HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-01-2018 8-a - Minutes1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 1, 2018
Action Agenda
Item No. 8-a
SUBJECT: MINUTES
DEPARTMENT: Board of County
Commissioners
ATTACHMENT(S):
Draft Minutes (Under Separate Cover)
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board
(919) 245-2130
PURPOSE: To correct and/or approve the minutes as submitted by the Clerk to the Board as
listed below.
BACKGROUND: In accordance with 153A-42 of the General Statutes, the Governing Board
has the legal duty to approve all minutes that are entered into the official journal of the Board’s
proceedings.
April 10, 2018 BOCC CIP Work Session
April 17, 2018 BOCC Regular Meeting
FINANCIAL IMPACT: NONE
SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT: NONE
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board approve minutes as
presented or as amended.
1
Attachment 1 1
2
DRAFT MINUTES 3
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 4
BUDGET WORK SESSION 5
April 10, 2018 6
7:00 p.m. 7
8
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a work session on Tuesday, April 10, 9
2017 at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, N.C. 10
11
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Dorosin and Commissioners Mia Burroughs, 12
Mark Dorosin, Barry Jacobs, Earl McKee, Mark Marcoplos, Renee Price and Penny Rich 13
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None 14
COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: None 15
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Deputy County Manager 16
Travis Myren and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other staff members will be identified 17
appropriately below) 18
19
Chair Dorosin called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. 20
21
Chair Dorosin said the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce Board is 22
requesting a representative of Orange County to serve as an ex-officio, non-voting member of 23
their Board of Directors. The Board of Directors generally meets on the 3rd Thursday of each 24
month from 8:30-10:00am. He said the letter is at the Commissioners’ places. 25
26
A motion as made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to 27
nominate Commissioner McKee to serve on the Chapel Hill - Carrboro Chamber of Commerce. 28
29
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 30
31
1. Discussion of Manager’s Recommended FY 2018-23 Capital Investment Plan 32
(CIP) 33
34
BACKGROUND: 35
Each year, the County produces a Capital Investment Plan (CIP) that establishes a budget-36
planning guide related to capital needs for the County as well as Schools. The current CIP 37
consists of a 5-year plan that is evaluated annually to include year-to-year changes in 38
priorities, needs, and available resources. Approval of the CIP commits the County to the first 39
year funding only of the capital projects; all other years are used as a planning tool and serves 40
as a financial plan. 41
42
Capital Investment Plan – Overview 43
The FY 2018-23 CIP includes County Projects, School Projects, and Proprietary Projects. The 44
School Projects include Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools, Orange County Schools, and 45
Durham Technical Community College – Orange County Campus projects. The Proprietary 46
Projects include Water and Sewer, Solid Waste Enterprise Fund, and Sportsplex projects. 47
48
2
The CIP has been prepared anticipating moderate economic growth of approximately 2% in 1
property tax growth and 4% in sales tax growth annually over the next five years. Many of the 2
projects in the CIP will rely on debt financing to fund the projects. 3
4
Tonight’s discussion will focus mainly on County and Proprietary CIP projects. The Durham 5
Technical Community College – Orange County Campus County Health Technology Building 6
project, with planning funds beginning in FY 2021-22, will also be discussed. Discussion of the 7
Schools CIP projects is scheduled for the April 24, 2018 Joint County/School Boards Meeting. 8
CIP document page #’s are provided after each project, with funding recommended for FY 9
2018-19 within the following categories (consistent with the Manager’s CIP presentation on 10
April 3, 2018): 11
12
Travis Myren made the following presentation: 13
14
ORANGE COUNTY 15
CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN 16
FY2018-23 17
Board of Orange County Commissioners 18
Work Session 19
April 10, 2018 20
21
FY2018-20 Recommended CIP 22
23
• CIP Themes and Cost Drivers 24
o School Bond Projects 25
Chapel Hill High School Cost Escalation 26
Borrowing and Cash Flow Schedule 27
Potential FY2017-18 Capital Budget Amendment 28
o Affordable Housing Bond 29
Last Bond Draw of $2.5 Million 30
o Public Safety 31
Detention Center & Northern Campus Development 32
o Debt Service Structuring 33
Subject to Approval by the Local Government Commission 34
Debt Service to General Fund Revenue Policy 35
Potential Tax Impacts 36
37
• Questions from April 3rd Presentation 38
o Project Description, Cost Explanation 39
April 24th – Joint Meeting with Schools 40
o Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS) Bond Allocation ($72.1 million) 41
$5 million issued in Fall of 2017 42
$64.4 million remaining for Chapel Hill High School (FY2017-18) 43
$2.7 million remaining for issuance at later date (FY2021-22) 44
45
Chair Dorosin clarified that the schools received $5 million, and will receive $64.4 46
million more, totaling $69.4 million. 47
Travis Myren said some of the $5 million was used for design money for the Lincoln 48
Center project, to get them up to a bid. He said that part of the project did not move forward. 49
3
Commissioner Rich asked if there has been discussion with the schools about 1
reallocating some of the $2.7 million to some of the other projects that were on CHCCS’s to do 2
list. 3
Travis Myren said Todd LoFrese, CHCCS Assistant Superintendent, can better address 4
this at the joint meeting of the BOCC and the School Boards on April 24th, but a lot of that 5
decision will be driven by whether it is indeed $2.7 million, or if it is actually more/less. 6
Travis Myren resumed the presentation: 7
8
FY2018-23 Recommended CIP Education Capital Projects (bar chart) 9
10
Project Schedule – Critical Path Approvals (chart) 11
12
Commissioner Price asked if any problems are expected in securing the Special Use 13
Permit (SUP). 14
Chair Dorosin said he sent out notes to the BOCC from the joint school staff meeting, 15
but the Towns are not involved in these meetings. He said there were some concerns 16
expressed from the public about the stream crossings, and staff has offered up mitigation 17
solutions. He said if the permit does not get approved by April 23rd then the project (CHCCS 18
High) will be significantly delayed. 19
Commissioner McKee asked if the stream crossings are on the feeder streams of Bolin 20
Creek, or another area. 21
Jeff Thompson, Asset Management Services Director, said it is the feeder streams and 22
some wetland impact areas areas, which were resolved recently. He said there is still some 23
question about how the feeder stream will be crossed, and the engineering of that, but this has 24
been somewhat solved with the group. 25
Commissioner McKee said there is some continuing work to be done to solve some of 26
these issues, and hopefully it should be resolved by this summer. 27
Jeff Thompson said there were some concerns about traffic queuing, and this is being 28
work ed through. 29
Travis Myren resumed the presentation: 30
31
Long Term Debt Service Model (bar chart) 32
33
Chair Dorosin asked if there is a reason that the existing revenues are flat (red line on 34
chart). 35
Travis Myren said these are the existing revenues that are required to support the 36
existing debt. He said as time goes on, this is independent of the tax rate. He said the green 37
line includes that natural growth of the tax base, which will occur. 38
Commissioner Burroughs referred to the two-year span, where the blue line goes over 39
green line, and what would happen if there was no natural growth. 40
Travis Myren said in 2021, more than is needed will be collected to meet the blue line, 41
and those funds will be saved, put in the bank and applied to where the blue line exceeds the 42
green line. He said this will take excess generated at 2.54, and apply it at 0.02, so that the 43
increase at that time will not have to be as high as it otherwise would be. 44
Travis Myren resumed the presentation: 45
46
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan - chart 47
• Total Recommended Capital Budget Expenditures 48
• Durham Tech Orange County Campus 49
50
4
Travis Myren said the Durham Tech campus expansion will come into play in years 4 1
and 5, and borrow about $8 million; with the balance of the project occurring in years 6-10, at 2
$15.4 million. 3
Penny Gluck, Durham Tech Executive Dean of Orange County Operations, and Matt 4
Williams, Durham Tech Vice President of Finance and Administrative Services, made the 5
following PowerPoint presentation: 6
7
2017 – 18 Selected Performance Measures 8
Orange County Budget Presentation 9
10
Enrollment 11
Highest Enrolled Programs 12
Durham Tech’s programs with the highest enrollment include our Arts, Sciences, and 13
University Transfer programs; Health Technologies programs; and our Information Technology 14
programs. We also serve a large group of students who come to take one or two courses 15
(visiting students). 16
Recent High School Graduates 17
The enrollment of recent high schools graduates continues to grow. In the Fall Semester 18
2017, 9% of our total credit enrollment (499/5,417 students) were recent high school 19
graduates. Of our recent high school students - 2% of the total Fall 2017 enrollment (93/5,415 20
students) - came from Orange County 21
Dual-Enrollment Students 22
Durham Tech continues to experience enrollment increases for students who are dually-23
enrolled in high school and Durham Tech. In the Fall Semester 2017, 513 Career and College 24
Promise (CCP) students enrolled this fall. Of this group, 314 high school students are enrolled 25
in CCP courses from high schools, home schools, and cooperative/innovative high schools, 26
and 199 students are enrolled in CCP courses from Middle College High School (MCHS). 27
28
Orange County Enrollment - graph 29
Note: End of Term Unduplicated Headcount represents the number of duplicated students that 30
completed the course, not total # of students enrolled in the course. (Enrolled number of 31
curriculum students would be 20% to 25% higher) 32
33
Capital Project Request 34
• 56,000 SF Building 35
• Total cost – Approx. $24,547,911 36
• Budget – includes $1,000,000 of the 2017 Statewide NC Connect Bond Funds and 37
$23,547,911 of Orange County Capital Project funding 38
39
Needs Analysis – Hanover Research 40
• Report evaluates employer perceptions of the Orange County campus and workforce 41
skills needs within Orange County. 42
• Hanover reached out to local stakeholders and conducted in-depth interviews 43
• Report also examines data on the local workforce, large employers, and typical 44
education and skills for in-demand local jobs. 45
46
Needs Analysis – Hanover Research 47
RECOMMENDATIONS 48
• Expand the following programs in Orange County: 49
o public safety, 50
5
o information technology, 1
o and health technology. 2
These programs meet the demands of the largest employers in the county, and offer training in 3
skills that are currently needed in the workforce. 4
• Durham Tech should consider adjusting its offerings to accommodate a wider variety of 5
students. Working adults would likely benefit from night and weekend programs, while 6
high school students need career readiness training, apprenticeships, and internships. 7
• Durham Tech should consider expanding its advertising and communication in Orange 8
County, including reaching out to small businesses and high schools. Employers report 9
that there is limited awareness of Durham Tech’s offerings in Orange County. 10
• The most in-demand programs include: 11
o Credit programs in health technology, information technology and public 12
safety 13
o Non-credit programs in career readiness, industrial training, and culinary 14
arts 15
o Apprenticeships for skilled trades, internships for high school students, 16
and tailored training programs for specific employers 17
18
New Building Timeline 19
• Hanover Needs Analysis – completed Dec. 2017 20
• Conduct Focus Groups (July 2018 – December 2019) 21
o Local Schools 22
o Local Employers 23
o Key Community Stakeholders 24
• Identify Programs and Facility Requirements (January 2020 – September 2020) 25
o Health Programs 26
o Public Service Programs 27
o General Classrooms 28
o Student Service Space 29
o Middle College 30
o Multi-Purpose Space 31
• NC Community College State Board Project Approval/Architect Selection/Advanced 32
Planning – October 2020 - June 2021 33
• Design Phase – July 2021 (year 4 of the Orange County Capital Project Plan) 34
• Construction – July 2022 35
36
Commissioner McKee asked if this timeline accommodates the needs of Durham 37
Tech’s projected student population. 38
Penny Gluck said Durham Tech will give its best effort. She said it will be a challenge, 39
but Durham Tech will continue to be creative, and look to others for short-term space rental if 40
need be. 41
Matt Williams said some courses may not be offered in Orange County until the 42
expansion, but all classes are offered at the Durham campus. 43
Commissioner McKee asked if Durham Tech has considered having employers do 44
training on site, at the employers’ facility. 45
Matt Williams said yes, and this does happen sometimes. 46
Chair Dorosin asked if there is a reason that high school facilities are not used at night 47
and on weekends, or community centers, or government buildings that are not otherwise being 48
used. He said this could be a long-term solution. 49
6
Penny Gluck said alternative schedules are being researched, but it is important to 1
ensure that the necessary educational equipment is available to support the instructors. 2
Chair Dorosin said he knows challenges may exist, but co-location is being discussed 3
in other contexts, and it seems wise to consider it here as well, as the high schools and County 4
facilities already exist. He said it is important to be creative. 5
Travis Myren resumed the CIP presentation: 6
7
FY2018-19 Recommended CIP Expenditures County Projects: $28.5 million total - chart 8
9
• Conservation Easements - $500,000 County share (page 60) 10
Project Description/Justification: The Conservation Easement component of the Lands Legacy 11
program was initially funded in July 2002, and provides matching funds for State and federal 12
grants to acquire conservation easements to conserve prime or threatened farmland, sensitive 13
natural areas, or important water quality buffer lands in keeping with Board goals and Lands 14
Legacy priorities. These lands have conservation values or agricultural operations to be 15
enhanced and protected, and the land stays in private ownership and is not publicly-accessible 16
except upon landowner consent. Over 2,100 acres of prime farmland and natural areas have 17
been conserved to date, with millions of dollars in state/federal grants leveraged. It is 18
anticipated that additional matching funds of approximately 50% would again be leveraged for 19
easements, shown as Grant Funding and Landowner Donations. 20
21
FY2018-23 Recommended CIP Continuation Projects 22
• Conservation Easements - $500,000 County (p. 60) 23
o Component of Lands Legacy Program 24
Protects threatened farmland from development 25
Protects sensitive natural areas 26
Protects water quality buffer lands 27
o CIP authorizes $1 million every other year 28
o County costs offset by $500,000 in State/Federal Grants 29
o 10 active projects underway 30
o $45,000 remaining in Conservation Easement Program 31
o $500,000 included in Spring 2018 financing package 32
33
Conservation Easement Map 34
Lands Legacy Program Acquisitions 2000-2017 35
36
• Land remains in private ownership 37
• Over 2,100 acres conserved to date 38
• Over $3 million leveraged in grant funding and donations 39
40
Commissioner Price asked if Lands Legacy can be used for any of these conservation 41
easements. 42
David Stancil, Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks and Recreation (DEAPR) 43
Director, said historically there have been two pots of money. He said the monies from the 44
1997 and 2001 bonds could not be used for publically accessible lands, and conservations 45
easements typically are not, and this was the origin of the separation of the two funding 46
sources. He said because the conservation easement fund is down to $45,000, staff has been 47
able to go to the Lands Legacy fund, which has existing money, but also has a lot of upcoming 48
potential obligations. He said staff has tapped into the conservation easement monies a bit, 49
but there are some large ticket items in the works, and this would not be sustainable going 50
7
forward. He said there are approximately 32 property owners who have expressed interest in 1
doing conservation easements with the County. 2
Chair Dorosin asked if these easements affect the tax value of the land. 3
David Stancil said typically not, because these lands are usually already in the use 4
value program. He said if conservation easements were acquired on taxable land, then the 5
value of the land may be affected. 6
Travis Myren resumed the presentation: 7
8
• Continuation Projects 9
Project Description/Justification: Funding of $1,250,000 in prior years is included for 10
architectural/engineering costs. The construction, equipment/furnishings, and other 11
professional services costs are included in FY 2017-18 through FY 2019-20. This project 12
includes a preliminary construction estimate for a facility capacity to house 144 detainees. The 13
facility will be designed for expansion capability, if needed, up to approximately 250 detainees. 14
The architect will conduct a staffing and operating cost analysis for different detention facility 15
configurations as part of the Board’s review of the schematic design of the facility. The County 16
has conducted a master planning and site feasibility study on several potential sites including 17
the existing Jail site, the site adjacent to the Justice Facility in downtown Hillsborough, and 18
other sites around Hillsborough proximate to the justice facility. Results of this study were 19
presented to the Board in January, 2018, and a site off of Highway 70 near Hillsborough was 20
chosen as the location for a potential Northern County Campus that would include the 21
Detention Center, Environment and Agriculture Center, and Parks Operation Base. Should the 22
Board of Orange County Commissioners authorize the development this campus, a revised 23
combined project will be presented to the Board consisting of the three primary uses. 24
25
Northern County Campus Property (map) 26
• 21 acres 27
• Due Diligence 28
o Environmental Site Assessment 29
o Cultural & Archaeological Assessment 30
o Soils and Geotechnical Analysis 31
o Hydrology Analysis; Wetlands Delineation 32
o Schematic Land Planning 33
• Land use designations approved in March 2018 34
• Property acquisition in April 2018 - $394,050 35
36
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan 37
Continuation Projects 38
• Northern County Campus Development Plan – pages 157, 32, and 57 39
o Merge three individual projects into integrated campus development plan 40
EAC Building 41
Detention Center: $12,500,000 million (page 32) 42
Parks Operation Base 43
o Reallocation of Project Funds – No new cost to the CIP 44
o Timing Changes – EAC delayed, Parks Operations Advanced 45
46
Orange County Northern Campus Concept (drawing) 47
48
Commissioner McKee asked if staff could identify the additional costs that would be 49
incurred if only the detention center was built. He said he has an issue with prioritization, and 50
8
can support the purchase of the land, but feels that budget constraints should play a part in 1
prioritizing what is built. 2
Travis Myren asked if Commissioner McKee would want the price for doing the grading 3
work for the three facilities. 4
Commissioner McKee said he would like to price the detention center only. 5
Commissioner Burroughs seconded Commissioner McKee’s comments, and said she 6
questions if these projects need to be completed so soon. She said she would continue to 7
caution the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) to consider what can be delayed, and 8
while building in the future may be more expensive, that is true of every project being 9
considered in all areas of the County. 10
Commissioner Rich asked if the proposed detention center would the have room for 11
expansion in the future, beyond the capacity of 144 detainees. 12
Travis Myren said yes, up to 250. 13
Commissioner Rich asked if this would entail additional construction down the road, or 14
if the building will be constructed now, and used at a later date. 15
Jeff Thompson said the infrastructure would be prepared to expand to 250, include the 16
subgrade work, but there would be no actual walls. 17
Bonnie Hammersley said it will be only a 144 bed facility, but with the capability of 18
expanding to 250 beds; for example the kitchen will have the ability to serve a population of 19
250, but there will be no additional empty cells. 20
Commissioner Rich said it is being built to capacity for the services, but not having the 21
full capacity beds at this time. She said at one point there was discussion of having a place at 22
the facility where one can be brought who is not necessarily getting arrested, but may be in 23
need of mental health services. She asked if this is still part of the discussion. 24
Travis Myren said it is not in the current facility price. 25
Sheriff Blackwood said there was a trip to the WakeBrook facility in Wake County, 26
which is mental health facility that accepts people in custody as well as those who come in off 27
the street. He said Orange County had the thought of doing that with 6-8 rooms at this 28
detention site that were off by themselves and could provide wrap around services to help 29
people on the street get to a secure and safe alternative. He said this discussion came about 30
as possibly being a great opportunity to serve an underserved population that does not belong 31
in the jail or in the emergency room. 32
Chair Dorosin asked if these rooms are in this design now. 33
Sheriff Blackwood said this was just a vision, and a what if. He said the number of 34
beds is all over the place and changes frequently. He said he does not know if 250 beds will 35
be needed, but the 126 beds at the current jail are insufficient. 36
