HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8-a - Minutes 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: October 16, 2018
Action Agenda
Item No. 8-a
SUBJECT: MINUTES
DEPARTMENT: Board of County
Commissioners
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Draft Minutes Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board
(919) 245-2130
PURPOSE: To correct and/or approve the minutes as submitted by the Clerk to the Board as
listed below.
BACKGROUND: In accordance with 153A-42 of the General Statutes, the Governing Board
has the legal duty to approve all minutes that are entered into the official journal of the Board's
proceedings.
September 4, 2018 BOCC Regular Meeting
September 6, 2018 BOCC Work Session
September 20, 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
I Attachment 1
2
3 DRAFT MINUTES
4 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
5 REGULAR MEETING
6 September 4, 2018
7 7:00 p.m.
8
9 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday,
10 September 4, 2018 at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Building, in Hillsborough, N.C.
11
12 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Dorosin and Commissioners Mia Burroughs,
13 Barry Jacobs, Earl McKee, Mark Marcoplos, Renee Price and Penny Rich
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Deputy County Manager
17 Travis Myren and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other staff members will be identified
18 appropriately below)
19
20 Chair Dorosin called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.
21 Chair Dorosin said Commissioner McKee would be late tonight.
22
23 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
24
25 Chair Dorosin noted the following items at the Commissioners' places:
26
27 - PowerPoint for item 6-a
28 - PowerPoint for item 6-b
29
30 Commissioner Jacobs suggested that the information item on land use plan
31 amendments be moved up for discussion on the regular agenda.
32 Chair Dorosin suggested moving this to item 6-d.
33 The Board agreed by consensus.
34 Katie Murray, Arts Commission Director, introduced the Arts Moment:
35
36 Arts Moment — Barbara Claypole White — Bestselling author who creates hopeful family drama
37 with a healthy dose of mental illness. Originally from England, she writes and gardens in the
38 forests of rural Orange County, where she lives with her beloved OCD family. Her award-
39 winning novels include The Unfinished Garden, The In-Between Hour (a Southern Independent
40 Booksellers Alliance Okra Pick) The Perfect Son, which was a Goodreads Choice Awards
41 Nominee for Best Fiction 2015, Echoes of Family, and The Promise Between Us. She is also an
42 OCD Advocate for the A2A Alliance, a nonprofit group that promotes advocacy over adversity.
43 To connect with Barbara, please visit www.barbaraclaypolewhite.com.
44 Barbara Claypole White read an excerpt from one of her books.
45
46 2. Public Comments
47
48 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
49 Craig Carter said he came to a previous meeting about the flag, and he asked the Board
50 to change the size of the flags that can be flown, as he has a flag to honor a lost relative which
2
1 he can no longer fly due to the size restrictions. He asked the Board if it would consider
2 amending the regulation. He said he had a relative die years ago due of the slow ambulance
3 service to the northern part of Orange County, and asked if the Board would look into improving
4 this service. He said there is a fire station on St. Mary's road, but it has no firefighters and has
5 been empty for 10 years. He asked if the Board would look into saving historical sites such as
6 gristmills around the Town of Hillsborough. He said there are no regulations in Orange County
7 to protect historical items that reside on private property. He said the County needs do a better
8 job of funding their schools. He asked if the Board would notify him about the flag issue, as he
9 has no phone or Internet.
10 Chair Dorosin asked if he would give his contact information to the Clerk and staff will be
11 in touch.
12 Jamie Paulen said she supported the Board's comments on the removal of the Silent
13 Sam statue.
14 Bill Ward said he is a member of Commission for the Environment, but he is speaking
15 for himself. He said the board passed a resolution in 2017 about renewable energy sources.
16 He said much has happened to mitigate climate change, including joining the Global Covenant
17 of Mayors for Climate and Energy, and beginning the greenhouse gas inventory. He said two of
18 the biggest contributors to the greenhouse gases are public transportation and utilities. He
19 gave examples of ways cities and countries are addressing these concerns, such as battery
20 operated boats and electric vehicles. He said there is great frustration with the federal
21 government in the United States.
22 Ivy Barger thanked the Board of County Commissioners for its statement in support of
23 the removal of the Silent Sam statue.
24 Heather Redding thanked the Board of County Commissioners for their statement in
25 support of the removal of Silent Sam.
26 Keith Percy thanked the Board of County Commissioners on its strong statement in
27 support of the removal of the Silent Sam statue.
28
29 b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
30 (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda
31 below.)
32
33 3. Announcements, Petitions and Comments by Board Members
34 Commissioner Price commended those that put on, and participate in, summer youth
35 programs throughout the County.
36 Commissioner Burroughs said the Family Success Alliance's (FSA) second major
37 funder, the United Way, has delayed the reapplication process until the spring, but will continue
38 to fund the FSA.
39 Commissioner Burroughs said the Board has been invited to the FSA strategic planning,
40 and she gave a shout out to Commissioner Marcoplos who spent two full days participating in
41 this process.
42 Commissioner Rich said the Food Council continues to work on several projects such as
43 promoting and preserving food waste in Orange County. She thanked farmer Ken Larsen, who
44 rolled off the Council.
45 Commissioner Rich said the Visitor's Bureau (VB) is trying to think of ways to
46 collaborate with the Chapel Hill VB, rather than duplicating efforts.
47 Commissioner Rich said she is on a group called WE POWER, who is a group of
48 women out of the Piedmont Food Processing Center, trying to empower women entrepreneurs
49 in the food business.
3
1 Commissioner Rich said she just moved into a new home along with her mom, and she
2 contacted the Department on Aging to assess the home's readiness for an aging individual.
3 She said the Department suggested changes, and she highly recommended this service to
4 anyone that has an aging individual in their home.
5 Commissioner Jacobs said over the summer Jerry Passmore, long-term aging director,
6 passed away.
7 Commissioner Jacobs said that the Piedmont Food and Agricultural Processing Center
8 (PFAP) is doing better than it has done before, and staff is talking about expansion; a real
9 success story.
10 Commissioner Jacobs said Community Home Trust is having its annual fundraiser on
11 Friday, September 7ch
12 Commissioner Marcoplos said GoTriangle is now distributing free youth passes (for 13-
13 18 year olds) in Orange County, and he listed the places to pick one up: Carrboro Cybrary and
14 the Orange County library in Hillsborough.
15 Chair Dorosin said the Board has an annual meeting with City of Mebane, but he was
16 talking to the Manager and Commissioner Rich about establishing a working group with several
17 elected officials and staff, where there can be more effective engagement on issues that are
18 current to both entities. He said this would allow for greater on going conversation.
19 Commissioner Jacobs asked if this group would be in lieu of having the meeting with
20 Mebane this fall, or subsequent to.
21 Chair Dorosin said this would be in lieu of having the September 13th meeting, but an
22 alternative meeting date will be set after this work group has met.
23 Commissioner Price said she was at a community meeting last week, and Mebane was
24 also there. She said there were issues of concern for both Mebane and Orange County at
25 large.
26 Commissioner Rich said it would be set up like the Chatham/Orange County work
27 group, and suggested making this a petition as it gives a formal request from Orange County to
28 Mebane.
29 Chair Dorosin said he would make a petition.
30 Commissioner Jacobs suggested giving the work group a limited time prior to having a
31 joint meeting between all elected officials, or have the joint meeting first to determine how to set
32 up the group, and what topics will be covered. He said Agritourism and farmland preservation
33 are two topics that initiated the joint meetings years ago.
34 Bonnie Hammersley said sewer lines will be transferred to Mebane on October, and
35 suggested a social meeting at that time to discuss the scope of the work group.
36 Chair Dorosin asked John Roberts if he could provide a short update on the Barn of
37 Chapel Hill, and the status of last Board of Adjustment (BOA) meeting, as related to the Barn.
38 Chair Dorosin attended the dedication for the Habitat for Humanity house that was
39 moved from the Sportsplex to Hillsborough. He said it was a wonderful event, and he
40 commended all the staff that was involved.
41 Chair Dorosin said there is another dedication at Waterstone this coming Saturday.
42
43 The Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) needs three volunteers to serve on the
44 2019 retreat planning committee.
45 Discussion ensued and the volunteers will be: Chair Dorosin, Commissioner McKee and
46 Commissioner Price.
47
48 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
49
50 a. Orange County Arts Commission 2018-19 Grant Recipients
4
1 The Board presented checks to local artists and arts organizations receiving 2018-19
2 Orange County Arts Grants.
3 Katie Murray presented this item.
4
5 BACKGROUND: The Orange County Arts Commission (OCAC) awards grants to local artists,
6 schools and nonprofit organizations from funds received from the state and Orange County
7 government for this purpose. These funds are distributed for arts projects and programs in all
8 arts disciplines.
9
10
ORGANIZATION PROGRAM NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE
The ArtsCenter Afterschool Arts Program Fleming Samuels
partnership w/ OCAC
Art Therapy Institute Operating support Hillary Rubesin
Boomerang Youth The Citizen Artist youth arts Tami Pfeifer
program
Carrboro Elementary PTA In-school cultural arts Lynn Weller
programming
Chapel Hill Philharmonia Operating support John Konanc (CO-nonch)
Chapel Hill-Carrboro Public School Artist-in-Residence program for Lynn Lehmann (LEE-man)
Foundation Estes Hills Elementary School,
Northside Elementary School, and
Phillips Middle School
Estes Hills Elementary School PTA In-school cultural arts Liz Kalies
programming
Franklin Street Arts Collective Operating support Sasha Bakaric
Gravelly Hill Middle School Cultural Explosion 2019 Michele Woodson
Hillsborough Arts Council (Free Annual Gospel Music Festival Thomas Watson
Spirit Freedom)
Hillsborough Arts Council Operating support, Last Fridays Art Neil Stutzer
Walk; Hillsborough Handmade
Parade
Hillsborough Elementary PTA Sounds of Drums Performance Sheril Sheppard and Jennifer
and Residency
Mary Scroggs Elementary School Afterschool Arts Enrichment Sarah Cornette
PTA Program
McDougle Elementary School PTA In-school cultural arts Daniela Miteva
programming
Music Maker Relief Foundation Margaret Lane Cemetery Day of Denise Duffy
Remembrance
Musical Empowerment Operating support Meredith Richard
New Hope Elementary Title 1 Artist-in-Residence Program Michele Woodson
for New Hope, Efland-Cheeks
Global, Central, and Grady Brown
Elementary Schools
North Carolina Arts in Action NC Arts in Action at Rashkis Doug Largent
Elementary School
Philips Middle School PTSA In-school cultural arts Kristen Stewart
programming
Seawell Elementary School Number Drummer Residency Jill Austin Hemmings
5
Voices, the Chapel Hill Chorus Operating support Susan Brunssen
Women's Theatre Festival Production of These Shining Lives Cheryl Edson
Women's Voices Chorus Fall 2018 retreat and Spring 2019 Amy Glass
Performance
1
2
3
NAME OF ARTIST PROGRAM
Pam Baggett Project Poetry.!
Iris Chapman Documentary: The Closing of a School
Max Miller Supplies for studio art classes
Kelly R. Johnston Residencies at Penland School of Craft and The Torpedo
Tinka Jordy Garden Arts Sculpture Show
Tamara Kissane and Jessica Fleming Development of a new play by Curious Theatre Collective
Salome Sandoval (sah-lo-MAY) The Last Conquistador performance by El Fuego Early
Renzo Ortega Professional development support for exhibit, Mas al/a de
Sol Ramirez 123 Puppetry Spring Production
Marie Rossetti and Benjamin Warshaw Fafnir Adamites sculpture installation at LEVEL Artist
Nancy Smith Women Speak 2019 exhibit
Heather Tatreau Dance-Theater Performance for UNC Process Series
Kristin Trangsrud and Alma Coefman Luna's Magic Flute
4
5 Not present: Ben Hamburger
6
7 b. "The Nature of Orange" Photography Contest 2018
8 The Board recognized the winners, and thanked all participants and judges of "The
9 Nature of Orange" 2018 Photography Contest.
10 Lynne Hecht, Recreation Therapist, presented this item
1 1 Commissioner McKee arrived at 8:06pm.
12
13 The 2018 contest winners are as follows:
14 Adult: 1" Place — Charles R. Sheppard; 2nd Place — Keith Newell; 3rd Place —WR Bullock;
15 Honorable Mentions: Charles R. Sheppard and Molly Cronenwet
16
17 Youth: 1St Place — Jasmin Brown; 2nd Place —Julia Vaughan; 3rd Place — Maggie Sandbeck;
18 Honorable Mentions: Jordan Barlow and Maggie Sandbeck
19
20 This year's judges were photographers Kent Murray, Holden Richards, and David Schaub
21 The Board recognized and congratulated the 2018 photography contest winners, and thanked
22 the judges and all those who participated in this community event.
23
24
25 5. Public Hearings
26 NONE
27
28 6. Regular Agenda
29
6
1 a. Approval of Contract with Open Broadband, LLC for Broadband Infrastructure
2 Development for Unserved Areas
3 The Board considered approving a contract with Open Broadband, LLC to develop the
4 next generation broadband infrastructure needed to meet the needs of unserved and
5 underserved Orange County residents and incorporate broadband solutions and business
6 models that are innovative, scalable and serve today's needs, thereby providing maximum
7 benefit to Orange County residents and authorize the Manager to sign.
8 Jim Northup, Chief Information Officer, presented this item:
9
10 BACKGROUND: In Fiscal Year 2017-18, funds were budgeted to create a scalable broadband
11 solution to foster innovation, drive job creation, stimulate economic growth, and serve new
12 areas of development in the community and also to provide a flexible menu of retail services
13 that offers new or enhanced service. Current estimates indicate that there are approximately
14 4,937 residential address points in underserved areas. The Service Area Map provided at
15 Attachment 2 depict these points,
16 • There are 2,342 residential address points in the underserved Service Areas 1, 2, and 3.
