange_County,_is approximately
200 days. It begins in approximately the second week
-of April and runs until about the last week in
October. This response will be consistent for all
_farms in Orange County.
e. Receive the available moisture needed to' produce high
yields for an average of 8 to 10 years.
Orange County receives approximately 42 — 45 inches
rainfall annually. This response will be consistent
for all farms in Orange County.
0 R
At least two--thirds of the land has been actively used in
agriculture, horticultural or forestry operations as defined
in the NC General Statutes, Section 105 -277.2 (1,2, and 3>
during each of the five previous years, measured from the
date on which the determination must be made as to whether
the land in" question qualifies.
Acres in cropland
Acres in forestland
Acres in homestead,
farmstead or other_
re I ated- -u-se _J
Total TRACT Acres
Greater than two--thirds in designated uses.
Yes L/ %
No ---- -- - - -- % - - - --
J.. rQ a 5 Cf^U,D�G s
N� "f`�SN•�a '
Comments: �0. QC re- I
9
:i.I
Al
17
_
4
Page 3
2. Farm must be managed, if highly erodible land exists on
the farm, in accordance with the USDA, Soil Conservation
Service (SCS) defined, erosion— control practices as specified
in the 1985 Food Security Act.
Plan o n f i _I e in SCS Office YES --V—/--- NO
If No, plan will be required before acceptance into the 4
Voluntary Agricultural Districts Program.
Comments:
N
w
_.ter
Aran e County
Agricultural Districts Advisory Board - " =" • : - - = =
r
�
^
VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT SELECTION
Date Application Received: A gar r 1 T 4 2
APPLICANTNAME: J'G�ar Car I k1ol�GrS,Sr
_
PROPERTY INFORMATION:
-1101 ii
• Property locetion/Add ' r , P,=- I L piO [CL t-+ J • Q. 2
•Township ( 2 GOY. C3 Tax Map: 2 Block: Lot:
3 - 101 '
•Parcel Identification Number [PIN]: � -
*Number of Acres: 2 g 4. 5 O Decd Book: 2 20 /14 Page:
.4•Sl /5o
CERTIFICATION CRITERIA REVIEW:
0
36 -
eMeets acreage requirements of:
[1] One farm containing at least 155 contiguous acres; OR
Yes: No- Initials• Date:
[2] Two or more contiguous farms containing at least 155 acres.
Yea: 4 No: Initiala: I'Yl �G Date: 4 9 9 2
*Participating in farm present use -value taxation program. i3d �4
Yes: V, _ No: Initials: c C- Date:
•Certified b�y oil Conservation Service as to land suitability_ �G 5/ t /4°�'
Yes: y No: Initials: r C 1 Data
*Managed ordance with SCS defined erosion control practices.
Yes: 1/ No: Initials: MGC �- Date: 5�1 lam( a2
CERTIFICATION/DESIGNATION ACTION:
*Application reviewed for completeness.
eApplication forwarded to
- Tax Supervisor's Office.
- Soil Conservation Service.
*Evaluation received from
- - - Tax Supervisor's Office.
- Soil Conservation Service.
*Application presented to Agricultural Advisory Board.
[11 dying farmland certification approved. Yes: —G _ No:
Reason:.
[2] Recommendation for district designation approved. Yes: NA No:_
Reason: .....
eApplication presented to Board of Commissioners.
[1] Agricultural district desigriation approved. Yea: No:
Reason:
[2] Conservation agreement form/content approved. Yes: No:
- - Reason:
*Conservation agreement signed/recorded.
*Agricultural district identified in Land Records System. '
* Agricultural district identified on Tax Map.
•Agricultural district signs] posted.
Date
4/q /9 Z
4 Ct 19 Z-
-4 / 3o /q 2 .
/z4 /CC?- -
5f b 4�
14
n
ORANGE COUNTY VOLUNTARY - FARMLAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM ORDINANCE
Section V — _APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF QUALIFYING
FARMLANDAND VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS
A. PURPOSE
The purpose of voluntary agricultural districts is to increase
identity and pride in the agricultural community and its way of
life, and to increase protection from nuisance suits and other
negative impacts on properly- managed farms.
B. REQUIREMENTS FOR INCLUSION IN A VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT
1. An agricultural district shall initially consist of:
a. At least 155 contiguous acres of certified qualifying
farmland; or
b. At least two or more certified qualifying farms,
contiguous to each other, which will create a district of
not less than 155 acres.
2. The owners of the qualifying farmland must execute an
agreement with orange County to sustain agriculture in the
District.
3. Qualifying farmland may be added to existing districts upon
execution by the owner of an agreement to sustain agriculture.
4. In the event that one or more participants in the District
withdraw and the acreage in the District becomes less
than the minimum acreage required or results in the remaining
land being non - contiguous, a voluntary agricultural district
will continue to exist so long as there is one qualifying
farm.
C. CERTIFICATION AS QUALIFYING FARMLAND
1. To secure certification as qualifying farmland, a farm must:
a. Be participating in the farm present use -value taxation
program established by the N.C. General Statutes,
Sections 105 -277.2 through 105 - 277.7, or is otherwise
determined by the County to meet all the qualifications
of this program set forth in the N.C. General Statutes,
Sections 105 - 277.3.
b. Be certified by the Soil Conservation Service of the
United States Department of Agriculture as being a farm
on which at least two - thirds of the land is composed of
soils that:
(1) Are best suited for providing food, seed, fiber,
is
forage, timber, and oil seed crops;
(2) Have good soil qualities;
(3) Are. favorable for,al1 major crops common to
Orange County;
(4) Have a favorable growing season; and
(5) Receive the available moisture needed to produce
high yields for an average of eight (8) out of ten
(10) years;
OR be one on which at least two - thirds of the land has
been actively used in agricultural, horticultural or
forestry operations as defined in the N.C. General
Statutes, Section 105 -277.2 (1,2, and 3), during each of
the five (5) previous years, measured from the date on
which the determination must be made as to whether the
land in question qualifies.
C. Be managed, if highly erodible land exists on the farm,
in accordance with the Soil Conservation Service defined
erosion- control practices as specified in the 1985 Food
Security Act.
d. Be the subject of a conservation agreement, as provided
in Article 4 of Chapter 121 of the N.C. General Statutes,
between the Orange County and the owner of such land that
prohibits non -farm use or development of such land for a
period of at least ten (10) years, except for the
creation of not more than three (3) lots that meet
applicable Orange County zoning and subdivision
regulations.
D. APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION PROCEDURES
A farmland owner may apply for either certification as qualifying
farmland or for_ qualifying farmland certification and designation
as a voluntary-agricultural district'. - For a farmland owner to
receive the benefits provided by this ordinance, the farm must be
certified as qualifying farmland by the Agricultural Districts
Advisory Board and designated as a voluntary agricultural district
by the Board of County Commissioners.
1. Applications for qualifying farmland certification and for
voluntary agricultural district designation shall be made to
the Orange County Planning Department on forms provided by
that department.
2. The Planning Department shall review each application for
completeness. When complete, the application shall be
forwarded to:
1.6
a. The orange County Tax Supervisor's Office; and
b. The local office of the Soil Conservation service of the
United•States Department of Agriculture.
Within 30 days of receiving'an application, the above offices
shall evaluate the application for compliance with the
requirements of Section V.D.2. above and return their findings
to the Planning Department. The Planning Department shall
present the application for consideration at the first meeting
of the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board, following
receipt of the findings of the above offices.
3. Within 60 days of receipt of the findings of the Orange County
Tax Supervisor and Soil Conservation offices, the Board will
render a decision regarding the application of qualifying
farmland status, and, if applicable, prepare a recommendation
to the Board of County Commissioners regarding the
establishment of a voluntary agricultural district. The
Chair will notify the applicant by mail of the Board's
decision as to whether the real property for which
certification is sought satisfies the criteria established in
Section V and has been certified as qualifying farmland. If
application was also sought for designation as a voluntary
agricultural district, the Chair will notify the applicant
of the Board's recommendation concerning such designation.
4. Upon receipt of the recommendation of the Board, the Board of
County Commissioners may consider an application for
establishment of a voluntary agricultural district. In
deciding whether to establish a district, the Board of
County Commissioners shall consider the findings of the Orange
County Tax Supervisor and Soil Conservation offices as well as
the recommendation of the Board.
5. Upon approval by the Board of County Commissioners, the
establishment of a voluntary agricultural district shall
become effective -upon recordation of a conservation agreement,
prepared in accordance with Section. V.C.(1)(d), executed by
the landowner and the County, and recorded in the Orange
County Register of Deeds as provided in the N.C. General
Statutes, Section 121 -41.
6. Upon recordation of a conservation easement, the Planning
Department will notify the Orange County Tax Supervisor of the
voluntary agricultural district established. The location of
said district will be marked on the Orange County tax
maps.
E. The County may take such action as it deems appropriate through the
Agricultural Districts Advisory Board or.other body or individual
to encourage the formation of voluntary agricultural districts and
to further their purposes and objectives, including, at a minimum,
a public information program to reasonably inform landowners of the
farmland preservation program.
r
ITEM #4:
17
Hunter stated that she felt the median is more realistic
than the average farm size.
Stewar -t, that this issue be reviewed again at
the June meeting. Collins responded that he could
prepare a "monthly status report.
More discussion indicated the Board was in agreement
that applications be reviewed and monthly status reports
be prepared before consideration is given to amending
the acreage requirement.
b. Rural Character Strategies
Delayed until the June 3 meeting.
ITEMS FOR DECISION
a. Qualifying Farmland Designation - Walters Farm
(Walters left the meeting during this presentation,
discussion, and vote since it was a personal conflict
of interest - Strayhorn chaired the meeting for this
item.)
Presentation by Marvin Collins.
This item is to consider the applications of Victor
Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters for
certification of their farm as qualifying farmland and
designation as a voluntary agricultural district.
Section IV.D.2. of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation
Program Ordinance permits the Agricultural Districts
Advisory Board to review and approve applications for
qualifying farmland and make recommendations concerning
the establishment and modification of agricultural
districts.
Section -V of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program
Ordinance contains the requirements for inclusion in a
voluntary agricultural district. To be certified as
qualifying farmland, a farm must:
1. Be participating in the farm present use - -value
taxation program established by the N.C. General
Statutes, Sections 105 - 277.2 through 105- 277.7,
or is otherwise determined by the County to meet
all the qualifications of this program set forth
in the N.C. General Statutes, Sections 105 - 277.3.
2. Be certified by the Soil Conservation Service
of the United States Department of Agriculture
as being a farm on which at least two - thirds of
W
the land is composed of soils that:
a.. Are best suited for providing food, seed,
fiber, forage, timber, and oil see crops;
b. Have good soil qualities;
c. Are favorable for all major crops common
to Orange County;
d. Have a favorable growing season; and
e. Receive the available moisture.needed to
produce high yields for an average of
eight (8) out of ten (10) years;
OR be one on which at least two - thirds of the
land has been actively used in agricultural,
horticultural or forestry operations as defined
in the N.C. General Statutes, Section 105 -277.2
(1, 2, and 3), during each of the five (5)
previous years, measured from the date on which
the determination must be made as to whether
the land in question qualifies.
3. Be managed, if highly erodible land exists on
farm, in accordance with the Soil Conservation
Service defined erosion- control practices as
specified in the 1985 Food Security Act.
The Orange Soil & Water Conservation District Office
and the Tax Supervisor have provided memorandum which
indicate that the Walters farm complies with all the
listed requirements. In addition, the Walters farm is
comprised of three separate tracts, totaling 284.50
acres. Thus, the acreage requirement of Section V.B.1.b
is satisfied, since the farm consists of two or more
contiguous tracts containing at least 155 acres.
The Planning Director recommends that the farm of Victor
Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters be certified
as qualifying farmland and recommended for designation
as a._ voluntary- agricuitural..district to the Board of
Commissioners.
Strayhorn reminded the Board that the Walters family had
been working on farmland preservation for many years and
stated that he felt it was very appropriate that their
farm be the first to be recommended for designation of
an agricultural district. The4other members agreed.
MOTION: Hogan moved approval of the Planning Director's
recommendation. Seconded by Stewart. VOTE: Unanimous.
b. Rules of Procedure
Presentation by Marvin Collins.
1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Action Agenda
Item No S 1 -8
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: April 21, 1992
SUBJECT: 1992 -97 Capital Improvement Plan
~
DEPARTMENT_ Budget PUBLIC _HEARING YES' X` NO+
+`
ATTACHMENT(S) INFORMATION CONTACT
None Sally Kost, ext 2152
TELEPHONE NUMBER
Hillsborough 732 -8181
Chapel Hill 968 -4501
Mebane 227 -2031
Durham 688 -7331
PURPOSE: To conduct a public hearing on the recommended 1992 -97
Capital Improvement Plan (CIP).
BACKGROUND: At the April 6 meeting, the Board of Commissioners
received a presentation from the County Manager about his
recommended 1992 -97 CIP. At that time, the Board scheduled a public
hearing for April 21 to receive citizen comments about the projects
included in the recommended CIP. The Board may make decisions about
all or a portion of the CIP projects at its May 4 meeting, with
formal adoption of the plan scheduled during approval of the 1992 -93
budget in June.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board hold the
public hearing.
O RANGE C O U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: MAY 19, 1992
Action Agenda
Item #
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF OWASA - RELATED ISSUES (APRIL 1 ASSEMBLY OF
GOVERNMENTS MEETING)
DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: Yes —X—No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
MANAGER'S OFFICE, EXTENSION 2300
DRAFT LIST OF ISSUES AND
QUESTIONS TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Durham - 688 -7331
Mebane - 227 -2031
Chapel Hill - 967 - 9251/968 -4501
PURPOSE: To determine a list of OWASA - related issues that all
jurisdictions may have a mutual interest in pursuing.
BACKGROUND: On April 1, the Orange County Assembly of Governments
asked:
1. That the Managers prepare a list of questions and
issues and take the list to each governing board
to determine if the list is correct and complete.
2. That the Managers then determine which issues all
- jurisdictions may_have- a_mutual interest in
pursuing.
3. That the list of issues of interest to all
jurisdictions be submitted to the elected boards
for refinement along with a time frame.
4. That such a list be a topic for the next Assembly
of Governments meeting.
Attached for your review is a draft list of questions
for your review, clarification.and additions and for
designation of the issues which each board desires to
discuss. we would suggest that the board individually
note each item on the attached list with a "yes" or
I
z•
a
"no" to indicate whether you wish to pursue the item
further.
A copy.of the draft minutes of the April 1 meeting,
and issues suggested by OWASA are attached as
background information. We have included questions
from these documents, and some additional issues, in
compiling the draft list of possible issues for
further discussion.
RECOMMENDATION: The Managers will compile the comments of all
jurisdictions and submit a proposed list of issues
reflecting mutual interest.
M M I ff V
DRAFT LIST OF ISSUES FOR POSSIBLE JOINT DISCUSSION
BY THE ORANGE COUNTY ASSEMBLY OF GOVERNMENTS
A. GOVERNANCE OF OWASA AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONSHIPS
1. Should each elected board appoint one of its members to serve on
the OWASA Board of Directors?
2. What is the role of the OWASA Board, what are the roles of the
Towns and County regarding OWASA, and what should be the
relationship among the boards?
3. What is the obligation of the elected boards to citizens
regarding OWASA - related matters?
4. What guidelines should the elected boards give the OWASA Board?
5. How can communication improve between the elected boards and
OWASA Board?
6. Should there be more informal communication with the OWASA Board
Members?
6. Is an OWASA Board necessary? Who should make water and sewer
policy decisions?
7. What process should be used to explain to citizens the
relationship of the OWASA Board to the elected boards?
8. What are the duties of the OWASA Executive Director, including
financial responsibilities?
9. Should the County and Towns review OWASA's preliminary capital
improvements program each spring and make comments to OWASA?
B. OWASA SERVICE AREA AND SALE OF WATER
1. Regarding the 'request by Chatham - County to buy OWASA water:
(a) What process should the elected officials use to consider
Chatham County's request?
(b) Should a work group representing the elected boards
be formed to identify land use issues and concerns
related to Chatham County's request?
(c) Should the OWASA and Chatham water systems be
connected to enable emergency sale of water between the
systems?