Commissioner Price said there have been other examples around the country where 37
the WakeBrook model does work, and there are chairs instead of beds in unsecure locations. 38
Commissioner Price referred to page 32 in CIP Notebook, and said the numbers are 39
different than those on the slide. She said the first sentence on page 32 says $1,250,000 were 40
spent in prior years and included in the architectural/engineering costs. She asked if these 41
funds have already been expended. 42
Jeff Thompson said some has been expended, but most has not. 43
Commissioner Price asked if the $12 million includes any more architectural funds. 44
Jeff Thompson said no. 45
Commissioner Price asked if it numbers in today’s handout could be clarified. 46
Travis Myren referred to page 32, and said those numbers were an estimate for a 47
stand-alone detention facility. He said the first row, of the table on page 13 of the PowerPoint 48
presentation, removes the site work and acquisition costs out of the $19.9 million five-year 49
total. 50
9
Commissioner Jacobs said he is confused by this conversation, because the Justice 1
Advisory Council has been talking about the supplemental services being in the building for a 2
long time. He said there were two different answers as to whether there is money in the 3
building for those services. He said he thought this was decided a long time ago. He asked if 4
it is or is not in the cost of the building. 5
Travis Myren said all of the support services are in the facility, but the Sheriff is talking 6
about building unsecured spaces in the facility, to serve clients who would never have reason 7
to be booked into the jail, or be held in a secure setting. He said the Sheriff is talking about 8
adding a section to the building for a non-secure space for people experiencing a mental 9
health issue, or someone who is extremely intoxicated, to receive a rapid turn around of 10
services/hand off to an appropriate service provider. 11
Commissioner Jacobs asked if this is opposed to receiving psychiatric or social 12
services within the jail. 13
Chair Dorosin said the social and mental health services for incarcerated inmates are 14
part of the plan in place, as supported by the plans of the Justice Advisory Council. He said 15
this idea of unsecured spaces would be more of a respite service, and it is not in the current 16
budget. 17
Commissioner Rich asked if there is a way to build the new detention center within the 18
current budgetary parameters. 19
Sheriff Blackwood said this is a question for the design team, now that the site location 20
has been secured. He said there has been no decision made about what the building will look 21
like, and thus bed numbers are not final at this time, but going under 144 beds would be a 22
horrible mistake. 23
Bonnie Hammersley said she supports the Sheriff regarding design, but there are other 24
flex spaces throughout the facility. She said as the designer looks at this, there may be an 25
opportunity to create the unsecured/respite space. She said the cost that she is 26
recommending will get a 144-bed facility. 27
Commissioner McKee said he highly endorses the idea of going with the additional 28
respite services, and would recommend shifting monies for the parks office space to fulfill this 29
need. 30
Commissioner Jacobs asked if the federal prisoners fit into the calculus. 31
Sheriff Blackwood said before the price change occurred, this was possibly going to be 32
pulled off the table; but the numbers coming up make this a topic for additional discussion. He 33
said his position is as long as it is beneficial to Orange County first, and to the Marshal service 34
second, then it is worthy. He said this can be a worthwhile partnership for the County to have, 35
and he would encourage the BOCC having a discussion about it. He said he will follow the will 36
of the Board, but he believes the County’s involvement with Federal Marshal service is a good 37
thing right now. 38
Chair Dorosin asked Bonnie Hammersley if the BOCC will have these conversations 39
about the number of beds in the facility, partnering with the Marshal Service, etc. 40
Bonnie Hammersley said these conversations should take place now. She said her 41
recommendation for the 144 beds was made with the understanding that as the need grows 42
locally, then the federal inmates would slowly go down. She said the current average daily 43
population is 126, with less than half being federal inmates. She said she thought the 144-bed 44
discussion had been held, because a designer was hired, and he has done most of the design 45
work . She said the original site was lost, but she did not think this changed the desired 46
number of beds. She said the only time she would expect expansion is when the number of 47
local inmates exceeds 144. She said she does not see this number getting that high for a long 48
time, due to the focused efforts of the Criminal Justice Resource Department and other 49
partners. 50
10
Chair Dorosin said this discussion did occur regarding this previous site, but all of these 1
questions seem to be back on the table with this new site. 2
Commissioner Jacobs said he would like to see a cost benefit analysis from the 3
Sheriff’s perspective, if they looked at half as many federal prisoners in order to accommodate 4
all the desired services. He said it would be harder go back and try to add services later on. 5
He asked if it is the desire to have the optimal facility at the beginning, or later on. He said he 6
is not pre-judging about the federal prisoners, but he would like to have the auxiliary/respite 7
services, and now is the time to do it, not later. 8
Commissioner McKee clarified that Commissioner Jacobs is saying to build to the 9
optimal need for the next 30 years. 10
Commissioner Jacobs said there have been previous discussions about pods. He 11
asked if it would be preferable to knock off one pod, which would have been for federal 12
prisoners, and take this money and space to have the auxiliary services now; or to keep the 13
same level of federal prisoners. 14
Commissioner McKee said his concern is that this facility needs to be built to meet 15
Orange County needs for 2040. He said he wholly supports restorative justice, diversion plans 16
etc., but as the County grows, so will the need for detention. He said he would suggest 17
building it for 144 beds, including all support services, and add pods as needed. He said as 18
the number of local inmates increases, the number of federal inmates will decrease. 19
Commissioner Jacobs said to build all the core services at the beginning, with a simple 20
design to add pods over time. He asked if they start with the assumption of x number of 21
federal prisoners, or do they remove some of the federal prisoners to add items that are not 22
currently included in the core services, such as the unsecured respite services. 23
Chair Dorosin said he recommends starting with the number of Orange County 24
prisoners, which is much less than 144. He said he would be in f avor of having it smaller, 25
doing all of the work on diversion, and take the federal piece out of the picture. 26
Bonnie Hammersley said will ask the designer to bring back options and economies of 27
scale. She referred to a cost analysis for federal inmates, and said the County does not 28
receive the full amount for these inmates, and the County is on a three-year fixed price 29
agreement. She said the County subsidizes the federal inmates. 30
Commissioner Marcoplos asked Sheriff Blackwood if he could give a quick overview of 31
the federal inmates. 32
Sheriff Blackwood said the federal inmates constitute a little less than half of the 33
population, and Orange County is a good location between Durham, Greensboro and Raleigh 34
to house these inmates while they are awaiting federal hearings. He said Travis Myren has 35
done a comprehensive study on the cost analysis. 36
Commissioner Marcoplos said federal inmates are basically waiting for hearings, and 37
asked if the average length of stay could be identified. 38
Sheriff Blackwood said it varies. 39
Commissioner Burroughs asked Chair Dorosin if he could further clarify his feelings 40
about the federal inmates. She said she understands he does not want the County to make 41
money from them, but asked if he is concerned about people being jailed in general. She said 42
the County has no control over who is assigned to federal prison. 43
Chair Dorosin said he feels that the County’s detention center should be for Orange 44
County detainees, and be built for the needs of the County, both from a financial perspective 45
and a criminal justice perspective. He said building a bigger jail than is necessary is 46
counterintuitive to what the County is trying to accomplish with its alternative services. He said 47
there is incentive to use diversionary programs for first time offenders, if there are constraints 48
in place regarding the size of the jail. He said this is consistent with trends across the country. 49
11
Commissioner Price said she agreed with Chair Dorosin, and the more the BOCC can 1
do to keep people out of incarceration the better. She said she would not want to 2
automatically cut back on federal inmates if the County is serving a purpose, and she asked if 3
the Sheriff knows where the inmates would go if Orange County was unwilling to house them. 4
Sheriff Blackwood said the federal government would have to figure that out, not 5
Orange County. 6
Chair Dorosin said if a larger facility is built, with empty spaces, than there will be 7
incentive to fill the spaces. 8
Sheriff Blackwood said he agreed with Bonnie Hammersley in that it is important to not 9
under build this facility. He said this may be a 100-year building, and he said he does not want 10
the County to go into this project and under build. 11
Commissioner Price asked if it would make sense to have 144 beds as the total build 12
out size, and build less to start with. 13
Sheriff Blackwood said he does not know what the future will hold. 14
Commissioner Burroughs asked if the number of inmates per pod is known. 15
Bonnie Hammersley said there are different models, and that number depends on the 16
design. 17
Jeff Thompson said the current design has an 8-bed denominator, and there are 18
different pod sizes depending on usage and holding requirements. 19
Bonnie Hammersley said this is a very small detention center. 20
Commissioner Marcoplos asked if the federal and local lawbreakers are different 21
classes of lawbreakers. 22
Sheriff Blackwood said yes. 23
Commissioner Marcoplos asked if the additional on site services would be tailored to 24
the needs of the local inmates. 25
Sheriff Blackwood said the inmates are housed separately but the need for services is 26
about the same. 27
Commissioner Marcoplos asked if the federal inmates would need some of these more 28
progressive services. 29
Sheriff Blackwood said the needs of the federal and local inmates are about the same. 30
Commissioner Marcoplos asked if the County is providing a greater service to the 31
region by housing federal inmates, rather than them going somewhere else. 32
Bonnie Hammersley said there are a lot of new facilities in this area, and one of the 33
reasons federal inmates are put in local jails is because they want more local funds to support 34
the federal system. She said it is done in economically challenged areas even more. 35
Commissioner McKee said regardless of how the BOCC proceeds regarding size, 36
support services, etc., he does not want to under build a detention center. He said no Board is 37
going to be enthusiastic about building another jail. He said he also does not want to see it be 38
over built, just to house federal prisoners. He said if the Board does decide to cut back to just 39
serving local inmates, then he would play devil’s advocate, and say a new jail is not needed at 40
all, but rather the County can refurbish the old jail. 41
Commissioner Rich said Chatham County had a progressive design for their new jail, 42
and the facilities within the jail were all built to future needs. She said she does like the idea of 43
having a separate entrance for these proposed alternative services. 44
Commissioner Rich said the Board had spoken about using the current Environmental 45
Agricultural Center land for affordable housing, and she would like to continue this discussion. 46
Bonnie Hammersley said Chatham County did overbuild its jail, and built for the future; 47
but Chatham County’s average daily cost to house an inmate is the highest, at $209/day. She 48
said the County has to build what it can afford. 49
12
Commissioner Marcoplos said he thinks the BOCC can find a number that allows the 1
County to be prepared for future needs. He said the desire to provide creative services to 2
prevent incarceration should not be based on the scarcity of beds. 3
Chair Dorosin asked if any of the federal inmates are undocumented immigrants 4
awaiting hearings, or waiting for deportation. 5
Sheriff Blackwood said yes, some are definitely undocumented, but he does not know 6
whether they are being held for deportation. He said if an inmate has committed a crime, and 7
is under bond, and an ICE detainer comes in, and the inmate makes bond, then the inmate 8
leaves. He said the detainer is a request, not an order, and the County will not hold the inmate 9
beyond the time that it can without an order. 10
Travis Myren resumed the presentation: 11
12
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan 13
Continuation Projects 14
• Northern County Campus Development Plan 15
o Community Engagement 16
• Shared Site Work 17
o Utilities & Storm Water Management 18
o Road Work and Parking 19
o Buffering, Landscaping, Lighting, Fiber 20
• Combine Park Operations Administrative Offices with EAC Building 21
• Sustainability Feature Studies 22
o Photovoltaic – Energy & Hot Water 23
o Geothermal Heating and Cooling 24
o Cool Roof Design 25
26
Chair Dorosin said Commissioner McKee had voiced his concerns about having any 27
other construction on this site. He said he respectfully does not agree with Commissioner 28
McKee, and would like to know how others feel. 29
Commissioner Burroughs said she is also opposed to the other proposed buildings. 30
Commissioner Marcoplos said the Board voted on this plan at the last meeting, and he 31
said he believed the County should move ahead with the County campus project as 32
envisioned. He said the Revere Road property is also a good opportunity for affordable 33
housing. 34
Commissioner Rich said she would like to move forward with the project, and to use the 35
Revere Road site for affordable housing. 36
Commissioner Jacobs said he is inclined to the plan that currently exists. He said he 37
has a slightly different opinion about the affordable housing option, and would like to see if it 38
would be more profitable to sell the Revere Road property, and use the sale proceeds to build 39
affordable housing elsewhere. He said Hillsborough’s planning department may not be easy to 40
work with, and there may be greater need for affordable housing in other areas of the County. 41
Commissioner Price said she supports moving forward with the proposed County 42
campus project. She said she does not want to jump to any conclusions regarding affordable 43
housing on the Revere Road site, and would like to explore all options for this property. She 44
said having the Ag Center and Parks Operations on the same site will provide a buffer 45
between the detention center and the neighboring properties. 46
Bonnie Hammersley said this is the recommended budget, and if the BOCC wants to 47
make any changes, please contact her office. 48
Chair Dorosin asked if the Commissioners would copy the entire Board on any 49
comments/suggestions that are sent to the Manager. 50
13
Travis Myren resumed the presentation: 1
2
• Orange County Southern Branch Library - $5,625,000 (page 39) 3
Project Description/Justification: Planned funding of $5,625,000 in FY 2018- 19 is for design 4
and construction costs for new Southern Branch location, which will replace the Cybrary and 5
McDougle facilities. The BOCC approved an agreement with the Town of Carrboro to 6
collaborate on a building project, which the library would be a tenant with various Town 7
functions. Based on this colocation, space needs will be re-evaluated to take advantage of 8
potential space efficiencies. Updated capital and operating cost estimates will be based on the 9
actual schematic and market based costs forecasts in collaboration with design, operations, 10
engineering, and construction cost estimating firms. 11
12
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan 13
Continuation Projects 14
• Orange County Southern Branch Library - $5.6 million (p. 39) 15
o Carrboro Partnership and Development Agreement 16
• 203 South Greensboro Street 17
• Colocation of Library Space with Town Offices 18
• Design - 2018 19
• Bid and Construction - Summer 2019 20
• Opening – Spring/Summer 2021 21
o Space Allocation, Operating and Capital Costs to be Reevaluated based on 22
Colocation 23
50 Dedicated Parking Spaces 24
25
Orange County Southern Branch Library Site (aerial photo) 26
27
Commissioner Price asked if the percentage being paid by Orange County is known. 28
Travis Myren said the County’s construction costs are estimated at $5.6 million. He 29
said operating costs and shared spaces would be allocated by the percentage of the building 30
that each party will occupy. 31
Commissioner Jacobs said he would like to propose that alternative energy sources be 32
automatically investigated for all major capital projects, including joint facilities. He said this 33
may need to come back to the Board as a policy item, but using this type of energy should be 34
standard practice, rather than having to be discussed per project. He said if it is incorporated 35
parenthetically with the CIP, then it would not have to be brought forward on every item. 36
Bonnie Hammersley said staff plans to make this part of the budget ordinance this 37
year, and every year, moving forward. 38
Commissioner Jacobs asked if that will include this joint project. 39
Bonnie Hammersley said yes. 40
Travis Myren resumed the presentation: 41
42
• Affordable Housing Bonds - $2,500,000 (page 29) 43
Project Description/Justification: Funding of $2,500,000 in FY2017-18 and planned funding of 44
$2,500,000 for FY 2018-19 are for the bond referendum projects. 45
46
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan 47
Policy Priorities 48
• Affordable Housing Bond - $2.5 million (p. 29) 49
o 2016 Bond Referendum - $5 million for Affordable Housing 50
14
o First Half ($2.5 million) Awarded in 2017 1
o 53 Affordable Units Created 2
o FY2018-19 Second Half ($2.5 million) 3
o Request for Proposal Process and Revised Scoring Criteria 4
• 2017 Affordable Housing Bond Projects – chart 5
6
Commissioner Price asked if any changes have been made to broaden who can apply, 7
as she was disappointed with the number of applicants in the first round. 8
Travis Myren said staff is reaching out to the Affordable Housing Coalition, and other 9
provider groups, with as much information as possible. He said the first round had a quick turn 10
around, and several providers did not have projects ready. He said this second round will be 11
widely promoted. 12
Commissioner Jacobs said he is skeptical about spending the remaining $2.5 million 13
next year, and then having no funds for the foreseeable future. He suggested spreading the 14
funds out over a longer period of time, as another bond will not be possible for some time. He 15
said Orange County is leading the affordable housing community to the brink of a cliff, will 16
jump off, and then have no money to do anything else. He asked if these funds should be 17
phased over a period of years. 18
Commissioner Rich asked if the County has a policy to look at minority women vendors 19
first. 20
Jeff Thompson said yes. 21
Commissioner Rich asked if a copy of the policy could be sent to her, and if it is in need 22
of any revision. 23
Chair Dorosin asked if a copy can be sent to the entire Board. 24
Commissioner McKee said he thinks the Board is setting itself up with the perception to 25
the public that Orange County will provide a sizable amount of funds to affordable housing 26
every year. He said he does not believe this will be possible. 27
Commissioner Marcoplos said Commissioner Jacobs’ point is interesting, and asked if 28
he thinks 2018 elections may change funding sources at the federal level. 29
Commissioner Jacobs said yes. He said he talked with Congressman Price and if he is 30
in the majority party, he will be the Committee Chair on housing, and there would be a direct 31
line of communication through him. 32
Commissioner Marcoplos said he would like to consider this proposal, and put it off 33
temporarily to see what happens. 34
Commissioner Burroughs clarified that the suggestion is that, with a more friendly 35
Congress, the County’s money may be able to be used to leverage federal money. 36
Commissioner Jacobs said yes, as is done with Lands Legacy funds. He said it is 37
possible that the tax credit may come back in a future budget, and using these funds over two 38
years, as opposed to one, may allow for some more flexible opportunities to garner federal or 39
state housing dollars. 40
Commissioner Burroughs said it would be logical to hold the funds until January 2019, 41
leaving them in the CIP, and make a final decision at that time. 42
Travis Myren said staff could schedule a check in with the Board of County 43
Commissioners in January 2019, as opposed to just issuing the bonds. 44
Commissioner Price said she is concerned for those who are in need of housing, and 45
asked if staff could find out if all of the units that were built are now occupied. 46
Commissioner Burroughs said only two Empowerment rentals are occupied, and 47
everything else is yet to be built. 48
Commissioner Price said if units are immediately occupied upon completion, she would 49
take this is an indication of the need for affordable housing. She said it is her recollection that 50
15
the County planned to put $1 million annually towards affordable housing, separate from the 1
bond funds. 2
Chair Dorosin said he does not think there should be any delay in spending the housing 3
bond money. He said he hoped the Board would continue to fund affordable housing, and he 4
asked if there was going to be a $1 million in the budget this year. 5
Bonnie Hammersley said no. She said there is $2 million already in the budget that has 6
not yet been spent, although some of it has been obligated. 7
Chair Dorosin said he would like to push this money out, and the Board has to balance 8
priorities all of the time. 9