17 • There are 331 residential address points in Service Area 10
18 Orange County issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) to develop the next generation
19 broadband infrastructure needed to meet the needs of these unserved and underserved
20 residents. Multiple vendors submitted initial proposals covering some of the service areas.
21 Three of the four proposals suggested pilot projects to prove that an economically sustainable
22 business model would result.
23
24 The pilot projects outlined in the attached agreement will have a 36 month duration at which
25 time the projects will be re-evaluated for economic viability, with no obligation for continued
26 County support beyond what is stated in the contract.
27
28 This initiative is part of a multi-track effort to enhance broadband and internet service
29 technology to Orange County residents. Pending the results from these pilot efforts, similar
30 partnerships and investment are planned to expand service to other areas of the County, and
31 staff will continue to pursue all opportunities to expand these services to County residents.
32
33 FINANCIAL IMPACT: The purpose of the attached agreement is to better understand the
34 financial viability for a business to offer broadband services to the aforementioned service
35 areas. The proposal has investments by Open Broadband, LLC, and Orange County. The result
36 is that the County will incentivize Open Broadband to make capital investments in Orange
37 County in order for them to sustain service offerings for at least 36 months.
38
39 The total Pilot Program Funding amount is $500,000, broken down as follows:
40 • Pilot Program 1 consists of Service Areas 1, 2, and 3 as shown on the Service Area
41 Map with a cost of$385,280.
42 • Pilot Program 2 consists of Service Area 10 as shown on the Service Area Map with a
43 cost of$114,720 in order to remain within the overall budget.
44
45 It should be noted that the County is only granting funds for this public-private partnership and
46 will not own any equipment or be providing any services. Equipment and services will be wholly
47 owned and offered by Open Broadband, LLC and not by Orange County.
48 Jim Northup made the following PowerPoint presentation:
49
50 Broadband for Rural Orange County
7
1 Jim Northrup
2 Orange County Information Technologies
3 September 4, 2018
4
5 Service Area Map (map)
6
7 • One of the goals of this effort was to offer an incentive for internet service providers to
8 invest in broadband infrastructure and provide a model that can scale to encompass the
9 entire county
10 • The term of 3 years for the pilot, speaks to how long the vendor must be able to sustain
11 this project not how long it will take to get the infrastructure installed for customer
12 signups.
13 • Much of the infrastructure should be up and running within the first 12 months.
14 • If the initial pilot is successful, additional investments could be made prior to the end of
15 the 3 year term.
16 • There are about 5,000 addresses in the underserved areas of the county
17 • 2,700 of addresses are addressed in this contract
18 • The test sites on the map are to ensure 90% coverage.
19 • 90% of the areas covered in the contract will be able to sign up for 25 down and 3 up
20 broadband service
21 • The first customer will be signed up within 6 months of contract execution
22 • Other speed and pricing offerings will also be available
23
24 This is a public private partnership where both the County AND Open Broadband, LLC are
25 making infrastructure investments. Beyond the initial investment, Open Broadband will be
26 continuing to invest in maintaining and adding to the initial infrastructure investment in order to
27 guarantee the service levels defined in the contract. More importantly, Open Broadband may
28 even expand the service areas based on adoption rate and on the success of these pilots.
29
30 Commissioner Jacobs said the public has raised questions, and asked Jim Northrup if
31 his presentation addressed these questions.
32 Jim Northup said yes, he answered the questions that he has received. He said
33 concerns were raised over the dots not included in the red circles, and he said the largest
34 concentration of unserved dots is in the western part of the County, and this will be address in
35 phase 2. He said there is no tower, or tall structure, in this area at this time. He said it is hoped
36 that vertical assets can be identified, and he will be working with a vendor to solve this issue.
37 Commissioner Jacobs asked if one will have to stop paying Century Link for DSL
38 services, and switch to this vendor once available.
39 Jim Northup said that would most likely be the case, and there will be a sign up page on
40 the vendor's webpage.
41 Commissioner Jacobs said this is predicted to be 90% effective, and asked if there is a
42 way that one can know if one is part of the 10% that are not covered.
43 Jim Northup said it will clear where the 10% is within the circle, and at that point,
44 perhaps the County could work with open broadband and make sure the public knows where
45 those areas are.
46 Commissioner Jacobs said one would be well advised to not drop one's current provider
47 until one knows one can be serviced by broadband.
48 Jim Northup said yes, and as this service starts taking off then this would be an
49 alternative choice.
8
1 Commissioner Jacobs said it may be good to provide a disclaimer somewhere
2 referencing this point. He is unsure how one can know whether it works without trying it.
3 Jim Northup said one can have parallel providers.
4 Commissioner Price asked if clarification could be provided regarding who owns the
5 services/equipment.
6 John Roberts said the County will not own the equipment, but is the owner of the site
7 (e.g.: tower).
8 Commissioner Price asked if the County bows out of this process, once the services are
9 set up.
10 Jim Northup said the County will always have an interest in the success of this project,
11 but once the contract is executed, the County will only be looking at performance monitors, and
12 making sure performance targets are hit to insure future payment.
13 Chair Dorosin referred to the area on the map where many are underserved, due to the
14 lack of vertical assets. He asked if that is a critically underserved area, can the County
15 consider building vertical assets in this area.
16 Jim Northup said the County has been doing communication tower studies with
17 Emergency Services independently of this, and if two birds can be killed with one stone, the
18 County will attempt to do so. He said a strata of these towers has been reserved for the County
19 to enable a low barrier for entry for a company to put something on the tower to improve
20 broadband. He said it is not just an issue of having the vertical asset, but being able to get
21 broadband to the vertical asset.
22 Commissioner Marcoplos asked if there is a minimum tower height that would be
23 required.
24 Jim Northup said about 100 feet tall.
25 Commissioner Marcoplos asked if the challenge is finding a space where this does not
26 stick out.
27 Jim Northup said no, the challenge is just finding a site.
28 Commissioner Marcoplos asked if satellite technology will work in the near future.
29 Jim Northup said this will not solve the rural broadband issue, as there is a bandwidth
30 limit. He said within this model, there is no bandwidth limit. He said this is an affordable
31 solution for rural residents.
32
33 PUBLIC COMMENT:
34 Tony Blake said he was pleased to be a part of the request for proposal (RFP) team,
35 and he supports this solution. He thinks that the County should pencil something into the
36 Capital Investment Plan (CIP) for expansion. He said another issue is digital literacy, and
37 scammers are a big problem. He said he hopes the County would ask Open Broadband to
38 provide this digital literacy resource to protect residents' privacy.
39 Bonnie Hauser said she lives in the unserved area, but she is excited about this pilot
40 program anyway.
41 Kevin McNamara said he is in support of this pilot project, and echoed the importance of
42 Internet speeds up to 25 megabytes.
43 Commissioner Jacobs thanked Jim Northup and the people that worked with him on this
44 project.
45
46 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs for the
47 Board to approve and authorize the Manager to sign the attached contract.
48
49 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
50
9
1 b. Authorization for the Chair to Sign a Letter Regarding Measures to Address the
2 State Funding Shortfall in the Durham-Orange Light Rail Project
3 The Board considered authorizing the Chair to sign a letter to the GoTriangle Board of
4 Trustees affirming Orange County's current funding commitment to the Durham-Orange Light
5 Rail Project ($149.5 million) and communicating a tentative agreement between Orange County
6 and Durham County to use Durham County dedicated transit revenues to supplant reduced
7 State funding.
8 Travis Myren presented the item below:
9
10 PURPOSE:
11 To consider authorizing the Chair to sign a letter to the GoTriangle Board of Trustees affirming
12 Orange County's current funding commitment to the Durham-Orange Light Rail Project ($149.5
13 million) and communicating a tentative agreement between Orange County and Durham
14 County to use Durham County dedicated transit revenues to supplant reduced State funding.
15
16 BACKGROUND:
17 In April 2017, the Board of Orange County Commissioners approved an Interlocal Agreement
18 for Cost Sharing for the Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project. The parties to this
19 Agreement are Orange County, Durham County, and GoTriangle.
20
21 The Cost Sharing Agreement, along with the Orange County Transit Plan, specifies the amount
1
22 of dedicated local transit revenue that each County will contribute to the light rail project.
23 Orange County's contribution is $149.5 million in year of expenditure dollars while Durham
24 County's contribution is $738.4 million.
25 1 Dedicated local transit revenue includes revenue produced by the Article 43 '/2 cent Transit
26 Sales Tax, Article 50 five percent (5%) vehicle rental tax, Article 51 three dollar ($3)
27 GoTriangle Regional Vehicle Registration Fee, and the Article 52 seven dollar ($7) County
28 vehicle registration fee.
29
30 The Cost Sharing Agreement also specifies a decision making and dispute resolution process
31 for changes that may occur in either project revenues or expenditures. In the event of a material
32 change in revenue, the parties are obligated to meet within fifteen (15) business days to discuss
33 measures to address the shortfall. During the adoption of the State Budget, the North Carolina
34 General Assembly placed several limitations on the Light Rail Project. One of these limitations
35 was to limit the maximum amount of State funding to $190 million. The light rail financial model
36 that was included in the Orange County Transit Plan and the Cost Sharing Agreement assumed
37 a total State contribution of ten percent (10%) or$247.6 million. The $190 million limitation
38 created a shortfall of$57.6 million.
39
40 Consistent with the terms of the Cost Sharing Agreement, the parties convened an initial
41 meeting on June 21, 2018 to begin discussing potential solutions to the funding shortfall.
42 Orange County was represented by BOCC Chair Mark Dorosin and Commissioner Mark
43 Marcoplos who met throughout the summer with two representatives from Durham County.
44 Using updated financial modeling, GoTriangle demonstrated that Durham County's dedicated
45 transit revenues were sufficient to compensate for the $57.6 million revenue shortfall created by
46 the State. The negotiating team agreed to present this solution to their respective governing
47 boards prior to September 7, 2018 when GoTriangle is required to submit a project progress
48 document to the Federal Transit Administration.
49
10
1 The negotiated solution for Durham County to commit additional dedicated transit revenue is
2 recognized in two letters, one from the Chair of the Durham County Board of Commissioners
3 and one from the Chair of the Orange County Board of Commissioners. Both of these letters
4 are attached. The Durham County Board of Commissioners considered and approved its letter
5 on August 27, 2018.
6
7 Both Orange and Durham counties will be asked to formally amend the Cost Sharing
8 Agreement and each County's Transit Plan to codify the change in funding commitments on a
9 schedule that supports GoTriangle's application for a September 2019 Full Funding Grant
10 Agreement.
11
12 FINANCIAL IMPACT: The negotiated agreement between Orange County, Durham County,
13 and GoTriangle does not create new financial obligations for Orange County. Orange County's
14 contribution to the Durham-Orange Light Rail Project would remain at $149.5 million in year of
15 expenditure dollars.
16
17 Travis Myren made the following PowerPoint presentation:
18
19 Durham-Orange Light Rail Project State Funding Gap
20 Board of Orange County Commissioners
21 Whitted Meeting Facility
22 _September 4, 2018
23
24 Purpose
25 To Authorize the Chair to Sign the Letter Attached to Abstract (Attachment 1)
26 o Affirming Orange County's $149.5 million Financial Commitment to the Durham-
27 Orange Light Rail Project
28 o Communicating a Solution to the Funding Shortfall Created by the State Budget
29 using Durham County Dedicated Transit Revenue
30
31 Background
32 Interlocal Cost Sharing Agreement & Orange County Transit Plan
33 o Cost Sharing Agreement Parties
34 ■ Orange County
35 ■ Durham County
36 ■ GoTriangle
37 o Adopted by the Board in April 2017
38 o Established Financial Obligations and Decision Making Framework for Changes
39
40 Interlocal Cost Sharing Agreement
41 Decision Making Framework for Changes
42 o Revenue Shortfalls Requiring Additional Local Funds
43 ■ Federal, State, Private, Local Revenues
44 ■ Parties meet within 15 business days to address the changes
45 o Cost Overruns or Unmitigated Shortfalls
46 ■ Decrease in Transit Revenues— 5% or more
47 • Increase in Capital Cost— 5% or more
48 ■ Increase in Operating Cost— 5% or more
49 ■ Parties meet within 15 business days to address the situation
50
11
I Board of Commissioners Statement
2 Board of Commissioners Statement
3 o Adopted June 5, 2018
4 o Affirmed Orange County's Commitment to Limit the County's contribution to
5 $149.5 million
6
7 State Budget Changes
8 State Budget Provisions
9 o All Non-Federal Funds Committed by April 30, 2019
10 o Federal Funds Committed by November 30, 2019
11 o $190 million Limit on State Contribution
12 ■ Created a $57.6 million funding gap
13 ■ Triggered the Revenue Shortfall Provision of Cost Sharing Agreement
14 ■ Parties Initially Met on June 21 within the 15 day window
15 ■ Parties Continued to Meet Over the Summer
16
17 Orange County Transit Plan — Cash Balances (graph)
18
19 Negotiated Solution to State Funding Gap (graph)
20 Durham County Dedicated Local Revenue
21 o Fills $57.6 million funding gap
22
23 Next Steps
24 • FTA Progress Report due September 7, 2018
25 • Letters Reporting Negotiated Solution
26 o Durham County Unanimously Adopted on August 27, 2018
27 o Board of Orange County Commissioner Consideration Sept. 4
28 • Amend Cost Sharing Agreement and Transit Plan
29 o Late 2018 - Early 2019
30
31 Manager's Recommendation
32 To Authorize the Chair to Sign the Letter Attached to Abstract (Attachment 1)
33 o Affirming Orange County's $149.5 million Financial Commitment to the Durham-
34 Orange Light Rail Project
35 o Communicating a Solution to the Funding Shortfall Created by the State Budget
36 using Durham County Dedicated Transit Revenue
37
38 Commissioner Marcoplos made a few corrections to the PowerPoint.
39 Commissioner Jacobs asked if any other changes are proposed.
40 Travis Myren said not at this time.
41 Commissioner Price clarified that this will be addressed again at end of year, and asked
42 if there is a specific reason for this.