(d) Should the interim sale of water to Chatham County be
founded on Chatham County's plans to develop its own
3
4 '
DQGIff�
long -term water - supply arrangements?
2. How should the Town of Hillsborough's request to purchase or
lease part of OWASA's 16" water line north of the Rural Buffer be
resolved? -
3. Regarding existing communities with well and septic systems:
(a) Is OWASA responsible for serving these neighborhoods
in the Chapel Hill and Carrboro town limits and future
annexation areas?
(b) Should OWASA also be responsible for extending water
and sewer service to communities with well and septic
systems in the Rural Huffer to the north and south of the
Towns?
4. What should OWASA's water and sewer service area be?
5. What should OWASA's long -range role be in providing water in
Orange County, including potential assistance to the Town of
Hillsborough and other Orange County areas?
6. Should OWASA have a jointly - developed water /sewer master plan
addressing questions of service area, long -term system development,
service level objectives, financing, etc.?
C. WATER SUPPLY SOURCES FOR OWASA
1. Should OWASA use water from the Jordan Lake in the future for
its customers in the Chapel Hill- Carrboro area? If not, what steps
should be taken to preclude any necessity to use the Jordan as a
water source for Chapel Hill and Carrboro in the future?
2. Should OWASA sell Jordan Lake water to other areas?
3. Should OWASA - plan - to -use thd-.Jordan Lake water supply on a
cooperative basis -with other utilities?
4. How do the Orange Alamance Water System, Orange County and the
Town of Hillsborough plan to use their allocations from the Jordan?
D. EFFECT OF OWASA FEES AND CHARGES ON HOUSING COSTS
1. Should OWASA be responsible for extending water and sewer at a
reasonable cost to neighborhoods which now have wells and septic
systems?
2. What techniques, if any, could OWASA use to reduce the effect of
its availability charges, assessments, and other rates and fees on
low income families?
a
0
D M M ff U
3. Can OWASA waive tap -on fees for low cost housing? If not, why
not?
4. Should Town and County sales tax funds be used to offset part or
all of OWASA's availability charges and assessments?
E. HALF CENT SALES TAXES
1. How should the half cent sales taxes authorized by the General
Assembly in 1983 and 1986 be used?
F. WATERSHED PROTECTION
1. What additional funding or cooperative funding should be
provided for buying land or development rights in the University
Lake and Cane Creek watersheds?
G. WATER CONSERVATION
1. How can OWASA further promote water conservation?
2. What objectives should be achieved through conservation?
H. ORANGE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER FUNDING
1. What is the status of the $1 million bond issue for a reservoir
which Orange County voters authorized?
2. What is the purpose and justification for the $78,000 recently
approved by Orange County for a sewer extension?
3. How are Southern Orange County citizens going to be compensated
for money spent in building the present Efland sewer line, and for
money which may be spent in the future? Should there be a matching
loan fund for grants to OWASA or the Towns to help cover
assessments and tap -on fees ?. .
I. MAINTENANCE
1. What should be OWASA's policy on maintaining the part of sewer
laterals which are within public right -of -way?
2. How much should OWASA seek to reduce inflow and infiltration of
stormwater into the wastewater collection and treatment system?
J. RELATIONSHIP OF OWASA RATES TO FIRE PROTECTION
1. Do OWASA's charges for supplemental water service for fire
protection discourage the use of sprinkler -systems? Should OWASA
revise its charges for supplemental fire protection service?
5
6
MMA(�7_
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY ASSEMBLY OF GOVERNMENTS
APRIL 10 1992
The Orange County Assembly of Governments meeting was held on
Wednesday, April 1, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. at the Homestead Community
Center in Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
COUNTY 2=8019=4 PRWZNT: Chair Moses Carey, Jr., and
Commissioners Alice M. Gordon, Verla C. Insko and Don Willhoit.
Stephen H. Halkiotis
PREANIML Mayor Eleanor G. Ki.nnaird and
Aldermen Jay Bryan, Hilliard Caldwell, Jacquelyn M. Gist, Tom
Gurganus and Frances Shdtley.
CnPEL BILL 2= C Mayor Kenneth S. Brown and
Council Members Julie M. Andresen, Joyce Brown, Mark Chilton, Joe
Herzenberg, Phan E. Rimer, Arthur S. Werner and Roosevelt
Wilkerson, Jr.
Allen A. Lloyd,
Evelyn Lloyd, Carol Lorenz and Robert M. Rose.
Chair Moses Carey,, Jr. made introductory remarks.
Brown and Kinnaird welcomed everyone to the meeting.
Mayors
Tara Pikes, Director of Housing and Community Development for
Orange County indicated that the provision of affordable housing
is very important to everyone in the County. The different groups
which provide affordable housing have been discussing the need to
work together to further this effort. A strategy has been
developed by Orange County represented by Tara Pikes, Chapel Hill
represented by Judy Russell, Carrboro represented by James Harris,
Hillsborough Planning Department and Donna Dyer representing the
orange Community Housing Corporation,
Donna Dyer-made Is presentation - on the report entitled
"Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy for Orange County,
North Carolina ". She made reference to the document and stated
that the high cost of homeownership has left many families out of
the housing market or sent them to surrounding counties to buy
homes and commute into Orange County. For families needing three
or more bedrooms, very little stock exists. Development of this
countywide CHAS was undertaken by a working group with a
representative from each, participating jurisdiction plus staff from
Orange Community Housing Corporation, the County's non - profit
housing development corporation. This document identified specific
needs and prioritized. them based on severity of need and
availability of resources to address the need. Section I,
Community Profile, is a description of the housing need and market
in Orange County. Section II is a five -year approach to addressing
[] wgI� I
these needs, and Section III is a one -year strategy, describing
actions to be taken during the Federal fiscal year, October 1, 1991
through September 30, 1992. She listed some of the opportunities
for dev*lopinq projects which will provide affordable housing.
There are many programs in Orange County which provide affordable
housing and it is proposed that all these groups work together in
• total effort except for Habitat for Humanity. Ks. Dyer presented
• transparency showing the existing programs and the new federal
programs being offered. She listed the goals and objectives of the
CHAS. She pointed out that no local jurisdiction qualifies as a
federal entitlement. There would need to be a consortium formed
with another county. This would require an interlocal agreement.
She feels the matching funds would be 25%. Based on population
this would mean allocations of $100,000 from Orange County and
Chapel Hill, $30,000 from Carrborc and $20,000 from Hillsborough.
Other than money can be used as a match. No matching funds will
be required the first year. A public hearing is scheduled for
April 22 to inform the people of the agreement and what is proposed
for providing affordable housing in Orange County. The local
Jurisdictions must enter into an agreement by June 30, 1992.
In answer to a question from Mayor Kinnaird, Ms. Dyer
indicated that having staff or board members interested in
affordable housing would be sufficient to enter into the agreement.
Also, the Orange Community Housing Board will be restructured to
limit the number of representatives from each jurisdiction.
Hillsborough Commissioner Carol Lorenz expressed a concern
that no one is getting to the root cause of how much added costs
are imposed on housing by local governments because of regulations.
She fools that local government has the power to reduce the cost
of housing.
Aldermen Hilliard Caldwell feels that the cost for basic
utilities is prohibitive. He would like for OWASA to join in this
effort to provide affordable housing.
Ms. Dyer - noted that the program is flexible. If a private
developer comes up with a proposal to provide this housing, it can
be considered and approved.
It was pointed out that the University is a major factor in
the high cost of housing and that there should be some coordination
with the University. They have a large amount of acreage which
could be used for this purpose.
It was the consensus of the elected officials that this
collaboration is a great step forward and that the time schedule
should keep everyone moving toward a decision.
7
Im A I� V
Lois Herring, Chair of the OWASA Board indicated they
were pleased to receive Chatham's request for Water. OWASA has an
unused water capacity that could accommodate Chatham's needs and
Also, if necessary, meet Hillsborough's emergency needs. OWASA
could use the extra income from this sale of water to Chatham
County. She noted that Chatham has been a good neighbor which they
would like to repay.
Henry Dunlap, Chair of Chatham County Board of
Commissioners, introduced County Manager Ben Shivar. He gave a
brief history of how their water system is laid out and what they
are doing to secure future water supplies. They have three (3)
systems which are not interconnected. The State has put them under
a moratorium which means that plans for new development are being
scrutinized. According to the state standards, Chatham County has
already approved development that will use the available water
supply. Many of these, subdivisions will not be built out for
several years. In terms of new sources of water, the Pittsboro
water plant is being expanded and will be finished in July and will
provide 365,000 gpd additional water. They have also developed new
wells to augment their supply of water. They also purchase water
from Sanford and Siler City when necessary. In order to supply the
north Chatham area, they need to secure an additional source of
water and that was their reason for contacting OWASA. In the long
run they plan to construct a plant on Lake Jordan. A proposal will
go to the Board as early as late summer.
Mark Ashley, 'Chatham County Engineer, distributed a
handout which indicated that they serve 1,417 customers with an
average daily demand of 2881403 gallons. There are 1,032 vacant
lots with state approval for water supply. By using a 400 gpd
standard per vacant lot this totals 412,800 gpd. The potential
supply agreement with OWASA is detailed in the handout with a
minimum daily gpd of 25,000 in 1.993 to a maximum daily gpd in 2002
Of 600,000 gpd. He noted that the area .is ' continuing to grow and
there are a significant number of vacant lots. Chatham County is
in the process of building a 1.1 million gallon storage tank on
Edwards Mountain. This tank will be in operation this fall and
Will be used in an emergency. The interconnection with OWASA will
provide a way to shut down one system for maintenance. With a ten
year agreement, Chatham will have the time necessary to build a
plant on Lake Jordan.
In answer to a question from Council Member Julie
Andresen, Mr. Ashley stated that it is their intention to have the
funds to construct this plant on Lake Jordan by that time. He
noted that the water system in the Governor's Club development is
owned and maintained by Chatham County. They are currently
providing water to 40 residences in this area. The total cost to
expand the plant at Pittsboro is $1.2 million. The Governors Club
i
i
8
DG1W�4
is paying $800,000 of this cost in return for 1,000 connections.
r *
Chair Carey noted that although this discussion can
continue, the group would probably not be able to come to any
consensus. The process needs to be developed for reaching a
consensus on the direction to pursue.
Mayor Kenneth Broun asked about time constraints and Mr.
Shivar stated that the sooner a decision can be reached the better.
In answer to a question from Council Member Joe
Herzerberg, Mr. Shivar stated that the population projection for
northern Chatham County which had a population 8,750 in 1991 is
12,500 by the year 2,004. They have 1300 water customers.
Mr. Shivar clarified that even when the expansion at the
Pittsboro plant is completed, the state will not lift these
constraints because they count all vacant lots as if they are
already built.
IL
In answer to a question from Carrboro Aldermen Jacqueline
Gist about the necessity of all elected boards approving the sale
of water to Chatham, Lois Herring stated that there are other
issues such as planning and zoning that will need to be addressed.
Chair Carey noted that all the elected boards should have an
opportunity to list and address any identifiable land use issues
or concerns. He suggested that this could be accomplished through
a work group made up of elected officials from each board.
Commissioner Insko stated that a subcommittee would need to
know the concerns of each elected board. Information on potential
problems or concerns need to be identified by each elected body and
she emphasized the importance of working with OWASA on this issue.
It was decided that each elected board would place this item
on their agenda for the purpose of determining if there are
identifiable problems. The Chairs and Mayors will then determine
if there are problems which affect all jurisdictions and if a
subcommittee is the best way to continue. The subcommittee will
then meet and their findings, along with a consensus - reaching
process, will be resubmitted to the elected boards for their
consideration. The group decided that the memo dated March 26
could be the point of reference to begin the discussion.
r.
DRAFT
Celli
(1) whether or not an elected official•fram each juris-
diction should be on the OWASA Board,
(2) role clarification - what the OWASA role is, what
the towns role is and how they relate to each other,
(3) identify what is expected or provide guidelines for
the respective representatives on the OWASA Board,
(4) identify ways for better communication between the
elected boards and the CWASA Board,
(5) identify what is or should be OWASA's long range
role in providing water to Orange County --
assisting Hillsborough and the remainder of the
County,
(6) identify a process to address the concerns of
citizens on the relationship between the elected
officials and OWASA,
(7) determine if an OWASA Board is necessary -- look at
the original charter,
(8) determine the obligation of the elected officials
to the people who elected them,
(9) pursue the question of the 16" line that Hills-
borough Wants to purchase from OWASA,
(10) discuss the issues of serving existing communities
which are on wells and septic tanks in town at a
reasonable cost including the rural buffer both to
the -north and south,
(11) identify the duties of the OWASA Director including
the financial responsibility,
(12) determine if OWASA is permitted to give "tapons" for
low cost housing and if not, why not.
10
C
ii
TnQffq
ILL pnocaes MR :MNQ FOR ADnx2e6112 . TtaO Ieeoaa
It was agreed that a process for addressing these
questions and issues needs to be developed. These are complex
issues and many are policy issues.
It was decided that (1) the managers will take the list
of questions /issues and discuss them with each governmental board
to determine if the list is correct and complete, (2) the managers
will then determine which issues all jurisdictions may have a
mutual interest in pursuing, (3) this list will than be submitted
to the elected boards for refinement along with a timeframe, and
(4) this refined list will be a topic for the next Assembly of
Governments meeting. It was pointed out that time is of the
essence.
NOTE: Julie Andresen asked that x service map be provided to the
staffs of Chapel Hill Carrboro.
12 0.
a
Mayor Kenneth S. Broun
April 21, 1992
OWASA CONCERNS REGARDING WATER AND SEWER SERVICES
I. Need for additional or cooperative funding for purchase of land
or development rights in watersheds.
2. Use of water and sewer sales tax moneys for assistance with
sewer assessments and tap -on fees
3.. Since Chatham County has developed a time schedule for using
Jordan Lake water, what plans are there for cooperative
development of the Jordan Lake water supply? How do
Orange /Alamance, Hillsborough, and Orange County plan to use
their allotments? Do they plan to join with OWASA and /or
Chatham County?
4. How are southern Orange citizens going to be compensated for
money spent in building the present Efland sewer line (and for
money which may be spent in the future)? A matching loan fund
grant to OWASA or the Towns would be very helpful in meeting
needs of citizens who do not have the resources to pay sewer
assessments and tap -on fees.
5. Status report on the $1 million bond issue approved for a
reservoir.
6. Information about the purpose and justification for the $78,000
recently approved by Orange County for sewer extension.
7. Explore how appointees to the OWASA Board can be used more
effectively as channels of..communicatiom. Informal talks are
needed Father than- additional work -- groups or more formal
presentations where interaction is difficult. A format which
allows OWASA to be a part of the circle could promote exchange
of information and understanding.
13
I. Memorandum of Understanding: We recommend the Council reaffirm
the value and need for the 1989 Memorandum of Understanding
regarding sharing of information and proposed plans and policy
actions; and express appreciation to OWASA for seeking comments
from local governments regarding the Town of Hillsborough's and
Chatham County's requests during the last year.
II. OWASA Service Area: We recommend that OWASA's service area be
defined as the Chapel Hill- Carrboro urban services area bounded by
the Rural Buffer, University Lake watershed, Chatham County line
and Durham annexation /water and sewer service boundary.
III. Water Sales: We recommend that any non - emergency water sales
to other utility systems should protect the long -term availability
of OWASA's current water supplies through plans by the utility
buying water to obtain its own permanent water sources.
IV. Watershed Protection: We recommend that the Council support and
encourage continuation of OWASA's purchase of land and conservation
easements to protect University Lake and the Cane Creek reservoir,
and plans for a study of the Cane Creek watershed to be
commissioned in 1992 -93. OWASA, the County and the Towns should
continue to work together-to protect these watersheds.
V. Conservation: We recommend that the Council commend OWASA for
its water conservation program, and encourage further initiatives;
for the quality of our drinking water and emphasizing the
importance of maintaining this high quality; and for OWASA's
increased emphasis on reducing stormwater inflow and infiltration
as a key to preserving capacity of the wastewater system.
VI. Financing the OWASA system: We recommend the Council enter into
discussions with OWASA to seek cooperative means of assisting low
income families with water and sewer costs including assessments,
availability fees and other charges.
VII. Other matters: We recommend consideration of whether OWASA
should maintain sewer laterals within public right -of -way, and of
OWASA's present charges for supplemental fire protection service.