Commissioner McKee said he does not want this to be delayed indefinitely, rather for 10
just 6 months to a year. He said he did not mean the County would cut back on its support for 11
affordable housing. He said he is just worried that the public perception will be that the County 12
will offer $2.5 million every year. 13
Commissioner Marcoplos asked if a realistic timeline is known. 14
Travis Myren said RFPs could be issued in the fall, and wait until January to award the 15
projects. He said, alternatively, staff could wait for RFPs in January 2019 and award projects 16
in June 2019. 17
Commissioner Marcoplos said he thinks this would be a reasonable gamble, and the 18
Board could spend half of the money as quickly as possible, and hold the other half to see if 19
there can be any leverage of funds. 20
Travis Myren resumed the presentation: 21
22
• Sheriff’s Office Body Worn Cameras - $300,000 (page 52) 23
Project Description/Justification: Funding of $300,000 in FY 2018-19 would equip Sheriff 24
Deputies with body-worn cameras. Body-worn cameras will allow deputies to better document 25
evidence while increasing accountability and transparency. Studies on the use of body-worn 26
cameras by law enforcement indicate that incidents of use of force decrease as do the number 27
of complaints filed against officers. 28
29
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan 30
Policy Priorities 31
• Sheriff’s Office Body Worn Cameras - $300,000 (p. 52) 32
o Successful Pilot Project – Report in February 2018 33
o Integrated with Portable Radio Project – Reallocated Funds 34
o 75 Body Camera Units 35
36
Commissioner Rich asked if the $300,000 is for equipment only. 37
Sheriff Blackwood said it is for both the purchase of the equipment and the storage for 38
3 years. 39
Commissioner Rich asked if the number of deputies could be identified. 40
Sheriff Blackwood said there are 162 total employees, and this process will be phased 41
in to determine who receives cameras, and in what order. 42
Commissioner Rich asked if there is a new contract every three years for data storage. 43
Sheriff Blackwood said cost negotiation will be completed every three years. 44
Travis Myren resumed the presentation: 45
46
• Community Centers - $100,000 (page 71) 47
Project Description/Justification: The Efland Cheeks Community Center is located adjacent to 48
Efland Cheeks Park and Efland Cheeks Elementary School. Due to the limitations of 49
expansion potential for the existing 1992 building, funding is proposed for FY 2018-19 to 50
16
examine the Center’s needs and facility options to meet those needs. Pending the outcome of 1
that assessment, funding is planned for facility improvement or construction in FY 2019-20. 2
Incremental increases in operating and personnel costs are also shown. 3
4
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan 5
Policy Priorities 6
• Community Centers - $100,000 (p. 71) 7
o Efland-Cheeks Community Center 8
o Needs and Use Assessment & Facility and Site Options 9
$1 million programmed for construction in FY2019-20 10
o Limitation on Existing Building Footprint due to Impervious Surface Constraints 11
and Topography 12
o Investigating Transfer of Impervious Surfaces from other County Owned 13
Property 14
15
Efland-Cheeks Park (aerial photo) 16
17
Commissioner Price asked if the $100,000 will be used for a consultant. 18
Travis Myren said yes. 19
Commissioner Price asked if the deliverables for the $100,000 are known, and if the 20
neighborhood associations will be brought into the process. 21
Travis Myren said the deliverables would be a detailed report of needs and use 22
assessment, including interviewing all stakeholders. He said the second deliverable would be 23
determining some options to meet the identified needs. 24
Commissioner Price said this is a lot of money to spend only to find out that the center 25
is too small to fit the needs. She said if this much money is going to be spent on an architect, 26
she would like to know the possibilities of expanding the current facility. 27
Commissioner McKee said the County has parkland that has thousands of square feet 28
of impervious surface, and he sees no reason why some of that cannot be transferred to this 29
site. He said topography is a simple construction problem, and any expansion of the building 30
will not be huge. He said he was at the facility on Sunday evening, and attended a nice 31
community event. He said the usage currently outpaces the capacity of the building. 32
Commissioner McKee said if this building is expanded, the acoustics will need to be 33
carefully considered. He said he agrees that the center needs to be expanded. 34
Commissioner Jacobs said he agrees with Commissioner McKee about the impervious 35
surface issue. He suggested doing it in a formal way, and having it recorded and set up a 36
County program on its own property. He said it may grow into a model for something better, 37
as long as it is designated for this purpose. 38
Commissioner Jacobs said the New Hope Improvement Association Community Center 39
has a failed septic system, and needs $30,000 to repair it. He said he can imagine other non-40
County owned community centers may need County assistance, and asked if the BOCC wants 41
to plan for this potential need going forward. He said many of these buildings meet community 42
needs. He said many community centers have fire departments associated with them, and 43
perhaps they could be given some funds via a fire department request. 44
Commissioner McKee said providing County assistance may be an expensive 45
proposition, but it would not be as expensive as building new community centers. 46
Chair Dorosin suggested moving to the Sportsplex item, to allow staff to leave earlier. 47
The Board agreed by consensus. 48
Travis Myren continued the presentation: 49
50
17
• Sportsplex Proprietary Projects (FY 2018-19): 1
Equipment, Repairs, and Improvements - $507,000 (pages 87-94) 2
Discussion will also be directed to recommended Future Capital Projects in Years 2-5 of the 3
CIP (FY 2019-20 through FY 2022-23); the Water and Sewer Debt Service requirements paid 4
with Article 46 Quarter Cent Sales Tax proceeds (page 177), and Debt 5
6
Service requirements for Solid Waste (page 178) and Sportsplex (page 179). 7
8
Sportsplex - New Facilities 9
Project Description/Justification: Funding in FY 2018-19 of $65,000 includes an elevated 10
enclosed connecting ramp between the Sportsplex and Field House. Prior Years funding 11
includes the Field House Complex featuring a Sports and Recreation section, Camp, After and 12
Pre-School area and Fitness section, for total funding of $3,997,000, $222,000 in reallocated 13
funding from previously unused project funds for a Family/Single User Change Room project, 14
and $125,000 in reallocated unused capital funds for storage space. Year 1 Operating costs 15
reflect a half year of operation with the overall project costs recovered from net operating 16
revenues over a six year period. Years 6-10 includes new member change area to 17
accommodate growth plus the need to segregate the youth and adult user segments currently 18
using the combined pool/member change areas; and enclosing the outdoor turf field to expand 19
revenue generating programs. 20
21
Sportsplex - Facilities Maintenance/Replacement 22
Project Description/Justification: Funding in FY 2018-19 includes $85,000 to replace HVAC 23
equipment that has reached or exceeded its life expectancy and $20,000 for replacement 24
exterior and interior access including automatic ADA door openers. In 2019-20 all remaining 25
access doors will be upgraded. Funding in FY 2020-21 includes $200,000 for an upgrade to a 26
high efficiency utility management system, which is projected to save $40,000 annually in utility 27
costs. Funding in FY 2021-22 totals $225,000 for additional parking lot repair/repaving in areas 28
not included in the prior years funding, and scheduled replacement of HVAC equipment and 29
IT/Communications/Security equipment replacement. 30
31
Sportsplex - Kidsplex 32
Project Description/Justification: Funding in FY2017-18 was authorized for additional Kidsplex 33
equipment to accommodate the growth in Kidsplex programs. Funding in FY 2018-19 and FY 34
2019-20 includes $30,000 for additional purchase of inflatables, to be positioned in space 35
created by the Field House project. Funding in FY 2021-22 includes $105,000 for additional 36
and/or replacement Kidsplex equipment, as well as inflatables. 37
38
John Stock, Sportsplex Executive Director, reviewed the following information: 39
40
Sportsplex - Ice Rink 41
Project Description/Justification: Funding in FY2018-19 includes $100,000 for major rebuild of 42
compressors and chiller barrel. Funding in FY 2019-20 includes $125,000 for replacement of 43
rink de-humidification unit. Funding in FY 2020- 21 includes $975,000 for ice rink re-build. In 44
2020, the rink will be 25 years old and is at its life expectancy. The re-build is planned to 45
protect this significant source of annual income to the Sportsplex Fund. FY 2020-21 also 46
includes renovations to the ice rink locker areas, rubberized flooring, and plexi-glass. 47
48
Sportsplex – Fitness 49
18
Project Description/Justification: Funding in FY 2018-19, FY 2020-21, and FY 2022-23 1
includes $100,000 in each fiscal year for replacement and upgrades of fitness equipment. 2
Based on industry standards, heavy use commercial cardio equipment has a useful life of 3
approximately 3 years. 4
5
Sportsplex – Pool 6
Project Description/Justification: Funding in FY 2018-19 includes $20,000 for a comprehensive 7
Natatorium study (re-allocated from a project funded from operations) as well as $80,000 as a 8
contingency to replace the compressors on one of the two major pool HVAC systems that are 9
experiencing premature end of life failure. Funding in FY 2018-19 also includes $12,000 for 10
handicap pool lifts to complement the handicap ramp currently in place as a result of more 11
users with disabilities using both pools. Funding in FY 2019-20 includes $50,000 for boilers 12
and pumps repair/replacement, and FY 2021-22 includes a total of $90,000 for replacement 13
and upgrade of the pool lane timer/scoreboard, additional boiler and pumps 14
repair/replacement, and repairs to the pool plaster and tile. Years 6-10 includes contingency 15
funding based on the results of the Natatorium study related to the pool HVAC systems. 16
17
John Stock gave an update on the field house construction. 18
Commissioner McKee thanked John Stock for the handicapped ramp and lifts with the 19
pool. 20
John Stock said one can never give too much support to the handicapped community. 21
He said automatic accessible doors are being looked into at this time, to allow for a longer 22
delay before the doors close. 23
Commissioner McKee said he expects usage to continue to grow. 24
John Stock said 46% of the Sportsplex members are over 55 years of age. 25
26
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan 27
Sportsplex 28
• Sportsplex Projects $507,000 (p. 87) 29
o Elevated Connector from Sportxplex to Fieldhouse - $65,000 30
o Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning - $85,000 31
o Access Doors - $20,000 32
o Kidsplex Inflatables - $25,000 33
o Ice Rink Rebuild of Compressor and Chiller Barrel - $100,000 34
o Fitness Equipment - $100,000 35
o Pool Equipment Replacement - $80,000 36
o Natatorium Engineering Study - $20,000 37
o Handicap Pool Lifts - $12,000 38
39
Travis Myren resumed the presentation: 40
41
• Economic Development (Water and Sewer) - $145,000 (page 75) 42
Project Description/Justification: Recent developer interest in this area of the County has 43
created the need to accelerate the capacity expansion of the Gravelly Hill pump station, 44
utilizing the capacity of the Efland Sewer to Mebane, Phase 2 Extension. $1,510,000 of 45
funding for design, construction and project management for Phase 3 has been advanced 46
accordingly. Phase 3 includes an upgrade to a lift station and connection to a different force 47
main. The project will extend under the interstate to the D3 area to the north as shown on the 48
project map from prior work in Phase 2. This 200+ acre area of the County has been 49
designated an Economic Development District and is one of the few areas with rail access. 50
19
The design and construction of water and sewer infrastructure in this EDD will facilitate 1
development in the area. 2
3
Operational Impact: None. After construction, this system would be owned, operated and 4
maintained by the City of Mebane per an existing interlocal agreement amended in 2012. 5
6
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan 7
Policy Priorities 8
• Economic Development Water & Sewer Infrastructure - $145,000 (p. 75) 9
o Phase 3 – Under Interstate to Site Served by Rail 10
o Site Readiness 11
o Zoned Economic Development – Buckhorn EDB – 1 12
Light industrial 13
200 acres total 14
Access improvements needed 15
o Construction FY2019-20 - $1.3 million 16
17
Commissioner Price asked if residential homes will be able to tap on. 18
Craig Benedict, Planning Director, said this is for undeveloped land, and the Gravelly 19
Hill lift station has been leveraged. He said there is not a lot of housing in this area, but 20
anyone could tie into the system once it is installed. 21
Travis Myren resumed the presentation: 22
23
• EMS Substation with Solar Pilot - $1,500,000 (page 53) 24
Project Description/Justification: Funding in FY 2018-19 includes a stand-alone station in the 25
Efland area. This station will replace the existing Station 4 on Mt Willing Road in Efland. The 26
existing station is incapable of expansion and the cost of upfitting and bringing the station into 27
compliance under the state fire code would be more than the cost of the building itself. The 28
proposed new station will provide bays to house the ambulance and will be within 1 mile of the 29
existing station. Funding in FY 2018-19 also includes installing a solar photovoltaic (PV) 30
system on the roof of the new stand-alone station. Future EMS stations will be strategically 31
located in developing districts that are experiencing increasing call volume and service 32
demand. The architectural design of the stations will allow for one drive through bay (with 33
expansion for an additional drive through bay), secure storage for narcotics, a decontamination 34
area, equipment room with washer/dryer, sleeping quarters, training/conference room, office 35
area, restrooms and shower, and public area separate from the secure area of the crew 36
quarters. The cost of the colocation stations represents efficiencies gained from sharing of 37
kitchen, training, and other common areas. The operating costs of the co-located facilities will 38
also be shared. 39
40
FY 2018-19: Independent station in the Efland area with a solar photovoltaic (PV) system FY 41
2021-22: Co-Location with fire department to be determined 42
FY 2022-23: $100,000 for architectural design for standalone in Years 6-10 43
Years 6-10: Independent EMS station in the Northern corridor of the County 44
Years 6-10: Co-Location with fire department 45
46
Emergency Services Substation Long Range Plan 47
• FY2016-17 Colocation with Chapel Hill Fire Department at Glen Lennox 48
• FY2017-18 – Colocation with Orange Rural Fire and Hillsborough Police at Waterstone 49
• FY2018-19 – Standalone station in Buckhorn-Efland area 50
20
• FY2019-20 – Colocation with fire dept. pending location study 1
• FY2020-21 – Standalone station in Northern corridor 2
• FY2021-22 – Colocation with fire dept. pending location study 3
4
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan 5
Policy Priorities 6
• Emergency Medical Services Substation - $1.5 million (p. 53) 7
o Standalone Station in Efland – 24 hour station 8
o Replaces Mt. Willing Road 9
Leased until 2019 for $1 from Efland Volunteer Fire Company, Inc. 10
o Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Demonstration 11
Roof mounted, 61kW system 12
Estimated cost of $76,000 to $100,000 after Duke Energy grant/rebate 13
Useful life of 25 years 14
11-13 year payback of County investment 15
Model for future PV installations on new construction 16
17
Chair Dorosin referred to the home in the aerial photo, and asked if it is currently 18
occupied. 19
Travis Myren said it is currently occupied via a month-to-month rental lease, and the 20
occupants have expressed interest in staying if possible. 21
Chair Dorosin asked if the occupants would then pay rent to the County. 22
Travis Myren said the County would transfer the property management to someone 23
else, but the County would own this building. 24
Jeff Thompson said the Krazy Karts building is 4000 square feet, and is adequate 25
within the developed prototype. He said the County does not need the house per se, but it just 26
comes with the property. 27
Commissioner Rich asked if the renters would be disturbed by EMS noise. 28
Dinah Jeffries, EMS Director, said there will be noise. 29
Jeff Thompson said the tenants still want to live there despite the noise. 30
Chair Dorosin asked if the renters would present any problem for the operations of the 31
site. 32
Jeff Thompson said no. 33
Commissioner McKee asked if there is a reason the County is buying a 5.5-acre site for 34
a stand-alone station. He said this seems like too much land. 35
Travis Myren said that is how the land was offered. 36
Jeff Thompson said the seller is unwilling to break it up. 37
Commissioner McKee said he is not crazy about building a stand-alone station, and 38
asked if co-location has been pursued with the Efland Fire Department. 39
Dinah Jeffries said the Efland Fire Department recommended this site to EMS, 40
because Efland is looking into expanding its own station. 41
Commissioner McKee asked if the substation would be an option. 42
Dinah Jeffries said the substation property may be used for a possible burn tower. 43
Commissioner McKee said he still does not understand why the County is buying 5.5 44
acres for a substation. He said it seems excessive. 45
Travis Myren said 5.5 acres is not necessary, but property is in a strategic location. He 46
said staff has completed other property searches. 47
Jeff Thompson said no alternatives were found. 48
21
Dinah Jeffries spoke to the strategic location of the property. She said she spoke with 1
the Efland Deputy Chief, and it was determined that this was one of the easiest locations in 2
which to enter and exit, and from which to access surrounding areas. 3
Commissioner McKee said purchasing this property will also take 5.5 acres of 4
commercial property off the tax roles. 5
Commissioner Jacobs asked if the renters have been approached about a possible 6
subdivision and sale of the property to them. 7
Jeff Thompson said staff could look into this. 8
Commissioner Price clarified that services would not be co-located in the beginning. 9
Dinah Jeffries said not for the Efland Station. She said EMS is trying to co-locate as 10
much as possible, but Efland has expansion plans for station 1, and may possibly locate the 11
burn tower at station 2. 12
Commissioner Price asked if the only thing at this proposed location would be the 13
ambulance. 14
Dinah Jeffries said yes. 15
Travis Myren said one of the options that staff could investigate is re-configuring the 16
property, and offering the portions not needed by the County for commercial sale. 17
Commissioner McKee asked if it is critical that this facility site on Highway 70. 18
Commissioner Rich asked if the rest of the property can be built on, and who would 19
want to do so. 20
Travis Myren said, given Commissioner McKee’s concerns, staff could explore what the 21
other options may be for a reconfiguration, etc. 22
Jeff Thompson said the eastern parcel can have its own entrance off of Highway 70, 23
and the large 3.5-acre parcel can share a driveway for something that can be developed on 24
the southwestern corner of that parcel. 25
Chair Dorosin asked if there is another house on this property. 26
Jeff Thompson said that is not part of this property. 27
Commissioner Price asked if the seller would break up the land. 28
Jeff Thompson said no, the seller is unwilling to do so. 29
Travis Myren resumed the presentation: 30
31
• Facility Accessibility, Safety and Security - $114,500 (page 33) 32
Project Description/Justification: Funding of $114,500 in FY2018-19 is for accessibility and 33
security improvements as identified by the Space Study W ork Group, Emergency Action 34
Planning Work Group, BOCC initiatives, and the Facilities Accessibility Self - Assessment. 35
These initiatives include adding way finding and warning signage, such as the "No Weapons" 36
signage, providing security cameras in multiple facilities including the Historic Courthouse and 37
the Orange County Fuel Station, fire alarm system upgrades at the Court Street Annex, 38
Orange Public Transportation Administrative Building, and Chapel Hill Visitors’ Center, and 39
replacing a wheelchair lift at Central Recreation. Funding in FY2019-20 includes automated 40
access doors at Skills Development, Animal Services, and other facilities and the purchase 41
and installation of AED units and cabinets at appropriate county facilities. The accessibility 42
need at the Visitors' Center is intended to replace the current access pathway from the Skills 43
Development parking area. 44
45
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan 46
Policy Priorities 47
• Facility Accessibility, Safety, and Security - $114,500 (p. 33) 48
o Wayfinding & Signage - $27,500 49
o Security Improvements - $30,000 50
22
Historic Courthouse 1
Orange County Fuel Station 2
o Wheelchair Lift @ Central Recreation & Parking Improvement @ Efland 3
Community Center - $32,000 4
o Fire Alarm System Upgrades - $25,000 5
Court Street Annex 6
OCPT Administration 7
Chapel Hill Visitors’ Center Building 8
9
Commissioner Price said more signage is needed downstairs in the Whitted building to 10
inform the public of the option to go inside the glass doors and ride the elevator up to the 11
second floor meeting room, instead of using the outside stairs. 12
Commissioner Price said the exterior steps are not safe, and there has to be some way 13
to improve them. 14
Jeff Thompson said the steps are coming out of design now, and funding is already in 15
place to fix them. He said he is working with the Town of Hillsborough on this item. 16
Bonnie Hammersley said the signs for Whitted can be done without adding them to the 17
CIP. 18
Travis Myren resumed the presentation: 19
20
• Orange County Public Transportation Bus Shelters - $125,000 (page 40) 21
Project Description/Justification: The Orange County Transit Plan, updated in April 2017, 22
includes bus stop improvements for Orange County Public Transportation (OCPT) through the 23