43 Travis Myren said over the next couple of months, the Federal Transit Authority (FTA)
44 will be doing a risk assessment of the project, and if there are any changes to be made, there
45 will time to do so.
46
47 PUBLIC COMMENT:
48 Charles Humble read the following comments:
49
12
1 1 speak tonight on behalf of many individuals and community organizations who would like an
2 update on the state of Durham-Orange Light Rail project. The $57 million shortfall in state
3 funding is one of many changes that have come up since you approved it last year. Since the
4 submission for federal funding is around the corner, this is a good time for Orange County to
5 step back and see where we are.
6
7 As we have stated before, we strongly support public transportation; we just want it to serve
8 more of the public. The original light rail plan to connect the Triangle would have served more
9 people. The current one, not so many. Now, the project limits service to a single corridor from
10 UNC and Durham, and jeopardizes Orange County's larger transit program.
11
12 In the interest of time, I won't go into detail on reductions in bust services nor discuss the failure
13 to serve Orange County's downtown districts or growth centers. What we need at this point is
14 to revisit the financial history of this project. Specifically:
15 • Local costs have more than quadrupled from $400 million in 2012 to now over$1.8
16 billion
17 • Changes in state and federal funding have required planners to assume nearly a billion
18 dollars in debt to make the project economics work
19 • The project will tie up our transit dollars for decades under even the rosiest of scenarios
20 that GoTriangle presented to you early last year
21
22 The $57 million shortfall that Durham has agreed to fill is only one of several new critical
23 problems facing the project. Another is the substantial shortfall in revenues from dedicated
24 transit taxes and fees. Our financial advisors (Davenport) warned us that this would likely
25 happen. Now we can see just how unsupported the original budgets were. We ask that the
26 current County Commissioners retain Davenport to re-analyze the financial data for DOLRT so
27 that the next Commission will have the best possible information to inform the looming
28 decisions regarding whether and how to proceed with this project.
29
30 My colleague and friend, John Morris wants to expand on this topic.
31 Charles Humble
32
33 John Morris said Davenport provided very valuable information eighteen months ago.
34 He said federal funding is at risk as the federal government as made a policy to fund no new
35 light rail projects that have not already received a binding commitment, which this project has
36 not. He said this project is the lowest ranked priority project in all the projects that applied for
37 FTA funding at the same time, and is the most expensive of all the projects, making a favorable
38 decision unlikely. He said constructions costs are rapidly, as are interest rates. He said an
39 independent evaluation is needed regarding these new trends. He said it is possible that the
40 land given by UNC and NCCU will be considered a state donation, and thus subtracted from the
41 $190 million maximum state contribution. He said as planning proceeds, changes are needed,
42 such as elevating the track near the Duke University Medical System, to the tune of$90 million.
43 He said cost increases are inevitable in the planning process, and more should be suspected.
44 He said the use of public transit is decreasing nationwide, and the result will be lower fare
45 income to offset the operational costs. He said GoTriangle is unresponsive and the need for
46 independent analysis is even more important.
47 Commissioner McKee referred to the mention of the $90 million elevated track, and
48 asked if this is a new expense.
49 John Tallmadge, GoTriangle Regional Services Development Director, said the $90
50 million is part of the work that has been done to progress the design from 30% to 50%. He said
13
1 it is part of the 50% design cost; the transition of some unknowns that were in contingency in
2 April 2017; value engineering decisions to accommodate the changes within the budget, which
3 remains at $2.476 billion.
4 Commissioner McKee clarified that the $90 million, and any other additional expenses,
5 have been off set by value engineering and or reductions in other areas.
6 John Tallmadge said yes.
7 Commissioner McKee asked if there are any surprises on the radar. He said there is a
8 huge amount of infrastructure between Chapel Hill and Durham, and asked if this will lead to
9 any surprised.
10 John Tallmadge said the risk assessment, which Travis Myren described, includes FTA
11 assessment of whether there is sufficient contingency left in the budget currently. He said this
12 is a potential change that is hanging out there.
13 Commissioner McKee said the Board is aware of the Transportation Infrastructure
14 Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loans that will be required, and asked if there is any
15 possibility that the proceeds for the loans will be considered part of the federal reimbursement,
16 or cash support.
17 John Tallmadge said no; the capital investment grant (CIG) program allows for up to
18 80% of the project costs to come from federal sources, but only 50% can come from the CIG
19 grant. He said this allows a TIFIA loan to be brought in, as well as other grant sources.
20 Commissioner McKee repeated that there is no possibility that TIFIA loans will reduce
21 the cash outlay from the federal government.
22 John Tallmadge said from the information that he has, and the conversations that
23 GoTriangle has had with the FTA, he does not see this as a possibility.
24 Commissioner McKee said this project is working on a razor's edge, and he will support
25 this action tonight though he thinks this is a boondoggle. He said he is not sure Durham will be
26 able to pick up anther shortfall, and he is worried with the continual evolution of this project and
27 the escalation of costs that there will come a time where costs cannot be value engineered out.
28 Commissioner McKee asked if GoTriangle is still standing by its sales tax projections.
29 John Tallmadge said Moody's did the original projections, and will be going back to them
30 for refreshed projections; but as of now, yes.
31 Commissioner Rich referred to the public comment, which identified this project as the
32 FTA's lowest rated project. She asked if this is accurate.
33 John Tallmadge said he has not heard that, and the information being submitted
34 currently, is part of the FTA's annual report, where all projects are reviewed and scored. He
35 said scores have not changed since last year.
36 Commissioner McKee said arrived late this evening, but he intended to petition to have
37 Davenport look at the sales tax projections, and overall financial outlook, again. He said he will
38 not make that petition.
39 Commissioner Marcoplos proposed a friendly amendment in order to ask what is the
40 state of Orange County's sales tax revenue, and if it is a problem, have a reassessment of the
41 projections.
42 Commissioner McKee agreed, and said he wants to make sure the County does not find
43 itself in a corner from which it cannot escape. He referred to the private fundraising, and asked
44 if there is an update, and how much is in cash.
45 John Tallmadge said this campaign remains active, and since this is a private non-profit,
46 he does not feel comfortable divulging this information, but there has been great interest in the
47 project.
48 Commissioner McKee said he is disappointed that the Board cannot at least get an idea
49 of the fundraising efforts.
14
1 Chair Dorosin summarized that over the next couple of months the cost sharing
2 agreement will need to be amended, and a lot of questions will be answered during that
3 process. He said the Board wants to be good stewards of funds, and he is pleased with the
4 negotiation and partnership process with Durham and other partners. He said having this letter
5 signed will be an important step in the private fundraising process.
6
7 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Rich for
8 the Board to authorize the Chair to sign the attached letter to GoTriangle affirming Orange
9 County's financial commitment and communicating a solution to the funding shortfall created by
10 the State budget.
11
12 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
13
14 Commissioner Rich thanked Chair Dorosin and Commissioner Marcoplos for their
15 diligence this past summer on this item.
16 Commissioner Jacobs asked if a written response was ever received from GoTriangle
17 regarding the Hillsborough passenger station.
18 Bonnie Hammersley said no.
19 Commissioner Jacobs said this is long overdue, and the voters need to be clearly
20 informed.
21 Commissioner Marcoplos referred to the GoTriangle youth go pass, and asked if these
22 are available at the Chapel Hill library.
23 John Tallmadge said not yet, but GoTriangle is in discussions with library staff.
24
25 c. Resolution Approving a Policy of Additional Inspections for Residential Projects
26 The Board considered a proposed resolution approving the Orange County's
27 Inspections Division to perform additional code enforcement inspections for residential projects
28 by policy, similar to the County's current level of service and number of specific inspections,
29 and authorize the Chair to sign.
30 Michael Rettie, Chief Building Officer, reviewed the following information:
31
32 BACKGROUND:
33 As allowed by Session Law 2013-118, the Orange County Inspections Division has submitted a
34 request to the North Carolina Department of Insurance to have additional Inspections approved
35 (see highlighted section of Attachment 2). Staff has been instructed by the North Carolina
36 Building Code Council to solicit approval from the Orange County Board of Commissioners for
37 the additional Building Code enforcement inspections. The Orange County Inspections Division
38 requests to add an additional 35 specific inspection types (as the County has done historically),
39 which would serve to facilitate a more systematic, timely and efficient inspection process.
40
41 The requested inspections are essentially an expansion of the eight listed inspections identified
42 in the NC Administrative Code and Policy into natural subcategories or parts, which are
43 currently verified together under each macro-inspection type. Staff has listed these additional
44 inspections with how each relates to the eight listed inspection types in Exhibit 2 to the
45 proposed resolution.
46
47 The proposed policy would ensure that builders and subcontractors have the flexibility and
48 control over the scheduling and sequence of inspections when, in the construction schedule
49 and process, the issue is most efficiently verified and repairs can be effectively made with
50 minimal cost or delay. The Orange County Inspections Division, as well as those being served,
15
1 would benefit by having certain components available for inspection when most accessible for
2 verification.
3
4 These inspections are intended to facilitate better construction projects by fostering a mutually
5 beneficial partnership between the building community and Inspections Division. The additional
6 inspections allow builders to choose the needed inspections individually, in combinations and
7 when they are most efficient to a project, which could help manage project costs. The Orange
8 County Inspections Division would have a greater variety of inspections for Building Safety
9 Officials to verify the multitude of elements and also offer more options to record the result each
10 inspection. Staff has been in contact with the Home Builders Association, which understands
11 the logic of the proposal, which is similar to the County's historic inspections suite of service.
12
13 Commissioner Marcoplos said this is a really good policy, and the flexibility that Orange
14 County provides is second to none, and this institutionalizes it. He thanked staff for the work it
15 has done.
16 Commissioner Price asked if the inspections will be the same, just completed at
17 different times.
18 Michael Rettie said yes, this will allow the builder and the County to spread the
19 inspections out in a more uniform, sequential manner. He said it also provides flexibility in
20 offering partial approvals, or non-critical items to another phase.
21
22 A motion as made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs for the
23 Board to approve and authorize the Chair to sign the attached Resolution, with associated
24 exhibits, provided at Attachment 1.
25
26 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
27
28 Added item:
29 d. Regarding Land Use Plan Amendments— Process to Expand Hillsborough
30 Economic Development Area (EDD)
31
32 Tom Altieri, Transportation Planning, gave a brief intro:
33
34 TO: Board of County Commissioners
35 FROM: Craig Benedict, Orange County Planning Director
36 Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor
37 DATE: August 15, 2018
38 SUBJECT: Land Use Plan Amendments — Process to Expand Hillsborough
39 Economic Development Area (EDD)
40
41 In September 2017, the BOCC approved an Amendment Outline Form authorizing staff to
42 proceed in processing amendments to expand the Hillsborough area EDD through a Joint Land
43 Use Plan amendment, which requires approvals by the Town of Hillsborough and Orange
44 County, and a companion County Comprehensive Plan amendment. These amendments were
45 triggered by the County's request to expand the Hillsborough Primary Service Area, as provided
46 by the Water and Sewer Management, Planning, and Boundary Agreement (WASMPBA).
47 However, the amendments to expand the EDD were postponed to allow for additional
48 coordination between the Town and County to gain a better and mutual understanding of the
49 desired future land uses for the area. Later, the amendments were further postponed to learn
16
1 more about the Settlers Point development application, which covered lands directly to the north
2 and adjacent to the proposed area for EDD expansion as discussed herein.
3
4 An update similar to this was provided to the BOCC on January 23, 2018.
5
6 February 22, 2018 BOCC/Hillsborough Board of Commissioners Joint Meeting: The Boards
7 discussed several Economic Development related topics, one of which was extension of the
8 WASMPBA boundary and Land Use Plan amendments to expand the Hillsborough EDD area.
9 The outcomes of discussions were for the Town to continue processing the Joint Land Use Plan
10 amendment and for the County to hold a public education meeting and consider its respective
11 amendments in the fall.
12
13 Link to Joint Meeting Minutes (See pp. 12-13):
14 http://www4.orangecountync.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=51872
15
16 Hillsborough Approval of Joint Land Use Plan Amendment Completed: As discussed at the
17 aforementioned Joint Meeting, the Town continued its portion of the amendment process and
18 approved the amendment to the Joint Land Use Plan in March 2018. The amendment now
19 requires County consideration and approval to become effective.
20
21 Orange County Concluding Process to Consider Land Use Plan Amendments to Expand
22 Hillsborough EDD:
23 2018
24 BOCC Information Item Sept. 4
25 Public Notification Mailed Sept. 14
26 Two-Part Public Outreach Meeting: Sept. 26
27 1. "Planning 101" General Public Ed. Seminar
28 2. EDD Expansion Information Planning Board Recommendation Oct. 3
29 BOCC Public Hearing Nov. 1
30
31 Planning Staff will provide subsequent notice to the BOCC with details of the Planning 101
32 Public Education and EDD Expansion Information Meeting to be held September 26. It will also
33 seek assistance from the Orange County Department of Community Relations to help notify the
34 public of the Planning 101 portion of the meeting. Consistent with County Ordinance,
35 notification of the Public Information Meeting will be mailed to affected property owners, as well
36 as owners of property within 1000' of the amendment area.
37
38 Review of Amendment Specifics: Maps identifying the amendment area and proposed land use
39 classifications are attached. Planning Staff is not recommending any rezoning at this time.
40 Currently, the area is zoned Rural Residential (R-1). Following are the definitions of the
41 applicable future land use classifications:
42
43 Joint* Land Use Plan Future Land Use Classification
44 "Suburban Office Complex" —These areas provide opportunities to for office and
45 employment enterprises which do not rely on walk-in customers or have a
46 manufacturing component. Businesses may be large or small but will generally arrange
47 themselves in a campus setting with limited walkability and supporting services.
