HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 10-17-1995 - XI-1 Stoney Creek Appts1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: October 17, 1995
Action Agenda
Item #� - I
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT TO STONEY CREEK SMALL AREA PLAN WORK GROUP
DEPARTMENT: COUNTY MANAGER PUBLIC HEARING: YES _X -NO
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
- Stoney Creek Neighborhoods Map County Manager, Ext. 2300
- 9 -14 -95 Meeting Minutes
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough - 732 -8181
Chapel Hill - 967 -9251
Durham - 688 -7331
Mebane - 227 -2031
PURPOSE: To consider appointment of an additional member to
the Stoney Creek Basin Small Area Plan Work Group.
BACKGROUND: On December 5, 1994, the Orange County Board of
Commissioners adopted the following charge: "To
prepare a land use plan, including recommendations
for implementation, for the Stoney Creek Basin
Planning Area southeast of the town of
Hillsborough." A Planning Group composed of
neighborhood representatives, elected and
appointed officials, and three "at- large" members
was formed. The group currently has 21 members
and 7 alternates and has met 8 times since March.
Discussion at the August 17 and September 14
meetings of the work group revealed that there is
a significant and important group that hasn't been
represented because of the way neighborhood
boundaries were drawn. This is the Bumphus Road
.Muclu L11:' l.L1C P1GW 1'1111 AL ca • V .
James Bumphus has attended approximately half of
the Stoney Creek meetings and has a strong
interest in the plan and what it may eventually
mean for his community. It has been requested
by the work group that Mr. Bumphus be added.
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the appointment of
Mr. James Bumphus to the Stoney Creek Work Group
to either neighborhood or "at- large" status as
the Board may decide.
so
AMR
Q ,Q1 . 0 t Val
GED
p Imago 11 son m IN WT/J�y'
Al.
Me
3
1' 11
STONEY CREEK BASIN SMALL AREA PLANNING GROUP
SEPTEMBER 14, 1995
The Stoney Creek Small Area Planning Group met on Thursday,
September 14, 1995 at 7:30 PM in the EMS facility training room,
New Hope Church Road, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Members Present: Lee Rafalow, Judson Edeburn, Bob Strayhorn, David
Yelton, Steve Price, Curtis Bane, Michael Warner, Dean Zehnder,
Elio Soldi, Bob Hall, Meg McKean, Bill Bracey, and Renee Price.
Members Absent: Bobby Nicholson, Trudy Cuffe, Gary Hanker, Dan
Teichman, Keith Cook, Clint Burklin, Dr. Stephen Halkiotis, and Don
Willhoit.
Facilitator Present: Verla Insko.
Staff Present: County Manager John Link and Planners Gene Bell and
Emily Cameron.
Visitors: James Bumphus, Frank Bumphus, Harold Daye, Sr. and Dan
Dunbar.
CALL TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCEMENTS - Verla Insko called the meeting to
order and asked if there were any announcements.
Dan Dunbal- said he had recently moved to area and lives on Bumphus
Road. He asked why representatives) for Bumphus Road could not be
elected or- appointed:
Verla Insko said the Commissioners had decided not to expand the
group and did not want to revisit that decision.
David Yelton said the problem is not that the whole area is —not -- -
represented, but rather that there seems to have been a breakdown
in communication. He suggested that representation already in
place for this area should get in touch better.
Gene Bell said this was the purpose of the newsletters sent to
neighborhood representatives and alternates for distribution. He
indicated he had had phone calls indicating that distribution was
not everywhere, however.
Harold Daye stated that discussion at the last meeting seemed to
indicate it wouldn't be a problem to get a representative from
Bumphus Road.
1
4
Verla Insko said this committee didn't have the authority to make
appointments; that was the responsibility of the Commissioners.
Meg McKean said the map of Stoney Creek neighborhoods was
confusing. She said the map chops everything up into pieces and
some of the pieces were un- natural.
Verla Insko said the group was about half -way through the planning
process and the sense she got from the Commissioners was that
people could come to meetings and through their representatives or
themselves make their concerns known; but the Commissioners had
chosen not to change the makeup of committee right now.
Elio Soldi said the opinion of the Planning Group at the last
meeting seemed to be strongly in favor of additional
representation. He asked Insko is she would entertain an. official
request to the Commissioners if the committee did not think it
disruptive and found it advisable.
Verla Insko said she believed an official request had been made and
the Commissioners had declined to put it on their agenda indicating
they did not want to add any more members to the committee.
Judd Edeburn said he thought in terms of consensus, a mechanism was
needed that would satisfy a group that may have concerns about'
representation; some way for input so that when the group comes up
with a recommendation, as many folks as possible can buy into it
because they' feel a part of it.
Verla Insko said she agreed.
Lee Rafalow asked what the group was going to do about the fact
that people on Bumphus road did not feel that they were being
adequately represented.