½ cent public transit sales tax. During FY 2018-19, $124,971 will be made available to design, 24
engineer, and install up to five bus shelters on OCPT routes. An Orange County staff team, 25
with assistance from GoTriangle is considering the highest ridership stops for improvements. 26
Sites presently being considered include Faucette Mill Rd/US 70; Rainey St./US 70; Hampton 27
Point/New NC 86 (2-shelters, one on each side of New NC 86); and at two stops on Martin 28
Luther King Boulevard in Chapel Hill. These stops are located on either the Hillsborough 29
Circulator or the Orange-Chapel Hill Connector OCPT routes. The transit shelter includes a 30
bench and shelter, and can be equipped with solar lighting for any to be located in low-light 31
areas. 32
33
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan 34
Policy Priorities 35
• Orange County Public Transit – Bus Shelters - $125,000 (p. 40) 36
o Five Bus Shelters 37
Located along Hillsborough Circulator and Orange-Chapel Hill 38
Connector Routes 39
May be used for Chapel Hill Transit and GoTriangle Routes 40
o Funded with Article 43 (1/2 Cent Transit Sales Tax) Funds 41
42
Chair Dorosin asked if it is possible to have benches without the anti-homeless dividers 43
at the bus shelters. 44
Theo Letman, Transportation Director, said he thinks this may be is an ADA component 45
to the bench. 46
Chair Dorosin asked if this information could be verified and shared with the BOCC. 47
Commissioner Price said she has heard that those in a wheelchair find it difficult to get 48
from the sidewalk to the bus due to patches of grass or dirt. 49
23
Commissioner Price said the bus stop on Highway 70 is bad, and there is nothing there 1
but a pole in the grass. She said it is dangerous. 2
Travis Myren resumed the presentation: 3
4
Parks, Open Space, and Trail Development (FY 2018-19): 5
6
• Blackwood Farm Park - $1,795,000 (page 57) 7
Project Description/Justification: Blackwood Farm Park is a 152- acre park midway between 8
Chapel Hill and Hillsborough on NC 86 and New Hope Church Road. The park opened on a 9
limited basis in June 2015 and is currently open Friday-Sunday. Funding for park 10
infrastructure, design and other associated needs, including construction of new turn lanes, 11
entryway and parking was included in FY 2016-17 and 17-18. Park construction for Phase II of 12
the park is proposed for FY2018-19, Consistent with the adopted master plan for a low-impact 13
park with agricultural and historic themes and components of the farm's agricultural past, 14
including interpretive signage, picnic areas, community garden, agricultural demonstration 15
areas and exhibits. The planned Phase II park construction also includes new picnic shelters, 16
restrooms, an amphitheater, repairs and renovations to the farmstead, fishing station, trails, 17
Nature Center and open play fields, along with a disc golf course. It is anticipated that the park 18
will open full-time in FY 2019-20 once Phase II construction is complete. Funding of $800,000 19
in FY 2021-22 includes an enhanced Nature Center (with associated matching partner 20
revenue). Funding of $529,500 is included in Year 5 for Phase III, which includes the 21
remaining New Hope Church Road area facilities. If the Board of Commissioners authorizes 22
the development of a Northern Orange County campus, a revised combined project will be 23
amended consisting of the Detention Facility, Environment and Ag Center, and Parks 24
Operations Base. 25
26
Long Range Parks Plan (map) 27
28
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan 29
Policy Priorities 30
• Blackwood Farm Park - $1.79 million (p. 57) 31
o Infrastructure work (prior approval) – Fall 2018 32
Turn Lane from Highway 86 33
New Park Entrance 34
Parking 35
o Phase II Construction - Low Impact Park with Agriculture and Historic Themes 36
Interpretive Signage 37
Picnic Areas and Shelters 38
Community Garden 39
Agricultural Demonstration Area and Nature Learning Center 40
Amphitheater 41
Disc Golf Course 42
43
Revised Blackwood Farm Park Master Plan (map) 44
45
Commissioner Jacobs said he previously proposed suspending Bingham Park, but the 46
CIP indicates that property is being considered. He said he would like to talk about this, as this 47
park is one that could be deferred to the second 10 years. 48
Commissioner Jacobs said he would like staff to bring a list of park priorities to the 49
Board. 50
24
Chair Dorosin asked if there is an update on this park, and any land that is being 1
considered. 2
David Stancil said there is a complicating factor that would make this park attractive on 3
another front, and he will send this information out to the Board. He said staff is just in the 4
process of having conversations as this point. 5
Commissioner Price referred to Phase II improvements, and asked if these need to be 6
completed right now. 7
David Stancil said this park is in the preliminary design stage, and part of that process 8
is assigning costs. He said typically the park projects that get completed are the ones that the 9
County can afford. 10
Commissioner Price said Phase II is listed in the next fiscal year, and includes 11
interpretive signage, picnic areas, and community garden, etc. She asked if these items are 12
included in the $1.79 million. 13
David Stancil said these are included in that total. He said Phase II has a Part A and a 14
Part B. He said Part A includes the road, parking, turn lane, etc., and Part B includes the 15
amenities. 16
Commissioner Price asked if staff wants to have these amenities completed next year. 17
David Stancil said if the amenities are not completed, there will be a lot of new 18
infrastructure, and nothing other than trails and a small picnic shelter. He said there is also a 19
Phase III in year 5. 20
Commissioner Price asked if staff would please itemize the portions of Phase II. 21
David Stancil said he can give general costs, or more specifics via the RFP for the 22
design and engineering work, which will be available this summer. 23
Commissioner Jacobs said at the Upper Eno Nature Preserve, the County signage 24
says, “no camping”. He said he thinks the Board should specifically ban fires on County 25
properties, unless someone has a specific permit from the County to camp there, e.g. the boy 26
scouts. 27
Commissioner Jacobs referred to the Northeast Park, and said language on the signs 28
needs to be updated. 29
Commissioner Jacobs said a condition to buying this property was that it could not be 30
used for a landfill, and this should be made known more widely. 31
Travis Myren resumed the presentation: 32
33
Parks, Open Space, and Trail Development 34
• Mountains to Sea Trail - $110,000 (page 65) 35
Project Description/Justification: The Mountains to Sea Trail (MST) is a part of the N.C. State 36
Parks system and would connect by trail the Great Smoky Mountains with the Outer Banks. 37
Funding was provided in FY 2016-17 for the initial phase of this project, acquiring and 38
constructing the trail segment from Occoneechee Mountain State Natural Area to the County’s 39
Upper Eno Nature Preserve (Seven Mile Creek Nature Park). Funding appropriated and 40
proposed is for acquiring easements, initial trail construction of identified segments, with 41
associated signage and fencing and any other privacy measures. The initial segment will also 42
include some type of pedestrian crossing improvements over Interstate 85/40. Additionally, 43
$110,000 has been moved from the Upper Eno Nature Preserve project to this project for FY 44
2018-19 to build waystation facilities for the Mountains to Sea Trail (MST) at Seven Mile 45
Nature Park. The second phase of the project is proposed for Year 2 and would address the 46
segment of the MST from Buckhorn Road around and on the OWASA-owned lands at Cane 47
Creek Reservoir, continuing to the Alamance County line. The third phase would be in Years 48
7-10 and would complete the middle section of the trail from Seven Mile Creek to Buckhorn 49
25
Road. The project reflects phased voluntary acquisition of trail easements and trail 1
construction in FY 2019-20 and beyond, as lands are acquired and segments connected. 2
3
Parks, Open Space, and Trail Development 4
• Mountains to Sea Trail - $110,000 (p. 65) 5
o Funding Moved from Upper Eno Nature Preserve Project 6
No New CIP Funding 7
o Waystation Amenities 8
o Future Funding 9
$450,000 in FY 2019-20 – Segment from Buckhorn Road to OWASA 10
Property at Cane Creek Reservoir to Alamance County 11
$693,000 in Years 6 through 10 – Middle Trail Segment from Seven Mile 12
Creek to Buckhorn Road 13
14
Seven Mile Creek Preserve Master Plan (aerial photo) 15
16
David Stancil said staff has reversed the sequence of the future segments. 17
Commissioner McKee asked if the location of the waystation is known. 18
David Stancil said there is a trailhead that is part of the Seven Mile Preserve, which 19
would be a logical place for the waystation. He said the letter C on the map is another 20
potential camping area that is consistent with the MTS. He said one of these two locations 21
would be the waystation. 22
Commissioner McKee asked if the process is getting ahead of itself, as there is 23
currently only a possible corridor for MTS. 24
David Stancil said that is correct, but right now staff is only talking about putting in a 25
well. 26
Commissioner McKee said he is unsure why any facilities are being put in until the 27
exact location of the MTS is known. 28
David Stancil said the segment from there back to Occoneechee Mountain is already 29
underway, and could be finalized in a matter of months. 30
Commissioner McKee asked if this is a way to pre-determine the route of the trail. 31
David Stancil said the route of the trail has already been adopted. 32
Commissioner McKee said the corridor for the route of the trail has been adopted. 33
David Stancil said there is really only one way to get to this part of the property from 34
Occoneechee Mountain. He said Riverwalk could be extended to this property in the short 35
term. 36
Commissioner Jacobs asked if, when talking about a campsite, it is one where fires are 37
not allowed. 38
David Stancil said yes. 39
Commissioner Price said the CIP wording states, “the project reflects phased voluntary 40
acquisition of trail easements….”, and asked if this means donated easements. 41
David Stancil said some property owners might donate easements. 42
Travis Myren said imminent domain will not be used. 43
Commissioner Price asked if the total amount the County plans to spend on MTS is 44
known. She said it was her understanding that the Friends of the MTS would take on 45
fundraising. 46
David Stancil said page 65 gives an overview of this. He said a memorandum of 47
understanding with The Friends of the MTS will be brought back to the Board next month. He 48
said trails are not expensive, but rather the boardwalks, trail heads, signage are where costs 49
26
increase. He said Connect NC bond and State Parks will contribute funding, especially with 1
land acquisition. 2
Discussion ensued back and forth about county funding for this project. 3
Travis Myren said staff will get Commissioner Price more detailed information. 4
5
Information Technology and Communications (FY 2018-19): 6
• BOCC Technology Initiatives - $50,000 (page 49) 7
Project Description/Justification: Funding in FY2018-19 includes $450,000 in infrastructure 8
components related to server upgrades, desktop and laptop replacements, data storage, 9
network improvements, printer replacements, and deployment of wireless capabilities. This 10
project also includes $50,000 in Board of Commissioners technology initiatives. 11
12
• Information Technology Infrastructure - $450,000 (page 49) 13
Project Description/Justification: Funding in FY2018-19 includes $450,000 in infrastructure 14
components related to server upgrades, desktop and laptop replacements, data storage, 15
network improvements, printer replacements, and deployment of wireless capabilities. This 16
project also includes $50,000 in Board of Commissioners technology initiatives. 17
18
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan 19
Information Technology and Communications 20
• BOCC Tech Initiatives - $50,000 (p. 49) 21
o Technology Priorities Identified by the Board of Commissioners 22
• Information Technology Infrastructure - $450,000 (p. 49) 23
o Server Upgrades & Data Storage 24
o Device Replacements – Laptops, Desktops, Printers 25
o Network and Wireless 26
27
Chair Dorosin asked if $50,000 could be explained. 28
Travis Myren said $50,000 is place held annually for different expenses. 29
Jim Northup, Chief Information Officer, said these funds have been used for Board 30
initiatives, such as website design or upgrades to meeting rooms. 31
Travis Myren resumed the presentation: 32
33
• Communication Systems Improvements (Sheriff replacement radios)- $505,000 34
(page 51) 35
Project Description/Justification: A consistent radio platform ensures integration and reliability 36
of the radios used by first responders. The replacement process was initiated in 2004. In FY 37
17-18 $920,000 was allocated to replace the most outdated mobiles and portables in the 38
Sheriff’s Office. Phase I has been completed. Currently, the Sheriff’s Office still has 76 mobiles 39
and 55 portables that are to be replaced in Phase II of this project, along with miscellaneous 40
equipment, such as, encryption, Bluetooth and special mikes for tactical and special teams. 41
Municipal partners will be engaged to discuss cooperative purchase that may bring the cost of 42
these radios for all agencies below the State contract price. 43
44
• Register of Deeds Automation - $80,000 (page 50) 45
Project Description/Justification: Funding of $80,000 in each fiscal year throughout the plan is 46
for the acquisition of technology for the preservation and storage of public records in the 47
Register of Deeds Office. The Register of Deeds Automation project is funded with fees 48
collected by the Register of Deeds. The funding is mandated by NC General Statute 161-11.3 49
27
which requires all Counties to reserve ten percent of revenue collected and retained by the 1
County in a non-reverting Automation Enhancement and Preservation Fund. 2
3
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan 4
Information Technology and Communications 5
• Communication System Improvements – Sheriff’s Office - $505,000 (p. 51) 6
o Final Year of Multiyear Replacement of Portable and In-Vehicle Radios 7
o Replace Remaining Sheriff’s Office Radios – Approximately 80 Units 8
• Register of Deeds Automation – $80,000 (p. 50) 9
o Multiyear Account to Finance Technology Improvements in Register of Deeds 10
Office 11
o Replacement of Records Management Software 12
13
Travis Myren resumed the presentation: 14
15
Building and Infrastructure Improvements (FY 2018-19): 16
• Criminal Justice Resource Department - $275,000 (page 31) 17
Project Description/Justification: The Criminal Justice Resource Department is currently 18
located in the lower level of the 1954 Courthouse. Recent program expansion has prompted 19
the need for consolidated office space. The Register of Deeds space in the Gateway building 20
has excess capacity because of advances in technology that require less physical storage 21
space for books and records. This project repurposes this extra capacity for the Criminal 22
Justice Resource Department, and adds a dry sprinkler system to protect sensitive historical 23
land records. 24
25
• Link Center Remodel - $50,000 (page 36) 26
Project Description/Justification: In March 2018, the Board approved renovations to the lower 27
level of the John Link Jr. Government Services Center to house the Public Defender resulting 28
in a loss of meeting space at this facility. Funding of $50,000 in FY2018- 19 would allow for 29
renovations to the first floor of the John Link Jr. Government Services Center by improving the 30
existing meeting spaces with upgraded Audio Visual equipment and furnishings. The County 31
owned 129 E. King Street facility that currently houses the Public Defender will become 32
surplus property and subject to disposition by the Board of County Commissioners. 33
34
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan 35
Building and Infrastructure Improvements 36
• Criminal Justice Resource Department - $275,000 (p. 31) 37
o Department Growth – Currently Located in Two Facilities 38
o Underutilized Space Near Register of Deeds in Gateway 39
o Includes Dry Fire Suppression System for Historic Land Records 40
• Link Center Remodel - $50,000 (p. 36) 41
o Public Defender Displacing Lower Level Conference Space 42
o Enhance Large Conference Room on Main Floor of Link 43
o 129 East King Street Building Disposition in Fall of 2018 44
45
• Old Courthouse Square – (Building/Grounds) - $20,000 (page 38) 46
Project Description/Justification: The FY2018-19 funding request is for the start of the 47
architectural and structural engineering services to design the upcoming renovations proposed 48
in future years. The FY2019-20 funding request addresses exterior restoration items and 49
necessary structural repairs. FY 2020-21 funding will address site work that must be carried 50
28
out after exterior restoration is complete, including foundation drainage, sidewalk 1
restoration/ADA modifications, landscaping, improved lighting, new public seating and 2
landscape plantings as per site master plan. This addresses interior restoration of historic 3
features, enhancements to accessibility and safety, and necessary upgrades to electrical, 4
audiovisual and lighting to meet court requirements. All work must be sequenced and planned 5
to coordinate with court schedules and requirements. 6
7
• Historic Courthouse Square - $20,000 (p. 38) 8
o Engineering and Design 9
o Exterior Renovation, Structure and Foundation Work in FY2019-21 - $630,000 10
11
Commissioner Price said to give outside groups notification about this process, as 12
many of them use the exterior space. 13
14
• HVAC Projects - $142,000 (page 35) 15
Project Description/Justification: Funding of $142,000 in FY2018-19 is for HVAC 16
improvements/replacements. The Year 2 controls upgrade request resulted from the 17
technology advancement made available to the County in spring FY16-17. This replaces our 18
current control system that will not be supported by the vendor after 2019. 19
20
• Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning - $142,000 (p. 35 21
o Air Conditioning at Motor Pool 22
o Replace Equipment at Emergency Services Radio Tower 23
24
• Roofing and Building Façade Projects - $369,800 (page 42) 25
Project Description/Justification: This project is a combination of building roof replacements 26
and building façade repairs. The Roof Asset Management Plan was updated in FY 2016-17. 27
Building envelope/facade systems include exterior walls, cladding, windows, doors, 28
foundations and associated components. The purpose of this project is to provide resources 29
for systematic operation and identification of any remedial action that may be needed in order 30
to cost-effectively maximize the useful life of the building envelopes of County facilities. Any 31
needed remedial activity would be listed and prioritized via a building envelope/façade study 32
initially being requested in FY2018-19. FY 2018-19 funding includes the comprehensive facility 33
facade study as well as needed attention at the Central Recreation Building, AMS North Motor 34
Pool Facility, and the John Link Jr. Government Services Center. This facade study will inform 35
the long-range facade plan. 36
37
• Roofing and Building Façade Projects - $369,800 (p. 42) 38
o Façade Needs Assessment and Condition Study - $22,000 39
o Repairs at Central Recreation ($45,000), Motor Pool ($152,800), and Link 40
Building ($150,000) 41
42
• Vehicle Replacements - $689,328 (page 45) 43
Project Description/Justification: Funding of $689,328 includes replacement of several public 44
safety related vehicles. Funds of $700,000 in the subsequent years includes replacement of 45
various vehicles county-wide. 46
47
• Vehicle Replacements - $689,328 (p. 45) 48
o Seven (7) Sheriff Patrol Vehicles 49
o Two (2) Sheriff Transport Vehicles 50
29
o One (1) Animal Services Vehicle Remount 1
o Two (2) Emergency Services Ambulance Remounts 2
3
4
Solid Waste Proprietary Projects (FY 2018-19): 5
• Recycling and Sanitation Vehicles & Equipment - $1,155,387 (pages 80-81,86) 6
Project Description/Justification: The Department follows the same process described above in 7
the Environmental Support Equipment Replacement section for evaluating and replacing 8
equipment. 9
Current Year (2017-18) 10
Waste & Recycling Center Stationary Compactors $214,000 Eight (8) stationary compactors 11
replacing current front-loading and roll-off containers at the Eubanks Road W&R Center. 12
Replacement of # 679, Dump Truck, deferred to FY 2019-2020. 13
Year 1 (2018-19) 14
Replace # 844, Hook Lift Truck, $251,790 15
Year 2 (2019-20) 16
Replace # 679, Dump Truck, previously deferred in FY 2017-18, $171,414; 17
Replace #881, Front End Loader, $359,832 18
Year 3 (2020-21) 19
Replace #922, Hook Lift Truck, and #927, Hook Lift Truck, ($260,952 each) $521,904 20
Year 4 (2021-22) 21
No capital vehicles replacement scheduled. 22
Year 5 (2022-23) Replace #959, Front End Loader, $395,052 23
Years 6-10 - $2,011,526 FY 2023-24 24
Replace Hook Lift Truck, $289,996 FY 2025-26 25
Replace Hook Lift Truck, $354,294 FY 2026-27 26
Replace Dump Truck, $162,400; Front End Loader, $506,320; (2) Hook Lift Trucks ($349,218 27
each) $698,436 28
29
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan 30
Solid Waste 31
• Solid Waste Projects (p. 79-86) 32
o Equipment Replacement - $745,387 33
Hook Lift Truck - $251,790 34
Multi-Family Truck - $281,991 35
Rear Load Compacting Truck (New) - $211,606 36
37
• High Rock Road Waste & Recycling Center - $676,428 (page 82) 38
Project Description/Justification: Improvements to the High Rock Road Waste and Recycling 39
Center include the modernization of the High Rock Road Center into a Neighborhood Center 40
($676,428). Construction of the site was deferred from current year to Year 1 due to the 41
possibility of site closure overlapping with the completion of the Eubanks Road facility. Costs 42
have been revised and updated, and the site is projected to open July 2019. 43
44
As a Neighborhood Center, services will be modified as larger bulky materials, metal, yard 45
waste, tires, clean wood, and white goods will no longer be accepted. Smaller bulky materials 46
which will fit into the household waste compactor will continue to be accepted. The salvage 47
shed, waste oil, oil filters, wet & dry cell batteries and electronics will also remain. Plastic film, 48
textiles, cooking oil and food waste recycling programs will be added. 49