48 Developments of this type should be kept small in nature to limit the peak transportation
49 impact and limited vitality.
50
17
1 Orange County Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Classification
2 "Economic Development Transition Activity Node" - Land in areas of the County which
3 has been specifically targeted for economic development activity consisting of light
4 industrial, distribution, office, service/retail uses, and flex space (typically one story
5 buildings designed, constructed, and marketed as suitable for use as offices but able to
6 accommodate other uses such as a warehouse, showroom, manufacturing assembly, or
7 similar operations.) Such areas are located adjacent to interstate and major arterial
8 highways, and subject to special design criteria and performance standards.
9 *Approved by Hillsborough March 2018
10
11 Commissioner Jacobs said he thinks this approach is a bad idea. He said, firstly, the
12 residents in this area were unhappy with the way this area was already zoned, and the County
13 tried to work with them to offer education and ameliorate the effects of Settlers' Point. He said
14 coming back this quickly, with more commercial development possibilities and more re-zoning,
15 is insensitive and premature. He said, secondly, the County should reestablish its relationship
16 with Hillsborough. He said when the Town of Hillsborough annexes a property it does not want
17 to have approved development standards, because if the Town annexes a property, it can
18 change the zoning and the uses. He referred to the letter from Orange County Schools (OCS)
19 to the Town of Hillsborough about the Collins Ridge Development being unable to
20 accommodate school buses. He said the response from the Town was that this was not the
21 Town's problem. He said this is not the type of partner relationship that should exist between
22 the County and the Town. He said, thirdly, the Board of County Commissioners represents
23 people in non-urban Orange County, and if the County allows Hillsborough annex, and make
24 changes without County input, the residents in the annexed areas will not even have the benefit
25 of their elected officials being able to comment, other than in a courtesy review capacity.
26 Commissioner Jacobs suggested either setting up a group of elected officials from the
27 two boards, or waiting until the annual joint meeting in February. He asked if this issue is time
28 sensitive.
29 Tom Altieri said it is not, but will need to come to a conclusion at some point, due to
30 water and sewer amendments, which become effective once the land use changes have been
31 made.
32 Commissioner Jacobs said the simplest way to discuss this is to be in the same room
33 with Hillsborough, noting the lack of respect that the non-urban residents get from Hillsborough.
34 He said if Orange County does not do this, then no one will do it.
35 Commissioner Jacobs said there is a Joint Planning Agreement (JPA) of sorts with
36 Hillsborough, and it was agreed that there would be the same development standards in each
37 jurisdiction when annexation occurs. He said if Hillsborough is going to change its policy then
38 the JPA should be revisited.
39 Commissioner McKee said there is something about this argument that is the same
40 argument that has stopped development in Orange County for the past 30 years. He said this
41 conversation with Hillsborough should be two way. He said he is less than inclined to be more
42 than respectfully accommodating. He said if an Economic Development District (EDD) exists,
43 he does not understand why it would not be fully used.
44 Chair Dorosin said he does not understand, and asked if Hillsborough has already done
45 something in defiance of the agreement. He said he thought everyone was on the same page
46 about Settlers' Point. He asked Commissioner Jacobs if he believes Hillsborough will annex the
47 property and change it all around. He said he feels that the outline in this evening's memo
48 seems like a process that came out of past meetings.
49 Commissioner Jacobs said the agreement with the Buckhorn EDD —with Mebane— is
50 that development within the EDD takes place under Orange County development standards,
18
1 and then the town annexes. He said he thought that was also the agreement with Hillsborough,
2 but it is his understanding that Hillsborough is telling the developers of Settlers Point that it does
3 not like some part of the development, and thus will withhold water and sewer. He said this is
4 holding developers hostage. He said he would like more information, and it is unclear to him if
5 Hillsborough even cares about what the County approves in areas that Hillsborough will
6 ultimately annex. He said he would like to the think that the County's plans/input do matter.
7 Commissioner Jacobs said, secondly, this could be part of the EDD, but it is not; so this
8 is not a matter of one blocking development. He said the County has to be sensitive to this
9 neighborhood, and maybe there is a difference between what is being done on the west side of
10 old 86 (impacting the Davis Road community), and what is being done on the east side. He
11 said on the east side the original plan was for senior housing, which is better for schools, and
12 the Town of Hillsborough said no. He said there is not great communication, and any leverage
13 that the County has is about to be lost. He said rather than moving ahead, he would like to
14 know what is going on, and give the residents a chance to breathe. He said the County could
15 do better explaining things to the residents.
16 Commissioner McKee said does not dispute Commissioner Jacobs' comments, but he is
17 reluctant to believe that there will be an awakening in Hillsborough that will change its course of
18 thinking. He said two years ago, when he was BOCC Chair, he knew that Hillsborough was
19 against this Settlers' point, since it is seen as competition to downtown Hillsborough.
20 Commissioner McKee said he would be reluctant to lose what little inertia that does exist
21 currently.
22 Commissioner McKee referred to the Eno EDD, and said Durham is irrelevant, as it such
23 a small area of the EDD. He said he does not expect Durham to be very accommodating. He
24 said he can recall Boards from 30-35 years ago being adamantly opposed to any commercial
25 development in Orange County, and the County's dependence on the residential tax base is
26 evidence of this. He said he understands the desire to be sensitive to the community, but there
27 will be people who are upset no matter when this development proceeds.
28 Commissioner Marcoplos said both Commissioners Jacobs and McKee have made
29 good points, and he suggests taking a couple of weeks to have a conversation with
30 Hillsborough to determine the cleanest hand off. He said this matter is not hugely time
31 sensitive, and he has to believe that this can be figured out.
32 Chair Dorosin referred to the two maps: the first one being Hillsborough's land use plan,
33 which approves 84 acres to be suburban/office. He said the second map, which shows roughly
34 the same acreage, and the County is considering making this a proposed EDD transition area.
35 Tom Altieri said yes, consistent with the properties to the north in red.
36 Chair Dorosin asked if there are inconsistencies between these two maps/plans. He
37 said Commissioner Jacobs is expressing concern that the Town of Hillsborough will change the
38 use of the parcel, post annexation, which would be within the Town's right to do. He asked if
39 there is there some inconsistency already on the map.
40 Commissioner Jacobs said no, the only inconsistency is that some of it zoned this way,
41 and some it is not. He said it has to be changed, by the County, to be consistent with what is
42 north of it, and for the County to do so is different than what was communicated to the residents
43 previously. He said once the land is annexed, the County will no longer be at the table to
44 represent the residents' interests, and that is why he would like to see a conversation occur.
45 Chair Dorosin said he is hearing two concerns, the first of which is Orange County's
46 rezoning and timing of this, and it seems that the timing is not urgent.
47 Tom Altieri said he has heard the terms zoning and rezoning brought up, and really they
48 are talking about changes to the future land use maps, which provide a very general vision. He
49 said to implement this vision one has to start a re-zoning process, getting into specifics such as
50 the permitted use table, etc. He said there is no proposal at this time to re-zone this area. He
19
1 said it is currently zoned rural residential, and the area to the north contains an EDD zoning,
2 and the area to the south is rural buffer.
3 Tom Altieri said this gets the developer one step closer to a re-zoning, but this would
4 have to go through many hoops first.
5 Commissioner Price said out of respect for the residents, there should be some
6 conversation on this topic and the plan moving forward.
7 Commissioner Burroughs asked if that is not the point of the public meetings.
8 Tom Altieri said yes, that is the intent. He said this has been done in the past, and the
9 proposal has not changed, but only the timing of when the process will be carried out.
10 Commissioner Price said she was referring to further conversation with Hillsborough.
11 Commissioner Rich said this has been discussed this for quite some time, and with all
12 due respect, she does not think it is due to lack of conversation with Hillsborough and the
13 residents in the area. She asked if residents have been notified of the proposal.
14 Tom Altieri said yes. He said the process has been ongoing for over a year, and it has
15 been a bit confusing with property owners previously, due to the developer's application, and
16 some misunderstanding over zoning and land uses.
17 Commissioner Rich said she understands Commissioner Jacobs' concerns, and it is
18 worthy of a conversation with Hillsborough to clear this issue up. She said it is important for
19 Hillsborough to know how Orange County feels, but she does not want to delay this project.
20 Chair Dorosin suggested getting information from Hillsborough and its future plans for
21 this area, by having Bonnie Hammersley communicate with the Town Manager by September
22 201h, the next regular BOCC meeting. He said once this information is received, the Board can
23 look at a timetable and whether to keep it as is, or slow it down. He said there is momentum,
24 and he would like to see it continue. He said the BOCC has a work session on September 6th
25 and there is a discussion on EDDs. He said this topic could be wrapped into that discussion.
26 He said to hold off for now on the proposed schedule in the memo.
27 Bonnie Hammersley said she will bring information back on the 20th
28
29 7. Reports
30
31 a. Northern Campus Capital Proiect Progress Update
32 The Board received a report on the progress of the Orange County Northern Campus
33 capital project. The update will include information regarding:
34 a) the execution of a professional services agreement amendment to Moseley Architects,
35 the designers of the Detention Center, as delegated to the Manager by the Board on
36 June 19, 2018;
37 b) the execution of a professional services agreement amendment to HH Architects, the
38 designers of the Environment and Agriculture Center and Park Operations Base, as
39 delegated to the Manager by the Board on June 19, 2018;
40 c) the award and execution of the Construction Manager at Risk ("CMAR") Agreement to
41 Bordeaux Construction of Raleigh, NC as delegated to the Manager by the Board on
42 June 19, 2018; and
43 d) a progress report on the project provided by Bordeaux Construction.
44
45 Bonnie Hammersley reviewed the purpose and background:
46
47 PURPOSE:
48 To receive a report on the progress of the Orange County Northern Campus capital project.
49 The update will include information regarding:
20
1 a) the execution of a professional services agreement amendment to Moseley Architects,
2 the designers of the Detention Center, as delegated to the Manager by the Board on
3 June 19, 2018;
4 b) the execution of a professional services agreement amendment to HH Architects, the
5 designers of the Environment and Agriculture Center and Park Operations Base, as
6 delegated to the Manager by the Board on June 19, 2018;
7 c) the award and execution of the Construction Manager at Risk ("CMAR") Agreement to
8 Bordeaux Construction of Raleigh, NC as delegated to the Manager by the Board on
9 June 19, 2018; and
10 d) a progress report on the project provided by Bordeaux Construction.
11
12 BACKGROUND:
13 On April 3, 2018, the Board of Orange County Commissioners authorized the acquisition of
14 approximately 21 acres of property to serve as the site for the Orange County Northern
15 Campus. This campus location contemplates housing the Orange County Detention Center,
16 Environment and Agriculture Center ("EAC"), and the Park Operations Base.
17
18 On June 19, 2018, the Board authorized the Manager to amend existing design agreements
19 with Moseley Architects, the Detention Center designer, and HH Architects, the EAC designer,
20 that would align the professional design services with the Northern Campus site and the
21 addition of the Park Operations Base. The fee for Moseley Architects is amended from $1.418
22 million to a not to exceed $1.647 million for the detention center and major site construction for
23 the overall campus. The difference in the fee relates to the major site work associated with the
24 Northern Campus. The Moseley Architects amendment is located in Attachment 1.
25
26 The fee for HH Architects is amended from $214,000 to a not to not to exceed $518,000 for the
27 EAC, Park Operations Base, Construction Administration, and related minor site construction
28 more specific to these facilities. The difference in the fee relates to the addition of the Park
29 Operations Base components of the Northern Campus Project and the addition of Construction
30 Administration services once construction begins. The HH Amendment is located in Attachment
31 2. The total not to exceed professional services fees for the two designers is $2.165 million or
32 8.87% of the estimated construction budget of$24.4 million.
33
34 The Board also authorized the Manager to continue the selection process of the Construction
35 Manager at Risk ("CMAR") over the summer break. Upon the solicitation of the May 23, 2018
36 Request for Qualifications, two firms responded and were interviewed by a staff panel of
37 stakeholders representing the County Manager's Office, the Sheriff's Office, the Department of
38 Environment, Agriculture, Parks and Recreation ("DEAPR"), the Orange County Cooperative
39 Extension Office, Asset Management Services, and Finance & Administrative Services. The
40 panel recommended Bordeaux Construction of Raleigh, NC to negotiate with the County for its
41 services as the overall project's Construction Manager at Risk, and the resulting CMAR
42 agreement is located in Attachment 3.
43
44 The CMAR is a delivery approach in which a construction management firm acts as an owner's
45 consultant during the pre-development phase of the project. During this process, the owner of
46 the project will rely on the CMAR to contract multiple subcontractors and is acknowledged as
47 the sole point of responsibility for the project delivery. During this process, the CMAR
48 possesses the role of hiring the subcontractors who will eventually develop the project. A CMAR
49 will establish a GMP or guaranteed maximum price from subcontractors once the project has
21
1 been designed. The final construction price is the sum of the CMAR's fee, the subcontractors'
2 bids, and allowances.
3
4 The CMAR is responsible for managing all subcontracts during the pre-development stage as
5 well as execution stage. The CMAR is responsible for assisting the owner in the following
6 areas:
7 • Construction Schedule
8 • Project Budget
9 • Cash Flow Analysis
10 • Discussion and acceptance of Means and Methods
11 • Value Engineering
12 • Cost Projects
13
14 During the early stages of a project, the focus of the CMAR will be on cost control and schedule
15 coordination, but once the project kicks off, its role will turn to design, structure and execution
16 issues. The projected timeline for this project is as follows:
17
18 Activity Estimated Date Range
19 Stakeholder Input, Site Design and Review Activities Summer, Fall, Winter, 2018
20 Schematic Design Review with the BOCC November, 2018
21 Program Completed, GMP Presentation to BOCC March-May, 2019
22 Construction Period Summer, 2019— Summer, 2021
23 Occupation Fall, 2021
24
25 Bonnie Hammersley introduced Blair Bordeaux, Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR),
26 saying he will be the face of this project.