MEMORANDUM
0
TO;
Mayor and Council
..
FROM:
Julie Andresen, Council Member
Mark Chilton, Council Member
Joe Herzenberg, Mayor pro tem
SUBJECT:
Summary of proposed Water and Sewer
Policy
Guidance to
OWASA
DATE:
May 14, 1992
I. Memorandum of Understanding: We recommend the Council reaffirm
the value and need for the 1989 Memorandum of Understanding
regarding sharing of information and proposed plans and policy
actions; and express appreciation to OWASA for seeking comments
from local governments regarding the Town of Hillsborough's and
Chatham County's requests during the last year.
II. OWASA Service Area: We recommend that OWASA's service area be
defined as the Chapel Hill- Carrboro urban services area bounded by
the Rural Buffer, University Lake watershed, Chatham County line
and Durham annexation /water and sewer service boundary.
III. Water Sales: We recommend that any non - emergency water sales
to other utility systems should protect the long -term availability
of OWASA's current water supplies through plans by the utility
buying water to obtain its own permanent water sources.
IV. Watershed Protection: We recommend that the Council support and
encourage continuation of OWASA's purchase of land and conservation
easements to protect University Lake and the Cane Creek reservoir,
and plans for a study of the Cane Creek watershed to be
commissioned in 1992 -93. OWASA, the County and the Towns should
continue to work together-to protect these watersheds.
V. Conservation: We recommend that the Council commend OWASA for
its water conservation program, and encourage further initiatives;
for the quality of our drinking water and emphasizing the
importance of maintaining this high quality; and for OWASA's
increased emphasis on reducing stormwater inflow and infiltration
as a key to preserving capacity of the wastewater system.
VI. Financing the OWASA system: We recommend the Council enter into
discussions with OWASA to seek cooperative means of assisting low
income families with water and sewer costs including assessments,
availability fees and other charges.
VII. Other matters: We recommend consideration of whether OWASA
should maintain sewer laterals within public right -of -way, and of
OWASA's present charges for supplemental fire protection service.
DQGI�p
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Julie Andresen, Council Member
Mark Chilton, Council Member
Joe Herzenberg, Mayor pro tem
SUBJECT: Water and sewer policy issues related to the Orange Water
and Sewer Authority
DATE: May 14, 1992
In previous discussions with the Council, we have indicated we
would prepare recommendations for the Councils consideration
regarding water and sewer policy matters.
This memorandum presents our recommendations regarding several
Policy areas:
Memorandum of Understanding among OWASA and local governments
Service area and system development
Water sales and other agreements with other utilities
Watershed and water quality protection
Conservation
Financing the OWASA system
Other matters
The attached discussion is intended to focus on areas that we think
are the most important. We recognize that the Council may want to
add to or delete items from this outline, and we welcome further
discussion of these matters.
I. Memorandum of Understandinct
Back round
In July, 1989, _ OWASA- and the three local- ..government boards which
appoint the OWASA Board Members entered into a Memorandum of
Understanding. This agreement sets forth the four entities,
commitments to share information and provide opportunity for
comment on proposed plans, policies and significant actions such as
proposed sale of water to other utilities.
The Memorandum concludes with a pledge by each of the parties to
make good faith efforts to reach agreements satisfactory to all of
the parties on matters of mutual interest.
A copy of the Memorandum of Understanding is.attached.
Comments and Recommendation:
The Council should reaffirm the value and need for the Memorandum
s
14
r
15
Mnipff4
of Understanding as a commitment to communication, and as a
mechanism for further agreement through refinements and /or
supplemental documnts as the local governments reach agreement on
additional matters.
The Council's proposal for annual, intergovernmental review of
OWASA's draft capital improvement programs is an example of a
procedure which could be incorporated into the communication
process for OWASA and the local governments.
II. Service area and OWASA system development
Back round
OWASA now serves about 60,000 customers in Chapel Hill, Carrboro
and surrounding areas including the Durham County part of Chapel
Hill and about a dozen customers in northern Chatham County near
Star Point.
OWASA's present customers in the University Lake watershed include
the Heritage Hills neighborhood west of Smith Level Road and the
Rangewood neighborhood south of NC 54 and west of Hatch Road. These
two neighborhoods were developed many years ago, before OWASA
adopted restrictions on extending service into the watershed.
In 1987, OWASA adopted a policy restricting extension of its
service into this watershed except due to imminent hazards. In
1990, the OWASA Board amended this policy on the advice of general
counsel to allow service to lots assessed for sewer service in the
Rangewood neighborhood..
OWASA has also entered into a service area agreement with the City
of Durham which parallels the 1986 annexation boundary agreement
between Durham and the Town of Chapel Hill.
OWASA has no other service area. boundary agreements, but the Board
has adopted a policy of being guided by:_the land management plans
of the localities which OWASA serves.
Comments and recommendations:
The 1987 Joint Planning Agreement among Chapel Hill, Carrboro and
Orange County defines Urban Transition and Rural Buffer areas as
part of a Joint Planning Land Use Plan (attachment).
The Rural Buffer includes most of the Now Hope Creek drainage basin
north of Chapel Hill and Carrboro, and most of the University Lake
watershed. The Towns have agreed not to annex Rural Buffer areas
defined in this agreement.
Based on these concepts, the Chapel Hill land use plan includes an
"urban services" district including the area in the Town limits,
16
M M M ff V 6
most of the Town s extraterritorial planning area, and the urban
transition areas.
We, believe OWASA's service area should be defined as a Chapel Bill
- Carrboro urban services area bounded by the University Lake
watershed on the west, the New Hope Creek part of the Rural Buffer
area to the north, Durham - Chapel Hill annexation boundary on the
east and the Chatham County and Rural buffer boundaries to the
south.
Defining such a service area would help OWASA make long -range plans
for system capacity based on a discrete area rather than based on
undefined, unknown and continually growing service area.
The proposed service area would also reflect the fact that
residents of Chapel Hill and Carrboro and a few surrounding areas
are paying for the cost of acquiring the OWASA system in 1977 and
for making major system improvements includia
development of the Cane Creek reservoir and expansions of treatment
plants. The long -term capacity of the present OWASA water and
wastewater system should be kept in place to serve the Chapel Hill -
Carrboro area citizens who have and will pay for these assets.
In addition, defining the Chapel Hill - Carrboro service area would
help provide focus on meeting community needs which already exist,
including reduction of inflow and infiltration into the wastewater
System, addressing neighborhoods where private septic and well
systems will eventually need to be replaced in the urban service
area, and other basic system needs.
OWASA's capital improvement program documents in past years have
shown as emphasis on accommodating demand associated with new
development. While this objective is appropriate and consistent
with the 1977 Purchase and Sale Agreements, there should be an
equal emphasis on meeting the needs of neighborhoods which are
already developed but lack public water and sewer service in areas
designated for urban- services.
We note that defining a Chapel sill- Carrboro service area would be
consistent with the provisions in the 1977 sales agreements that
OWASA will meet the reasonable needs of the Towns of Carrboro and
Chapel Hill for wastewater services.
Defining a service area for OWASA based on the principles in the
Joint Planning Agreement is the
which should be addressed by the single most important policy matter
local governments. Such a decision
or set of decisions would have important and positive effects
regarding the. focus and priorities for the Authority.
We note that a service area as described above need not preclude
contractual arrangements with other jurisdictions under appropriate
conditions, which are discussed below.
DpGI�7
III. Water sale and other agreements with other jurisdictions.
Background
As noted above, OWASA customers have experienced significant
increases in rates since creation of the Authority. In effect, the
community which provided revenues for development of the water
utility under University ownership is paying again for the water
system purchased from the University in 1977 as well as for the
Cane Creek reservoir and other system improvements such as
expanding the water and wastewater treatment plants.
The process of acquiring properties and applying for permits for
the Cane Creek reservoir as the major long -term water supply was a
long and expensive struggle during which citizens endured periodic
water shortages.
As Council Members have stated in the past, the Cane Creek
reservoir and water supply is a precious asset which should be
preserved for the long -term use of the communities which have and
are paying for it.
If the present concepts of the Joint Planning Land Use Plan remain
in use, the Cane Creek reservoir along with the University Lake
watershed and stone quarry storage supplies should be adequate to
serve the Chapel Hill - Carrboro urban services area at full
development based on current land use plans.
The capacity of Cane Creek and other supply sources also implies
that our community may not be forced to use water from the B.
Everette Jordan Reservoir when the present supply sources are fully
used. Using water from the Jordan Reservoir would raise concerns
based on the number of untreated or inadequately wastewater
discharges to the Haw River and other tributaries of the reservoir.
In the future, annexation and utility service area boundary
agreements) involving OWASA, Chapel Hill, Carrboro and the Town of
Hillsborough would be useful and appropriate to complement the
present Joint Planning Agreement and Rural Buffer concept.
Hillsborough is not a party to the Joint Planning Agreement for the
southeast part of the County, although Hillsborough has separate
Cooperative Planning arrangements with Orange County.
A service area agreement among the local governments and utility
systems in Orange County might help resolve a longstanding
difference between Hillsborough and OWASA regarding future service
from the part of OWASA's water transmission line which extends
north of the Rural Buffer to Hillsborough.
17
18�
M M M ff V
Comments and Recommendations:
a. Emergency crater sales
We support emergency water supply agreements of the type doveloped
through the Triangle J Council of Governments in 1987. These
agreements can benefit all parties, and we note that OWABA
customers have benefitted substantially in the past from the City
of Durham's and the Town of Hillsborough's willingness to share
their water supplies during shortages here. Continuation of
reciprocal emergency sales agreements with Durham and Hillsborough
therefore may be regarded as a moral obligation for OWASA.
b. Non - emergency water sales
Because of the substantial expense and effort necessary to, acquire
adequate water supplies for our community, however, we believe that
any future water sale agreements for non - emergency purposes must
protect the long -term capacity of the Cane Creek, University Lake
and stone quarry supplies to meet the needs of the Chapel Hill -
Carrboro urban services area.
Because of the legal potential for court decisions precluding the
termination of a water sale agreement, we would recommend that any
non - emergency water sales be based on plans for the utility buying
OWASA water to obtain permanent water sources through a plan of
action and a time frame reflecting capacity of OWASA's present
water supplies and projected future demand.
C. Chatham County request
Chatham County has requested OWASA's assistance through a water
sale agreement for the period until the County has its own water
supplies. Actions by the State . have required Chatham County to seek
a supplemental interim water supply, in part because the additional
water to be available through in_ agreement with the Town of
Pittsboro will be for a limited amount.
We recommend the Council discuss the principles summarized above
with Chatham County representatives as a potential basis for
reaching agreement.
When Chatham County provides a more specific proposal, we believe
it should address the concerns that a non - emergency sale agreement
might be continued by a court decision after expiration of the
agreement, and that a plan for permanent water supply from other
sources could be a basis for an interim water sale agreement.
We recognize that selling water to Chatham County would have
advantages in generating revenue such as for acquiring additional
land around the Cane Creek and University Lake reservoirs.
M M & ff V
d. Other contracts with utilities
As noted above, the formal designation of a Chapel Hill - Carrboro
service area would 'not preclude OWASA from entering into
contractual arrangements to assist other utilities in operating
treatment plants, for example, with full recovery of OWASA's costs
for adding personnel, etc.
Such contractual assistance arrangements would not need to involve
any change in existing jurisdictions or their policy decisions
related to water and sewer matters.
However, the caveats about preserving OWASA's overall system
capacity should be reflected in any of these agreements.
IV. Watershed and Water Quality Protection
Background
In 1988, OWASA engaged the firm of Camp Dresser and McKee to study
the University Lake watershed and the potential effect of
alternative development scenarios on the quality of water stored in
the lake.
This study led to revision of local zoning, subdivision and land
use ordinances to limit the effect of future growth and stormwater
run -off on water quality.
OWASA staff has begun a process of identifying and ranking critical
lands around the reservoirs as a basis for purchase of future
purchase of fee simple and conservation easement interests in
watershed land.
In recent budget deliberations, the OWASA Board has indicated it
will allocate $205,000 annually (a $100,000 increase) over the next
five years for watershed land acquisitions. As noted in the
December 5, 1991 joint meeting with OWASA.,_ the Authority recently
acquired a conservation easement in Cane Creek watershed at a cost
of $500 per acre.
OWASA also plans a study of the Cane Creek reservoir and watershed
in 1992 -93 to parallel the University Lake study in 1988 -89.
Comments and Recommendations:
We commend and support OWASA's actions and planning to acquire land
around the reservoirs and their tributaries as a water quality
protection measure.
The Cane Creek watershed study will be an important step in
planning the protection of our community's largest water storage
asset (3 billion gallons /10 million gallons per day).
19
f
20
M M M � 7 r
Continuing cooperation of OWASA, the County and the Towns is - needed
to protect these watersheds.
V. Conservation
Background
OWASA has undertaken extensive efforts to encourage conservation,
through public education, sale of low -f low showerheads at cost,
etc. The community has responded especially well during water
shortages.
Conservation is important as one way to help limit long -term
development costs of the water system, and as a way to preserve the
capacity of our present water supply sources.
The Triangle J Council of Governments is beginning a study of water
conservation for several water systems in the region, and this
study may be useful to OWASA, Chapel Hill and Carrboro regarding
water conservation possibilities.
The NC Building Code Council last year made significant plumbing
code changes to require that fixtures in new construction use less
water.
Comments and Recommendations:
We encourage OWASA to continue its support of conservation, and
urge OWASA to undertake further studies leading to new initiatives.
A key objective of water conservation should be to maintain the
adequacy of present water sources so that OWASA will not be forced
to use Jordan Lake water.
We recognize that successful, significant water conservation could
reduce revenue to OWASA relative to what the income would otherwise
be. However, we believe the - long -term positive impact in preserving
the capacity of our water supply sources is the key objective and
is important in limiting long -term costs.
We encourage OWASA to consider adopting specific, practical
conservation goals. Local governments' goals regarding solid waste
management and recycling come to mind as an example of numerical
goals which establish a target and define success.
We recommend the Council commend OWASA for the high quality of our
drinking water and for OWASA's emphasis on maintaining this high
quality.
Regarding conservation of wastewater system capacity, reducing
infiltration and inflow of stormwater into sewers is the most
important strategy. The OWASA Board is planning greater emphasis on
21
D
this need as part of the 1992 -93 budget in addition to comomitients
earlier this year to- accelerate work on the Bolin Creek and Tanyard
Branch sewer lines. - We commend OWASA !or these initiatives.
VI. Financing the OWASA
Background
OWASA receives about $1 million or annually from "availability"
charges to help pay for major water and sewer lines and a share of
treatment plant capacity. The revenue from this fee is used to help
pay for OWASA's capital improvement program.
For a typical home and lot size, the availability charge is about
$1,700 for water service and $1,100 for sewer service.
OWASA has responded to petitions from majorities of lot owners in
several neighborhoods for extension of water and sewer on an
assessment basis. OWASA has assessed 100% of costs as the Town did
in sewer projects before OWASA was created. This policy is pursuant
to the 1977 purchase and sales agreements.
Some OWASA Board members have expressed a belief that the Towns of
Chapel Hill and Carrboro should allocate a portion of their half
cent sales taxes for water and sewer purposes such as improvements
to the OWASA system or extending sewer in areas with septic
systems. They believe such use of the sales tax revenue would be in
accord with the intent of the sales tax legislation.
The Towns have received exemptions which are authorized in the
sales tax legislation to use all of the half cent sales tax revenue
for municipal services.
As previously discussed, the OWASA Board is unable to waive or
reduce fees and charges for low income families because of
provisions in OWASA's bond orders. However, the OWASA Board has
expressed interest in discussions with local governments to seek
cooperative arrangements for addressing these issues.
Comments and Recommendations:
A. Half cent sales taxes
We do not accept the assertion by some that the Towns' requests for
exemptions regarding municipal use of half cent sales taxes are
inconsistent with the legislature's intent.
The sales tax legislation expressly provides that the GC Local
Government Commission may grant exemptions, and the Commission has
done so in response to requests by cities including Greensboro,
Charlotte and Asheville.
22
M �3Glff4
More importantly, the 1977 purchase and sales agreements between
OWASA and the Tows. "provide that OWASA will in part "provide and
maintain such swage collection and treatment facilities as may be
required under applicable laws and regulations to meet the
reasonable needs of the Town" (emphasis added) as then and
thereafter constituted.