50
30
The High Rock Road Center is located on leased property, and planned site improvements will 1
continue to be coordinated with the property owner. The County has successfully negotiated a 2
new lease with the property owner that will take effect when the modernization project starts. 3
Terms of the lease will provide for long term assurance of the property’s availability. 4
5
Operating costs for the High Rock Center are estimated to increase to $50,765 for FY18/19. 6
The increase is due to ongoing electricity costs, and one-time costs associated with the 7
relocation and installation of security cameras and establishment of a temporary site during 8
construction. No new staff is required. 9
10
Estimated operational savings of $15,000 will result from a more efficient hauling of waste and 11
recyclables from compactors rather than hauling loose materials. Additionally, tip fees should 12
be reduced due to the fully enclosed waste compactors alleviating water logged, heavier 13
materials caused by the current open-topped dumpsters. 14
15
The Neighborhood/District Waste & Recycling Center concept was endorsed by the BOCC in 16
FY 2011-12 providing essential services to all county residential sectors, increasing services 17
and hours at District Centers and helps partially fund the center improvements through 18
increased efficiencies and savings from reduced/reallocated services and hours at the 19
Neighborhood Centers. Staff had proposed that High Rock Road Waste & Recycling Center 20
be the first Neighborhood Center constructed. Stationary compactors are considered 21
Recurring Capital and are reflected as such below. 22
23
o High Rock Neighborhood Waste & Recycling Center - $676,428 24
First Neighborhood Center - No Large, Bulky Materials (Metal, Clean 25
Wood); Increasing Services and Hours at District Centers 26
Property Lease Extension Options Pending Board Approval of Project 27
Current Lease Expires June of 2022 28
29
Commissioner Burroughs asked if there is a downside to delaying the High Rock 30
Neighborhood Waste and Recycling Center. 31
Travis Myren said most of this project will be funded via solid waste funds, but some 32
general fund monies are going into the solid waste fund. He said using the enterprise f und 33
money offsets most of this, and he can get the debt service information. 34
Commissioner Burroughs asked if staff could provide an update about the solid waste 35
fund, and the return on recycling. 36
Travis Myren said yes. 37
38
o Sanitation Equipment Parking Improvements - $410,000 39
Improve Working Conditions with Sheltered Parking, Lighting, and 40
Electricity 41
42
Chair Dorosin said he would like to see the costs of the individual vehicles 43
Paul Laughton said they are listed on each individual page by the year, including the 44
vehicle and the cost. 45
Travis Myren said staff can create a summary table. 46
47
FY2018-23 Recommended Capital Investment Plan 48
• Next Steps 49
o Document Review 50
31
Clerk to the Board’s Office 1
County Manager’s Office 2
Orange County Libraries 3
Orange County Website – orangecountync.gov 4
o Upcoming Budget Meetings 5
April 10 Work Session for Capital Investment Plan 6
April 24 Joint Meeting with Schools 7
May 1 Presentation of FY2018-19 Recommended Operating 8
Budget 9
May 10 & 17 Public Hearings on Operating Budget and CIP 10
May 24 Work Session for Schools and Outside Agencies 11
May 31 Work Session for Fire Dist., Public Safety, Support, Gen. 12
Govt. 13
June 7 Work Session for Human Services and Comm. Services 14
June 12 Amendments and Intent to Adopt 15
June 19 Adoption of Operating Budget and CIP 16
17
Bonnie Hammersley reminded the Board to email her and Travis Myren if there are any 18
changes to the CIP that it wants to make, and she will make a full listing later on for the Board 19
to vote up or down on. 20
21
A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Price to 22
adjourn the meeting at 10:11 p.m. 23
24
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 25
26
Mark Dorosin, 27
Chair 28
29
Donna Baker 30
Clerk to the Board 31
1
Attachment 2 1
2
DRAFT 3
MINUTES 4
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 5
REGULAR MEETING 6
April 17, 2018 7
7:00 p.m. 8
9
10
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, April 17, 2018 11
at 7 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, N.C. 12
13
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Dorosin and Commissioners Mia Burroughs, 14
Barry Jacobs, Earl McKee, Mark Marcoplos, Renee Price and Penny Rich 15
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None 16
COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts 17
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Deputy County Manager 18
Travis Myren and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other staff members will be identified 19
appropriately below) 20
21
Chair Dorosin called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. 22
23
1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda 24
Chair Dorosin said people have signed up to speak on item 8-d, and he suggested 25
moving this item to after 4-a. 26
27
A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Price to 28
move item 8-d to after 4-a. 29
30
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 31
32
PUBLIC CHARGE 33
Chair Dorosin dispensed with the public charge. 34
35
Arts Moment 36
Tom Hoke, Arts Commission Chair, introduced the Arts Moment: 37
The 2016-18 Hillsborough Poet Laureate William Davis, who goes by the performance name 38
“Endlesswill", is a spoken word artist dedicated to continuing the tradition of poetry in living 39
form. His most recent poetry collection, Broken Perception, is largely autobiographical, 40
exploring the themes of utilizing lessons of the past to positively shape one’s future and the 41
complexities of the human condition. The first twenty-five poems in the book can be found in 42
audio form on a CD also titled Broken Perception. 43
44
William Davis is originally from Grand Rapids, Michigan. He studied world history, and early 45
childhood education at Ferris State University. He is a father of five wonderful, artistic, and 46
sports involved children. He and his partner Catherine Stanley enjoy planning writing activities, 47
family book clubs, and riding bikes together. 48
49
William Davis read two of his poems. 50
2
1
2. Public Comments 2
3
a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda 4
5
James Ward said he is a resident of south Orange County, and is here to speak 6
against the proposed amendment to the flag ordinance. He said he opposes this 7
proposed amendment as it is clearly targeting confederate flags, and would likely not be 8
on the table for flying a Black Lives Matter, Me Too, or Gay Pride flag; all of which, he 9
feels, should be able to be flown at any size on private property. He said the confederate 10
flag is not akin to the Nazi flag, and there was never any genocide in the South. He said 11
he hopes Orange County is a more tolerant County, and thanked the Board of County 12
Commissioners (BOCC) for its time. 13
14
b. Matters on the Printed Agenda 15
(These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda 16
below.) 17
18
3. Announcements, Petitions and Comments by Board Members 19
Commissioner Jacobs asked the Manager if she could ask staff to determine the impact 20
on the County should the Supreme Court approve the sales tax on Internet sales. 21
Commissioner Jacobs congratulated Chair Dorosin on arguing the Silver case before 22
the NC Supreme Court, related to the Halifax County school issue. 23
Commissioner Burroughs said, in response to the public comments, that slavery was 24
genocide, and said she had ancestors on one side of her family tree that were slave holders, of 25
which she is ashamed. 26
Commissioner McKee had no comments. 27
Commissioner Rich said two Sundays ago the Food Council presented the Racial Equity 28
Institute (REI) groundbreaking event, and food from Syria and Burma was served. She said it 29
was held at the Whitted Building, and she is grateful that they have a facility that can be used 30
for these types of events. 31
Commissioner Rich commended Katie Murray about the “Monumental Voices” event, 32
which was a lovely. 33
Commissioner Rich said the Emergency Services Department just spent a week 34
celebrating Emergency Services week, and the “911 calls” celebrated 50 years. She thanked 35
the New Hope Fire Departments for providing food. She said she brought Commissioner 36
Jacobs a present from the Forest Rangers: a bandana with Smokey the Bear on it, and a 37
coozie that instructs how to put out a campfire. 38
Commissioner Price said the BOCC previously received a petition from the community 39
about plastic straws and reducing plastic, and she wondered if large water dispensers could be 40
installed in County facilities, to reduce the use of plastic bottles. 41
Commissioner Price said she attended the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS) 42
State of the Schools Report, and there is a lot of good work being done by a dedicated team. 43
She said the same is also true of Orange County Schools (OCS). 44
Commissioner Price said Cardinal Innovations had its quarterly meeting, and is making 45
efforts to be more accountable and responsive to the needs of its service community. 46
Commissioner Price said the Durham/Chapel Hill/Carrboro Metropolitan Planning 47
Organization (MPO) met, and is continuing its study of the 54-west corridor, and will hold some 48
community meetings in the future. 49
3
Commissioner Price said Deborah King, long time Executive Director of CASA, passed 1
away, and asked if the County could do something to commemorate her efforts for the 2
community. She suggested planting a tree or dedicating part of a community garden in her 3
honor. 4
Commissioner Marcoplos said he attended Equity Summit 2018 in Chicago last week, 5
which dealt with food insecurity, justice issues, etc. He said he looked forward to bringing some 6
ideas to the Board of County Commissioners. 7
Commissioner Marcoplos said he attended the Go Triangle meeting this morning, and 8
mentioned a new website link , goforwardnc.org, which intends to provide better quality 9
information about the Wake, Durham and Orange County plans. He encouraged the BOCC to 10
review it, and see if there is anything pertinent that is missing. 11
Chair Dorosin said this was a tough week for the community, with Immigration and 12
Customs Enforcements (ICE) engaging in a series of raids in Orange and Chatham counties. 13
He said several neighbors were arrested, and are being detained. He said Orange County has 14
made great strides towards inclusion and welcoming all peoples, and he said it is frustratingly 15
tragic how quickly these types of raids and arrests can undo this work. He said these arrests 16
reflect a change in federal policy. He said the Towns, Police Departments, and Sheriff’s 17
Department have stood with the County in protecting the community, while not becoming 18
agents of the federal government or immigration. He said the BOCC remains committed to 19
inclusion, and support of all families who are living in fear of the government. 20
Chair Dorosin read a press release about a local woman taking sanctuary in a church in 21
Chapel Hill, noting that NC has the most active congregational sanctuary cases in the country. 22
Commissioner McKee petitioned to have staff bring information to the Board regarding 23
the exact charges for which local residents have been detained. 24
25
Matters not on Printed Agenda (extended) 26
Sherry Appel spoke on the Poppy Project, a WWI Centennial event that will occur 27
throughout the year, and she reviewed the various events happenings in reference to this 28
project. 29
30
4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations 31
32
a. Discussion with Orange County’s Legislative Delegation 33
The Board met with the three members of the legislative delegation representing 34
Orange County in the North Carolina General Assembly to discuss topics and issues of concern 35
in preparation for the 2018 North Carolina General Assembly; and following the discussion, 36
provide any necessary direction on next steps to staff and Commissioners Mark Dorosin and 37
Penny Rich as the 2018 appointees to the Legislative Issues Work Group regarding the 38
development of any information for Board of Commissioners’ consideration. 39
40
PURPOSE: 41
To: 42
1) Meet with the three members of the legislative delegation representing Orange County 43
in the North Carolina General Assembly to discuss topics and issues of concern in 44
preparation for the 2018 North Carolina General Assembly; and 45
2) Following the discussion, provide any necessary direction on next steps to staff and 46
47
Commissioners Mark Dorosin and Penny Rich as the 2018 appointees to the Legislative 48
Issues Work Group regarding the development of any information for Board of Commissioners’ 49
consideration. 50
4
1
BACKGROUND: 2
The 2018 North Carolina General Assembly “short session” convenes in May 3
2018. The Board of Commissioners has historically appointed a Legislative Issues Work Group 4
(LIWG) to work with staff to develop a proposed legislative package for the County. Based on 5
the work of the LIWG, the BOCC then reviewed and approved packages of legislative items to 6
present to Orange County’s legislative delegation. 7
8
For 2018, and in contrast to past years, the Board of Commissioners has invited the three 9
members of Orange County’s legislative delegation to a regular Board meeting to discuss 10
issues of concern to the Board of Commissioners and the legislative delegation. Board 11
members will have the opportunity to converse with members of the delegation, and members 12
of the public will also have the opportunity to comment. 13
14
Following the discussion, the Board will provide direction to staff and to Commissioners Mark 15
Dorosin and Penny Rich as the 2018 appointees to the Legislative Issues Work Group. 16
17
Chair Dorosin said this is the first time the Board has used this meeting format for the 18
legislative discussion. 19
Chair Dorosin asked if the delegates could offer a sense of what to expect in the coming 20
session, and what the Board should be anticipating. 21
Senator Valerie Foushee said to expect the unexpected. 22
Representative Verla Insko said it will be a very short session, but some constitutional 23
amendments are expected. 24
Senator Valerie Foushee said she had nothing to add, but it will be a short, yet important 25
session, packed with things they do not want to see. She said she expects deliberation on at 26
least three constitutional amendments, and believes there will be some compensation 27
consideration for teachers and state employees. 28
Representative Graig Meyer said the 3 constitutional amendments he anticipates are: 29
voter id requirement; right to hunt and fish; and capping the state income tax rate at 5.5%. He 30
said there is discussion of replacing the income tax cap with an expenditure rate increase cap. 31
He said he thinks the most debilitating amendment would be the capping of the income tax rate, 32
as the State would be limited in the ways it can increase revenue to take care of severe needs. 33
He said the only other way to raise revenue would be to increase fees or the sales tax, which 34
would hurt residents, and put counties in an awful position. 35
Chair Dorosin asked if there was any update on getting rid of judicial elections. 36
Senator Valerie Foushee said she this is not on the list for constitutional amendments, 37
but she believes there will be a bill passed in some form, as relates to judicial redistricting. 38
Representative Verla Insko said this was on the table before, and she believes it will be 39
back again. 40
Representative Verla Insko referred to the abstract and Medicaid, and said the goal 41
behind moving to managed care is to reduce the number of unwanted prescription drugs and 42
unwarranted tests, which generate savings for private sector profit making companies that 43
come in to do the managed care. She said Community Care Network of NC has been 44
successful at saving money every year in the Medicaid program, so she is not sure if there is a 45
lot of left over funding in the Medicaid program. She said all are happy to have Governor 46
Cooper on board, and the wonderful Mandy Cohen as Health and Human Services Secretary. 47
Representative Verla Insko said every state starts out with a state health plan, put in 48
place when it enters into the Medicaid program. She said any changes to this are called state 49
plan amendments. She said the waiver to go to managed care was put forth by a previous 50
5
secretary, and is in Washington, DC. She said Secretary Cohen amended this waiver, and did 1
not have to go through the General Assembly (GA); and as part of that waiver, she included 2
Carolina Cares, a Medicaid expansion proposal, which includes a work provision. 3
Representative Verla Insko said there has been an increase in funding for Smart Start 4
and early childhood education, and there is bipartisan support for these services; but the State 5
is still below the 2007 funding levels. 6
Representative Verla Insko referred to mental health funding, and said as hospital beds 7
were closed, funding was supposed to go into building community based facilities, which never 8
happened. She said expanding Medicaid would help provide mental health services to the 9
uninsured. She said the funds that were saved by closing hospitals went into Medicaid mental 10
health services, but only for those who are Medicaid eligible. 11
Senator Valerie Foushee addressed item #6: Raise Age for Juvenile Jurisdiction in 12
Criminal Court. She said this was accomplished in the 2017 budget, and will go into affect on 13
December 1, 2019. 14
Representative Graig Meyer referred to item #20: Broadband/Digital Infrastructure, and 15
said the Bright Futures Act passed the House in the last session, and has a good chance of 16
passing in the Senate. He referred to item #240: bona fide farm use, and said he negotiated a 17
study of the bona fide farm use to be put into one of the agricultural oversight committees. He 18
said he has been watching the committee agendas, and this has never been added to one. He 19
said he is unsure why, but will continue to pursue it. He referred to item #33: Agricultural 20
Economic Development, and said he thinks there will be continued efforts from the Legislature 21
to support the growth of the industrial hemp industry, and possibly helping to support the 22
development of a privately owned processing center that would be convenient for farmers. 23
Chair Dorosin said this is the list in the packet is from last year, and the Board will make 24
a new list. 25
Senator Valerie Foushee referred to item #15: Voter Registration and Voting, and said 26
all of this has been accomplished, with the exception of restoring straight party ticket voting and 27
public financing. 28
Commissioner Marcoplos asked if it is useful for the Board to hone down to 2 or 3 well- 29
defined issues, or to provide a laundry list of more generic issues. 30
Representative Verla Insko said a prioritized package is useful, and it is effective to 31
send something to them as the issue is on the agenda. 32
Senator Valerie Foushee said it is helpful for the County to include a resolution. 33
Commissioner Price asked if there is any update about the reduction in class sizes for 34
K-3. 35
Representative Graig Meyer said after the special session bill, which was an attempted 36
fix to this issue, it is now known that the class size mandate is going to be delayed by one full 37
year, and then staged in over four years. He said there is a pledge to provide additional funding 38
of specials classes, which will increase annually over the four years. He said there are two 39
problems: 1.) the formula used for the new funding allotment is less generous than the standard 40
per pupil allotment, so school districts are still going to be short on teachers; and 2.) there is still 41
no capital funding for increasing school facility space to meet the mandate of the class size 42
dropping. He said a verbal pledge was given by legislative leaders to address capital needs 43
during the short session. He said the House has been broadly supportive of a schools 44
infrastructure bond to try and address the massive capital needs of schools across the State, 45
but the Senate has not taken up this issue, nor expressed much interest. He said he has no 46
predictions about work actually being done on school capital needs. 47
Representative Verla Insko said she expected this bill will come to the House, and may 48
be able to be passed. She said the smaller class mandate is not possible for many school 49
districts to accomplish without significant capital increase, and building new classrooms. 50
6
Senator Valerie Foushee said the Senate will not take up this bill in the short session. 1
Commissioner Rich said the Board passed a resolution where everyone is registered to 2
vote when they reach a certain age, and she asked if this has hit the floor. 3
Representative Verla Insko said she has not heard anything about this, but many people 4
are in favor of having automatic voter registration based on social security. She said there are 5
many ways to increase voter registration, and she is very pleased that 16 and 17 year old pre-6
registration is back. 7
Commissioner Rich said more and more states are doing automatic registration. 8
Commissioner McKee said, given the less than warm reception he received in Raleigh 9
last year over impact fees, he has a slight understanding of the uphill battle the delegates face, 10
and he appreciates the effort put forth. He asked if the delegates would please give the BOCC 11
a heads up if anything significant is expected to happen. 12
Commissioner Jacobs asked the Chair if there is a specific process for this evening’s 13
discussion, and whether the BOCC has additional topics to be added to the resolution regarding 14
legislative matters. 15
Chair Dorosin said suggestions can be solicited from the Board, the old list amended, 16
and he and Commissioner Rich can come up with a working list to propose. 17
Commissioner Jacobs said it is critically important that school impact fees be reinstated. 18
He asked if the delegates would identify one thing that they would like to see accomplished in 19
the upcoming short session. 20
Representative Verla Insko said more funding for education is at the top of her list. She 21
said teachers are spending their own money to buy supplies. 22
Senator Valerie Foushee said the same, and that is the issue that will get the most 23
traction, since it is an election year. 24
Representative Graig Meyer said the Bright Futures Act should get done this year, and 25