27 Blair Bordeaux said he is the president of Bordeaux Construction, who has been
28 working on the pre-construction phase. He said the next 30-60 days will be spent digging into
29 the budget, building on sites, feed back to designers, etc.
30 Blair Bordeaux introduced Carl Davis to talk about diversity in sub-contracting.
31 Carl Davis, Right Build International, said before they were builders they were
32 consultants in the areas of minority participation, tracking and monitoring; conflict resolution;
33 and workforce development. He said his company has run workforce programs throughout the
34 state, and started with Durham's Capital Improvement projects in 2005, including the Durham
35 Performing Arts Center. He said they couple a workforce program with minority outreach, and
36 will report back to the County as requested by the Manager. He said they have worked with
37 Blair Bordeaux for a long time, and they are a team. He said they keep one foot in the
38 community for outreach, and plan to reach out to organizations such as Empowerment,
39 Compass Center, NC Works, Orange County Housing Authority, etc.
40 Blair Bordeaux said they understand the type of financial impact that a project like this
41 has on the County, and he said Carl Davis' role is really focus on the local involvement
42 workforce development in the specific area. He said he has heard the politics of the facility,
43 and seeks to maximize the financial impact it can bring to this area. He said his staff will be
44 from 5-10 people from a construction side, and Carl Davis can dive deep and focus on
45 workforce development and minority participation. He said they have committed minority
46 business goals of 20%, and an Orange County workforce development goal of 30%.
47 Carl Davis said the 30% commitment is on new hires for the project, and would not
48 affect existing staff.
49 Bonnie Hammersley said floor plans will be presented to the Board of County
50 Commissioners at the November 8 t" work session.
22
1 Chair Dorosin asked if the monthly reports will be shared with the BOCC, via the
2 Manager.
3 Bonnie Hammersley said yes.
4
5 8. Consent Agenda
6
7 • Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
8 Commissioner Price: items e, g, n, q
9
10 • Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
11
12 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to
13 approve the remaining items on the agenda.
14
15 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
16
17 Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
18
19 8-e Tax Collector's Annual Settlement for Fiscal Year 2017-18
20 The Board received the tax collector's annual settlement on current and delinquent
21 taxes, consider approving by resolution the accounting thereof, upon acceptance of the reports,
22 issue the Order to Collect for Fiscal Year 2018-2019, and authorize the Chair to sign.
23 Commissioner Price asked if Orange County has always collected from real and
24 personal property taxes from Mebane City.
25 Bonnie Hammersley said this is the second year, which is outlined on page two of the
26 abstract.
27
28 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to
29 approve the tax collector's annual settlement on current and delinquent taxes, consider
30 approving by resolution the accounting thereof, upon acceptance of the reports, issue the Order
31 to Collect for Fiscal Year 2018-2019, and authorize the Chair to sign.
32
33 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
34
35 8-g- Ratification — Conservation Easement for Tunnel's End Horse Farm
36 The Board considered ratifying the County Manager's decision to accept an agricultural
37 conservation easement for Tunnel's End Horse Farm.
38 Commissioner Jacobs said whenever someone is generous enough to make a
39 conservation easement, he urged the Board to put it on regular agenda to recognize them,
40 unless they prefer to go unrecognized.
41 Kim Livingston, DEAPR, reviewed the following information:
42
43 Ratification Request
44 Tunnel's End Horse Farm Conservation Easement
45 Orange County Lands Legacy Program
46 The purpose of this agenda item is to consider ratifying the acceptance of the County Manger's
47 decision to accept an agricultural conservation easement for Tunnel's End Horse Farm.
48
49 Ms. Wegner contacted the County just before the Board of County Commissioners' summer
50 break and expressed her wishes to donate to the County a conservation easement on her 16-
23
1 acre horse farm in an expedited fashion due to health reasons. Tunnel's End Horse Farm is
2 located on Walnut Grove Church Road (Cedar Grove Township)just south of the Underwood
3 property, which is under an Orange County conservation easement. Given the extenuating
4 circumstances, the County Manager, after consulting with the Chair and Vice-Chair, accepted
5 this conservation easement, which closed on August 15, 2018.
6
7 Tunnel End Horse Farm
8 16-acre horse farm
9 200-feet South Fork Little River frontage
10 Little River Protected Watershed
11 500-feet upstream of two Natural Heritage areas: South Fork Little River Marsh and
12 Little River Aquatic Habitat
13
14 This property has significant conservation values. It is within a priority watershed for acquiring
15 agricultural easements in a dual effort to protect prime farmland and drinking water quality
16 Ms. Wegner donated a permanent conservation easement that restricts future development to
17 protect prime farmland and streams, as well as scenic views of the farmland from Walnut Grove
18 Church Road. There is one existing residence on the property. The easement prohibits future
19 subdivision of the property and protects forested stream buffers located on the farm. Future
20 farm activities will be in accordance with a Conservation Plan prepared for this farm by the
21 Orange Soil & Water Conservation District.
22
23 Financial Impact:
24 Landowner Donation
25 Orange County (Lands Legacy) $ 2,551
26
27 The owner of Tunnel's End Horse Farm donated the conservation easement to Orange County.
28 The cost to the County was $2,551 in transaction costs, including title search and closing fees.
29 Those funds came from existing funds budgeted in the Conservation Easements Capital
30 Project.
31
32 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to
33 approve ratifying the County Manager's decision to accept an agricultural conservation
34 easement for Tunnel's End Horse Farm.
35
36 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
37
38 8-n Oranqe County Arts Commission — Proposed Change to the Membership-
39 Reclassifying an At-Large Position on the Arts Commission to a Student Liaison
40 Position
41 The Board considered approving a proposed change in the Arts Commission's
42 membership roster, reclassifying an At Large Position to a Student Liaison position with a one-
43 yearterm.
44 Commissioner Price said UNC is not the only institution of higher learning, and perhaps
45 a student from Durham Tech could be involved via an additional at-large seat.
46 Katie Murray said that is a good idea, and the reasoning for looking at UNC is to bridge
47 the arts communities on and off campus. She said she has not worked much with Durham
48 Tech, but she would be willing to look into this.
49 Commissioner Price said she would like to motion that Katie Murray investigate options
50 for student involvement at Durham Tech.
24
1 Chair Dorosin said he would like to move away from designated positions, and could
2 simply task the Arts Commission with trying to do outreach to students using the at-large
3 positions.
4 Chair Dorosin asked if this can be left as an at large position, and the Board will
5 encourage the Commission to engage a student membership if possible.
6 Katie Murray said she has spoken with staff about the best way to do this, and the
7 reason for changing the designation from at-large to student is because it is a one-year term.
8 She said it would only be available to a senior, and the student would be required to solicit
9 candidates to full the position upon their graduation.
10 Donna Baker said the change in designation is to create a one-year term, as opposed to
11 3 years, in order to attract a student.
12 Commissioner Rich said if it only open to seniors, this may be difficult as Durham Tech
13 is a two-year college.
14 Katie Murray said she will add that factor to her investigative process.
15
16 A motion was made by Commissioner Price seconded by to Commissioner Jacobs to
17 approve a proposed change in the Arts Commission's membership roster, reclassifying an At
18 Large Position to a Student Liaison position with a one-year term and also ask Katie Murray to
19 look at options for students at Durham Tech.
20
21 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
22
23 8-q- Fiscal Year 2018-19 Budget Amendment#1
24 The Board considered approving budget, capital, and grant project ordinance
25 amendments for fiscal year 2018-19.
26 Commissioner Price said funding got cut for the literary outreach position in the library,
27 and she thinks this position was doing important work with Pre-K. She would like staff to
28 explore other ways to fill this gap at some point.
29
30 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to
31 approve budget, capital, and grant project ordinance amendments for fiscal year 2018-19.
32
33 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
34
35 a. Minutes
36 The Board approved the minutes from May 31, June 12 and 19, 2018 as submitted by the Clerk
37 to the Board.
38 b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds
39 The Board adopted of a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release motor vehicle
40 property tax values for seven taxpayers with a total of eight bills that will result in a reduction of
41 revenue, in accordance with the NCGS.
42 c. Property Tax Releases/Refunds
43 The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release property tax
44 values for twenty-nine (29) taxpayers with a total of forty-five (45) bills that will result in a
45 reduction of revenue, in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 105-381.
46 d. Applications for Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion
47 The Board considered fifteen (15) untimely applications for exemption/exclusion from ad
48 valorem taxation for twenty-three (23) bills for the 2018 tax year.
49 e. Tax Collector's Annual Settlement for Fiscal Year 2017-18
25
1 The Board received the tax collector's annual settlement on current and delinquent taxes,
2 consider approving by resolution the accounting thereof, upon acceptance of the reports, issue
3 the Order to Collect for Fiscal Year 2018-2019, and authorize the Chair to sign.
4 f. Change in BOCC Regular Meeting Schedule for 2018
5 The Board considered one change to the Board County Commissioners' regular meeting
6 calendar for 2018.
7 g. Ratification — Conservation Easement for Tunnel's End Horse Farm
8 The Board ratified the County Manager's decision to accept an agricultural conservation
9 easement for Tunnel's End Horse Farm.
10 h. Riqht of Way Encroachment Agreement for Non-Utility Encroachments on Primary
11 and Secondary Highways — Simme-Seats
12 The Board approved a Right-of-Way Encroachment Agreement for Non-Utility Encroachments
13 on Primary and Secondary Highways authorizing Orange County, on behalf of Orange County
14 Public Transportation, to enter into an agreement with the North Carolina Department of
15 Transportation (NCDOT) for the installation of eight (8) Simme-Seats at existing bus stops, and
16 authorize the Chair to sign.
17 L Request for Road Additions to the State Maintained Secondary Road System for
18 Westhampton Way, Weston Lane, and Brookford Court in Westhampton Subdivision
19 The Board made a recommendation to the North Carolina Department of Transportation
20 (NCDOT), and the North Carolina Board of Transportation (NC BOT), concerning a petition to
21 add Westhampton Way, Weston Lane, and Brookford Court in Westhampton Subdivision to the
22 State Maintained Secondary Road System.
23 j. Request for Road Addition to the State Maintained Secondary Road System for Paper
24 Birch Lane and Greenbrook Lane in Pleasant Green Woods Subdivision Phases 3 and
25 4
26 The Board made a recommendation to the North Carolina Department of Transportation
27 (NCDOT), and the North Carolina Board of Transportation (NC BOT), concerning a petition to
28 add Paper Birch Lane and Greenbrook Lane in Pleasant Green Woods Subdivision Phases 3
29 and 4 to the State Maintained Secondary Road System.
30 k. Request for Road Additions to the State Maintained Secondary Road System for
31 Lochwood Court and Dumfries Lane in Annandale at Creek Wood Subdivision
32 The Board made a recommendation to the North Carolina Department of Transportation
33 (NCDOT), and the North Carolina Board of Transportation (NC BOT), concerning a petition to
34 add Lochwood Court and Dumfries Lane in Annandale at Creek Wood Subdivision to the State
35 Maintained Secondary Road System.
36 I. Hillsborough Area Economic Development District Phase 1 Water and Sewer
37 Extensions — Project Easements and Acquisitions
38 The Board authorized County Staff to acquire the private easements required to construct and
39 maintain the Hillsborough Area Economic Development District (EDD) Phase 1 Water and
40 Sewer Project by negotiation, purchase, or condemnation, if necessary.
41 m. Amendment Outline Form for Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text
42 Amendments — Update of Effective Date of Flood Information Rate Maps (FIRM)
43 The Board approved process components and schedule for proposed amendments to the
44 Orange County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) updating the effective date for the
45 County's Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM).
46 n. Orange County Arts Commission — Proposed Change to the Membership-
47 Reclassifying an At-Large Position on the Arts Commission to a Student Liaison
48 Position
49 The Board approved a proposed change in the Arts Commission's membership roster,
50 reclassifying an At Large Position to a Student Liaison position with a one-year term.
26
1 o. Ratification of Contract Signature Authority for EmergencV Contract
2 The Board ratified the County Manager's signature on an emergency repair contract executed
3 with the Sasser Companies, Inc. in the amount of $390,849 above the Manager's signature limit
4 of $250,000.
5 p. Designation of an Acting County Manager During the County Manager's Temporary
6 Absence
7 The Board approved the County Manager's appointment of Travis Myren, Deputy County
8 Manager, to serve as Acting County Manager during the County Manager's temporary absence
9 or disability.
10 q. Fiscal Year 2018-19 Budget Amendment #1
1 1 The Board approved budget, capital, and grant project ordinance amendments for fiscal year
12 2018-19 to the Health Department; Planning and Inspections; Animal Services; Housing and
13 Community Development; Criminal Justice Resource Department; County Capital Projects;
14 Department of Social Services; Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks and Recreation;
15 Department on Aging; and Library Services.
16 r. Marketing Communications Management Agreement with FleishmanHillard
17 The Board will consider approving a professional services agreement for tourism marketing and
18 advertising with FleishmanHillard.
19 s. Performance Agreement Between the Town of Chapel Hill and Visitors Bureau
20 The Board will consider approving the 2018-19 performance agreement between the Town of
21 Chapel Hill and the Chapel Hill/Orange County Visitors Bureau.
22
23 9. County Manager's Report
24 Bonnie Hammersley said there will be a BOCC work session on September 6th and
25 topics include:
26
27 • Economic Development Districts — Follow-up from Board Retreat
28 • Additional Discussion Regarding the Election Method for Members of the Orange
29 County Board of Commissioners
30 • Discussion on Proposed Nonprofit Capital Funding Policy and Criteria
31 . Board of Commissioners - Boards and Commissions Appointment Process Discussion
32
33 10. County Attorney's Report
34 John Roberts said he wanted to address public records requests, noting there has been
35 an uptick in the amount across the state, and the request of voluminous amount of pages. He
36 said the most recent request will be close to 500,000 pages, and these have to be reviewed to
37 separate potentially confidential and privileged communication.