These agreements also included OWASA's "pledge and unequivocal
assurance that it will use its best efforts in good faith" to
extend sewers in annexation areas where required by State law as a
condition of annexation.
The latter commitments were important considerations for the Town
in selling its wastewater lines and one -half interest in the Mason
Farm wastewater treatment plant.
The only financial consideration by OWASA in acquiring the Town's
wastewater system, excluding payment for trucks and other
equipment, was OWASA's assumption of debt payments on Town sewer
bonds. The amount of these payments as scheduled from 1976 -77
through 1992 -93 is about $2 million. However, if the present value
of these payments were calculated based on a 10% annual discount
rate, the time - discounted value was only about $1 million.
The sale of the Town's sewer system and half interest in the
wastewater treatment plant on these very favorable terms further,
emphasises the importance of OWASA's commitments to meet the
community's wastewater needs.
B. Assistance to low income families
We recommend that the Town enter into discussions with OWASA and
other interested local governments regarding possible means of
cooperatively assisting low - income families with water and sewer
costs.
The Town can continue to assist iaw income families in Chapel Sill
with water and sewer costs through the Tow's water and sewer
reserve of sales taxes collected in the 19809, and with Community
Development grant funds as in past years.
VII. Other matters
As noted in previous discussion with the Council, OWASA does not
maintain the portion of private sewer laterals which is in public
right -of -way.
we think there should be public discussion.and consideration of
whether OWASA customers should share the risk of repairing laterals
in right- of-way by paying for this as an OWASA service. Such a
policy would be similar to OWASA's maintenance of water connection
laterals and meters in public right of way.
23
D °:
aO � i
L
In addition, we would'encourage review and further consideration of
the charges for OWASA.'s supplemental fire protection service to
buildings with sprinkler systems. We are concerned that these rates
may discourage sours building owners from having sprinkler systems.
Conclusion
As discussed above, we believe designation of the Chapel Hill -
Carrboro "urban services" area as OWASA's service area is the key
to resolving several matters involving the focus, priorities and
future development of the OWASA system which was purchased with
revenue from local customers in the Chapel Hill - Carrboro area.
We support non - emergency water sales agreements, and believe that
interim, non - emergency water sales can be advantageous when based
on plans for the buying utility to achieve self - sufficiency.
We encourage discussion among OWASA and the local governments of
creative alternatives for addressing concerns about the impact of
water and sewer availability and assessment costs on low income
families.
24
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
mEMORANDUN OP UNDERSTANDING among the Town of Carrboro, Town of Chapel Hill,
Orange County and Orange water and Sewer Authority (OWASA).
I. PREAMBLE
WHEREAS, issues frequently arise which are of cosmon interest to the Towns, the
County, and OWASA which should be addressed through exchange of information,
opportunity for review, and providing of constructive comments; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the parties to promote an environment for good
relations and positive communication in all matters that may affect one another.
11. AGREEMENTS
1. It is understood and agreed by the County, the Towns and OWASA that good
communication among them is essential. To that end, the parties have agreed
to communicate regularly and to provide each to the others information
regarding policy matters affecting their mutual interests, including, without
limitation:
A. proposed intergovernmental agreements which involve water and sewer
services, facilities, and service areas.
B. planning policies, reports and studies such as joint and local land use
plans, water and wastewater systems development plans, capital
improvements plans, community .facilities plans, environmental
characteristics studies, and other long-range and comprehensive planning
documents;
C. water and sever extension policies and amendments thereto;
D. zoning and development regulations and maps and amendments thereto;
E. requests and proposals for water and sewer facilities which would be
located in or which would serve areas which are now generally undeveloped
or not developed at urban densities;
F. proposals for new development, including subdivisions, in areas which are
not served by public water and sewer;
G. financial policies and plans such as multiyear projections including
planned rate adjustments and long -range financing plans for capital
improvements;
Memorandum of Understanding
H. reports and studies on significant OWASA institutional issues including
but not limited to swatters of structure, relationships, role(s) and
responsibilities;
I. plans for municipal annexation, such as resolutions designating areas for
possible future annexation and resolutions of intent to consider annexing
specified areas;
J. other matters which one or more of the governing boards determines is of
interest to one or more of the other boards, and matters on which one or
more of the boards requests discussion or information.
2. The three governing boards and the OWASA Board agree to provide adequate and
timely opportunity for each board to comment on proposed establishment or
amendment of policies, and on proposed actions having policy implications,
pertaining to but not necessarily limited to the topics in 1. above.
3. Each board will arrange to have the agendas for all of its meetings mailed to
the Chair of the requesting board and to the appointed chief administrative
official of such body. Mailing of additional materials such as agendas of
major committees, Planning Boards, etc. is encouraged.
Each board agrees to distribute copies of quarterly and annual reports to the
other parties. Such reports shall include discussions of major activities
and projects.
4. The boards agree to meet jointly at least annually to discuss matters of
mutual interest. At any orientation session held for the newly elected
officials of the governing boards OWASA shall be asked to participate in an
appropriate portion of the session.
S. It is further agreed that the County, the Tovns, and OWASA shall continue
discussions beyond the Memorandum of Understanding to identify and attempt to
resolve issues of common interest .pertaining to protection of the water
quality in the University Lake and Cane Creek watersheds.
III. ASSURANCE
The governing bodies of Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Orange County, and the OWASA Board
of Directors pledge their good faith efforts to reach agreements satisfactory to
all of the parties on matters of mutual interest.
2s
JOINT
J
'`�MN1N4 AREA , 27
I
a
Rt +�R
Carrboro Transition Area 1
T Carrborp Transition Area 2
Chapel Mill Transition Area
••••••••• Carrboro /Chapel Mill Joint
Planning Boundary
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
t ■
I,
4.
M ' randum of Understanding
(SEAL)
7 -20- f4
Date
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
%- f p, 9
Date
ATTEST:
— MR12
(SEAL)
: - /a -'r 9
Date
ATTEST:
(FEAT.
Date
ATTEST:
TOWN OF CARRBORO
Eleanor G. [innaird, Mayor
TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL
r
1� 1t
Jonathan B. Bowes, Mayor
COUNTY OF ORANGE
&sCarey, Jr.,
G
or the Board
ORANGE WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY
1ri�
rc
Robert H. Peck, Chairman of the Board
24
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 19, 1992
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENTS
DEPARTMENT: Board of Commissioners
ATTACHMENT(S): Under Separate Cover
Action Agenda
Item No. X=T_
PUBLIC HEARING YES: NO: X
INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly Blythe
Ext. 2130
TELEPHONE NUMBER -
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Chapel Hill - 968 -4501
Mebane - 227 -2031
Durham - 688 -7331
PURPOSE: THE ATTACHED RECOMMENDATIONS ARE BEING PRESENTED FOR THE BOARD
OF COMMISSIONERS CONSIDERATION. THE INDIVIDUAL APPOINTMENTS ARE LISTED ON
PAGE TWO.
BACKGROUND:
PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL:
ABC BOARD:
PERSONNEL ADVISORY BOARD:
ADVISORY BOARD OF AGING:
TASK FORCES /WORK GROUP NEEDING BOARD OF COMMISSIONER MEMBER:
DURHAM /CHAPEL HILL WORK GROUP:
TASK FORCE ON REDUCING VIOLENT CRIME AND DRUG USE:
RECOMMENDATION(S): AS THE BOARD DECIDES
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Action Agenda
Item No.
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
SUBJECT: MINUTES Meeting Date: MAy 19, 1992
- - -- ----------------------------------
DEPARTMENT: COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PUBLIC HEARING YES: NO: X
- -- ----------------------------------
ATTACHMENT(S): UNDER SEPARATE INFORMATION CONTACT: BEVERLY BLYTHE
COVER
TELEPHONE NUMBER
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Chapel Hill - 968 -5401
Durham - 688 -7331
Mebane - 227 -2031
- -
PURPOSE: To correct and /or approve the minutes assubmitted - --
April 21, 1992 - Regular Meeting
BACKGROUND: In accordance with 153A -42 of the General Statutes, the
Governing Board has the legal duty to approve all minutes that are entered
into the official journal of the Board's proceedings.
RECOMMENDATION(S): As the Board decides.
A statement to the Orange County Commissioners, May 19, 1992 from the
Citizens Against Site Eleven
We are here again to demonstrate how very dissatisfied we are with the search process for
Orange County's next landfill. We would first like to remind you of our statement of
May 4, and then add the following comments:
1. We are very displeased that after our demonstration two weeks ago you have
failed to put discussion of an LSC revote on the agenda, particularly given that you stated
last time that you would do so. This is a breach of public faith. We are calling for an
investigation of the voting process that led to the selection of landfill sites 11, 2, 9 and 17
for geotechnical drilling. We trust that your sound judgment will guide you to the
conclusion that the selection process for these 4 sites was flawed. Clearly the intention of
the Landfill Search Committee (LSC) was to drill only sites 17 and 3, before the LSC was
overridden by political coercion.
2. Site 11 has been voted off the list two times. by the LSC, and both times pushed
back on by a revote heavily influenced by the LOG. In none of the four votes, however,
did a majority of the 12- member LSC vote to keep Site 11 on the list.
3. 17 sites were initially identified by using maps and flyovers, thereby obviously
missing sites that are as good as or better than those that were chosen. It is easy to spend
taxpayers' money, but harder and more expensive to cover or clean up mistakes. The
public has never been shown that anyone involved in the search process has a scientific
knowledge that qualifies them to make a site choice. Furthermore it is critical that a
sound solid waste management policy should be formulated prior to the choice of a site.
In addition there appears to be a conflict of interest in that Joyce Engineering is clearly
influencing the choice of a land fill site that they will ultimately be running. Another
example of conflict of interest has already been manifested by the action of the County
Commissioners to reduce UNC's ash tipping fees, and perhaps this is only the tip of the
misguided iceberg.
4. The four sites to be drilled were clearly chosen by a process heavily influenced by
an angry public and not by sound public policy and scientific reasoning. Why is it that the
top sites early on that were also defended by the most vocal populaces, are no longer
under consideration? Is it really because all of these sites are unsuitable for a landfill ?
Evaluation by flyovers and arbitrary statistical compilations are an insult to Orange
County citizens.
5. With the provided information, we simply do not understand why site 3 or even
part of site 3 was eliminated. We demand a plausible explanation that will satisfy us, the
LOG and the LSC. We trust that the LOG and the LSC have sufficient imagination to
come up with a site that is within a reasonable distance of an existing landfill.
6. Citizens Against Site 11 are clearly angry. Of course we are angry that the County
landfill could end up in our backyards. But wherever the landfill ends up, the citizens of
Orange County, and not just those in Chapel Hill, must be satisfied that the selection
process was scientifically sound and politically just. Otherwise, your mistakes today will
continue to haunt you and the County for many years to come. Please do not approve the
drilling of the four sites and waste $60,000 of our hard -earned money. Drill site 17 as this
has the unanimous support of the LSC, and if that is not suitable, then, and only then, drill
one more.
April 24, 1992
Mr. John Link
County Manager
Orange County Courthouse
109 Court Street
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Dear Mr. Link:
APIA G 1 I��1
,5- /9- fyr�'/ 0 V-- -0G
Rudolph H. Green
Vice President
and General Counsel
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Please find enclosed two originals of the Settlement Agreement and Release of
Claims executed on behalf of Prime Cable Income Partners, along with a check in
the amount of $50,000 payable to Orange County. Upon execution of the documents
on behalf of Orange County, please forward a fully executed original to Jerry
Lindauer of Prime Cable, 600 Congress, Suite 3000, Austin, Texas 78701 and a copy
to Randall Roden of Tharrington, Smith & Hargrove, P. O. Box 1151, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27602.
Yours very truly,
Rudolph H. Green
rls
Enclosures
c: Geoff Gledhill w/ enclosures
Prime Cable • One American Center • Suite 3000 • 600 Congress • Austin, Texas 78701 • (51.1) 476 -7888
COUNTY OF ORANGE
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
SHITLEMENT AGREEIVESNT AND
RELEASE OF CLAIMS
THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE OF CLAIMS is made
and entered into the 2 4 t h day of Ap r i 1 , 1992, by and between PRIME
CABLE INCOME PARTNERS, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership doing business in
Orange County, North Carolina as Carolina Cable ( "Prime ") and ORANGE COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA, a political subdivision of the State of North Carolina (the
"County").
WHEREAS, Prime owns and operates a cable television system in Orange
County, North Carolina pursuant to a franchise granted by the County (the
"Franchise "); and
WHEREAS, the terms of the Franchise require Prime to pay a percentage of its
gross revenues to the County as a tax for the privilege of operating a cable television
system in the County (the "franchise fees "); and
WHEREAS, a dispute has arisen between Prime and the County concerning the
percentage of franchise fees to be paid by Prime and the amount owed to the County;
and
WHEREAS, Prime has requested approval from the County to transfer the
Franchise to American Television & Communications Corporation ( "ATC") and such
request is pending approval from the Board of County Commissioners; and
WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to resolve the dispute on the terms and
conditions set forth in this Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed as follows:
1. No Admission Of Liability Or Fault. This Agreement shall not constitute
an admission of fault, wrongdoing or liability of any kind and is made for the purpose of
resolving the dispute between Prime and the County in an amicable fashion on the
terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.
2. Pa ent L3y Prime. Prime agrees to pay and the County agrees to accept
in full settlement of all outstanding amounts due the County as compensation from
Prime under the Franchise for any period prior to January 1, 1992, the sum of FIFTY
THOUSAND AND N01100 DOLLARS ($50,000.00) as additional franchise fees for
such period.
3. Future Franchise Fees. Prime hereby agrees to pay franchise fees at the
annual rate of FIVE PERCENT (5 %) of gross revenues for the period January 1, 1992
until the effective date of the transfer of the Franchise to ATC. ATC has represented
to Prime and to the County that it will agree to pay franchise fees at the rate of FIVE
PERCENT (5 %) when it assumes the obligations of the franchise.
4. Mutual Release Of Claims.
(a) Release By Counly. The County, for itself, its successors, and
assigns, does hereby forever discharge and release Prime, its partners, members,
stockholders, trustees, officers, directors, representatives, employees, agents,
heirs, successors, and assigns, from any and all claims, lawsuits, liabilities,
demands, actions, or causes of action of any kind or character whatsoever,
whether at law or equity, whether known or unknown, which the County had,
may have ever had, now have or may now have arising out of or on account of
the payment or nonpayment of franchise fees arising out of the cable television
2
franchise held by Prime in Orange County or the Orange County Cable
Television System Ordinance, except for the obligations contained in this
Agreement.
(b) Release M Prune. Prime, for itself, its officers, directors, trustees,
shareholders, partners, representatives, heirs, successors, and assigns, does hereby
forever discharge and release the County, its officers, representatives, employees,
agents, successors, and assigns, from any and all claims, lawsuits, liabilities,
demands, actions, or causes of action of any kind or character whatsoever,
whether at law or equity, whether known or unknown, which Prime had, may
have ever had, now have or may now have arising out of or on account of the
payment or nonpayment of franchise fees arising out of the cable television
franchise held by Prime in Orange County or the Orange County Cable
Television System Ordinance.
5. Transfer A roval As Condition Of A eement. This Agreement and the
obligations contained herein are expressly conditioned upon approval by the County of
the pending request by Prime to transfer its Franchise to ATC. Prime agrees to pay the
amount due under this Agreement to the County within thirty (30) days of the approval
of the transfer of the Franchise. In the event that the transfer request is not approved
by the County, this Agreement shall be null and void and shall be without prejudice or
effect whatsoever on the rights or responsibilities of the parties under the Franchise.
3
This the 2:4 t.b day of April, 1992.
[9680.000.p.or.03/1Le]
PRIME CABLE INCOME PARTNERS, L.P.
By: PRIME VENTURE T, INC.,
general partner
ORANGE COUNTY
By tvy�
CHAIR, ORANGE~ COUNTY
Title HOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
4
� PROJECTS
' corporation
OPTIONS FOR
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
COVERAGEIMPROVEMENT
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
MAY 4, 1992
4917 Waters Ede Drive, Suite 230
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
' 919•$51.5466
Fax 919.851.5782
The factors contributing to the perception of poor coverage in the
Orange County fire and rescue radio communications systems have been
examined. Terrain has been identified as a significant factor because of the
numerous hills and valleys throughout the County which have a major influence
on radio propagation.