that will be a net positive on rural broadband. 26
Commissioner Jacobs said there is a two-page spread in USA Today that discusses 27
what teachers purchase for their classrooms. 28
Representative Verla Insko said broadband is part of the education issue too. 29
Commissioner Jacobs said the Board has asked OCS to try and enable its buses with 30
Wi-Fi, but have had no response yet. 31
Commissioner Rich said she heard that the buses do not have enough power for more 32
than 2 hours of Wi-Fi usage, and asked if staff could find out if this is accurate. 33
Chair Dorosin said typically the BOCC sends a long list of items, knowing most of them 34
will not get passed, but also wants to provide support to the issues that are most useful to the 35
delegates in achieving some successes. He said it sounds like broadband and education 36
funding are the highest priorities. He asked if there are any other top priorities. He said he 37
recalls the BOCC prioritizing the top 4 or 5 items last year. 38
Representative Verla Insko said Medicaid expansion and mental/behavioral health 39
integration with physical health. She said there has been a public system of the management 40
of the mental health system, but the plan is to integrate the mild and moderate with the regular 41
physical health, so that there will be one Medicaid card. She said those with more severe and 42
persistent mental health needs would remain with Local Management Entity and Managed Care 43
Organization (LME/MCO ), and ask for physical health to be integrated into that system. 44
Chair Dorosin asked if there are specific bill numbers for important issues: 45
Bill #s 46
• HB 68 (Bright Futures Act) 47
• Carolina Care bill has already been rolled into the waiver that has gone to DC, and 48
support for this waiver would be welcomed. 49
50
7
Greg Wilder, County Manager’s office, said he could address the five topics highlighted 1
by the BOCC last year: 2
#6 - Raise the Age - accomplished 3
#15- Voter registration – most parts of this are accomplished 4
#24 - Bona fide farm use – addressed by Representative Meyer 5
#29 - Agriculture – Support Conservation of Working Lands and Farmland Preservation 6
#34 -Transportation funding 7
8
Chair Dorosin suggested that the Board look over the items in the packet, and to add or 9
delete items, and send them to all board members over the next two weeks. He said he and 10
Commissioner Rich will convene the Legislative Issues Working Group to compile a 11
comprehensive list. 12
13
ITEM MOVED UP 14
8. Consent Agenda 15
16
d. Resolution of Approval – Conservation Easement Amendment for Keith 17
Arboretum 18
The Board considered a resolution to approve an amendment to a conservation 19
easement held by Orange County for the Keith Arboretum now owned by Pickoretum, LLC, and 20
authorizing the Chair to sign. 21
David Stancil, Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks and Recreation (DEAPR) 22
Director, reviewed this item, and said this is an amendment to an existing conservation 23
easement. 24
25
BACKGROUND: 26
In September 2005 the Board authorized Orange County’s acceptance of a conservation 27
easement from Dr. Charles Keith. The Keith Arboretum, as it is now known, was purchased by 28
Jeffery Fisher of Pickoretum, LLC. The Keith Arboretum is located at the end of Marion’s Ford 29
Road (off Dairyland Road) in Bingham Township. 30
31
The conservation easement helps to protect 45 acres of arboretum consisting of an estimated 32
5,000 different species of plants as well as the undeveloped woodlands, and the Morgan Creek 33
headwater streams located on the property. The conservation easement was completed and 34
recorded on May 19, 2006. 35
36
The property is comprised of four adjoining tracts (Attachment 2). The former Keith residence – 37
a restored 1830’s log cabin – and the Arboretum are located on a 19-acre parcel 38
(Tract A). Tracts B, C and D are entirely wooded and undeveloped. Future development 39
rights were relinquished, with the exception of potential walking trails and a potential future 40
visitor/educational center and maintenance buildings for the Arboretum (restricted to Tract 41
A). Tracts B and C were to remain entirely undeveloped. 42
43
The owner, Jeff Fisher, initially requested an amendment to the easement that was broad in 44
scope and did not maintain or enhance the conservation values of the property. DEAPR staff 45
has worked with Mr. Fisher to amend the conservation easement to better serve the needs of 46
the arboretum while upholding the original conservation values of the property. 47
48
Kim Livingston, Land Conservation Manager, reviewed the following proposed 49
amendments that have been agreed upon by Mr. Fisher and staff: 50
8
1
• Remove the allowance for expanding the existing residence in exchange for allowing 2
the proposed new building footprint to be larger (1,000 square foot to 2,000 square 3
foot), within the “Building Envelope”. 4
o Rationale: One for one swap of building footprint 5
6
• Allow for new structures or improvements proposed for locations outside the “Building 7
Envelope” to be built provided they are for the care, maintenance or enjoyment of the 8
arboretum and located on Tract A or B. 9
o Rationale: Allows for better and safer management of the Arboretum 10
as well as providing a better facility for public access. 11
12
• Allow for the construction and maintenance of pervious farm roads necessary to carry 13
out the improvements and permitted uses permitted on the Property. 14
o Rationale: Allows for better and safer management of the Arboretum. 15
16
• Allow Grantor to raise bees, or permit others to raise bees on the property, to support 17
the horticultural activities occurring within the Keith Arboretum; and to graze sheep for 18
the care and maintenance of the arboretum within the arboretum boundary. Grazing 19
would not be allowed within a 100-foot wide stream buffer and must comply with a 20
current Conservation Plan. 21
o Rationale: Allows for sustainable management of the Arboretum, 22
decreasing the need for herbicides. 23
24
• Trees may be removed, cut and otherwise managed to restore forest composition and 25
structure, to control insects and disease, to prevent personal injury and property 26
damage, or to salvage wind-thrown timber. Such management activities must be 27
pursuant to a Forest Management Plan prepared by a North Carolina Registered 28
Forester, the selection of whom is mutually agreed upon by Grantor and Grantee and 29
which management activities must be agreed to in advance by Grantee and Grantor. 30
o Rationale: Allows for sound, sustainable forest management practices 31
to restore pine forests to hardwood forests. 32
33
• Allow Grantor to engage or contract others to engage in any activity designed to 34
repair, restore, or otherwise enhance the natural resources found or once present on 35
the Property, that are consistent with the Conservation Values of this Conservation 36
Easement and subject to the written approval of the Grantee and the Natural 37
Resources Conservation Service. 38
o Rationale: Allows for natural resource value enhancement. 39
40
The Land Conservation Manager has evaluated the proposed amendment relative to purposes 41
of the conservation easement and the protection of the property’s “conservation values”, and 42
believes the proposed amendment strengthens the protection of the property afforded by the 43
conservation easement, while allowing this unique asset to be shared with the community. 44
Additionally, staff has received and reviewed a previous question regarding the protection of the 45
rare and specimen trees on the property, and that topic is addressed via the attached 46
memorandum, which was previously provided to the Board. 47
48
PUBLIC COMMENT: 49
9
Elise Alexander requested that the proposed changes be tabled for further discussion, 1
based on the following reasons: 2
• she questioned putting property in an easement if it is so easily changed 3
• building on section B: this property has no access from Bright’s Way, and she is the 4
spokesperson for this Way; 5
• the proposed addition of 1000 square foot building, and other buildings that may be built 6
“as he determines for the enjoyment of the arboretum”. Mr. Fisher’s intent for the 7
arboretum is for it to serve as a community center for a housing development that the 8
present owner is putting in. 9
She said the original owner would not have wanted these changes, and she said the 10
current owner talked with her personally about his intent. 11
Vann Evans said this property is at the end of Marion Ford’s Road, and he has lived at 12
the end of this road since 1974. He said he and his neighbors do not want to see the proposed 13
changes. He said the present owner brought 400 acres adjacent to this property to build a 14
housing development. He said it is his opinion that they do not need this kind of development 15
on their rural road. He asked if Dr. Keith were here, what would he say? 16
Jo Vest said the neighbors need to have time to process changes in their neighborhood, 17
and they just heard about these changes about two hours before this meeting. She asked if the 18
Board would let the neighbors talk about this before any changes are made. 19
Chris Hagenberger said she has lived on Bright’s Way since 1990, and said section B 20
runs along Bright’s Way, and has a creek behind it. She said the only way the current owner 21
will be able to access his proposed maintenance building on section B is via Bright’s Way, due 22
to a creek being on the section of land. She said the only other option is to build a bridge 23
across the creek. She referred the owner’s request is too broad, and asked if the Board would 24
please table this item for now. 25
Susan Walser said she has lived in this community for 22 years, and has property 26
adjacent to the Keith property. She said the Keith Arboretum directly impacts many of the 27
neighbors. She said a big problem with this issue, is that the new owner is under the farm 28
exemption, and the arboretum is under this. She said these uses do not have to go through 29
special use permits process, neighbors are not notified, and there is no comment period. She 30
said Mr. Fisher makes requests and he changes the easements, and his requests are granted 31
such as “roamer”, people flying drones, walking their dogs, etc. She said the community wants 32
time to talk among themselves and with Board members. 33
Marilee McTigue asked the Board to protect Dr. Keith’s vision, and she seconded others’ 34
comments. She said the community needs time to digest all of this information, and to support 35
the original vision. 36
Commissioner McKee said he has the same concerns about this amendment as he did 37
with Triple Crown development. He said he reviewed the bullet points in the abstract, and said 38
he does not understand all of them. He said this conservation easement was set up for the 39
preservation of this property, and gets very nervous when changes are made because he can 40
see trouble further down the road. He said the Board should proceed with great caution on any 41
issue like this. 42
Commissioner Jacobs said he and a couple of commissioners met with Jeffrey Fisher 43
several months ago, and he spoke about making a park, with the County being the facilitator of 44
a multi hundred-acre park. He asked if this is the same area that is now being referred to as a 45
potential subdivision. 46
Commissioner Rich said she thinks this is the same piece of land, but she does not 47
remember a housing development being a part of the conversation. She said there is some 48
concern, and she would like to see a neighborhood meeting take place so that Mr. Fisher can 49
10
explain his vision and get everyone on the same page. She said it was her understanding that 1
the roamer is gone, and most of their conversation in the past was about educational purposes. 2
David Stancil said he has heard a lot of new things tonight, and staff will be glad to have 3
a neighborhood meeting. He said much of what has been voiced tonight is about other 4
properties that are owned by the same owner, and tonight’s item was about one specific 5
property. He said the Planning Department has not received any requests pertaining to the 6
other portions of land. 7
Bonnie Hammersley said there was a meeting between Mr. Fisher, Commissioner 8
Jacobs, Commissioner Marcoplos, Commissioner Rich, Travis Myren and herself, where a 9
request was made beyond what the staff felt could be done. She said she has heard a lot of 10
new information this evening. She said this evening’s item contains all that the staff felt it was 11
able to do, and it is not nearly as much as Mr. Fisher originally requested. 12
Commissioner Jacobs said there are two issues: 1.) He would like to see the original 13
abstract that proposed the conservation easement for Dr. Keith’s arboretum; and 2.) He 14
wonders if this is being used as a stalking horse for something else, and this would involve 15
planning as well as DEAPR. He said it is important to discuss everything with those most 16
impacted, including the present owner. 17
Commissioner Jacobs said the Board’s first priority is to protect the conservation 18
easement, for which the County paid, and suggested deferring this item until questions have 19
been resolved. 20
Commissioner Price agreed with Commissioner Jacobs. 21
Commissioner Burroughs supported tabling this item until discussions have taken place. 22
Commissioner Marcoplos agreed. 23
24
A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs 25
Consensus to table this bring back with more information about original easement, community 26
meeting and also to get as much information as they can around this property. 27
28
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 29
30
4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations RESUMED 31
32
b. Board of Adjustment (BOA) Overview 33
The Board received information regarding the purpose and operations of the Orange 34
County Board of Adjustment, including a brief presentation from Professor David Owens, 35
Gladys Hall Coates Professor of Public Law and Government, of the UNC School of 36
Government, and the Board will discuss this matter as necessary and provide direction to the 37
Manager. 38
39
BACKGROUND: 40
Orange County residents have expressed concerns regarding the operations of the Board of 41
Adjustment and staff appointed to assist the Board of Adjustment. The Board of 42
Commissioners directed staff to recruit a neutral third party to present an overview of the 43
purpose and operations of boards of adjustment. The County Manager, County Attorney, and 44
staff have been reviewing the issues raised and associated solutions and costs. In addition to 45
questions related to process concerns were expressed regarding availability of public records. 46
Orange County is in the midst of converting to a process in which most public records subject to 47
requests would be published on the County’s website. This conversion is ongoing, but once 48
complete will eliminate situations in which a record may be provided in a format not acceptable 49
11
to the requesting party. Per newly enacted state law most records will be posted electronically 1
in response to requests. 2
3
Below is a brief overview of county boards of adjustment: 4
5
The Orange County Board of Adjustment is a quasi-judicial hearing panel appointed by the 6
Board of Commissioners. The term quasi-judicial usually refers to the adjudicative acts of an 7
elected or appointed official or board. In Orange County the quasi-judicial hearings before the 8
Board of Adjustment generally fall into three categories – appeals of final decisions, 9
applications for special use permits, and variances. 10
11
Unlike legislative hearings in which the public at large may comment on all conceivable policy 12
issues associated with the subject matter of the legislative hearing, there are restrictions on 13
who may participate in quasi-judicial hearings. The participants of a quasi-judicial hearing may 14
only be those interested parties with standing. Interested individuals with specific knowledge or 15
expertise on the subject matter may participate as witnesses or expert witnesses as long as 16
they have the ability to offer competent, material, substantive testimonial or other evidence. 17
Members of the general public may not participate if they do not fall into one of these 18
categories. 19
20
The parties to a quasi-judicial hearing have a right to have their matter heard by an impartial 21
decision-maker. If a member of a quasi-judicial board has already formed an opinion before the 22
hearing or has a conflict of interest, that member should not participate in the hearing. Members 23
of quasi-judicial boards should also ensure they have no ex parte communications either with 24
parties, witnesses, or the general public. Any such communications must, at a minimum, be 25
disclosed. 26
27
There may be members of local quasi-judicial boards who would prefer to deliberate in closed 28
session. This is not permitted. North Carolina open meetings laws require meetings of public 29
bodies to be held in open session so that the public may remain informed of the nature and 30
subject matter of the meetings. The law does have exceptions that allow closed sessions, but 31
these exceptions do not include the authority to deliberate on quasi-judicial hearings. The only 32
exception that may apply to boards of adjustment is consultation with an attorney. There may 33
be situations in which a board of adjustment needs to consult an attorney – for example, when 34
a decision is appealed to inform the Board of Adjustment of its role in the appeal. 35
36
Currently, meetings of the Orange County Board of Adjustment are attended by a staff attorney 37
of the County Attorney’s office. Under the prior County Attorney, meetings were attended by the 38
assistant attorney. In both situations the attorney was present to answer questions of law and 39
procedure and to help ensure due process. As noted above, it may be lawful for boards of 40
adjustment to meet in closed session to consult with an attorney. This has only occurred once 41
in the last thirteen years. That incident was for the limited purpose of discussing the board’s 42
role in an appeal. Questions of law are generally asked in open session and generally 43
responded to by all attorneys present. 44
45
Attachment 1 in their agenda packet shows examples of how surrounding counties and towns 46
staff board of adjustment meetings. None regularly hire independent counsel to represent their 47
boards of adjustment. 48
The only exceptions to this appear to be when there is an actual conflict for the attorney who 49
attends their board of adjustment hearings. Only in those situations does another attorney 50
12
attend for the board of adjustment. The only situations in which another attorney would be 1
needed are situations as noted above when the Board of Adjustment has questions of law that 2
for some reason cannot be asked in open session or if the County appeals a Board of 3
Adjustment decision. The former has occurred once as noted above. The latter has not 4
occurred in at least the last thirteen years are unable to determine if it has ever occurred in 5
Orange County. 6
7
Orange County Planning Staff is presently training Planning Board members using an 8
interactive video E-Learning seminar series from the UNC School of Government. Some 9
training topics are directly relatable to the Board of Adjustment functions, including “Conducting 10
an Evidentiary Hearing” and “Making a Quasi-Judicial Decision,” both by Professor Owens. 11
Training can begin immediately for the Board of Adjustment and continue while the access is 12
active. 13
14
David Owens, Gladys Hall Coates Professor of Public Law and Government, of the UNC 15
School of Government, gave a brief history of the BOA. He said when zoning was first 16
envisioned, it was deemed that a separate board would be needed to handle quasi-judicial and 17
administrative aspects of development and regulations, as opposed to legislative body that sets 18
the policies and created the board in the first place. He said New York City had the first Board 19
of Adjustment to apply policies to individual cases where some judgement and discretion and 20
fact-finding were necessary. 21
David Owens said this was incorporated into the state enabling acts, which N.C. 22
adopted in 1923 for cities, and required a BOA. He said when counties were given the authority 23
to do zoning in 1959, that same authority was applied. He said the notion was that the Board of 24
County Commissioners would adopt policies, and determine the substantive requirements of 25
the development and regulation, with the advice of a planning board. He said once this was 26
done, decisions that were not objective and were the application of policy would be assigned to 27
the BOA. He said these decisions typically fall into one of three categories: 28
29
• Variances - justified by substantial hardship but still consistent with the purpose of intent 30
of ordinance; 31
• Appeals of staff decisions or interpretation of an ordinance 32
• Special/conditional use permit – where the ordinance says, “this is allowed in a zoning 33
district” but only if one can show evidence that specific standards set forth in the 34
ordinance are met: harmonious with the surrounding neighborhood, not have a 35
significant adverse impact on neighboring property values, be consistent with plan and 36
ordinance 37
38
David Owens said in carrying out the authority to make decisions, the BOA holds an 39
evidentiary hearing, not to determine public opinion, but to apply the ordinance as written by the 40
Board of County Commissioners. He said there is very little comment made at these hearings, 41
and the only reason to hold these hearings is to gather evidence to determine the facts that are 42
necessary to apply the ordinance as written. He said witnesses are under oath and subject to 43
cross examination, there is opportunity to present rebuttal testimony, and general fair trial 44
standards seen at a court, but in a slightly more informal sense. 45
David Owens said there are about 500 BOAs in N.C., made up mostly of lay members, 46
who exercise the judicial type function of hearing evidence, and based on that evidence, 47
applying the standards in the ordinance. He said if the BOA does not like the standards, it can 48
make a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to change the ordinance, but 49
the BOA has no authority to amend the ordinance on its own. 50
13
David Owens said he has been asked ahead of time to explain how BOAs are staffed 1
and who provides legal assistance to BOAs. He said in most cities/counties, the planning staff 2