38 John Roberts said if this trend continues, it may be necessary to have a dedicated staff
39 person for just public records requests. He said another way to approach this is to ask the
40 General Assembly to amend the statute to state that all public records request are open only to
41 North Carolina residents.
42 Chair Dorosin asked if a staff person were added, would it need to be a lawyer in the
43 County Attorney's office.
44 John Roberts said not necessarily, but rather someone who is charged with compiling
45 the records, and performing an initial review. He said anything that needs legal review would
46 be forwarded to his office.
47 Chair Dorosin asked if there is someone responsible for this currently.
48 John Roberts said if it is a request just for emails then Information Technology compiles
49 it, and if there is a request for hard copies, these are fulfilled by staff within the departments
50 from which the documents have been requested.
27
1 Commissioner Rich asked if there is a tipping point at which a dedicated staff person will
2 be needed.
3 John Roberts said it is uncomfortable now, but until this year there has only been one or
4 two of these massive request; however, there have been several this year, which is line with the
5 statewide trend, but he would like to make sure this is a trend in Orange County before
6 requesting additional staff.
7 Commissioner Jacobs said there was a professor from Massachusetts that made a
8 huge request. He asked if this request was honored, and if this person was charged any fees.
9 John Roberts said since 2009, there has been a policy in place to recoup actual costs.
10 He said the request was for about 1 million pages, at the cost of around $10,000, and the
1 1 gentleman withdrew his request.
12 Commissioner Marcoplos asked if the North Carolina Association of County
13 Commissioners (NCACC) could find out if other counties would support a bill such as this.
14 John Roberts said he will follow up with NCACC General Counsel.
15
16 11. *Appointments
17
18 a. Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee —Appointments
19 The Board considered making appointments to the Adult Care Home Community
20 Advisory Committee.
21
22 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
23 appoint the following:
24
25 • Position 1- Tiketha Collins - At-Large for a One Year Initial Term ending in 09/04/2019
26 • Position 2 Nancy McCormick for an At-Large for One Year Initial Term ending in
27 09/04/2019
28
29 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
30
31 b. Nursing Home Community Advisory Committee —Appointment
32 The Board considered making an appointment to the Nursing Home Community
33 Advisory Committee.
34
35 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Price to
36 appoint the following:
37 Position 4 for Stephanie Boswell for the At-Large position for a One Year Initial Term
38 ending in 09/04/2019
39
40 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
41
42 John Roberts said state statute lets the boards merge.
43
44 c. Animal Services Advisory Board —Appointments
45 The Board considered making appointments to the Animal Services Advisory Board.
46
47 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Price to
48 appoint the following:
49 • Position 2- Dr. Lee Pickett -Veterinarian -Partial Term ending in 06/30/2019
50 • Position 5 Dr. Bryan Stuart - Town of Hillsborough - First Full Term ending 06/30/2021
28
1 • Position 13 Lisa - Wells Manager/Owner Retail Pet Services for a Partial Term ending
2 06/30/2020
3
4 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
5
6 d. Central Community Board (Cardinal Innovations) —Appointments
7 The Board will consider making appointments to the Central Community Board.
8
9 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Marcoplos to
10 appoint the following:
11
12 • Position 2 —Antonio Pedroza - Consumer or Family Member for a First Full Term ending
13 06/30/2021
14 • Position 3 - Ellen Perry- Other Citizen or Stakeholder for a First Full Term ending
15 06/30/2021
16
17 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
18
19 e. Chapel Hill Parks, Greenways, and Recreation Commission —Appointment
20 The Board considered making an appointment to the Chapel Hill Parks, Greenways, and
21 Recreation Commission.
22
23 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Price to
24 appoint the following:
25 Position 1 Alice Armstrong Orange County Representative for a Partial Term ending
26 06/30/2020
27
28 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
29
30 f. Historic Preservation Commission —Appointments
31 The Board considered making appointments to the Historic Preservation Commission.
32
33 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to
34 appoint the following:
35 • Position 1 Rebecca Paxton At-Large for a First Full Term ending 03/31/2021
36 • Position 3 Paul Noe At-Large for a First Full Term ending 03/31/2021
37
38 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
39
40 g. Workforce Development Board (Regional Partnership) —Appointment
41 The Board considered making an appointment to the Workforce Development Board.
42
43 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
44 appoint the following:
45 • Position 2 Sue Holaday for an At-Large - Private Sector— Business for a First Full Term
46 ending 06/30/2021
47
48 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
49
50 12. Information Items
29
1
2 • June 19, 2018 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List
3 • Tax Collector's Report— Numerical Analysis
4 • Tax Collector's Report— Measure of Enforced Collections
5 • Tax Assessor's Report— Releases/Refunds under$100
6 • Century Farms in Orange County Update
7 • Memorandum Regarding Land Use Plan Amendments— Process to Expand
8 Hillsborough Economic Development Area (EDD)
9 • Memorandum — 203 S. Greensboro Capital Project Update (Southern Branch Library)
10
11 13. Closed Session
12 NONE
13
14 14. Adjournment
15
16 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Rich to
17 adjourn the meeting at 10:24 p.m.
18
19 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
20
21 Mark Dorosin, Chair
22
23 Donna Baker
24 Clerk to the Board
25
26
1
I Attachment 2
2
3 DRAFT MINUTES
4 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
5 WORK SESSION
6 September 6, 2018
7 7:00 p.m.
8
9 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a work session on Thursday, September
10 6, 2018 at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, N.C.
11
12 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Dorosin and Commissioners Mia Burroughs,
13 Barry Jacobs, Mark Marcoplos, Earl McKee, Renee Price and Penny Rich
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Deputy County Manager
17 Travis Myren and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other staff members will be identified
18 appropriately below)
19
20 Chair Dorosin called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.
21
22 1. Economic Development Districts — Follow-up from Board Retreat
23
24 Travis Myren reviewed the following information:
25
26 Background:
27 The work session discussion will attempt to clarify the strategic issues raised by the Board
28 during the 2018 retreat and provide direction to staff on future economic development goals
29 and tactics. Staff will provide information and facilitate a discussion on the following questions
30 and themes:
31
32 1. What is the context for economic development in Orange County?
33
34 The Board has adopted a social justice goal and an operational goal related to
35 economic development. The social justice goal is to Ensure Economic Self Sufficiency
36 and is further defined as, "The creation and preservation of infrastructure, policies,
37 programs and funding necessary for residents to provide shelter, food, clothing and
38 medical care for themselves and their dependents."
39
40 The Board's adopted operational goal is to, "Implement planning and economic
41 development policies which create a balanced, dynamic local economy, and which
42 promote diversity, sustainable growth, and enhanced revenue while embracing
43 community values."
44
45 On an operational level, economic development may also influence the Board's current
46 policy priorities:
47 • Tax base growth to pay for increased demand for public services
48 • Living wages and housing
49 • Transportation
50 • Environmental preservation
2
1 Impacts on the criminal justice system
2 Economic diversification and quality of life
3
4 2. What activities are included in the category of economic development? How should
5 those activities be prioritized?
6 • Arts
7 • Commercial and Industrial Recruiting
8 • Small Business Development
9 • Agricultural Development
10 • Tourism
11
12 3. How much money is the County currently investing in economic development?
13 Specifically, how are Article 46 funds being allocated? What is the return on investment
14 for those activities?
15
16 4. What is the current land use framework in which economic development may occur?
17
18 5. What is the tax base profile and how has it changed over time? How has recent
19 economic activity changed the tax base?
20
21 6. What is happening in the Economic Development Districts that may impact future
22 economic development strategy?
23 • Status of water and sewer extensions
24 • Encroaching residential development
25 • Practical considerations of expanding utilities in the Eno Economic Development
26 District
27
28 7. What are the potential next steps for discussion and implementation?
29 • Using objective criteria identify the most marketable sites within the current areas
30 designated for economic development.
31 • Reduce development risk by preparing a site for development
32 o Identify willing sellers
33 o Conduct due diligence
34 o Gain property control for price certainty
35 o Extend utilities and other infrastructure
36 Pre-zone property in the areas designated for economic development that are
37 within the County's zoning jurisdiction
38 Reexamine the boundaries of areas designated for economic development
39 Investigate the potential for research and development sites in cooperation with
40 area universities
41 • Reexamine the uses of Article 46 sales tax revenue
42 • Review permitting and regulatory procedures with respect to barriers to efficient
43 processing
44
45 Travis Myren said there is a copy of the PowerPoint presentation, a revised handout for
46 the Article 46 sales tax, and a booklet of the loan and grant recipients from 2017-18 at the
47 Commissioners' places. He made the following PowerPoint presentation:
48
49 Economic Development Work Session
50 Board of Orange County Commissioners
3
1 Southern Human Services Meeting Facility
2 September 6, 2018
3
4 Context for Economic Development in Orange County
5 • Social Justice Goal
6 o Ensure Economic Self Sufficiency. Create and preserve infrastructure, policies,
7 programs, and funding necessary for residents to provide shelter, food, clothing,
8 and medical care for themselves and their dependents.
9 • Strategic Goal
10 o Implement planning and economic development policies for a balanced, dynamic
11 local economy that promotes diversity, sustainable growth, and enhanced
12 revenue while embracing community values.
13
14 Commissioner Price arrived at 7:07:06 PM
15
16 Operational izing Economic Development Goals
17
18 • Tax Base Growth
19 o Pays for Public Services and Balances the Tax Base
20 • Living Wages & Housing
21 o Allows Economic Self Sufficiency
22 • Transportation
23 o Reduces Single Occupancy Trips and Miles Traveled
24 • Environmental Preservation
25 o Makes Farmland Profitable to Reduce Development Incentive
26 • Criminal Justice System
27 o Reduces Crime Associated with Poverty and Improve Outcomes
28 • Quality of Life
29 o Promotes Economic Diversity and Opportunity
30
31 Economic Development Activities —
32 What Counts?
33 • Arts
34 o Director of Arts Commission
35 o Grant Program
36 • Commercial and Industrial Recruiting
37 o Water & Sewer Extensions
38 o Staff Support
39 • Small Business Support
40 o Staff Support
41 o Grant Program
42 • Ag Development
43 o Staff Support
44 o Grant Program
45 • Tourism
46 o Visitors Bureau Staff Support
47 o Marketing
48
49
4
1 Economic Development Investments (chart)
2
3 Chair Dorosin asked which infrastructure has the debt on it.
4 Travis Myren said mostly in the Buckhorn Economic Development District (EDD).
5 Commissioner Rich said Mebane is at 17%, and asked if this is also part of the
6 infrastructure in the Buckhorn EDD.
7 Travis Myren said no, all of the infrastructure will show up in the red portion of the pie
8 chart (53%), and the Mebane-specific portion is grants and/or loans going to businesses
9 primarily located in Mebane, Efland, etc.
10 Commissioner Rich said it seems strange that Mebane is the smallest portion, yet it
11 receives more than other municipalities.
12 Commissioner McKee asked if this 14% includes agriculture grants.
13 Travis Myren said yes.
14 Commissioner Rich said that makes more sense.
15 Commissioner Jacobs clarified that this is not within the City of Mebane
16 Travis Myren said it would be within Mebane, but also includes the incentives for
17 Morinaga.
18 Commissioner Rich said that makes even more sense. She said she wanted to make
19 sure that funds are being spent in the Orange County portion of Mebane.
20 Commissioner Jacobs said when this sales tax began, it seemed logical to build in the
21 EDDs as all of the municipalities would get a cut of the pie. He said he is unsure if this was
22 equitable or not, and would be curious to know if the reverse is true: if County funds are spent
23 in the municipalities, is the same percentage returned as when funds are spent in the County?
24 Travis Myren said he would have to research this question. He said he imagines that
25 analysis would work both ways.
26 Commissioner Jacobs said he wonders if it is a mirror image, or if it is different because
27 it is going through the municipality versus the County.
28 Travis Myren said if there were tax base growth anywhere in the County, it would drive
29 down the countywide tax rate. He said in that sense tax base is tax base.
30 Commissioner McKee said they were talking about sales tax increases that the County
31 distributes out to the municipalities.
32 Commissioner Jacobs said he wants to know how this works coming back to the
33 County.
34 Chair Dorosin said it all goes to the State, and then it comes to the County and is
35 distributed. He said every municipality benefits when any municipality does better.
36 Commissioner Jacobs said a past County Manager wanted to change the formula to
37 freak out the municipalities, and when considering how to spend the infrastructure money, it
38 would be interesting to see if there is a dollar-for-dollar return.
39 Travis Myren said the County has a choice as to whether to use a per capita distribution
40 or an ad valorem distribution, and he is not sure of the implications based on where the tax
41 revenue is generated; and if there are any. He resumed the presentation:
42
43 Article 46 Sales Tax (chart)
44
45 Article 46 Sales Tax Expenditures To Date (pie chart)
46
47 Article 46 Performance Measures
48 Measuring Return on Investment
49 • Small Business Investment Grant Program (From FY15-16— Present)
50 o 105 Grants Made
5
1 o $558,230.95 Granted
2 o 191 New Jobs
3 • Agriculture Grant Program (From FY15-16 — Present)
4 o 53 Grants Made
5 o $402,249.98 Granted
6 o 114 New Jobs
7 • Loan Fund (From 2009)
8 o 22 Loans Made
9 o $974,848 Loaned
10 • Commercial Businesses Connected to Sewer
11 o Morinaga
12
13 Commissioner McKee asked if some of this money was used to connect businesses in
14 Carrboro to the sewer.
15 Steve Brantley, Economic Development Director, said yes; $27,000.
16 Commissioner Price asked if the average grant amount is known, and the number of
17 applicants.
18 Travis Myren said staff will get that information to the Board.
19 Mike Ortosky, Agriculture Economic Developer, said ag grants average about $8000,
20 and have about 20-30% more applicants.