The primary fire and rescue transmitter site is on Eno (or Occoneechee)
Mountain. This site is just west of the I -85 overpass at Orange Grove Road
(1006). Ground level at this site is 860 feet AMSL (above mean sea level).
The antennas are mounted on a 125 -foot, self- supporting (unguyed) tower.
Although centrally located and on relatively high ground, this site does not
provide adequate coverage of the entire County. The increased use of portable
(hand held) radios has exacerbated the problem and there are many locations
where the receiver at the Eno Mountain site cannot hear low - powered, portable
radios with their inefficient spring -type antennas. This is especially true from
inside vehicles and buildings.
An Radio Coverage Map is attached which indicates the predicted
receiver coverage from the Eno Mountain site. This map was calculated using
the FCC F(50,50) propagation curves and taking into account signal attenuation
due to terrain obstructions. Areas shaded in red are predicted to have solid
coverage of portable radios which are inside vehicles and buildings. Areas
shaded in yellow are predicted to have solid coverage of mobile radios and
marginal coverage of portable radios. Unshaded areas have marginal coverage
of mobile radios and no coverage of portable radios.
' 1
� PROJECTS
corporation
A second transmitter site, in an attempt to improve coverage, has been
' established on the Faculty Laboratory and Office Building (FLOB). Although
this is the tallest building on the University campus, it does not provide
' acceptable coverage in many areas around Chapel Hill, including the University
Mall shopping center. Coverage is also extremely poor in the southwestern
' corner, the northeastern corner, and some areas in the northwestern comer of
the County.
Numerous options were investigated and a taller tower at Eno Mountain
' was considered. The practical limit to increasing height is 500 feet due to
environmental and FAA regulations. The cost of such a tower would be over
' $300,000. Our studies indicate that a 500 -foot tower would not provide County-
wide coverage.
An antenna mounted at the 700 -foot level on one of the tall broadcast
' towers near the Chatham County line would provide County -wide coverage.
However, even if these towers could support additional antennas and
' transmission line, there are two reasons to seek other solutions: (1) there would
be a recurring monthly tower space rental, and (2) a receive antenna mounted
' that high would be subject to significantly increased interference from out -of-
County stations.
The transmitter at Eno Mountain can be heard throughout the County.
tY .
' If a person is using a portable radio in a poor location, they can move a few
feet and find a better spot for reception. Unfortunately, the optimum locations
' for reception are not always the best for transmitting back to the receiver at
Eno Mountain. The user has no way of finding the optimum location for
transmitting. Thus, the major problem is receiving from portable radios in the
z
f ROJECTS
orporation
field.
Augmenting the dispatcher's receiving capability was investigated. It is
possible to use several additional receivers in a 'voting system ". The additional
receivers are located so that they provide improved coverage of problem areas.
The audio from these receivers is routed through a comparator circuit which
automatically senses and selects the receiver with the 'best signal ". This is done
by comparing the noise levels. Thus, the portable radio transmitting in the field
has the opportunity to be in a good location for transmitting back to each of
several receivers. The dispatcher has the option of manual override of the
comparator circuit from his console position.
Numerous sites for voting receivers were investigated, some of which
were outside Orange County. Potential sites were selected and evaluated using
computer -based coverage studies. These studies were verified with field
observations. Various volunteer firemen from throughout Orange County also
confirmed that the coverage maps matched their experience with the radio
coverage on the fire frequency.
The three sites which are recommended for consideration are the White
Cross VFD, Cedar Grove #2 VFD, and Glen Lennox FD (Chapel Hill). A
second Radio Coverage Map is attached which indicates the predicted receiver
coverage from an antenna mounted with its center of radiation at 175 feet on a
tower at each of these fire stations. Shaded areas have the same meaning as
the previous map. The two maps show that adding three voting receivers to the
current receiving capability at Eno Mountain will provide coverage of portable
radios and solid coverage of mobile radios throughout the entire County.
' 3
�
WPROJECTS
corporation
I
A 199 -foot tower can be erected to support receiver antennas at each fire
' station. This height is chosen so that the towers will not require painting or
lighting. A 100 to 200 -foot guyed tower, with sufficient capacity to meet the
' County's current and future needs, can be installed for approximately $17,000.
' The cost of a voting system is approximately $5,000 for the comparator
circuit, plus approximately $4,000 to $6,000 for each receiver, transmission line,
' and antenna. One antenna, with suitable receiver multicouplers, can be used for
several receivers (on different frequencies - within the same band) at each
' voting site.
4
� PROJECTS
corporation
Certification
I, W. Reed Whitten, certify that I am a Technical Consultant with
RF Projects Corporation, a Telecommunications Consulting Firm with offices in
Raleigh, North Carolina,; that I have more than twenty years experience; and
that I have been retained by Orange County to prepare this study.
I further certify that the calculations and drawings contained herein were
prepared by me personally or under my direction; and that all facts contained
herein are true of my knowledge except where stated to be on information or
belief, and those facts are believed to be true.
W. Reed Whitten
May 4, 1992
' PROJECTS
corporation
r
w\'m
� WOMRSO
\m
"'EMISIMMISM
7
0
A
-�g
VIP
WRIN
II
IN/
0
II
LAW
IN/
LAW
�zo
LGC -205 (Rev. l/l /1992)
File in Triplicate.
CONTRACT TO AUDIT ACCOUNTS
of ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Governmental unit
Deloitte & Touche
On this 30 day of March 19. 92 Auditor
Post Office Box 2778, Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 -2778
Mailing Addrm
hereinafter referred to as
Board of Orange Count hereinafter referred
the Auditor, and County Commissioners _ of covermaenial Unit '
Governing Board
to as the Governmental Unit, agree as follows:
I.
The Auditor shall audit all statements and disclosures required by generally accepted accounting principles and
additional required legal statements and disclosures of an funds and/or divisions of the Governmental Unit for the period
beginning Jul L.19_21 , and ending June 30 19 92 . The combining, individual fund,
and account group financial statements and schedules shall be subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit
of the-combined flnaneial statements -and an opin:or, -will be rendered is relation to the combined financial statements
taken as a whole. The audit will have no scope limitations except:
2. The Auditor shall conduct his audit and render his report in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. The
audit shall include such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as are considered by the Auditor
to be necessary in the circumstances, except as follows: (See Item 12.)
3. It is agreed that generally accepted auditing standards include a review of the Governmental Unit's system of internal con-
trol and accounting as same relates to accountability of funds and adherence to budget and law requirements applicable
thereto; that the Auditor will make a written report, which may or may not be a part of the written report of audit, to
the Governing Board setting forth his findings, together with his recommendations for improvement. All matters defined
as "reportable conditions" in AU 325 of the AICPA Professional Standards will be communicated to the Governing Board
in writing. The Auditor shall file a poRy of all orts with the Secretary of the Local Government Commission.
4. After completing his audit, the Auditor shall submit to the Governing Board a written report of audit. This report shall
Include, at least, the financial statements and notes thereto prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, combining and supplementary information requested by the client or required for full disclosure under the law,
and the auditor's opinion on the material presented. The Auditor shall furnish 1 copies of the report of audit
to the Governing Board as soon as practical after the dose of the accounting period. The Auditor shall file three
Mies of said report of audit Q copy if no singie audit is aired with the Secretary of the Local Government Commission.
5. It is agreed that time is of the essence in this contract. All audits are to be performed and the report of audit submitted
by October 31 19 92
6. Should circumstances disclosed by the audit call for a more detailed investigation by the Auditor than necessary -under
ordinary circumstances, the Auditor shall inform the Governing Board in writing of the need for such additional investiga-
tion and the additional compensation required therefor. Upon approval by the Secretary of the local Government Com-
mission. this agreement may be varied or changed to include the increased time and compensation as may be agreed upon
by the Governing Board and the Auditor.
7. The Auditor shall perform a compliance audit for all federal and State financial assistance programs in accordance with
the Single Audit Act of 1984 (Pub. L. No. 98 -502 and G.S. 159 -34). The Auditor will file three copies of all re orts
- - _ ___ - ___ _r .t-_ r --..1 1^^m eeinn Mbic
includes the report required in Item 3.) (See Items 15 and 18.)
In consideration of the satisfactory performance of the provisions of this agreement, the Governmental Unit shall pay to
the Auditor, upon approval by the Secretary of the Local Government Commission, a fee which includes any cost the
Auditor may incur from work paper reviews by third parties (Federal and/or State agencies) as required under the Federal
and State Single Audit Acts: CAFR and Certification of Tax Levy $30,500;
Single Audit of Grant Funds $16,500
All local government and public authority contracts for annual or special audits, financial statement preparation, finance -
related investigations. or any audit - related work in the State of North Carolina require the approval of the Secretary of
the Local Government Commission. Invoices for services rendered under these contracts shall not be paid by the Govern-
mental Unit until the invoice has been approved by the Secretary of the Local Government Commission. (This also includes
any progress billings.) All invoices should be submitted in triplicate to the Secretary of the Local Government Commission.
The original and one copy will be returned to the Auditor. Approval is not required on contracts and invoices for system
improvements and similar services of a non - auditing nature.
(Continued on Reverse)
10. The contract should be executed and submitted in triplicate to the Secretary of the Local Government Commission, 325
North Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 -1388.
11. Upon approval, the original contract will be returned to the Governmental Unit, a copy will be forwarded to the Auditor,
and a copy retained by the Secretary of the Local Government Commission. The audit should not be started before the
contract is approved.
12. This contract contemplates an unqualified opinion being rendered. Any limitations or restrictions in scope which would
lead to a qualification should be fully explained in an attachment to this contract. Contracts with such limitations will
not be approved unless satisfactory explanation is made.
13. If an approved contract needs to be varied or changed, the change must be reduced to writing, signed by both parties,
and submitted to the Secretary of the Local Government Commission for approval. No change shall be effective unless
approved by the Secretary of the Local Government Commission, the Governing Board, and the Auditor.
14. A separate contract should not be made for each division to be audited or report to be submitted. The scope of the audit
and the fee for the audit should be clearly stated. Stated fees include any cost the Auditor may incur from work paper
or peer reviews or any other quality assurance program required by third parties (federal and State agencies or other
organizations).
15. Three copies (one copy for units not having a single audit) of the report of audit and any other written report by the Auditor
shall be filed with the Secretary of the Local Government Commission when (or prior to) submitting the invoice for the
- X _ - Years e
seruicess..xendered_�a� .�ur�tz.the o of the fiscal ear for fiscal ndinQ Tune 30 this would _
be October 31). The report of audit as filed with the Secretary of the Local Government Commission, comes a matter
of public record for inspection and review in the offices of the Secretary by any Interested parties. These reports are used
in the preparation of Official Statements for debt offerings as well as by municipal bond rating services.
16. There are no special provisions except:
See engagement letter attached
17. Whenever the Auditor uses an engagement letter with the client, Item 16 should be completed by referencing the engage-
ment letter and attaching a copy of the engagement letter to the contract to incorporate the engagement letter into the
contract. In case of conflict between the terms of the engagement letter and the terms of this contract, the terms of this
contract will control. Engagement letter terms are deemed to be void unless the conflicting terms of this contract are specifically
deleted in Item 21 of this contract.
18. A Governmental Unit not having a single audit on federal and State funds would list Item 7 in Item 21 of the contract
as being a deleted provision. AnqSxplanation must be given in Item 21 for any Governmental Unit not receivin a sin le
audit on federal and State funds (e.g., a single audit is not required under the Federal and State Single Audit Acts and
Is not being performed).
19. If this audit engagement is subject to the standards for audit as defined in the Government Auditing Standards, issued by
the Comptroller General of the United States, then the Auditor warrants by accepting this engagement that he/she will
meet the requirements for an external quality control review specified in the Government Auditing Standards. Copies of
any written communications that are a result of an external quality control review will be made available to the Secretary
of the Local Government Commission upon his request.
20. There are no other agreements between the parties hereto and no other agreements relative hereto that shall be enforceable
unless entered into in accordance with the procedure set out herein and approved by the Secretary of the Local Govern -
--
21. All of the above paragraphs are understood and shall apply to this agreement, except the following numbered paragraphs
shall be deleted: (See Items 17 and 18.)
Deloitte & Tauche
Audit firm
By Rex Price, Partner
-- (Please ty or print)
(Si Lure)
Approved by the Secretary of the Local Government
Commission as provided in Article 3, Chapter 159 of the
General Statutes or Article 31, Part 3, Chapter 115C of
the General.. Statutes.
V D 1 HR
r 'e tart', Laval C nment Commission
Date
ignat ne
Orange County, North Carolina
Governmental Unit
By Moses Carey, Jr, Chairman
(Please tyre or pri me and title)
( "gnature of Mayor or Chairperson of gover g d) ~
This instrument has been preaudited i e manner re-
quired by The Local Government Budg and Fiscal Con-
trol Act or by The School Budget and Fiscal Control Act.
Kenneth T. Chavious, Finance Director
Govern t nit Fi e Officer (Please type or print)
(Signature)
Date May 19. 1992
Moses Carey, Jr.
Alice M. Gordon
Stephen H. Halldotis
Verla C. Insko
Don Willhoit
ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
P.O. Box 8181
HILLSBOROUGH, N.C.
27278
COUNTY OF ORANGE
NOTICE OF
CHANGE OF PLACE OF MEETING
OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
732 -8181
968 -4501
688 -7331
227 -2031
644 -3004 (Fax)
WHEREAS, N.C.G.S. 153A -40(a) requires the Board of County
Commissioners to fix the time and place of its meetings; and
WHEREAS, this Board desires to change the place of the special
meeting scheduled for May 21, 1992 at 6:00,p.m.
. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County
Commissioners that the May 21 special meeting scheduled for 6:00
p.m. will be held in the DSS Conference Room instead of the Food
Lab as originally scheduled.
This notice is provided pursuant to N.C.G.S. 153 --40.
Beverly A. Blythe
Clerk to the Board
YOU COUNT IN ORANGE COUNTY !
PROJECTS
corporation
OPTIONS FOR
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
COVERAGEIMPROVEMENT
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
MAY 4, 1992
4917 Waters Edge Drive, Suite 230
Ralei h, North Carolina 27606
919.51.5466
Fax 919.851.5782
The factors contributing to the perception of poor coverage in the
Orange County fire and rescue radio communications systems have been
examined. Terrain has been identified as a significant factor because of the
numerous hills and valleys throughout the County which have a major influence
on radio propagation.
The primary fire and rescue transmitter site is on Eno (or Occoneechee)
Mountain. This site is just west of the I -85 overpass at Orange Grove Road
(1006). Ground level at this site is 860 feet AMSL (above mean sea level).
The antennas are mounted on a 125 -foot, self - supporting (unguyed) tower.
Although centrally located and on relatively high ground, this site does not
provide adequate coverage of the entire County. The increased use of portable
(hand held) radios has exacerbated the problem and there are many locations
where the receiver at the Eno Mountain site cannot hear low - powered, portable
radios with their inefficient spring -type antennas. This is especially true from
inside vehicles and buildings.
An Radio Coverage Map is attached which indicates the predicted
receiver coverage from the Eno Mountain site. This map was calculated using
the FCC F(50,50) propagation curves and taking into account signal attenuation
due to terrain obstructions. Areas shaded in red are predicted to have solid
coverage of portable radios which are inside vehicles and buildings. Areas
shaded in yellow are predicted to have solid coverage of mobile radios and
marginal coverage of portable radios. Unshaded areas have marginal coverage
of mobile radios and no coverage of portable radios.
1
i PROJECTS
corporation
A second transmitter site, in an attempt to improve coverage, has been
established on the Faculty Laboratory and Office Building (FLOB). Although
this is the tallest building on the University campus, it does not provide
acceptable coverage in many areas around Chapel Hill, including the University
Mall shopping center. Coverage is also extremely poor in the southwestern
corner, the northeastern corner, and some areas in the northwestern corner of
the County.
Numerous options were investigated and a taller tower at Eno Mountain
was considered. The practical limit to increasing height is 500 feet due to
environmental and FAA regulations. The cost of such a tower would be over
$300,000. Our studies indicate that a 500 -foot tower would not provide County-
wide coverage.