provides planning and administrative support; and usually the city or county attorney provides 3
legal advice to the BOA. He said in smaller governments, most attorneys do not attend unless 4
there is a controversial issue; but in larger governments, county attorneys almost always attend. 5
He said some larger jurisdictions hire outside counsel to represent the BOA, especially if the 6
county attorney is an active participant in the hearing on behalf of the staff whose decision is 7
being appealed. He said it would be unethical for the county attorney to advise the BOA and 8
represent the staff at the same time. He said Raleigh and Charlotte tend to have outside 9
counsel for the BOA all of the time. He said another variation that is sometimes used in larger 10
jurisdictions, is when there are multiple members of the city or county attorney staff, and they 11
will split up the duties, with one attorney advising the BOA, and another advising the staff if 12
necessary. 13
Chair Dorosin referred to the scenario where the attorney wears multiple hats, and 14
asked if this can occur in all three of the matters typically heard by BOAs, or is it more often 15
with appeals. 16
David Owens said it happens most often if there is a question of interpretation; where 17
someone has applied for a variance or a SUP. He said in many jurisdictions staff does not take 18
a position, so the attorney is generally working with the BOA, since he is not working with staff. 19
He said the appeals are different because sometimes staff makes a determination without 20
consulting the attorney. He said staff can ask an attorney to interpret laws, as can the BOA. 21
He said when additional counsel is hired, it is typically due to workload, as opposed to conflict of 22
interest. 23
24
PUBLIC COMMENT 25
Laura Streitfeld said she is here with Preserve Rural Orange, and thanked the BOCC for 26
adding this item to the agenda. She said she brought this request to the Board of County 27
Commissioners so as to look at the role of the BOA; access to public records; recording of BOA 28
meetings; and for considering the bona fide farm use as a priority with the legislative 29
delegation. She asked the BOCC to consider if using outside counsel would be appropriate 30
when the County Attorney is directly involved in the decision making process. She said the 31
bona fide farm item is of particular interest, and there are three properties in the County 32
operating event centers, while claiming bona fide farm use. She said there has been 33
legislation, since the BOCC prioritized this item last year, but the way that item #24 is worded 34
really lays out the question of whether the primary use should be agriculture, with marketing 35
and agritourism as secondary uses, in order to claim exemptions from zoning. 36
Commissioner Rich said Professor Owens spoke of outside counsel being necessary 37
due to high caseloads, and asked John Roberts if he knows the number of cases in Orange 38
County on a yearly basis. 39
John Roberts said the BOA meets 6-8 times per year, with usually one or two cases per 40
meeting. He said Orange County does not have nearly the caseload of larger entities. 41
Commissioner Rich clarified that there are 10-12 cases per year. 42
John Roberts said there was a slow down during the recession, but that is about 43
average. 44
Commissioner McKee said he has previously advocated for independent counsel for the 45
BOA, and his concern is not impropriety of staff or counsel, but rather it is one of perception. 46
He said having in house counsel can give the perception that the County Attorney is covering 47
the County’s position. He said he supports outside counsel, and does not think this would be a 48
funding issue due to their being a small number of cases. 49
Commissioner Price asked if a staff attorney is present at all BOA meetings. 50
14
John Roberts said Staff Attorney James Bryan attends all BOA Meetings, and he does 1
not advocate on behalf of staff at the BOA meetings. He said the attorney can answer a 2
planning staff question before it makes its way to the BOA, but the attorney does not advocate 3
on behalf of the staff. He said should this situation arise, then outside counsel would be 4
retained. 5
Commissioner Jacobs said a county attorney was added to the BOA meetings as 6
developers were bringing their own attorneys to the BOA meetings. He said having an attorney 7
present is a good thing. He said the issue here is whether there should be recourse to the BOA 8
if it feels it requires or desires the additional support of outside counsel. 9
Commissioner Jacobs said he does not want to spend the extra money to have outside 10
counsel at every BOA meeting, and he feels that the County Attorney’s office does a good job; 11
however, the BOA should be given the opportunity to request outside counsel if it deemed it 12
necessary. 13
Chair Dorosin said there some things already being put in motion to improve the BOA 14
process: 15
• Recording BOA meeting 16
17
Bonnie Hammersley said she received quotes from the Clerk for the recording team at 18
the Whitted facility, and she will be recommending this as part of the FY17-18 budget for all of 19
the additional meetings. 20
21
• Access to public records on line 22
John Roberts said last session, the General Assembly passed a law changing the way 23
cities and counties can respond, and have that response be compliant with the law. He said he 24
began working with the IT Director to post almost all public records requests on line, and the 25
final process is being drafted now. He said once this is done, they will be able to get this 26
started for countywide responses to public record requests. He expects this process to be 27
completed in a month or two. 28
Chair Dorosin clarified that if one makes a public records request, the response to the 29
request will be posted on line so that not only the requestor can access them, but all of the 30
public may do so as well. 31
John Roberts said yes, there will be about a 10 day turn around between a request 32
being made and online access to view the response. 33
34
• Training for BOA members upon joining the BOA 35
John Roberts said Professor Owens has a webinar series, which includes: “Conducting 36
an Evidentiary Hearing” and “Making a Quasi-Judicial Decision”. He said both of these are 37
available to the BOA. 38
Craig Benedict, Planning Director, said a full year of access to the webinars was 39
purchased in December 2017. He said these are interactive webinars for either the BOA or 40
Planning Board. He said new members go through an orientation, including rules of procedure, 41
by laws, and a review of county created brochures. He said access to these webinars will be 42
helpful. 43
Chair Dorosin thanked staff for all its efforts on these different topics. He said the 44
question of outside counsel remains. He asked if Commissioner McKee wanted outside 45
counsel at all cases, or if he would prefer to follow the lead of the Town of Chapel Hill where 46
independent counsel is hired when necessary 47
Commissioner McKee said he would like independent counsel retained for all cases. 48
49
15
A motion was made by Commissioner McKee to retain outside counsel to represent the 1
Board of Adjustment in all matters coming before it. 2
3
Dies for lack of a second 4
5
Commissioner Rich referred to the process in Chapel Hill, and asked if it is known who 6
determined when outside counsel is needed. 7
John Roberts said the Town Attorney decides if he has a conflict of interest, and outside 8
counsel is hired. 9
Commissioner Rich said that process is not consistent with what Commissioner Jacobs 10
is asking for, as he said the BOA should request an outside attorney, rather than the County 11
Attorney determining the need for outside counsel. 12
Commissioner Jacobs said he could make it cover both. 13
Commissioner Rich said covering both would mean that there would be outside counsel 14
at every meeting. 15
Commissioner Marcoplos said both the County Attorney and the BOA should be able to 16
weigh in for outside guidance, but he does not think outside counsel is needed all cases. 17
Chair Dorosin asked if it would be worthwhile to get more information: does Chapel Hill 18
have a written policy that is uses, and an estimate of cost. 19
Commissioner Jacobs said he is always willing to defer for more information, but it may 20
be difficult to get an estimate of the costs. 21
Bonnie Hammersley recommended getting more information, because this would be 22
setting precedence for an advisory board to make fiscal decisions with County money. 23
Commissioner Rich agreed with the Manager, and feels a policy is needed. 24
Commissioner McKee asked Bonnie Hammersley if there are any other 25
boards/committees/task forces in the County that look at quasi-judicial issues. 26
John Roberts said the Board of Equalization and Review and the Animal Services 27
Hearing Pool hear these matters. He said the Animal Services Hearing Pool does not have 28
outside counsel present, but appeals go directly to Superior Court. 29
Bonnie Hammersley said the question of an attorney arose when allowing the appellant 30
to have an attorney present, which was a new change to the ordinance. 31
Commissioner Jacobs said Chapel Hill does not authorize its BOA to do anything, but 32
rather the attorney is authorized. He said the BOCC would be doing something different, and 33
the BOCC could add in that the Chair of the BOA would have to report quarterly to the Chair of 34
the Board of County Commissioners about the usage of outside counsel. He said this could 35
provide oversight of any potential abuse, while allowing the County to respond to a public 36
irritation with the system. 37
Chair Dorosin said he does not philosophically disagree, but he is proposing to gather 38
more information prior to the summer break, and then resolve this. 39
Bonnie Hammersley said she would like to look at some historical analysis of BOA 40
meetings to determine length of meetings, and some ballpark costs. She said the Attorney’s 41
and the Manager’s offices do not have extra funding for this, and she would like more time to 42
review this information. 43
Commissioner Price said she thinks the County Attorney’s office should determine if it 44
needs to recuse itself and hire outside counsel. She said if it is the will of the BOCC to allow 45
the BOA to make the determination, she would like more information. 46
Commissioner Jacobs said at some point it is important to involve the Chair of the BOA 47
in this process, as the BOA may deem this offer unnecessary, or have other input. 48
Bonnie Hammersley said she would gather input from the BOA Chair. 49
16
Commissioner Marcoplos said if the County Attorney says there is a conflict of interest 1
then that should be honored immediately. 2
Chair Dorosin said this process is already in place. 3
4
c. Orange County Partnership to End Homelessness 2017 Report9:18:14 PM 5
The Board received presentation on the 2017 activities of the Orange County 6
Partnership to End Homelessness (OCPEH) and also review an update to the homeless service 7
system gaps analysis. 8
Allison Demarco, OCPEH Chair, and Corey Root, Homeless Programs Coordinator, 9
reviewed the information below, as well as the OCPEH 2017 report, found in this evening’s 10
packet: 11
12
BACKGROUND: 13
The Orange County Partnership to End Homelessness was created in 2008 to coordinate 14
funding and activities to end homelessness in Orange County. OCPEH is jointly funded by 15
Orange County (39%) and the Towns of Carrboro (15%), Chapel Hill (41%), and Hillsborough 16
(5%), with the percentages based on the 2010 Census population counts. 17
18
Orange County Partnership to End Homelessness Coordinator Corey Root and OCPEH Board 19
Chair Allison De Marco will provide a brief presentation at the meeting and present the 20
homeless service system gaps analysis. 21
22
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with receiving the report. 23
In addition to utilizing office space at the Link Government Services Center, OCPEH received 24
$43,096 for FY2017-2018 from Orange County. The total OCPEH budget for FY2017-2018 is 25
$170,502. Contributions from the other jurisdictions, based on the Census population 26
percentages noted above, were: 27
• $45,306 from Chapel Hill 28
• $16,575 from Carrboro, and 29
• $5,525 from Hillsborough 30
31
OCPEH is requesting $60,782 in FY2018-2019 from Orange County. The full requested 32
budget is $183,352, with the proposed contributions from the other jurisdictions (based on the 33
Census population percentages noted above) as follows: 34
• $63,899 requested from Chapel Hill 35
• $23,378 from Carrboro, and 36
• $7,793 from Hillsborough 37
38
Allison DeMarco highlighted the statistics from the 2017 OCPEH report. 39
Chair Dorosin asked if the Allison DeMarco could clarify the statistic regarding 127 40
people in Orange County who experienced homelessness on one night. 41
Allison DeMarco said of the 127 people, 35 were unsheltered, meaning they were living 42
in a place not meant for human habitation. 43
Chair Dorosin asked if the remaining people were living in better situations. 44
Allison DeMarco said yes and no. 45
Corey Root said this gets into the definition that HUD uses for homelessness, and the 46
others were in shelters or other transitional housing programs. She said one who is living in a 47
shed would be considered to be living in a place not meant for human habitation, but one who is 48
staying on different friends’ couches every night is not counted as homeless, under the HUD 49
definition. She said this definition really prioritizes the most vulnerable of the vulnerable. 50
17
Corey Root said there a group called the HOME committee, which meets on a monthly 1
basis and goes through a by name list, of those who have given consent to be on the list, and 2
completes housing case conferencing for each person. She said 21 people on this list were 3
housed in 2017, and 85 total since 2012. 4
Corey Root made the following PowerPoint presentation: 5
6
Update to Homeless System Gaps Analysis 7
2017 – Homeless System Mapping 8
9
#1: Best-practice, fully-funded Rapid Re-housing 10
• What: Short-term rental assistance and case management for households with a mid-11
range of service needs 12
• Funding target: $578,000 13
o 2 FTE case managers, rental assistance for 60 households 14
• Status: Partial 15
o $39,392 in ESG funding awarded (corrected from printed doc) 16
o $25,000 HOME funds previewed to start July 2018 17
o Case manager added Aug. 2017, subcontract to IFC Jan 18
o Strategy: Diversify funding sources 19
20
#2: Income-based rental units 21
What: Rental units that use household income to determine amount of rent paid by 22
clients 23
• Funding target changes for development vs. non-development 24
o Development: millions 25
o Non-development: $455,370 26
Master leasing for rental subsidies and case management for 50 units 27
• Status: Partial 28
o Limited units available from Town/County subsidies, HUD subsidies 29
o Referrals not coordinated or prioritized 30
o Community need far outstrips number of available units 31
• Strategy: Collaboration, Master Leasing 32
33
#3a: Landlord Partnership: 34
Housing Locator 35
• What: Staff to connect voucher-holders to existing units 36
• Funding target: $53,000 37
o 1 FTE case manager 38
• Status: Previewed 39
o CEF, July 2018 40
o Need funding July 2019 and beyond 41
• Strategy: Secure long-term funding 42
43
#3b: Landlord Partnership: 44
Risk Mitigation Fund 45
• What: Funding for landlords to partially recoup costs for damage and eviction for 46
voucher-holders 47
• Funding target: $55,000 48
• Status: Previewed 49
o Orange County Housing & Community Development, May 2018 50
18
• Strategy: N/A 1
2
#4: Drop-In Day Center with Integrated Services 3
What: One-stop access for services 4
• Funding varies significantly on approach 5
o Orange Community Hub at CEF: $77,000 6
Upfit of space + contracts for off-site services (laundry) 7
Additional staff 8
o New space + 3 FTEs: $3.15 million 9
• Status: Partial 10
o OC Hub active with at CEF 11
o Criminal Justice Re-Entry Council for folks exiting correctional facilities 12
• Strategy: Decide on approach, secure long-term funding 13
14
#5: Street Outreach Program 15
What: Linking people living unsheltered with services 16
• Funding target: $80,154 17
• Status: Unfunded 18
o Community partner meetings resulted in program budget & hosting agency, UNC 19
Center for Excellence in Community Mental Health 20
o Not included in FY18-19 budget 21
• Strategy: Eligible ESG program; Foundations? 22
23
#6: 24-hour Bathrooms in Downtown 24
What: Free public restrooms open 24 hours 25
• Funding target: $205,000 for construction 26
• Status: Partial 27
o Chapel Hill - Wallace Deck bathrooms open daylight hours 28
o Carrboro - Town Commons open daylight hours 29
• Strategy: Integrate with #4 drop-in day center? Partner with Franklin Street churches? 30
Integrate in Chapel Hill downtown plans going forward? Have available in Carrboro 31
library opening 2020? 32
33
#7: Accessible & Housing-Focused Shelter 34
What: Shelter with low barriers to entry and housing-focused orientation 35
• Funding varies significantly on approach 36
o Re-tooling IFC Shelter: $194,700 37
Additional 155 staff hours & training 38
o New shelter construction: $3.17 million 39
Construction & staff costs 40
• Status: Partial 41
o Potential changes to Good Neighbor Plan? 42
• Strategy: Foundations? Local government? 43
44
#8: Diversion Funding 45
What: Assistance to prevent homelessness 46
• Funding target: $19,750 47
o Staff, financial assistance, training 48
• Status: Partial 49
o Many groups provide this, not coordinated or targeted 50
19
• Strategy: Recruit groups doing this work to collaborate 1
2
Commissioner Price said there is a request for additional funds for next year, and asked 3
if these funds are intended for additional services or for staff. 4
Corey Root said this will keep the budget flat, but a decent amount of fund balance has 5
been used in the last two years, and this request is to maintain services at their current level. 6
Commissioner McKee referred to the Landlord Partnership Initiative, and said he 7
thought there was an agency in Hillsborough that was coordinating those in need of housing 8
with available housing. He said he thinks the name of the director is James Stroud, and he 9
asked if this initiative is different from what she is doing. 10
Corey Root said she sits with James Stroud on the Orange County Affordable Housing 11
Coalition, but is unaware of him serving a similar population. She said she will connect with him 12
further to make sure of no overlap. 13
Bonnie Hammersley said there are a number of agencies that are providing similar 14
services, but for different populations. 15
Sherrill Hampton, Housing Director, said James Stroud manages the Center for Home 16
Ownership, which works mostly towards home ownership, and not rentals. She said her office 17
has asked him if he will work closely with Habitat for Humanity and Community Home Trust 18
(CHT). 19
Commissioner McKee asked if there are efforts in place to keep all of these services 20
under one umbrella, in order to avoid duplication. He said all of these organizations do good 21
work, but he wants to make sure there is no overlap. 22
Bonnie Hammersley said her recommended budget will show that staff has eliminated 23
the overlap. 24
Commissioner Marcoplos said the street outreach program is prioritized as #5, which 25
indicates to him that those taking advantage of the services are finding out about them 26
somehow, even without street outreach. He asked if people are interfacing with other agencies 27
that are connecting them to these services. 28
Corey Root said in some cases, but there are still people who are not connected at all, 29
or not in an efficient manner. She said there are still a lot of gaps, and there are currently no 30
staff trained to go out and connect with those who are living unsheltered. 31
Commissioner Marcoplos asked if there is any idea of how many people with whom a 32
street outreach staff could connect, who are not finding their way to services somehow. 33
Corey Root said on one night in 2017, there were 35 people living unsheltered. She 34
said this is the highest unsheltered count on record. 35
Commissioner Jacobs said there are homeless people trying to live near Whitfield Road, 36
and asked if there is an update on this group. 37
Corey Root said it is her understanding that the Sheriff served the people living in this 38
area, as far as trespassing on the median near I-40 and Highway 86. She said she often drives 39
past this area, and has not see anyone in recent weeks. 40
Chair Dorosin thanked the OCPEH for all its efforts, and said there is a lot of 41
collaboration among these various organizations, but little overlap. 42
43
d. County Government Month 44
The Board considered voting to approve a proclamation designating April 2018 as 45
County Government Month in Orange County, and authorize the Chair to sign. 46
Todd McGee, Community Relations Director, reviewed the information below: 47
48
BACKGROUND: 49
20
The National Association of Counties (NACo) celebrates National County Government Month 1
each April in an effort to educate the public about county government. A proclamation to 2
acknowledge the month of April 2018 as County Government Month is attached. 3
4
As part of National County Government Month, 2017-18 NACo President Roy Charles Brooks 5
has introduced the “Serving the Underserved” initiative, which focuses on the critical role 6
counties play in breaking multi-generational cycles of poverty. Orange County’s Family Success 7
Alliance was formed to combat poverty in the community. It is a collaboration of leaders from 8
local government, non-profits, schools, and the community who envision an Orange County 9
where all children and families have the opportunity to succeed in school and in life. 10
11
To highlight National County Government Month, the Community Relations Department 12
coordinated a social media campaign to draw attention to the many programs and services 13
offered by the County. Departments were asked to submit interesting facts and notes about 14
their services, and a different Tweet was sent each day during the month of April. Departments 15
highlighted included Environment, Agriculture, Parks and Recreation (DEAPR), Board of 16
Commissioners, Solid Waste, the Board of Elections, Human Resources, Animal Services, 17
Child Support Services, Aging, Information Technology and Economic Development. The 18
Community Relations Department is also sponsoring a County Budget Simulation Exercise for 19
students, which will be held at the Whitted Building on April 26, from 4:30 – 7 p.m. 20