21 Travis Myren resumed the presentation:
22
23 Article 46 Performance Measures (chart: page 9)
24 Incentives Return on Investment
25
26 Article 46 Sales Tax Projections (graph: page 10)
27
28 Chair Dorosin noted the blue line on page 10, and asked if this referred to the Buckhorn
29 and Hillsborough EDDs only.
30 Travis Myren said it also refers to the Eno EDD.
31 Chair Dorosin asked if water and sewer are planned for the Eno EDD.
32 Travis Myren said yes, a $1.4 million project, but not all of those expenditures have been
33 made yet. He resumed the presentation:
34
35 Economic Development and Land Use
36 Land Use Framework
37 • Annexation and Zoning
38 o Town/City Annexation Extinguishes County Zoning
39 o Interlocal Agreements Provide Joint Understanding/Boundaries of
40 Development
41 • Joint Land Use Agreement
42 o Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro
43 o Establishes Urban Growth Boundaries, Transition Areas, Rural Buffer
44 • Water and Sewer Management Planning and Boundary Agreement-map
45 o Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Hillsborough
46 o Establishes Boundaries for Utility Extensions
47
48 Appendix A: Water and Sewer Management Planning and Boundary Agreement (map:
49 page 12
50
6
1 Economic Development & Property Tax Base (pie chart: page 13)
2
3 Property Tax Base Profile by Jurisdiction —2017 (pie charts: page 14)
4
5 Commissioner Rich referred to page 13, and said Mebane only gives back 2% to
6 Orange County, yet is receiving more Article 46 tax dollars than Chapel Hill.
7 Chair Dorosin said the money is still in Orange County.
8 Commissioner Rich said she is just concerned about this.
9 Chair Dorosin said the goal of the conversation is to talk about the EDDs, which is the
10 driver behind the disparity that Commissioner Rich is seeing.
11 Commissioner McKee said there is a difference between money spent in the City of
12 Mebane, versus money spent on a Mebane address. He said Morinaga is not a City of Mebane
13 project.
14 Commissioner Rich said Article 46 monies come from across the entire county.
15 Commissioner McKee said he understands, but does not want this conversation to be
16 that one town is getting more than another.
17 Chair Dorosin said the EDDs are what is driving how the Article 46 monies are spent.
18 Commissioner Price clarified that the tax base in Chapel Hill is 19%, which is 42% of the
19 County.
20 Travis Myren said no that would be all uses within Chapel Hill, which includes
21 everything.
22
23 Economic Development & Property Tax Base (table: page 15)
24
25 Economic Development & Property Tax Base (graph: page 16)
26
27 EDD Status and Trends (chart: page 17)
28
29 Commissioner Price asked if, upon completion, will the Eno EDD be transferred to
30 Durham?
31 Travis Myren said yes. He resumed the presentation:
32
33 Encroaching Residential Development (map: page 18)
34
35 Travis Myren said the discussion at the retreat was to pre-zone sites. He resumed the
36 presentation:
37
38 Cost of Community Services (graphs: page 19)
39 • The cost of Community services in Orange County from 2006- revenue 1.00 and
40 expenditure is $1.32 in Orange County
41 • The Cost of Community Services in North Carolina
42 • Averages per $1.00 Tax Revenue- Residential: 1.26/ Commercial
43
44 Industry Type/Investment/Tax Revenue (table: page 20)
45
46 Commissioner Jacobs said the County's policy was not to recruit high water users, due
47 to limited capacity, and this was not acknowledged in the report. He said he would like the
48 Planning Department or the Commission for the Environment to reply to that aspect of what is
49 being discussed.
50 Travis Myren resumed the presentation:
7
1
2 Utilities in the Eno Economic Development District
3 • Served by the City of Durham
4 • County to Assume Project Responsibility
5 • Eno EDD is comprised of 776 Acres
6 • $6.3 Million is the most recent cost to serve all 776 acres
7 • The current project ($1.4 million) would serve approx. 100 acres
8 o At an additional cost of$100,000 - $150,000 a private sewer pump
9 system could be installed to serve an additional 100 acres
10
11 Utilities in the Eno Economic Development District (map: page 23)
12
13 Commissioner Marcoplos referred to the area in solid red on the map, and asked if that
14 is an abandoned area.
15 Commissioner McKee said that area is found in the red dash line area.
16 Craig Benedict, Planning Director, said the dashed circle is more of a redevelopment
17 area, and the 100 acres are primarily undeveloped, and there is a 25,000 square foot building
18 under site review in Durham and a 36,000 square foot site plan under review on undeveloped
19 property in the 100 acre area. He said a 25,000 square foot building has been built already that
20 did not undergo annexation with Durham, but now Durham would like to annex all new
21 buildings. He said staff does not see a problem with this, as long as there is coordination. He
22 said the Eno Small Area Plan has standardized the regulations between both areas, and the
23 same outcomes will be achieved.
24 Chair Dorosin asked if"both areas" could be defined.
25 Craig Benedict said whether it is in Orange County, or whether it is annexed by Durham.
26 Commissioner Rich asked if there is a plan for the dotted line area.
27 Craig Benedict said the area is underdeveloped or undeveloped, and the private
28 property owners are trying to form a 100+ acre area to install their own pump lift station, and
29 pump it across to the new gravity line being installed by the County. He said the County cannot
30 extend the gravity sewer any further than the red box, but residents can pump to it. He said
31 Durham has verbally agreed to this connection should the private property owners wish to pump
32 into the system. He said there are always limitations on the amount of sewer capacity, and
33 Durham is in the process of upgrading the sewer just over the county line, which Orange
34 County can flow into by gravity. He said the $6.3 million would be a large lift station and
35 pumping over 3 miles into downtown Durham to find a place that was not over capacity, which
36 is really not feasible.
37 Commissioner Price said she thought the Board had discussed that the area across
38 from the residential portion would not be economic development, in order to provide a buffer.
39 Craig Benedict said the land use in the lavender portion remains economic
40 development, as this is one of the few districts that has a lower intensity economic
41 development. He said the zoning has not been changed. He said there is such difficulty in
42 serving this entire area, and part of the discussion must be are there better places that can be
43 served more easily from a utility standpoint. He said this has been on the map since the 1980s
44 due to its location, being that it is an interchange to 1-85; thus making it an appropriate place for
45 development.
46 Commissioner Price said the residents expressed some concern about the area south of
47 this, and she thought the County was going to try to avoid having industrial development on the
48 other side of the road.
49 Chair Dorosin said there is a lot to consider, and the theme from the retreat was if some
50 of this needs modification.
8
1 Commissioner Jacobs said Commissioner Price's recollection is accurate, and there
2 have been several conversations with Duke about the possibility of locating economic research
3 facilities in this area, and Duke has been verbally receptive, but Orange County has not
4 pursued the idea. He said Duke keeps expanding, and there is no reason for the County to not
5 try and make Duke a partner here in this EDD.
6 Chair Dorosin said it is encouraging to hear about these new flex space buildings going
7 up in this area.
8 Craig Benedict said one may be a recreation/retail building.
9 Craig Benedict said staff has met with the Department of Transportation (DOT)
10 regarding the N.C. 751 area, which DOT has said may be a feasible 4-way intersection. He
11 said staff is in discussions with property owners up in the red area. He said DOT may have
12 some funds for intersection reconfigurations, if the County can secure the right of way to the
13 north.
14 Travis Myren resumed the presentation:
15
16 Economic Development Future
17 Identify Most Marketable Sites
18 • GIS Site Selection Study
19 o $15,000 to $25,000
20 • Scope of the Analysis
21 o Current Economic Development Districts
22 o Include Town Land
23 o Examine Land Outside of Economic Development Districts
24 • Potential Boundary Adjustments
25 o Mebane Area Planning
26 o Implication for Joint Land Use Plan and Water & Sewer Boundary
27 Agreement
28
29 Site Readiness
30 $1,000 to $1,500 per acre with utilities in place
31 o Identify Willing Sellers
32 o Geotechnical Analysis
33 o Wetland Delineations
34 o Boundary Surveys
35 o Mitigate Adjacent Property Uses
36 o Water & Sewer Capacity Study
37 $75,000 to $100,000
38
39 Pre-zoning Parcels in Economic Development Districts (map: page 25)
40
41 Steve Brantley said, a year ago, the Board discussed incentives for Project Sky, and this
42 was announced in Greensboro last week: Publix warehouse, $300 million and 1000 jobs. He
43 said Sky Publix came to Orange County three times, but the proposed site has residential next
44 to it.
45 Steve Brantley said a Japanese company has also visited twice in the past nine months,
46 but announced last week in Sanford: 109 jobs in auto parts, and a $30 million investment. He
47 said this company was heavy manufacturing, and Orange County had residential by its site.
48 Steve Brantley said there are statistics for the cost of services, but for business
49 recruitment is that it is detrimental; it is not compatible. He said one would not buy/build a
50 home next to a factory, and factories do not want to buy/build next to residential. He said the
9
1 more the County puts money in the ground to provide water and sewer, the more the properties
2 proliferate with housing; and the less likely it becomes that a quality investor, like Morinaga, will
3 want to build near by.
4 Commissioner Price said the Board still does not know what type of economic
5 development it wants. She said Raleigh has economic development next to residential, and it
6 all depends on the type of economic development that is pursued. She said the Board needs to
7 decide which type of development it wants to pursue, and some want research and
8 development, while others seek commercial.
9 Steve Brantley said staff wants all types of development, and Wake County has 13
10 municipalities, which makes finding existing commercial office space easy. He said Wake
11 County also has industrial properties, and the comparable blue-collar job sites in Orange
12 County are going to be along the interstates in the EDDs. He said the Blue Cross Blue Shield
13 building represents an opportunity to land high tech companies, which have typically gone to
14 Raleigh, but this will not create the type of blue-collar jobs that many are looking for. He said
15 having both opportunities is ideal.
16 Commissioner Jacobs said Commissioner Price made a good point, and in addition to
17 look at land use, the County needs to consider what it wants to hunt. He said the Board
18 constantly hears negativity about Orange County as a place to develop economically, and the
19 County needs to promote the positive strengths in Orange County, and type of development it
20 can attract.
21 Chair Dorosin said he does think the focus in only on the negative, and there is a
22 sequence to this. He said there are broader questions from retreat: the need for larger
23 parcels; access to parcels; questions about set ups of EDDS, etc.
24 Chair Dorosin said one of the challenges of discussions like this is the desire to put their
25 arms around the entire concept, instead of taking incremental steps.
26 Travis Myren resumed the presentation:
27
28 Land Prices Relative to the Market (table: page 26)
29
30 Site Control Options
31 • Option Agreements
32 o 2% - 5% of the per acre cost for one year
33 o Example: $50,000 per acre for 50 acres = $50,000 - $125,000
34 • Ownership
35 o Price will vary by site
36 o Example: $50,000 per acre for 50 acres = $2,500,000
37
38 Prepared Product
39 • Shovel Ready or Pad Ready Sites
40 o $50,000 to $100,000 per acre
41 • Spec Buildings
42 o $50 to $100 per square foot
43
44 Other Opportunities
45 • Identify Additional Economic Development Partnerships with Towns
46 • Reexamine the Uses of Article 46 Sales Tax Revenue
47 • Investigate Research Partnerships with Area Universities
48 • Review Permitting and Regulatory Processes
49 o Overall Efficiency
50 o Identify Common Barriers or Misconceptions
10
1
2 Chair Dorosin said no one wants to abandon the EDDs, but there seemed a merging
3 consensus of revisiting the redevelopment of them. He said on the maps the EDDs look huge,
4 but in reality they are much smaller areas, in which to achieve some substantive economic
5 development.
6 Commissioner Burroughs said she finds it important to work rather quickly on pre-
7 zoning, which is a defensive move.
8 Chair Dorosin asked if the number of these areas that are already pre-zoned is known.
9 Craig Benedict said the whole purple area in the Buckhorn EDD (900 acres gross) has
10 been pre-zoned. He said the Commercial Industrial Transition Activity Node (CITAN) are areas
11 that were not pre-zoned; 1300 acres total in the Buckhorn/Mebane area, and only 300 have
12 been pre-zoned. He said there are more areas in the yellow and green that can be pre-zoned.
13 He said in the New Year, some land uses may be combined to allow for more streamlined ED
14 zones.
15 Chair Dorosin clarified that the purple area cannot be zoned residential.
16 Craig Benedict said that is correct.
17 Commissioner Rich asked if there is a downside of pre-zoning.
18 Craig Benedict said the property owners may be in agreement with pre-zoning, or not.
19 He said the pre-zoning in the CITAN area went smoothly, and pre-zoning needs to be done
20 comprehensively, and not by small areas. He said in 1994 the Board pre-zoned the Buckhorn,
21 Hillsborough, and Eno EDDs.
22 Chair Dorosin asked if there is a difference between pre-zoning and zoning.
23 Craig Benedict said pre-zoning means to have zoning consistent with the land use
24 already, so that it does not have to be done retroactively.
25 Craig Benedict said, in contrast, the CITAN areas have been left at base zones, and
26 everyone would have to ask for different zoning, unless residential were permitted by right.
27 Commissioner Burroughs said she is focused on preventing residential areas.
28 Commissioner Jacobs said in the 1990s there was pre-zoning, but with the idea that the
29 developers had to bring the infrastructure, which is why nothing happened. He said a different
30 Board put Gravely Hills Middle School in the middle of an EDD to get water and sewer into the
31 EDD.
32 Commissioner Jacobs said the Board did turn down a subdivision in the EDD. He said
33 the Board has discussed the idea of housing above shops - more of a mixed use. He said he
34 would not preclude having some form of mixed use in the some the EDDs. He said the main
35 reason it was not zoned any further is because it gives more negotiating leverage, but he is not
36 sure what the County is trying to negotiate at this point.
37 Commissioner Marcoplos said his main questions are if the Board decides to go ahead
38 and do this, what would it look like, how long would it take, and is there any advantage to
39 finding a likely place for a mixed-use area. He said the Board ought to go ahead and pre-zone.