An antenna mounted at the 700 -foot level on one of the tall broadcast
towers near the Chatham County line would provide County -wide coverage.
However, even if these towers could support additional antennas and
transmission line, there are two reasons to seek other solutions: (1) there would
be a recurring monthly tower space rental, and (2) a receive antenna mounted
that high would be subject to significantly increased interference from out -of-
County stations.
The transmitter at Eno Mountain can be heard throughout the County.
If a person is using a portable radio in a poor location, they can move a few
feet and find a better spot for reception. Unfortunately, the optimum locations
for reception are not always the best for transmitting back to the receiver at
Eno Mountain. The user has no way of finding the optimum location for
transmitting. Thus, the major problem is receiving from portable radios in the
' 2
� PROJECTS
corporation
field.
Augmenting the dispatcher's receiving capability was investigated. It is
tpossible to use several additional receivers in a 'voting system ". The additional
receivers are located so that they provide improved coverage of problem areas.
' The audio from these receivers is routed through a comparator circuit which
automatically senses and selects the receiver with the 'best signal'. This is done
' by comparing the noise levels. Thus, the portable radio transmitting in the field
has the opportunity to be in a good location for transmitting back to each of
' several receivers. The dispatcher has the option of manual override of the
comparator circuit from his console position.
Numerous sites for voting receivers were investigated, some of which
were outside Orange County. Potential sites were selected and evaluated using
computer -based coverage studies. These studies were verified with field
observations. Various volunteer firemen from throughout Orange County also
confirmed that the coverage maps matched their experience with the radio
coverage on the fire frequency.
The three sites which are recommended for consideration are the White
Cross VFD, Cedar Grove #2 VFD, and Glen Lennox FD (Chapel Hill). A
second Radio Coverage Map is attached which indicates the predicted receiver
coverage from an antenna mounted with its center of radiation at 175 feet on a
tower at each of these fire stations. Shaded areas have the same meaning as
the previous map. The two maps show that adding three voting receivers to the
current receiving capability at Eno Mountain will provide coverage of portable
radios and solid coverage of mobile radios throughout the entire County.
3
PROJECTS
corporation
1
A 199 -foot tower can be erected to support receiver antennas at each fire
' station. This height is chosen so that the towers will not require painting or
lighting. A 100 to 200 -foot guyed tower, with sufficient capacity to meet the
' County's current and future needs, can be installed for approximately $17,000.
' The cost of a voting system is approximately $5,000 for the comparator
circuit, plus approximately $4,000 to $6,000 for each receiver, transmission line,
' and antenna. One antenna, with suitable receiver multicouplers, can be used for
several receivers (on different frequencies - within the same band) at each
' voting site.
4
� PROJECTS
corporation
Certification
I, W. Reed Whitten, certify that I am a Technical Consultant with
' RF Projects Corporation, a Telecommunications Consulting Firm with offices in
Raleigh, North Carolina,; that I have more than twenty years experience; and
' that I have been retained by Orange County to prepare this study.
' I further certify that the calculations and drawings contained herein were
prepared by me personally or under my direction; and that all facts contained
herein are true of my knowledge except where stated to be on information or
belief, and those facts are believed to be true.
1
W. Reed Whitten
May 4, 1992
� PROJECTS
corporation
A RkWN
ljllpi�l�, I ��j
VM
M
IN I
x M/
m
W
M
@\\0
O'k
,�ZIRW
Al
NO ON MIX,
xv
.......... -.1
W10111'11-il 1 41T
lmll x"
///// fi, �����i�h��h% ����� 'Jr'I�I��II�II''�iil',II`i',`' �,� \'������ \��\��,
NOWN otom
Is j
IMMOR
� MEN
�` ��•";� ,tit. ii" i1 •�,ti'•_: ��i �jj1
alji;�:.•..v � .
l \\
AN
� / l��l �I��•�i 11 l!':,�:�.'.:�.1:1 �, ;, `` \ \L \\
MEMORANDUM
To: BBCC
From: Alice Gordon kK V
Subject: Support of H916, a hill related to the distribution of local
revenues
Gate: May 19, 1991
I would like to add to the agenda an item related to H916
introduced by Rep. Ann Barnes. The bill is apparently in the House
Appropriations Committee now- I suggest that the BOCC go on record in
support of this bill and direct the chair to send a letter to the appropriate
legislators i n support of this action_ This item could be included after
item IVC (NCACC Annual Conference Resolutions) although it would be less
formal than a resolution.
H916 is a bill "to provide that distributions and reimbursements to
local governments shall be provided by earmarking rather than by
appropriation and to remove the cap on these distributions and
reimbursements that was adopted in 1991." Please refer to the May 6
Legislative Alert from NCACC for further information.
0
I
i
,
i�I,I L I i
I I.
Cr
s
,! y
ili II I
1
I I
17.
i
I
i+
, I•I
li ;I
is
I
j'
i�
i
I I
I
L
Ikl I'!
I'
�I
I I'I
I :I'
{s.
I' I
'i I PI
I
I� I
I.
r
`I
Pi l
I'II�
hl' 'lila
,' II
111 ,:d,1
11 it
�I
1 I
i 1.1
7
Cc ;
!I.
g' I
I
I'•
I.
:d
j
I.
!III
ELI �'•,
�i
,I
r,l
�I r:
is 'a;i;r
I
,
II
I
I
x'71,
I
I r
�I, I
I
i •Iri '
.L.
I
IJ
" 1
i 1 I
Ir '
II I
I
I'1
• id' Ipl�;'.
.1.
. I•
I
rl
111 il:
,
5,
i
I
II
1111', ':•III 1
1'•
{{
i.
�'11'I�.R Ilti' I
„I.
^Il i I'5971=i' i1
I
I
,a
L li
I! I
!i 1'll II
I
,I
lN'I I I7.
I I I'I
II
n.
a;, 11L
{'I
{ 1il
r
d
d� '1
tll
J7 1,1
I I
I. 1jI 1
I
<j. : pia ,•I,I, ,,I'; I,
.;1
II,I,
•1.1
'1.
1f
Ihd; 'I', drr Ii I
I
,
I q
to !
i I
I
I
�� I i�: , 9 i r4 r•
r �
I' I
I
r I
°I
I
s I'
I u
r �
1.
I t
{ r I-
�I I
I I rl
I
'I
q i I
Ik
L1 � rl; i, L,I� Iaild
,.1 a • I ''
I' I
�a I�t i ri
il� 1
•L I
i y li y • rl' l' I.
1', �.. i 11 1 I•.. I ,'i''.
r1 � I.
,a I
r �.I
J. .
I� I II
yy Iii lil
r II
I I
k+ I I
a'I
I,' 1
{{ 1,
I dl
P•
, a�� ,,I:. II,• ,I 1::
I 1• i
9
I
a `Ik
I r. •
I "I rl,
.y I
,1
��•j. � I'. it r� S , L'. r
I
�I
'I
S u
91, ,
vl!
I
r i L
I, fl y I.
,II r
I
'V' I
6. I:.I•
s' I,
;l
I'f' ell la.
— i J
11�
gq I ;q I
II la
11,•
{FI I y
II ti �
L. ..a h• I
••N- I I
I. I II
,I•s I
.i r 1.•t:. ' ry :
r t
r' I I It
1Lt I
•I
'ul• i" ��I 1'
4 ;
I
I
i.
:f I "-
"I
I .
,
,:r, '.J. 7'�: rf.,� 'n.p ill •'II �'i'.
1 'ri., I r•'. � I ' lil•' I i'I II
I I p
,r y'
a' it
.11,1 I rt I
e
1
11
' I''i� :r•li; ' 1 r
r.9 1 I i I
111; L .I,I d
I' I 1 od I• t
I Ii' li I'
I
I
l
r, I hr
I .,11'1 1P ' •'.I
it {ryj
I �1
Ja 1 I
L.
N, gp n
I
I
1 •r'
1. 1.
�i
III•II a' 'I r,; 1.
rk I :i,II,
I I !I II II �'u•.'
.I I'I''L;'ll:. 1 119 �r,., IfR,' .', �:li, 1; !,i' ,I I .. +. 11•'.1 I !Ij.
u,
1�' � L'•I'� ad; I'
•il '1•
I
5,
'I f
f IAN II
I
I
A statement to the Orange County Commissioners, May 19, 1992 from the
Citizens Against Site Eleven
We are here again to demonstrate how very dissatisfied we are with the search process for
Orange County's next landfill. We would fast like to remind you of our statement of
May 4, and then add the following comments:
1. We are very displeased that after our demonstration two weeks ago you have
failed to put discussion of an LSC revote on the agenda, particularly given that you stated
last time that you would do so. This is a breach of public faith. We are calling for an
investigation of the voting process that led to the selection of landfill sites 11, 2, 9 and 17
for geotechnical drilling. W-, trust that your sound judgment will guide you to the
conclusion that the selection process for these 4 sites was flawed. Clearly the intention of
the Landfill Search Committee (LSC) was to drill only sites 17 and 3, before the LSC was
overridden by political coercion.
2. Site 11 has been voted off the list two times by the LSC, and both times pushed
back on by a revote heavily influenced by the LOG. In none of the four votes, however,
did a majority of the 12- member LSC vote to keep Site 11 on the list.
3. 17 sites were initially identified by using maps and flyovers, thereby obviously
missing sites that are as good as or better than those that were chosen. It is easy to spend
taxpayers' money, but harde r and more expensive to cover or clean up mistakes. The
public has never been shown that anyone involved in the search process has a scientific
knowledge that qualifies them to make a site choice. Furthermore it is critical that a
sound solid waste management policy should be formulated prior to the choice of a site.
In addition there appears to be a conflict of interest in that Joyce Engineering is clearly
influencing the choice of a U, id fill site that they will ultimately be running. Another
example of conflict of interest has already been manifested by the action of the County
Commissioners to reduce UNC's ash tipping fees, and perhaps this is only the tip of the
misguided iceberg.
4. The four sites to be dr.11ed were clearly chosen by a process heavily influenced by
an angry public and not by so and public policy and scientific reasoning. Why is it that the
top sites early on that were al io defended by the most vocal populaces, are no longer
under consideration? Is it read ly because all of these sites are unsuitable for a landfill ?
Evaluation by flyovers and w-bitrary statistical compilations are an insult to Orange
County citizens.
5. With the provided information, we simply do not understand why site 3 or even
part of site 3 was eliminated. We demand a plausible explanation that will satisfy us, the
LOG and the LSC. We trust .hat the LOG and the LSC have sufficient imagination to
come up with a site that is w= thin a reasonable distance of an existing landfill.
6. Citizens Against Site 11 are clearly angry. Of course we are angry that the County
landfill could end up in our backyards. But wherever the landfill ends up, the citizens of
Orange County, and not just those in Chapel Hill, must be satisfied that the selection
Process was scientifically sound and politically just. Otherwise, your mistakes today will
continue to haunt you and the County for many years to come. Please do not approve the
drilling of the four sites and waste $60,000 of our hard -earned money. Drill site 17 as this
has the unanimous support of the LSC, and if that is not suitable, then, and only then, drill
one more.
PRESS RELEASE, May 4, 1992
Citizens Against Site Eleven
Orange County citizens who live near site 11 have assembled at the Orange County
Commissioners meeting to demand attention to the following points:
1. We are calling for a REVOTE on the decision to drill all four land fill sites, as
the failure to notify Bryant Walker that his proxy vote would not be accepted at the
March 25 LSC meeting resulted in a manipulated and thus unacceptable 6 -5 vote.
2.Site 11 has been voted off the list two times by the LSC, and both times pushed
back on by a revote heavily influenced by the LOG. In none of the four votes, however,
did a majority of the 12- member LSC vote to keep Site 11 on the list.
3. We do not feel that the members of the LOG are making sufficient effort to
minimize solid waste production in the county, but rather are focusing on operating the
landfill for profit.
4. We are unhappy with the midnight revote by the County Commissioners on the
reduction of the tipping fees for UNC's ash, and are suspicious of the influence of County
Commissioner Don Wilhoit in this decision, as he is both an LOG member and an
employee of UNC.
5. We demand that the County Commissioners pass a resolution that would
prohibit the use of Orange County's Landfill for waste from outside the county. We
remain unconvinced that solid waste officials have excluded the possibility of a regional
landfill in the future, and will not be convinced until we see it in writing.
The site selection process for a new Orange County landfill h; Ls been flawed from
the start. The goal appears to be the identification of the largest tract of land that can
accommodate unnecessary amounts of waste, through a process that is not based on a
sound solid waste management program. The citizens of rural Orange county have
insufficient representation in county government and feel that solid waste policy is being
set by the Chapel Hill Public Works Department behind closed doors. The latter's policy
reflects the interests of the landfill business rather than those of the pi iblic, and does not
work toward a reduction of the volume of garbage.
The Landfill Owners Group (LOG) intends to drill four sites based on a vote of
the Landfill Search Committee (LSC). This vote was, by any reasonable measure,
manipulated. The LSC had previously voted to exclude three of the Four sites, but that
was not the conclusion that the LOG had originally intended. Another meeting was
therefore called to reconsider the issue. An LSC member who was publicly known to
oppose the LOG's plan was misled into believing that he could vote by proxy, and then
the proxy was disallowed after it was too late for him to attend. The remaining LSC
members met under thinly veiled threats that they would be disbanded if they did not
change their recommendation, and they were then redirected by Wilhoit as to what vote
outcome would be acceptable. The resulting 6 to 5 vote adopted the LOG's directive. This
decision to drill four sites was not approved by a majority of the 12 member LSC. In at
least four separate votes a majority of the LSC have never recommended site 11 for a
final list. In essence, two years of LSC work was ignored because their decision was not
liked.
The Chapel Hill Public Works staff saw that by reducing the tipping fees for
UNC's ash, they could keep a major customer from going elsewhere. Neighboring
counties had in fact welcomed the ash. Public Works was clearly guided by immediate
costs rather than a sound waste management plan. The county commissioners initially
voted down this proposal. At the next commissioners meeting, however, they waited until
11:30 p.m. when most of the concerned audience had left, and then voted to accept the
reduced price to keep the ash. This action disregards the fact that landfill volume must be
kept to a minimum, and favors only the interests of the landfill business.
Commissioner Wilhoit asks us to believe his reassurances that the landfill will not
accept garbage from out of the county. The Orange County Citizens' Landfill Council,
however, presented him with a petition several weeks ago requesting a resolution to ban
out -of -county trash. The commissioners still have not acted on that petition. The
commissioners re;'use to ban out -of- county solid waste, and voted to underbid other
landfills to keep UNC ash. At the same time the LOG seeks huge tracts of Northern
Orange County lard which are suspiciously convenient to both Durham and Chapel Hill.
This apparent coincidence raises serious questions about solid waste policies and about
the integrity of sorne elected officials in Orange County.
The process of public input has been severely compromised by manipulated votes,
faulty reasoning and midnight decisions. The Orange County commissioners must hold
the LOG accountable for a fair and open site - selection process, and direct them to
reconvene the LSC before spending $80,000 of taxpayers' money to drill sites which have
been selected by a faulty and tainted process. If the commissioners can revote on UNC's
ash, surely they can permit a revote of the LSC.
2
RESOLUTION
PROHIBITING ACCEPTANCE AT THE ORANGE COUNTY LANDFILL
OF SOLID WASTE GENERATED OUTSIDE ORANGE COUNTY
WHEREAS, it is the.policy of the Orange County Board of Commissioners
and the Landfill Owners' Group not to knowingly accept solid waste at
the Orange Regional Landfill that is generated by individuals or
organizations residing outside the geographical boundaries of Orange
County and that portion of the Town of Chapel Hill located within
Durham County, and
WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners recognizes the need
to reduce and manage solid waste responsibly now and in the future, and
WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners is committed to a
good solid waste management plan and to preserving natural resources,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Orange County Board of
Commissioners reaffirms the policy that to the extent permitted by
law, the existing Orange County Landfill, as well as any successor
thereto, shall be designated to accept solid waste generated
exclusively by residents, businesses, and other institutions located in
Orange County and that portion of the Town of Chapel Hill located
within Durham County.
This, the 19th day of May, 1992.
ems, L Qv i n P
�-L3
..........