Commissioners are invited to visit the session to hear how the different groups put together a 21
county budget. 22
23
Commissioner Price read the proclamation: 24
25
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 26
PROCLAMATION 27
County Government Month - April 2018 28
"Serving the Underserved" 29
30
WHEREAS, the nation’s 3,069 counties serving more than 300 million Americans provide 31
essential services to create healthy, safe and vibrant; and 32
33
WHEREAS, counties move America forward by providing health care, administering justice, 34
keeping communities safe, creating economic opportunities and much more; and 35
36
WHEREAS, Orange County and all counties take pride in their responsibility to protect and 37
enhance the health, welfare and safety of their residents in efficient and cost-effective ways; 38
and 39
40
WHEREAS, through National Association of Counties President Roy Charles Brooks’ “Serving 41
the Underserved” initiative, NACo is focusing on the critical role counties play in breaking multi-42
generational cycles of poverty; and 43
44
WHEREAS, counties provide public health, justice, safety, infrastructure, transportation, 45
technology, environmental stewardship and economic services that play a key role in everything 46
from residents’ daily commutes to emergency response; and 47
48
WHEREAS, Orange County Government exists to provide governmental services requested by 49
County residents or mandated by the State of North Carolina, and is guided by the objective 50
21
that “Our Residents Come First” and with the charge to treat all residents and all County 1
employees with fairness, respect, and understanding; and 2
3
WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners have made tremendous investments 4
in public education, affordable housing, human services, economic development and public 5
safety to enhance the quality of life for all County residents; 6
7
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT we, the Orange County Board of 8
Commissioners, do hereby proclaim April 2018 as County Government Month and encourage 9
all County officials, employees, schools and residents to participate in county government 10
celebration activities. 11
This the 17th day of April, 2018. 12
13
A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner McKee for the 14
Board to approve and authorize the Chair to sign the proclamation. 15
16
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 17
18
e. Resolution in Support of 3DaysCount™ 19
The Board considered voting to approve a Resolution in Support of 3DaysCount™ – A 20
Nationwide Effort To Make Communities Safer And Ensure Better Outcomes For All By 21
Applying Common Sense Solutions To Widespread Pretrial Justice Challenges. 22
Cait Fenhagen, Criminal Justice Resource Director, reviewed the information below: 23
24
BACKGROUND: 25
At the April 3, 2018 Board meeting, the Board voiced an interest in considering a Resolution in 26
Support of 3DaysCount™ – A Nationwide Effort To Make Communities Safer And Ensure 27
Better Outcomes For All By Applying Common Sense Solutions To Widespread Pretrial Justice 28
Challenges. 3DaysCount™ is an initiative of the Pretrial Justice Institute’s. Commissioner 29
Renee Price provided a sample resolution as the basis for the attached resolution for Board 30
consideration. 31
32
Nearly 12 million people are booked into United States jails each year, mostly for nonviolent 33
misdemeanors, and a majority is detained before trial largely because they are too poor to post 34
even small money bond amounts – costing local governments a nationwide aggregate of nearly 35
$14 billion annually in incarceration expenses. Pretrial detention is also deeply disruptive to 36
people’s lives and can have serious consequences, from interrupted education and medical 37
treatment to lost jobs, housing, and even custody of children. Research also shows that when 38
people who are most likely to appear in court and stay out of trouble are detained for even three 39
days, they become more likely to be arrested for new criminal activity during the pretrial period 40
compared to similar individuals released within just 24 hours. 41
42
The goals of 3DaysCount™ are to help states reduce unnecessary arrests by expanding the 43
use of citations or summons, replace money bail with non-financial, least restrictive conditions, 44
restrict detention to the small number of people for whom no condition or combination of 45
conditions can reasonably assure appearance in court and public safety, and reduce disparity 46
within the pretrial justice system. 47
48
Orange County has already implemented many of the recommendations of the Pretrial Justice 49
Institute including: 50
22
• internalizing the Pretrial Release program in the Criminal Justice Resource Department 1
• using an evidence-based pretrial risk assessment tool 2
• ensuring the presence of defense counsel at first appearances 3
• increasing opportunities for pre-arrest diversion 4
• employing mental health professionals to work directly with individuals incarcerated at 5
the County detention center to assess and refer to treatment in the community; and 6
• continuing to collect data and measure performance on County efforts. 7
8
Cait Fenhagen read the resolution: 9
RES-2018-025 10
11
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 12
13
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING 3DaysCount™ – A NATIONWIDE EFFORT TO MAKE 14
COMMUNITIES SAFER AND ENSURE BETTER OUTCOMES FOR ALL BY APPLYING 15
COMMON SENSE SOLUTIONS TO WIDESPREAD PRETRIAL JUSTICE CHALLENGES 16
17
WHEREAS, nearly 12 million people are booked into United States jails each year, mostly for 18
nonviolent misdemeanors; and 19
20
WHEREAS, more than 60 percent of people in jail are not convicted – detained before trial 21
largely because they are too poor to post even small money bond amounts – costing local 22
governments a nationwide aggregate of nearly $14 billion annually in incarceration expenses; 23
and 24
25
WHEREAS, pretrial detention is deeply disruptive to people’s lives and can have serious 26
consequences, from interrupted education and medical treatment to lost jobs, housing, and 27
even custody of children; and 28
29
WHEREAS, the money bail system places a disproportionate and unfair burden on people of 30
color, who, on average, face higher bail amounts even as they have fewer resources as a result 31
of chronic, systemic exclusion from economic opportunity; and 32
33
W HEREAS, research shows that when people who are most likely to appear in court and stay 34
out of trouble are detained for even three days, they become more likely to be arrested for new 35
criminal activity during the pretrial period compared to similar individuals released within just 24 36
hours; and 37
38
WHEREAS, the money bail system allows nearly half of those least likely to succeed on pretrial 39
release to quickly buy their release from jail with little to no meaningful support or supervision, 40
without regard for the needs of victims, witnesses, and the broader community; and 41
42
WHEREAS, the goals of 3DaysCount™ are to help states reduce unnecessary arrests by 43
expanding the use of citations or summons, replace money bail with non-financial, least 44
restrictive conditions, restrict detention to the small number of people for whom no condition or 45
combination of conditions can reasonably assure appearance in court and public safety, and 46
reduce disparity within the pretrial justice system; and 47
48
WHEREAS, Orange County has already implemented many of the recommendations of the 49
Pretrial Justice Institute including internalizing the Pretrial Release program in the Criminal 50
23
Justice Resource Department, using an evidence-based pretrial risk assessment tool, ensuring 1
the presence of defense counsel at first appearances, increasing opportunities for pre-arrest 2
diversion, employing mental health professionals to work directly with individuals incarcerated at 3
our jail to assess and refer to treatment in the community and continuing to collect data and 4
measure performance on our efforts; 5
6
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Orange County Board of Commissioners 7
hereby endorses the goals of 3DaysCount™; and 8
9
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Orange County Board of Commissioners strongly urges our 10
state-level stakeholders and government leaders to apply to join the Pretrial Justice Institute’s 11
3DaysCount™ initiative. 12
This the 17th day of April 2018. 13
14
A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Rich for the 15
Board to approve the Resolution, and if approved, authorize the Chair to sign the Resolution in 16
Support of 3DaysCount™ – A Nationwide Effort To Make Communities Safer And Ensure 17
Better Outcomes For All By Applying Common Sense Solutions To Widespread Pretrial Justice 18
Challenges. 19
20
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 21
22
Commissioner Price asked for the Clerk to send both the proclamation and resolution to 23
Legislative Delegation, and to also send the proclamation to the National Association of 24
Counties (NACo) and the resolution to the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners 25
(NCACC) and all 100 counties. 26
27
5. Public Hearings 28
NONE 29
30
6. Regular Agenda 31
32
a. Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application – Triple Crown Farms 33
The Board continued reviewing and taking final action on a request to modify a 34
previously approved Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat application. 35
Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor – Planner III, summarized the abstract and 36
information below: 37
38
STAFF COMMENT: At its April 3, 2018 regular meeting, the BOCC voted 3 to 3 on a motion to 39
approve the requested modification. As a result of the tie vote, the request was technically 40
denied. The BOCC then voted unanimously to bring the item back to the April 17, 2018 regular 41
meeting so the full BOCC could re-review and take action on the request. 42
43
BACKGROUND: The request seeks to modify conditions associated with roadway construction 44
within the Triple Crown Farms subdivision. Specifically, the applicant is seeking a modification 45
to the County’s original approval, which required internal roadways to be constructed to NC 46
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) public road standards. 47
48
STAFF COMMENT: As detailed during the April 3, 2018 BOCC regular meeting, the 49
Triple Crown Farms Major Subdivision was originally approved by the BOCC on June 50
24
17, 2014 as a 20 lot single-family residential subdivision. At that time the applicant 1
proposed, and the BOCC approved, internal roadways to be constructed to applicable 2
NCDOT public road standards. 3
4
The developer is requesting that the roads be constructed to Class A private road standards as 5
detailed in Section 7.8.5 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). The roads could still 6
meet NCDOT road standards except for elements of the drainage culvert/bridge construction 7
(i.e. the wing walls, side slopes, and bottom flow material) and other similar items. 8
9
Staff is recommending that this be approved, as articulated on Page 7. 10
11
Peter Bellantoni, of Pennoni, reviewed a PowerPoint presentation, which reviewed maps 12
and photos of the land. He said the issue with getting approvals for the development pertains 13
to three creek crossings: two off Secretariat Court, and a larger one on Galant Fox. He said 14
these three crossings were approved in 2014. He said the Developer has submitted essentially 15
the same layout (19 lots), with a few changes such as the two properties on the Triple Crown 16
Drive frontage being combined into one and sold; and trying to further reduce impervious 17
surfaces by going down to an 18 foot wide road; and eliminating the fire pond, due to an outside 18
source of sustainable water. 19
• He reviewed the culverts and pipe crossing/bridge structure and durability with maps 20
and photos. 21
• He said their structure is approved by DOT Standards. 22
• No problem with Emergency Services accessing these roads. 23
• Maintenance agreements 24
• Disclosure Statements 25
• He reviewed the modified proposal of a 10 lot exempt sub-division if the present 26
proposal is not approved- pros and cons 27
28
Commissioner McKee said, in the interest of full disclosure, he is a Summit Engineering 29
employee. He said he rode out to this development and saw the span of the bridge. He said it 30
blends in well with the environment, and he has no questions about the structural integrity of the 31
bridge, but it was not the one that was approved in the original permit, which said it would meet 32
Department of Transportation (DOT) standards. 33
Peter Bellantoni said the original plan showed for a span there, and DOT was not going 34
to accept a span, because it is an environmental crossing. 35
Commissioner Burroughs said she watched the video of the April 3rd, and this is an 36
unfortunate situation, but she believes that the disclosure statements will protect the residents, 37
and it is a net benefit to the County to approve this project with the larger number of lots. 38
Commissioner Rich asked if clarification could be provided between what the Army 39
Corps of Engineers wanted and what DOT wanted. 40
Michael Harvey said it is not a question of what the Army Corps wanted, but rather what 41
it would allow as part of its permit process. He said this is a situation of a difference in opinion 42
from two regulatory agencies, each of which have a separate and independent view of the 43
needs of a particular construction item. He said the Applicant chose a path that centers on 44
requesting that this comes back as private roads, to address its concern. He said for the 45
Applicant to comply with DOT standards, would have meant further impact on the stream, and 46
would have required the Applicant to go back to the Army Corps to revise their permit, for which 47
there was no guarantee they would get one. 48
Michael Harvey said buffers will not go away regardless of what shape this project 49
takes. He said the imposition of stream buffer requirements is not a subdivision development 50
25
standard, but is a zoning development standard. He said if there were ten-acre lots, each 1
property owner that had a water feature on their property, would have to preserve the buffer as 2
articulated in section 6.13 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). He said all applicable 3
development regulatory standards would be imposed on any independent lot developed as part 4
of any project. 5
Chair Dorosin asked if the roads will be smaller. 6
Michael Harvey said there would be an 18-feet wide roadway instead of 25-feet wide, 7
which is consistent with the County’s private road standard per section 7.8.5 of the UDO. He 8
said one of the benefits of this is the reduction in impervious surface area. 9
Chair Dorosin asked if there is a reason the developer did not come to the BOCC for 10
approval, prior making the modification. 11
Peter Bellantoni said they had submitted to DOT and the Army Corps, received the 12
permit for Army Corps, and the discussion with DOT seemed unresolvable. He said it was their 13
understanding that private roads were the alternate possibility. He said they should have come 14
to the BOCC sooner, but the crossing was needed either way. 15
16
A motion was made by Commissioner Marcoplos, seconded by Commissioner Price for 17
the Board to approve the applicant’s request to modify the proposed roadways within the Triple 18
Crown subdivision from public to private, and approve the modified Resolution of Approval 19
contained in Attachment 4 with recommended conditions recommended by staff . 20
21
VOTE: Ayes, 4 (Commissioner Rich, Commissioner Burroughs, Commissioner Marcoplos, and 22
Commissioner Price); Nays, 3 (Chair Dorosin, Commissioner Jacobs, and Commissioner 23
McKee) 24
25
7. Reports 26
NONE 27
28
8. Consent Agenda 29
30
• Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda 31
32
- Item d: discussed earlier in the meeting. 33
- Items e and f by Commissioner Price 34
35
• Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda 36
37
A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to 38
approve the remaining items on the Consent Agenda. 39
40
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 41
42
• Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda 43
44
e. Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Amendment Outline 45
Form Modification – Home Park Acreage Increase and Additional Land Uses 46
The Board considered a modification to a previously approved Amendment Outline Form (AOF) 47
and re-approve process/schedule components for a proposed text amendment to the Orange 48
County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). 49
50
26
Commissioner Price asked if the ratio of mobile homes to the public parks/government 1
offices is known. 2
Michael Harvey said the UDO does not establish a ratio, as this is a conditional zoned 3
process, it would have to come before the BOCC, to be reviewed with the Applicant. He said 4
the BOCC originally approved this amendment outline form to allow the staff to modify 5
allowable uses in the home park conditional zoning district. He said it was then determined that 6
with the density limits in Orange County, that a 50 acre lot size would not necessarily result in a 7
lot of mobile homes on a parcel of property within these low intensity watershed protection 8
overlay district areas. He said the Planning Director and Current Planning staff discussed the 9
issue, and opted to bump the minimal allowable acreage from 50 to 100 acres, which allows for 10
additional density for residential units, especially in those watersheds that are intended to be 11
low intensity. 12
13
A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to 14
approve a modification to a previously approved Amendment Outline Form (AOF) and re-15
approve process/schedule components for a proposed text amendment to the Orange County 16
Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). 17
18
VOTE: UNANIMOIUS 19
20
f. Board of Commissioners - Chatham Orange Joint Planning Task Force 21
The Board considered appointing Commissioner Barry Jacobs to the Chatham Orange 22
Joint Planning Task Force. 23
24
Commissioner Price asked who is serving on this task force now. 25
Commissioner Rich said that the same three people that were serving: Commissioner 26
Marcoplos, Commissioner Rich and Commissioner Jacobs, who will continue to serve going 27
forward, just in different slots. She said Commissioner Marcoplos will now be the Go Triangle 28
representative, and Commissioner Jacobs and Commissioner Rich will be the Orange County 29
representatives. 30
31
A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to 32
approve appointing Commissioner Barry Jacobs to the Chatham Orange Joint Planning Task 33
Force. 34
35
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 36
37
a. Minutes 38
The Board approved the minutes from March 20, 22 and April 3, 2018 as submitted by the Clerk 39
to the Board. 40
b. Fiscal Year 2017-18 Budget Amendment #8 41
The Board approved budget and capital project ordinance amendments for fiscal year 2017-18 42
for the Department of Social Services; Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks and 43
Recreation; Department on Aging; Orange County Food Council; and Library Services. 44
c. Application for North Carolina Education Lottery Proceeds for Chapel Hill – Carrboro 45
City Schools (CHCCS) and Contingent Approval of Budget Amendment #8-A Related 46
to CHCCS Capital Project Ordinances 47
The Board approved an application to the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction 48
(NCDPI) to release proceeds from the NC Education Lottery account related to FY 2017-18 49
debt service payments for Chapel Hill – Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS), and to approve 50
27
Budget Amendment #8-A (amended School Capital Project Ordinances), contingent on the 1
NCDPI’s approval of the application, and to authorize the Chair to sign. 2
d. Resolution of Approval – Conservation Easement Amendment for Keith Arboretum 3
The Board will consider a resolution to approve an amendment to a conservation easement 4
held by Orange County for the Keith Arboretum now owned by Pickoretum, LLC, and authorize 5
the Chair to sign. (moved) 6
e. Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Amendment Outline 7
Form Modification – Home Park Acreage Increase and Additional Land Uses 8
The Board modified a previously approved Amendment Outline Form (AOF) and re-approve 9
process/schedule components for a proposed text amendment to the Orange County Unified 10
Development Ordinance (UDO). 11
f. Board of Commissioners - Chatham Orange Joint Planning Task Force 12
The Board appointed Commissioner Barry Jacobs to the Chatham Orange Joint Planning Task 13
Force. 14
15
9. County Manager’s Report 16
Bonnie Hammersley provided an update on the Golden Leaf Foundation grants, for 17
which the County applied. She said the County did not receive the first grant for the 18
Hillsborough Area Economic Development District-Gravity Sewer; however, the County was 19
awarded the Piedmont Food and Agricultural Processing Center (PFAP) Regional Cold Chain 20
and Co-packing Initiative grant in the amount of $128,000. 21
22
10. County Attorney’s Report 23
John Roberts said he thought the BOCC would need a closed session tonight on a 24
proposed item, but he did not receive the necessary information for this item, and the closed 25
session is no longer necessary. 26
John Roberts said the BOCC is getting emails and members of the public speaking at 27
meetings, about the BOCC regulating the confederate flag, and he wants to reiterate that this is 28
not what the BOCC is considering. He said staff was tasked with coming up with content 29
neutral language, which will be forthcoming and will only regulate the size and height of flags. 30
He said there are two large confederate flags already flying in the County that he believes will 31
be unaffected by this change, and the only two flags that he knows of personally, which may be 32
impacted by this change, are American flags. 33
34
11. *Appointments 35
NONE 36
37
12. Information Items 38
• April 3, 2018 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List 39
• Orange County Sustainability and Environmental Responsibility Goal Update 40
41
13. Closed Session 42
NONE 43
44
14. Adjournment 45
46
A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to 47
adjourn the meeting at 10:27 p.m. 48
49
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 50
28
1
Mark Dorosin, Chair 2
3
Donna Baker 4
Clerk to the Board 5