Elio Soldi said if the group intended to make a recommendation that
had any chance of being adopted and implemented, everybody needed
to be included. He said there seemed— to—be__.a_ strong feeling that
people in the community long before he was there, who had a history
in the community, and did not feel represented posed a great
problem. He strongly recommended opening the process to admitting
a representative from Bumphus Road. He felt that there was clear
evidence that as long as a group in the community did not feel
represented, anything the Planning Group did would be secondary.
He said the Bumphus Road residents could express their concerns to
committee members or come to meetings and express them, but that
was not the same as being part of the committee and that feeling
seemed to be important.
Bob Hall asked if the group could not re- affirm its previous
consensus that Bumphus Road had an official recommendation and
request that it be passed back to the Commissioners indicating that
2
9
it wasn't a "willy - nilly," last minute type of thing, but something
the group had taken time to think about and felt it was very
relevant.
David Yelton said that without further discussion, he wouldn't be
able to go along with consensus on that.
Bob Strayhorn said it was unfortunate that the commissioners left
early when this issue was discussed at the August meeting. He felt
they would have looked at it differently if they had been there.
He said it wasn't like James Bumphus and his brother and brother -
in -law have not been involved, because this was the fourth or fifth
meeting he had seen them at. He said they were concerned enough to
be there and that half of the members who have been appointed stay
away. He thodght it was a good opportunity to get some long-
standing members of the community involved who were willing to be
involved. He said if the Commissioners were not sensitive to that,
then everyone needed to go home.
David Yelton said he he wasn't out to reject someone, but was
concerned what it represented.
Lee Rafalow speculated that there were two reasons the
Commissioners may not want to consider this. The first was
continuity in the group and he agreed that people who participate.
need to have all the information. He said he would argue that
James Bumphus had been to as many meetings as some formal
representatives and for that reason his appointment would not be
disruptive. The other reason the Commissioners might not want to
do additional appointments is it raises whole specter of
participation to anyone who has an interest in the process. He
said he had advocated early on that everyone should be able to
participate, but felt the process was too far along now and that
continuity was needed. He said if the group could express to the
Commissioners that there was a way to improve the representative
aspect of the group and that continuity was not lost because James
Bumphus had been a participant, then the problem could be solved
without opening a can of worms.
Elio Soldi said he agreed with Lee Rafalow that this was an
exceptional case. He didn't think other groups would be asking for
membership and felt that a strong case could be made to the
Commissioners that this would not disrupt the process.
David Yelton said he intended no disrespect to the people from
Bumphus Road, but asked if people had been attending meetings, why
was the connection never made that there was a representative for
that geographic area?
Harold Daye responded that no one ever said anything. The only
thing they ever heard was Stoney Creek; there was no indication
that Bumphus Road was included.
3
n.
Meg McKean said there were four Stoney Creeks - the creek, a
subdivision, a proposed development named Stoney Creek Farms, and
the whole area. She thought that when the term "Stoney Creek" was
used, the whole area was being referred to.
Bob Strayhorn made a motion that the group ask the County
Commissioners to reconsider appointing a member from Bumphus Road
and requested that Mr. Link deliver this request to the
Commissioners. Bill Bracey seconded the motion.
David Yelton asked how many people were being talked about in the
Bumphus Road area and /or was the group talking about somebody
represented by large land holders in the area. He suggested maybe
it was just a matter of shifting who spoke for that group. He
asked if the group was talking about a group of people or a chunk
of land that needed to be represented.
Bob Strayhorn said they were talking about a community.
Dan Dunbar added they were 'talking about a historic community
composed of people, land, and kinship patterns; land that amounts
to roughly 100 acres and represents historic continuity.
John Link said the discussion of the last 15 minutes had become
much more focused and positive and as he understood it, they were
talking about a community that may have been represented
geographically, but did not feel like they were represented as a
community.,.He felt that it was a very legitimate message to send
back to the Commissioners that way. A community historically
present in this area that did not feel like they had been
represented by the previous appointments. He said if they could
agree on one person to represent the community, he would be glad to
carry that to the Commissioners and felt that in that context, they
probably wouldn't have any trouble making an appointment.
David Yelton asked the size of the Bumphus Road community.
James Bumphus responded that there were twelve houses on Bumphus
- -Road.
David Yelton asked if they had been getting the newsletter? He
said it seemed like it had just been a miscommunication.
Meg McKean said that Michael Warner represents Bumphus Road as
people and Bob Strayhorn represented them as landowners.
David Yelton said it seemed they had two representatives already.
Michael Warner said there were a lot of people on the group who
didn't come to meetings and here we had a group that did come, that
wanted to be on it, that wanted to contribute, and that was the
point to him.
4
7
Dan Dunbar added that they were a community, a unique community.
He thought the planning group had an opportunity to improve their
power as a group.
Bob Strayhorn said he was absolutely right.
Verla Insko said the group needed to have consensus on this before
sending it to the Commissioners.