---------------
A
U)
7-
w
r
M
n
o
0
ai
+-3
c�
0
rn
•r
Q�
L.
m
•
�J
t
O R A N G E C O U N T Y
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 19 1992
Agenda Abstract
item # V= -A
I
SUBJECT: VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT DESIGNATION - WALTERS FARM
DEPARTMENT: Planning PUBLIC HEARING: Yes_ %_No
ATTACHMENT (S)
Applications
Vicinity Map
Certifications
- Soil conservation Service
- Tax Supervisor
Staff Checklist
5/6/92 Agricultural Districts
Advisory Board Minutes
Proposed Conservation Agreement
Section V - Voluntary Farmland
Preservation Program ordinance
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Planning Director X2592
Hillsborough
732 -8181
Mebane
227 -2031
Durham
688 -7331
Chapel Hill
967 -9251
--------- - --------- M ----- ------------------------- ------------- ----
PURPOSE: To consider the applications of Victor Carl Walters,
Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters for designation of
their farm on High Rock Road in Cedar Grove Township
as a voluntary agricultural district.
BACKGROUND: Section IV.D.2. of the Voluntary Farmland
Preservation Program Ordinance permits the
Agricultural Districts Advisory Board to review and
approve applications for qualifying farmland and
make recommendations concerning the establishment
and modification - -of agricultural districts. The
o €ficial designation of" agricultural districts is
the responsibility of the Board of Commissioners.
Section V of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation
Program Ordinance contains the requirements for
inclusion in a voluntary agricultural district. To
be certified as qualifying farmland, a farm must:
1. Be participating in the farm present use -value
taxation program established by the N.C.
General Statutes, Sections 105 -277.2 through
105 - 277.7, or is otherwise determined by the
County to meet all the qualifications of this
program set forth in the N.C. General Statutes,
Sections 105 - 277.3.
- 2. Be certified by the Soil Conservation Service
of the United States Department of Agriculture
as being a farm on which at least two - thirds of
the land is composed of soils that:
A. Are best suited for providing food, seed,
fiber, forage, timber, and oil seed crops;
b. Have good soil qualities;
C. Are favorable for all major crops common
to orange County;
d. Have a favorable growing season; and
e. Receive the available moisture needed to
produce high yields for an average of
eight (8) out of ten (10) years;
OR be one on which at least two - thirds of the
land has been actively used in agricultural,
horticultural or forestry operations as defined
in the N.C. General Statutes, Section 105 -277.2
(1,2, and 3), during each of the five (5)
previous years, measured from the date on which
the determination must be made as to whether
the land in question qualifies.
3. Be managed, if highly erodible land exists on
the farm, in accordance with the Soil
Conservation Service defined erosion - control
practices as specified in the 1985 Food
Security Act.
The orange Soil & Water Conservation District Office
and the Tax Supervisor have provided memorandum
which indicate that the Walters farm complies with
the above requirements. In addition, the Walters
farm is comprised of three separate tracts, totaling
254.50 acres. Thus,. the�agreage requirement of
Section V.B.l.b. is satisfied, since the farm
consists of two or more contiguous tracts containing
at least 155 acres.
At its May 5, 1992 meeting, the Agricultural
Districts Advisory Board voted unanimously to
approve the certification of the Walters farm as
qualifying farmland. In addition, the Advisory Board
also voted unanimously to recommend that the farm be
designated as a voluntary agricultural district.
•
0
RECOMEF'NDATION: The Administration recommends that the farm of
Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters
be designated as a voluntary agricultural
district and that the'.Chair be authorized to sign
the conservation agreement.
•
•
R
- - - - -;7
grange Count �,,::�.=�
v
A rlcultural Districts Advisory Board-.
_..
APPLICATION . ALIFYIN
GNATIO
ON FOR CERTIFICATION AS QU G F
_
AND .DESIGNATION
N AS AN ORANGE COUNTY
VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT RECEIVED APR 0 9 1
INSTRUCTIONS: Before completing the application, please review the provisions of the Orange County Voluntary Farmland
Preservation Program Ordinance, then fill out the form as accurately and completely ss possible. Be sure to
sign acid date,the forth, and return it to the Orange County Planning & Insp4oti01s Department, 306F Revere
Road, Hillsborough, N.C.
APPLICANT:
Name: victor Carl Walters Jr & Elizabeth T. Walters
Address: 71 19 H i h Rock Rd.
City: E f l a n d State: NC ZIP Code: 27243
Phone Number: (Home) 563-3842 (Work)
PROPERTY INFORMATION:
Property Location/Address: N / 0 1340
Township:
2 Tax Map: 4 2 Block: Lot: 1 1
Parcel Identification Number [PIN]: 9836-19-5898
Number of Acres: 8 4. 19 Deed Book: 2 2 0 Page: 19 5 `-
Does this land have a plan on file with the Soil Conservation Service or U.S. Forest Service?
Yes: X No: If "no ", please complete back of form.
Is this land listed for farm present use -value taxation with the Orange County Tax Office?
Yes: x Na: If "no ", please complete back of form.
OWNER[S] CERTIFICATION:
I_ [We]; the applicant[s],= hereby certify that, to the best of my [our] ability, the foregoing
application is complete and accurate. -
Signature: Date�L�(- ? _- / Tf
� y
Signature: /. a. Date:
Please direct inquiries to:
Orange Soil &Water Conservation District
Cooperative Extension Service
Orange County Planning & Inspections Department
Hilpbp w* 732.8181Kbrpel Hsi 967- MleDmrhsm 688.7031OMehom 227.2x11
4
s • ,.COuI1
Y _ - g _
--....
- - -- _ gricliltutal Districts Adwisoiy Board -.�
w.�... _..
-7 9 :Ski: yY' _ "+;" �; _N _ _ �w-'•y +'x'`.' =,;� 1 40 - - - _ - e -r - ?
W � N FOR CERTCA TION A3QU ALFYIN G FAiRN ti II, = 'A'aN"' D- "
-
'AND DESIGNATION
Y_
As AN
COUNTY•= RECEIV. _
_ - 1994
j r.....
VOLUNTARY AGRICUi.TURAI, DLSTRICT . �•.. APR 0 9
INMUC nONS: Before completing the ucation, please review the provisions of the Orange County Voluntary Farntland
Preservation Program Ordinance, then fill out the form as accurately and completely as possible. Be sure to
- , - -_.. sign and date the form, and return it to the- ong County Planning l� tions D
epartment, 306F Revere
-' Reed, Hillsborough. N.C.
-'
APPLICANT:
Name:' Victor Carl Walters,• Jr. ' &'Elizabeth T. Walters
Address: 7 1 19 High Rock Rd.
City: E f l a n d State: NC ZIP Code: 27243
Phone Number: (Home) 563-3842 (Work)
PROPERTY INFORMATION:
Property. Location/Address: 0 f f SR 1 3 4 6
Township: Tax Map 1 Block: Lot: 7
Parcel Identification Number [PIN]: 9826-87-3901
Number. of Acres -; 8 8 -.:,. =:
- _.... 9 8 4 2 Deed Book•.• 4 51 :. Page: _ 5 01 _ - -
Does this land have a plan on file with the Soil Conservation Service or U.S. Forest Service?
Yes: x No: If "no ", please complete back of form.
Is this land listed for farm present use -value taxation with the Orange County Tax Office?
Yes: x No: It "no ", please complete back of form.
OWNER[S] CERTIFICATION:
I: [We], the applicant[s],- hereby certify that, to the best of my [our] ability, the foregoing
_ application is complete and accurate.
:. Signature: - - Datd � L - / S 1 Z.
—r -
J ]� ' n
Signature• G(/akG�[.c.Y _Date:
Please direct inquiries to: _
iOrange Soil & Water Conservation District
- Cooperative Emmion Service
Orange County Planning & Inspections Department
Hilbb*mu& 732- 8181•CWpd Hil1967-9751•Dmhm 66t- 7031•AI , '727 -2031
=IE0
Z7
ffLAPFLICATION FOR. CERTMCATION AS QUALIFYING
7.1
DESIGNATION AS AN. ORANGE C0UNty.._,_L,,_
VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT T
J ----------
-
INn`RUC`n0NS:' Before compkdn the appEcation, piesse review •the providona of the
Onl�p County Voluntary FannhuW
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
am fin out the form as accurately wO oornplcteV to..
*=Prtservadon Program Ordinance.9 48 powdble. Be sure
agn and date the forni, return R to the Orange County
rannins ct Inspections Departnumt, 306F Revere
Road ,Hffisbogh, N.C.,
Name: LVLct_or_CarJ__Wa1Lggs. jr & Elizabpth T,; Wgltprx
I_-
Address: 7 119 Hikh Rock Rd.
: E and City - State:. NC ZIP Code: 27243
Phone Number: (Rome) 563-3842 (Work)
PROPERTY INFORMATION:
Property Location/Address: of Hish Rock Rd.
Township: 2 Tax Map: 4 2 Block: Lot: jjA
Parcel Identification Number [PIN]: 9836-09-3000
Acres: 220 Page: 19 5
Number of 335 Deed Book
Does this land have a plan on file with the Soil Conservation Service or U.S. Forest Service?
Yes: X No:
is
I ihi laik liit�d for farm present:usvvalue taxation. with the Orange County, Tax Office?
des: X.
I-— .
OWNER[S] ... ....
CERTIFICATION:,,—
hei6y,_cerdf`yth' th
rw6j,., at; to. e est of my [our] ability the foregoing,
-7 e,- appl 9
application is complete and accurate. 77,",..l
Signature:
de4 Date- r4
. . ...... .. ate:
,Signature D
,.:'
Please direct inquiries to:
CIvarigo Soil Water Conscavation District
Caopciative Extanxion service
Orange County Phnriing & Inspections Deputrnent,_
Hill. annish 732-9181*C*el HM 967-MIODw @m 688 -7031*Mchm 227-2113I
_'
40 .
43
o • " mil _. _. � X
c jj . \
,0..
O
i
-•� na
I -
uC[a3 °• I L ip.r a.�r -- } �ni�a, � j• - -,
._�' _ � j . � � : ICI ' •;,�
w riw.c• � z,x iI .tM I
b
C*�:.,j
El
:vim. - •.�,-;�h .°. �� G ~b.,� �,:,� , -
^M:` I I I .. .... 'I�� � �° t) • , sue' K -
J
` iD '• P ,K a r Z .e I to �. (� :,,.e °. i9• ;
111 liq - III �_ - • � �' S' .., , 1 .' �—' ')" •
I
C 0 1
- -- -- -- '�_� � _,. • ° °, � are«,. =f. =j�;_;;w��nr:
\I `` I `•1�.ri1 � :� �� r,cnin`ii: Knztn 33:l�m,•._i,..,��
SLOT REFER =-,:Ea
nfic t'
..... i•, - ,.. __— I.- - _ - - - __ - 'J�.;};.•' ::�.. -:.:� ORANG�COUN7Y�NC.'rq`�p�.�w�
-.'n a_nv::yt�h�ti..,p. - - - i.:.'?: --'.; ;•=�1y --_3z_ ..7i�`.T.F -'.`�V -
_ Is.a_e_„ x�ifulxr_' y __.. ,.. - � I � ^,�•� —_ — ��` - _ - � •.�.5- aL'a•�..«r
8
ORANGE COUNTY TAX SUPERVISOR'S OFFICE
208 SOUTH CAMERON STREET
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278
MER \!IT LLOYD
Tax S„pPriuwr
MEMORANDUM
TO: Marvin Collins, Planning Director
FROM: Kermit Lloyd, Assessor��
SUBJECT: Voluntary Agricultural District Application
for Victor and Elizabeth T. Walters
DATE: April 30, 1992
This is to verify that Victor Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth
T. Walters are actively participating in the Present Use
Value Program.
C�
�P.wN&ZN United States
Department of
Agriculture
I
Soil
Conservation P.O. Box 8181
Service Hillsborough, INC 27278
732 -8181, Ext. 2751
May 1, 1992
TO: Marvin Collins, Planning Director
-- FROM: Gregory A. Walker, District Conservationist
SUBJECT: V. Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters Application
for Certification as Qualifying Farmland
Attached is certification for Carl and Elizabeth Walters as qualifying
farmland for the Voluntary Agricultural Districts Program.
40 Attachment
^ The Soil Conservation Service
is an agency of the
Department of Agriculture
9
10
�A '�: �� United States Soil
Department of Conservation
;,�> Agriculture Service
This report serves to document how the proposed farm
qualifies for acceptance into the Voluntary Agricultural
Districts in Orange County.
1. Two— thirds of the soils on the farm must:
a. Be suited for providing food, seed, fiber, forage,
timber and oil seed crops.
yes - -- — ' - - -1 o no %
Comments:
b. Have good soil qualities.
yes
no
Breakdown of soil classes in percent:
Class I Classes I, IL, III are
Class II 2��_ primarily used for cropland.
Cl ass I I I
Class IV _� Classes III —VI are generally
Class V ___ —__ best suited for pasture or
Class VI woodland.
Class VI_II
Cl ass 7_V -III generally unsuited
for agricultural use.
Comments: �� r /5� - 5.3
Gln fv4 . ! % Ct ire. w
c. Be favorable for all major crops common to Orange
County. Major crops are corn, tobacco, small grain,
pasture, loblolly pines.
favorable % unfavorable 40
^ The Soil Conservation Service
is an agency of the
Department of Agriculture
i.
. Page 2
d..Have favorable growing season. (YES)
.The - growing season for Oran_ge_CountY_is approximately
200 days. It begins in approximately the second week
-of April and runs until about the last week in
October. This response will be consistent for all
_farms in Orange County.
e. Receive the available moisture needed to produce high
yields for an average of 8 to 10 years. .
Orange County receives approximately 42 — 45 inches
rainfall annually. This response will be consistent
for all farms in Orange County.
� o>
At least two— thirds of the land has been actively used in
agriculture, horticultural or forestry operations as defined
in the NC General Statutes, Section 105 -277.2 (1,2, and 3)
during each of the five previous years, measured from the
date on which the determination must be made as to whether
the land in-question qualifies.
Acres in cropland
Acres in forestland
Acres in homestead,
farmstead or other
re I ated use
Total TRACT Acres
Greater than two — thirds in designated uses.
Yes �/ % fO0 _
No
Comments: pas40-1 -Q ocrea -�� iNCAV -#W i"l cryta'd t,SKr.es.
0 1 'f'
12
Pag.e 3
2. Farm must be managed, if highly erodible land exists on
the farm, in accordance with the USDA, Soil Conservation
Service (SCS) defined erosion — control practices as specified
in the 1985 Food Security Act.
Plan o n f i -I e in SCS Office YES NO
If No, plan will be required before acceptance into the
Voluntary Agricultural Districts Program.
Comments;
W
N
[-- - 7
_...f...._. .... ...... Mil: �'.::'.•�M..a _ _ ..
ro�
_
Con _
. Orange nty:.
Agricultural Districts Advisory Board
_ —_
�"g
•r w r
...F .
=mss-
- -:,... �._�.;��_ ���fi+ ,?�.�.rR• �,4 -- ...-� STAFF CIEIECKLIST
_ .
. _ .. -. VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT SELECTION = -
Date Application Received: A r l• 1 9 i g g 2
APPLICANT NAME: Jhcfor- Carl tJcl.(i^G�s�'r /P-:lLZCXb= -h T. \Alal�MrS _
PROPERTY INFORMATION:
—IILa H, k
•Property Locetion/Add s:
•Township CG C 2 Cu k (3 Tar
•Parcel Identification Number [PIN]:
• Number of Acres: -7-84.,50
Roa L R and
CERTIFICATION CRITERIA REVIEW:
t= 'Clae,cl MrC- S7,4-3
1I a r,
01 8'�SQO o -
Deed Book: _ 2 90 / 145 - Page:
4.51/60 I
•Meets acreage requirements of:
[1] One farm containing at least 155 contiguous acres; OR
Yes: No: Initials• Date:
[2] Two or more contiguous farms containing at least 155 acres.
Yes: YZ No-. Initials: iYl PG Date: 4 2.1 9 2
•Participating in farm present use-value taxation program.
Yes: 1/ _ No: Initials: PC Date: Pbe, L4 �
*Certified by Soil Conservation Service as to lard suitabili
Yes: 1/ No: Initials: V6 e, C, Date: 5/ 1 P ?a
eMaraged in rdwwe with SCS defined erosion control practices.