Meg McKean said she thought the problem stemmed from the original
drawing of neighborhood lines.
Verla Insko asked if there were additional comments.
David Yelton said he would go along with a proposal to the
Commissioners telling them of the group's dilemma and that they
wanted to have everyone who had something to offer to the committee
and particularly people who had a community or historical base. He
thought it needed to be explained to them where the problem came
from, i.e., that it was a miscommunication, a misunderstanding of
the lines of representation and then let the Commissioners make the
recommendation back to the group.
Bob Strayhorn asked if his motion had been out of order. The group
responded that it had not.
David Yelton said the group was still in a discussion mode. He
said as part of that discussion, he thought it would be a better
recommendation to the Commissioners than just saying we want a
representative for this group of families.
Verla Insko indicated that this ,was one of the dilemmas of
consensus building. When you had consensus, motions are sort of a
formality., She asked-Yelton how he would frame a recommendation to
the Commissioners.
David Yelton said he would say that the group had found that there
was a significant and important group in the Stoney Creek Basin
that had not had proper representation because of misinterpretation
of the bounds of the districts and would like to incorporate them.
He suggested the group should leave it to the Commissioners to
decide how that would be done.
Bob Hall asked David Yelton if he felt like the group was setting
a precedent. He questioned Yelton's reluctance to support an issue
on which there seemed to be consensus.
David Yelton said consensus had been thrown out by several people,
but there were people on the group he hadn't heard from regarding
opening up the representation question again. He indicated there
could be other areas that would say they didn't feel represented
and wanted more representatives. He said the point was that there
F".
E
had been representation; it had just been misconstrued and needed
to be corrected. He said that everyones' opinions needed to be
expressed if consensus was to mean something at the end of the
process, but now that the group was at this juncture, he didn't
know if there was a perfect way to do it.
Elio Soldi observed that David Yelton seemed to be concerned that
there was representation, but it had not been properly communicated
and he seemed reluctant to send a message to the Commissioners that
the group thought that representation was not there to begin with.
He said the point was to solve what seemed to be an impasse. He
stated that a large number of people seemed to understand that for
this community, representation meant to be able to speak directly
and to be part directly of the planning group. Soldi continued
that they had participated far more than some representatives and
he didn't see why Yelton could not understand the importance for
the group to convey to the Commissioners what they felt.
Verla Insko asked if someone could make a proposal back to David
Yelton that would address h'is concerns about setting a precedent.
Lee Rafalow said the fact that James Bumphus had been to more
meetings than many of the representatives who were official
participants should allay concerns about it being disruptive to the
progress of the group (assuming James Bumphus was appointed). If,
James Bumphus wasn't the one appointed, then concerns about new
participants not having the background to participate was a
legitimate concern. Rafalow said if wording was to the effect that
there was a community that hadn't been adequately represented and
there was a solution that was not disruptive, he felt it would deal
with the-,potential for any kind of precedent setting.
David Yelton said his question to the Commissioners was should
Bumphus Road be represented as land holders or as so many families.
Lee Rafalow said that appointments to the group fell into three
categories: 1) representatives of an arbitrarily drawn district
line (in some cases less arbitrary than others) ,• 2) people who were
appointed because they have long- standing interests or were
recognized by the commissioners as being a particularly valuable
addition to the group; and 3) people who were active in other
committees of the County's set of advisory panels. He said it
didn't matter to him how somebody got appointed to this group; the
fact of the matter was there was a group that felt unrepresented
because the arbitrary lines didn't recognize the standing of their
community.
Verla Insko said they had three things: 1) this is a neighborhood;
2) the group believes that it has not been adequately represented;
and 3) Mr. James Bumphus has come to these meetings and he has
provided continuity. She asked the group if they wanted to
recommend to the Commissioners that James Bumphus be appointed as
0
Ai
a new neighborhood representative.
David Yelton asked if they could be incorporated under large land
holders.
Verla Insko said she thought large land owners was being confused
with at -large representatives, a mix up of terms. She said the
question was would they be appointed as at- large, or as
representatives of their neighborhood.
David Yelton indicated he thought the decision should be left up to
the Commissioners.
Bob Strayhorn said he thought he had made a motion that was clear
and he thought he heard the County Manager say he understood the
group's intent and that he would deliver it to the Commissioners.
He said he was satisfied with that and felt that it would get the
group back on the agenda and satisfy the Bumphus family too.
James Bumphus said that was correct.
Verla Insko said she thought the group had consensus and the
Commissioners could decide the question of neighborhood or at -large
representation.
John Link said if Insko could summarize the three points mentioned
earlier, without raising the question about type of appointment, he
thought it would be pretty easy to carry to the Commissioners.
Verla Insko summarized as follows: 1) We have a defined
neighborhood that has not been represented on this group; 2) there
has been a member of this neighborhood who has been a fairly
consistent. attendee;. and 3) the planning group requests that an
appointment from that neighborhood be made.
7