Yea: V No- Initials• I(V1�Ci Date: 5/t
CERTIFICATION/DESIGNATION ACTION:
Date
*Application reviewed for completeness.
*Application forwarded to
- Tax Supervisor's Office.
- soil Conservation Service.
• Evaluation received from .
- - Tax Supervisor's Off=.
- soil Conservation Service.
*Application presented to Agricultural Advisory Board.
[1] Qualifying farmlsrd certification approved. Yes: 4 No:
Reason:
[2] Recommendation for district designation approved. Yea:_) _No;_
Reason:
*Application presented to Board of Commissioners.
[1] Agricultural district designation approved. Yes: No:
Reason:
[2] Conservation agreement form/content approved. Yea: No:
Reason:
•Conservation agreement signed/recorded.
'I'Agrieultural district identified in Land Records System.
*Agricultural district identified on Tax Map.
•Agricultural district sign(s) posted.
41-1111-2-
4111 /9 z
4J - x-
/ 3o /q 2 ,
564
JA
ORANGE COUNTY VOLUNTARY FARMLAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM ORDINANCE
Section V -- APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF QUALIFYING
FARMLAND' AND VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS -
A. PURPOSE
The purpose of voluntary agricultural districts is to increase
identity and pride in the agricultural community and its way of
life, and to increase protection from nuisance suits and other
negative impacts on properly- managed farms.
B. REQUIREMENTS FOR INCLUSION IN A VOLUNTARY AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT
1. An agricultural district shall initially consist of:
a. At least 155 contiguous acres of certified qualifying
farmland; or
b. At least two or more certified qualifying farms,
contiguous to each other, which will create a district of
not less than 155 acres.
2. The owners of the qualifying farmland must execute an
agreement with Orange County to sustain agriculture in the
District.
3. Qualifying farmland may be added to existing districts upon
execution by the owner of an agreement to sustain agriculture.
4. In the event that one or more participants in the District
withdraw and the acreage in the District becomes less
than the minimum acreage required or results in the remaining
land being non - contiguous, a voluntary agricultural district
will continue to exist so long as there is one qualifying
farm.
C. CERTIFICATION AS QUALIFYING.: FARMLAND
1. To secure certification as qualifying farmland, a farm must:
a. Be participating in the farm present use -value taxation
program established by the N.C. General Statutes,
Sections 105 -277.2 through 105 - 277.7, or is otherwise
determined by the County to meet all the qualifications
of this program set forth in the N.C. General Statutes,
Sections 105 - 277.3.
b. Be certified by the Soil Conservation Service of the
United States Department of Agriculture as being a farm
on which at least two - thirds of the land is composed of
soils that: 0
(1) Are best suited for providing food, seed, fiber,
15
forage, timber, and oil seed crops;
(2) Have good soil qualities;
(3) Are favorable for all major crops common to
Orange County;
(4) Have a favorable growing season; and
(5) Receive the available moisture needed to produce
high yields for an average of eight (8) out of ten
(10) years;
OR be one on which at least two - thirds of the land has
been actively used in agricultural, horticultural or
forestry operations as defined in the N.C. General
Statutes, Section 105 -277.2 (1,2, and 3), during each of
the five (5) previous years, measured from the date on
which the determination must be made as to whether the
land in question qualifies.
C. Be managed, if highly erodible land exists on the farm,
in accordance with the Soil Conservation Service defined
erosion - control practices as specified in the 1985 Food
Security Act.
d. Be the subject of a conservation agreement, as provided
in Article 4 of Chapter 121 of the N.C. General Statutes,
between the Orange County and the owner of such land that
prohibits non -farm use or development of such land for a
period of at least ten (10) years, except for the
creation of not more than three (3) lots that meet
applicable Orange County zoning and subdivision
regulations.
D. APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION PROCEDURES
A farmland owner may apply for either certification as qualifying
farmland or for qualifying farmland certification and designation
as a voluntary agricultural district:- -For a farmland owner to
receive the benefits provided by this ordinance, the farm must be
certified as qualifying farmland by the Agricultural Districts
Advisory Board and designated as a voluntary agricultural district
by the Board of County Commissioners.
1. Applications for qualifying farmland certification and for
voluntary agricultural district designation shall be made to
the Orange County Planning Department on forms provided by
that department.
2. The Planning Department shall review each application for
completeness. When complete, the application shall be
forwarded to:
16
a. The orange County Tax Supervisor's Office; and
b. The local office of the Soil Conservation Service of thie
United.States Department of Agriculture.
Within 30 days of receiving'an application, the above offices
shall evaluate the application for compliance with the
requirements of Section V.D.2. above and return their findings
to the Planning Department. The Planning Department shall
present the application for consideration at the first meeting
of the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board, following
receipt of the findings of the above offices.
3. Within 60 days of receipt of the findings of the Orange County
Tax Supervisor and Soil Conservation offices, the Board will
render a decision regarding the application of qualifying
farmland status, and, if applicable, prepare a recommendation
to the Board of County Commissioners regarding the
establishment of a voluntary agricultural district. The
Chair will notify the applicant by mail of the Board's
decision as to whether the real property for which
certification is sought satisfies the criteria established in
Section V and has been certified as qualifying farmland. If
application was also sought for designation as a voluntary
agricultural district, the Chair will notify the applicant
of the Board's recommendation concerning such designation.
4. Upon receipt of the recommendation of the Board, the Board oe
County Commissioners may consider an application for
establishment of a voluntary agricultural district. In
deciding whether to establish a district, the Board of
County Commissioners shall consider the findings of the orange
County Tax Supervisor and Soil Conservation offices as well as
the recommendation of the Board.
5. Upon approval by the Board of County Commissioners, the
establishment of a voluntary agricultural district shall
become effective -upon recordation of a conservation agreement,
prepared in accordance with Section V.C.(1)(d), executed by
the landowner and the County, and recorded in the orange
County Register of Deeds as provided in the N.C. General
.Statutes, Section 121 -41.
6. Upon recordation of a conservation easement, the Planning
Department will notify the Orange County Tax Supervisor of the
voluntary agricultural district established. The location of
said district will be marked on the orange County tax
maps.
E. The County may take such action as it deems appropriate through the
Agricultural Districts Advisory Board or other body or individual
to encourage the formation of voluntary agricultural districts and
to further their purposes and objectives, including, at a minimum
a public information program to reasonably inform landowners of th
farmland preservation program.
U]
17
Hunter stated that she felt the median is more realistic
than the average farm size.
Stewart suggested that this issue be reviewed .again at
the June meeting. Collins responded that he could
prepare a monthly status report.
More discussion indicated the Board was in agreement
that applications be reviewed and monthly status reports
be prepared before consideration is given to amending
the acreage requirement.
b. Rural Character Strategies
Delayed until the June 3 meeting.
ITEM #4: ITEMS FOR DECISION
a. Qualifying Farmland Designation - Walters Farm
(Walters left the meeting during this presentation,
discussion, and vote since it was a personal conflict
of interest - Strayhorn chaired the meeting for this
item.)
Presentation by Marvin Collins.
This item is to consider the applications of Victor
Carl Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters for
certification of their farm as qualifying farmland and
designation as a voluntary agricultural district.
Section IV.D.2. of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation
Program Ordinance permits the Agricultural Districts
Advisory Board to review and approve applications for
qualifying farmland and make recommendations concerning
the establishment and modification of agricultural
districts.
Section -V of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program
Ordinance contains the requirements for inclusion in a
voluntary agricultural district. To be certified as
qualifying farmland, a farm must:
1. Be participating in the farm present use -value
taxation program established by the N.C. General
Statutes, Sections 105 -277.2 through 105- 277.7,
or is otherwise determined by the County to meet
all the qualifications of this program set forth
in the N.C. General Statutes, Sections 105 - 277.3.
2. Be certified by the Soil Conservation Service
of the United States Department of Agriculture
as being a farm on which at least two - thirds of
MOTION:
the land is composed of soils that:
a. Are best suited for providing food, seed,
fiber, forage, timber, and oil see crops;
b. Have good soil qualities;
c. Are favorable for all major crops common
to Orange County;
d. Have a favorable growing season; and
e. Receive the available moisture needed to
produce high yields for an average of
eight (8) out of ten (10) years;
OR be one on which at least two - thirds of the
land has been actively used in agricultural,
horticultural or forestry operations as defined
in the N.C. General Statutes, Section 105 -277.2
(11 2, and 3), during each of the five (5)
previous years, measured from the date on which
the determination must be made as to whether
the land in question qualifies.
3. Be managed, if highly erodible land exists on
farm, in accordance with the Soil Conservation
Service defined erosion - control practices as
specified in the 1985 Food Security Act.
The Orange Soil. & Water Conservation District Office
and the Tax Supervisor have provided memorandum which
indicate that the Walters farm complies with all the
listed requirements. In addition, the Walters farm is
comprised of three separate tracts, totaling 284.50
acres. Thus, the acreage requirement of Section V.B.l.b
is satisfied, since the farm consists of two or more
contiguous tracts containing at least 155 acres.
The Planning Director recommends that the farm of Victor
Carl. Walters, Jr. and Elizabeth T. Walters be certified
as qualifying farmland and recommended for designation
as a.voluntary agrictil,tural..district to the Board of
Commissioners.
Strayhorn reminded the Board that the Walters family had
been working on farmland preservation for many years and
stated that he felt it was very appropriate that their
farm be the first to be recommended for designation of
an agricultural district. The other members agreed.
Hogan moved approval of the Planning Director's
recommendation. Seconded by Stewart. VOTE: Unanimous.
b. Rules of Procedure
Presentation by Marvin Collins.
•
hl
NORTH CAROLINA
ORANGE COUNTY
CONTRACT AND AGREEMENT
THIS CONTRACT AND AGREEMENT, made and entered into this the
day of -y"L5. 1992, by and between the COUNTY of
ORANGE, hereinafter referred to as- County and the North Chatham
Volunteer Fire Department, Inc., hereinafter referred to as Fire
Department;
W I T N E S S E T H:
THAT WHEREAS, North Carolina General Statutes 69 -25.5
provides that counties may Provide for fire protection in a fire
district by contracting with an incorporated nonprofit volunteer or
community fire department; and
WHEREAS, Damascus and Southern Triangle Fire Districts are
special tax districts created pursuant to Chapter 69 of the North
Carolina General Statutes; and
WHEREAS, Fire Department is a nonprofit corporation
organized for fire protection purposes; and
WHEREAS, County has elected to provide fire protection and
fire prevention services and optional first responder services
authorized by North Carolina General Statutes 69 -25.7 (hereinafter
"services "), within the boundaries of the Damascus and Southern
Triangle Fire Districts, by contracting with Fire Department to
provide services; and
WHEREAS, Fire Department has the ability to provide and is
willing to be the contract provider of services within the
boundaries of Damascus and Southern Triangle Fire Districts; and
A
... w
f
2
WHEREAS, County levies and collects the taxes and is
responsible for appropriating said funds for the use of the
citizens in the Damascus and Southern Triangle Fire Districts; and
WHEREAS, County desires to establish a renewable contract to
enable Fire Department to make long- -range plans;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants
and premises herein contained, the parties hereto contract and
agree as follows:
1. Each fiscal year, the County will cause to be levied a
special tax not exceeding 15 cents ($0.15) per one hundred dollar
valuation of all real and personal property subject to taxation in
the Damascus and Southern Triangle Fire Districts unless otherwise
limited by law and /or a vote of the people; and will collect said
tax as a part of the ad valorem tax collections of the County.
The amount levied annually shall be based on a tax rate approved
by the Board of County Commissioners following review of the needs
Projected in the budget estimate submitted to the County by the
Board of Directors of the Fire Department and shall be sufficient
to provide an appropria::ion to Fire Department of Fifty Thousand
and N01100 Dollars ($50,000.00) less the amount equal to all
Payments received by Fire Department from any municipality
pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. 160A- -31.1, 160A -37.2 and 160A -49.2
(proportionate share of debt service) and N.C. Gen. Stat. 160A-
37.1 and 160A -49.1 (contract between municipality and rural fire
department for fire protection service).
M
2. That a special revenue fund shall be maintained for each
fire district by the County for funds collected as a result of
said special tax in which fund appropriations will be based on the
budget estimates approved by the County Commissioners.
Unappropriated amounts remaining in the revenue fund shall be
carried over to the next fiscal year for fire department use.
3. That all appropriations established by the County
Commissioners will be remitted to the Fire Department in quarterly
payments by the 15th day of the first month of each quarter for
the first three quarters beginning in July and ending on March 31,
and the final quarterly payment will be made based on the County
Finance Directors estimate of overall tax collections through the
fiscal year end not to exceed the appropriation amount. All late
listing penalties and interest on delinquent taxes associated with
collections will be retained by the County as cost of collections.
4. The Fire Department shall provide the necessary
equipment,' personnel, and other resources as determined by the
North Carolina Department of Insurance, Fire and Rescue Service
Division, and the insurance Service Office for all property
located within the Damascus and Southern Triangle Fire Districts,
will strive to achieve and maintain at least a 9S insurance
rating, and will furnish services free of charge to all persons
and individuals within the Districts.
A
5. That all funds paid to the Fire Department by the County
shall be used exclusively by the Fire Department to provide
services within said Districts, and to pay other legitimate
expenses. The Fire Department may provide a first responder
program, if it is provided under the guidelines provided by Orange
County Emergency Management and under the direction of the
Emergency Medical Services Medical Director to provide basic
emergency medical care to citizens- within the fire districts.
6. The Fire Department shall operate in compliance with all
applicable state and local laws and regulations including the
Local Emergency Planning Committee Hazardous Materials Training
requirements and North Carolina Fire Incident Reporting System,
for which reports shall be submitted to the Fire Marshal's Office
on a monthly basis. The Fire Department further agrees to
annually file with the Fire Marshal's office a current list of its
Board of Directors and a roster of its members with addresses,
telephone numbers, social security numbers; an annual training
report; and a list of fire apparatus including pump and tank size,
and specialized fire suppression equipment, no later than July 31.
7. The County may inspect all books and accounts of the Fire
Department at any time, upon reasonable notice. The Fire
Department will present to the County within 90 days of the close
of each County fiscal year (July 1 -June 30), an accounting of how
Public funds have been expended on the forms provided by Orange
County Finance Department.
8. The Fire Department will comply with County budgeting
procedures and other procedures provided for by State Law and
agrees to submit annual budget estimates and a supporting letter
of request for a proposed tax rate signed by the Board President
upon approval by the Board of Directors of the Fire Department.
The Emergency Management Office will provide the standard forms
used by county departments for presentation to the Board of
Commissioners, in accordance with established County budget
timetables. The Fire Department will use standard line items for
accounting devised or consented to by the County Finance Office.
9. The Fire Department will file with the County Fire
Marshal a true copy of the Articles of Incorporation, existing
Bylaws, Standard Operating Procedures, and any changes made
thereto from time to time. Further, the Fare Department agrees to
amend and adopt its charter and bylaws as necessary to meet all
minimum legal requirements for a North Carolina nonprofit
corporation, as allowed in G.S. 55A -1 through 55A -43, with or
without voting members which charter and bylaws have provisions
enabling citizens of the community to have input in the affairs of
the corporation at least at an annual meeting as described by
G.S. 55A -30 and vesting in the Board of Directors the authority to
manage the affairs of the corporation.
10. This contract shall renew automatically each fiscal year
on the 1st day of July, and shall continue in effect until
terminated by either party hereto, upon three hundred sixty five
6
days (365) written notice to the other party. Any contracts
between the County and the Fire Department now in effect, with
respect to the subject matter contained herein, are superseded
upon the effective date of this contract.
11. This contract was written with the laws of the State of
North Carolina in mind. It shall be construed consistent with and
interpreted pursuant to the laws of the State of North Carolina.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the County has caused this instrument
to be executed by the chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners and attested by the Clerk to the Board of County
Commissioners, and the Fire Department has caused this instrument
to be signed in its name by its President, attested by its
Secretary, and its corporate seal hereto affixed, all by order of
its Board of Directors duly given.
ATTEST:
C erk)
ATTEST:
� "
(sec etary)
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
BY:
(Chair)
(Fire Department)
BY:
(Pr sident, Board of Directors)