40 Craig Benedict said there was a work session on this 8-10 years ago that discussed
41 permitting uses that fit certain areas; and zoning according to the type of development that
42 would naturally fit.
43 Craig Benedict said this could probably be accomplished in 3-4 months, and would have
44 to have additional community meetings. He said there are has been some community meetings
45 in the Buckhorn/Efland area when utilities were installed. He said the residential property that
46 has been mentioned closer to Mebane cannot contain an industrial building, due to the
47 topography.
48 Craig Benedict said staff can come up with a proposal for rezoning in the next month or
49 so.
50 Commissioner Marcoplos asked if there are any anticipated speed bumps.
11
1 Craig Benedict said staff had community meetings about the Efland/Buckhorn/Mebane
2 access management program, and 100 people attended. He said the land uses are roughly
3 appropriate in the area, there are utilities, and so staff is working on bolstering the roadway
4 infrastructure system. He said there will be some community concern.
5 Commissioner McKee said to move forward as quickly as reasonably possible. He
6 asked if there is a downside of not doing pre-zoning. He said for him, it would be to have 2-3
7 residential developments pop up in the Buckhorn EDD, which would kill commercial
8 development.
9 Steve Brantley said his staff and advisory board are not high on the Eno EDD. He said
10 there are concerns about the EDDs being slow to perform, and only one sewer line has been
11 completed in the 7 years he has been with Orange County. He said what happens first will set
12 the tone for what happens next. He said in the 30 years that the EDDs have existed, they have
13 filled up with homes, and residential will continue to move in if the County does not do
14 something. He said the Flea Market site would be suitable for a Tanger mall, and there is
15 another confidential possibility in the works currently. He said if the County took 2000 acres of
16 land and designated all of it industrial, with infrastructure put in various parts of it, decisions
17 would be made on where the County wants to focus investment first. He said Mebane is a
18 water-sewer partner, and helped incentivize the Morinaga project. He said it is unfortunate that
19 Carrboro does not have an EDD.
20 Steve Brantley said to consider the history, and reason that Article 46 was passed in the
21 first place, was to diversify the non-residential tax base, and alleviate the burden off of the
22 residential tax base.
23 Chair Dorosin said the Board is on the same page about the residential, and wants the
24 EDDs to work better. He said it may be wise to identify marketable sites, and maybe not pre-
25 zone all areas, but rather ones that may be more marketable. He said these options are not
26 mutually exclusive. He hears consensus about moving forward with pre-zoning, and wants to
27 also consider site readiness, site control, and is it easier for the County to put smaller parcels
28 into a larger, potentially more marketable, parcel.
29 Commissioner Price said the area is already zoned, and asked if the intent is now to
30 zone it with pre-zoning.
31 Craig Benedict said the EDD in the dark purple area has appropriate zoning, and it is
32 the yellow and light green areas that need to be considered. He said this should be changed
33 away from residential and agricultural/residential. He said there are 2400 acres.
34 Commissioner Price said she still is unclear about what is best to put in the EDD, and if
35 there are trends to consider. She said it is also important to consider the desires of residents.
36 Chair Dorosin said right now the focus is on not wanting housing.
37 Commissioner Price said but with pre-zoning, what kind of ED does the Board want?
38 She said the desire for big fish projects that will bring blue-collar jobs is understandable, but
39 there are many artists seeking studio and retail space. She said when anything is built the
40 surrounding areas are affected.
41 Chair Dorosin said he agrees, but he does not think pre-zoning against residential will
42 have an impact.
43 Commissioner Jacobs said all of the rezoning was done for Buckhorn Village in less
44 than a year. He said another reason why they focus on Mebane is that Mebane has abided by
45 the idea of developing under Orange County standards, and then annexing the property. He
46 said Hillsborough has not done the same. He said some criteria is needed about how long the
47 County will hold onto a parcel waiting for the potential "big fish" project before moving ahead
48 with a guaranteed "smaller fish" project.
49 Commissioner Burroughs said she would like to start identifying marketable sites and
50 site readiness, with criteria being developed at some point down the line.
12
1 Commissioner McKee agreed with Chair Dorosin with putting the pre-zoning in place,
2 and do what was identified in the PowerPoint presentation: studies, analysis, etc. He said he
3 does not want to get too far down in the weeds of what the Board wants and does not want, and
4 the more expeditiously this moves forward, the better it is for all.
5 Commissioner Marcoplos said a lot of these things can be done simultaneously, and he
6 also does not want to get hung up on what kind of ED they want. He said the Board should
7 take away as many of the roadblocks as possible.
8 Commissioner Rich said she is excited about the pre-zoning, and would like to add
9 public—private partnerships to the list, besides the universities.
10 Commissioner Rich said she went to the Chairs/Mayors meeting at Triangle J Council of
11 Governments (TJCOG), and the topic was behavioral patterns in government, and the lack of
12 innovation in comparison to the private sector. She said it is important to think outside of the
13 box, and be more innovative. She said she liked the idea of allowing some mixed use.
14 Commissioner Jacobs referred to what Craig Benedict was describing with the Eno EDD
15 property owners coming together to develop a parcel, and said at least 10 years ago he and
16 Senator Valerie Foushee met with the residents of the Eno EDD, who very much wanted to
17 develop it. He said this is a great opportunity to partner with small, private investors.
18 Chair Dorosin said it may be possible for the County to play a role without actually
19 buying the parcels.
20 Commissioner Price said when she was referring to understanding trends; it was not to
21 define who would move into the spaces, but rather related to site readiness.
22 Chair Dorosin said there is consensus here regarding: pre-zoning; a site readiness
23 capacity study; and identifying marketable sites, with the Board needing to determine whether
24 to limit it just to EDDs or broaden it outside of the EDD; he is in favor of broadening this.
25 Commissioner Rich said she would like to add access points.
26 Commissioner McKee referred to sites outside of the EDDs, and asked Steve Brantley if
27 it is more efficient to focus on areas within EDDs now, and broaden the scope as a second
28 step.
29 Steve Brantley said the staff can go either way, and knows where most of the outside
30 sites are, but have yet to approach property owners. He said the Economic Development
31 Advisory Board would also be excited to participate in this matter as they have a great deal of
32 expertise.
33 Commissioner McKee said he does not want to shift focus by making the scope too
34 large.
35 Chair Dorosin said the GIS study would be a first step, and knocking on the doors of
36 property owners may come next. He said there may be parcels in the towns or town
37 extraterritorial jurisdictions (ETJs) that may be more marketable options to consider.
38 Commissioner McKee said that is good and he just does not want to give too much
39 workload to staff.
40 Bonnie Hammersley said, as staff looks into the most marketable sites, a third party
41 would be brought into to do much of the legwork.
42 Commissioner Jacobs suggested not venturing out too far from EDDs prior to
43 investigating the capabilities within them, because that is where sprawl occurs, like in Wake and
44 Durham counties. He said when this happens, the integrity of the land use plan is
45 compromised.
46 Commissioner McKee said that is part of his concern too.
47 Commissioner Jacobs said the more deliberative way to do this is to use what currently
48 exists and see if that is enough; if not, then decide where you want to go.
49 Commissioner Marcoplos agreed with the danger of overreach, but knows there is land
50 that has been asked about, and the sooner marketable sites are identified, the better the Board
13
1 can address this issue. He said the EDD maps are 30 years old, and may need to be
2 reconfigured. He said it is important to be mindful of these issues like sprawl, the rural buffer,
3 what makes Orange County unique and attractive, etc.
4 Chair Dorosin said there are controls in place like the rural buffer to prevent sprawl, and
5 he has confidence in them. He said there seems to be consensus to look into the EDDs, and
6 the areas immediately around them, while being open to other marketable sites that staff may
7 uncover. He said the Board can move forward with the pre-zoning and site readiness capacity
8 study.
9 Commissioner Jacobs said this is good summary, but there is not consensus.
10 Chair Dorosin said there is consensus on doing all that he mentioned within the EDDs
11 specifically, and a majority of the Board that is willing to look immediately beyond the EDDs.
12 Bonnie Hammersley asked if the Board wants to limit this evening's agenda, given the
13 hour.
14 Chair Dorosin said to do the election item, and defer items 3 and 4 to another agenda.
15 The Board agreed by consensus.
16
17 2. Additional Discussion Regarding the Election Method for Members of the Orange
18 County Board of Commissioners
19
20 Greg Wilder, Assistant to the County Manager, reviewed the following background
21 information:
22
23 BACKGROUND:
24 In late 2016 and early 2017, some members of the Board of Commissioners expressed an
25 interest in discussing and possibly amending the current election method for seats on the Board
26 of Commissioners. Several related topics were voiced regarding potentially amending the
27 method.
28
29 At the Board's March 28, 2017 work session, staff addressed those topics and others in the
30 agenda abstract for the meeting (See Attachment A— March 28, 2017 Work Session Agenda
31 Abstract).
32
33 During the March 28th discussion, the Board asked for additional information on several items.
34 Those items are addressed below and/or in concert with Attachments B through I.
35
36 1) Keeping all other aspects of the current Commissioner election method intact,
37 what is the approval process for a change from the current district
38 residency/district nomination/countywide election method for Commissioners —
39 to a district residency/district nomination/district election method?
40
41 A change from the current district residency/district nomination/countywide election method for
42 Commissioners —to a district residency/district nomination/district election method —would
43 require Board approval of a resolution detailing the change and authorizing a countywide voter
44 referendum on the proposed change. If the voters approved the proposed change, the Board of
45 Commissioners could then consider a resolution implementing the change. If voters did not
46 approve the change, no further action on the matter would occur. At no time would this potential
47 change require review or approval by the North Carolina General Assembly.
48
49 2) What is the party affiliation for current voter registration countywide and by the
50 two current Commissioner electoral districts?
14
1
2 Staff has provided a map as Attachment B summarizing the party affiliation for current voter
3 registration countywide and by the two current Commissioner electoral districts.
4
5 3) Can staff review the annual population projections published by the American
6 Community Survey (ACS) and provide information on the population trends for
7 both Commissioner districts - since the 2010 Census - in anticipation of the 2020
8 Census?
9
10 Staff reviewed 2010 Census data and the most recent population estimates from the American
11 Community Survey. The 2010 Census detailed population numbers are based on more precise
12 block level delineations (Attachment C). Conversely, the ACS develops its population
13 projections at a larger block group level, with each block group consisting of multiple Census
14 blocks (Attachment D). The block group areas in some cases consist of land areas larger than
15 the towns in the County. Additionally, while block boundaries align more directly with the
16 Commissioner electoral districts, the larger block group level boundaries vary substantially from
17 the current Commissioner electoral district lines.
18
19 The ACS 5-Year estimates utilize 5 years of collected data to produce estimates based on the
20 block group level. It should also be noted that the ACS data are only estimates based on
21 sampling and are not as accurate as the decennial Census data. For example the 2010
22 Census population for Orange County was 133,801. Conversely, the 2010 ACS (5-year), a 5
23 year period prior to the 2016 ACS, estimated the County's population at 129,562. This equates
24 to 3.22% lower than the actual 2010 Census. The 2016 ACS may similarly underrepresent the
25 2016 population, but is statistically relevant.
26
27 Using the 2016 ACS 5-year data (the most current data available from ACS), staff developed
28 estimates of the population for the two BOCC voting districts. Unfortunately, as noted
29 previously, the block group boundaries do not follow the current BOCC electoral districts (figure
30 1). There are six block groups that are split by the voting districts.
31
32 Figure 1
33 For each block group that was entirely within a single BOCC voting district staff assigned the
34 population numbers to that voting district. For three of the block groups that were split, staff
35 utilized the County's current address layer to calculate how many residential addresses were in
36 each block group. Staff subsequently took the percentage of addresses for each block group
37 that were in each voting district and then divided the total population for each block group by
38 the percentages and then assigned the population numbers to each district (figure 2). This
39 allowed staff to estimate the 2016 populations for each BOCC voting district (figure 3). For the
40 other three split block groups that had only a small percent of addresses in a district, staff
41 applied the entire population to the district that had the majority of addresses.
42
43 Figure 2
44 To summarize, the 2010 Census population for District 1 was 82,412. The County staff
45 generated 2016 ACS 5-Year estimate for District 1 is 85,990.
46
47 The 2010 Census population for District 2 was 51,389. The County staff-generated 2016 ACS
48 5-Year estimate for District 2 is 53,817.
49
15
1 The 2010 Census total County population was 133,801. The 2016 ACS 5-Year estimate for the
2 entire County is 139,807.
3
4 4) Can staff investigate and provide potential scenario maps eliminating at large
5 Commissioner seats and detailing two Commissioner districts with multiple
6 Commissioners representing each district?—{Page 4 of abstract. )
7
8 At the March 28, 2017 work session, the Board discussed, in theory, the elimination of at large
9 seats. A scenario of seven districts with one Commissioner representing each district was
10 discussed. However, based on Board discussion, staff understood that seven-district framework
11 was removed from consideration due to the "pie-shaped" districts that would emanate from the
12 Chapel Hill Carrboro area due to the population concentration in that area.
13
14 The Board also discussed establishing two Commissioner districts with multiple Commissioners
15 representing each district. The possibility of a district consisting of five seats and a district of
16 two seats was discussed. Staff understood however following Board discussion that this
17 concept was also set aside and that the Board requested that staff develop information and
18 mapping for two districts - one consisting of four seats and the other district consisting of three
19 seats.
20
21 Staff has provided two possible "4-3" scenarios for the Board's initial review— Possibility 1 and
22 Possibility 2 (See Attachments E and F). There are other possible variations that could be
23 developed and considered based on Board input. These two scenarios were chosen by staff as
24 starting points as both entail limited variance from the current Commissioner district lines, and
25 also limited variance from the Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools and Orange County Schools
26 district boundaries which were used to guide delineation of the original Commissioner district
27 lines established in 2006.
28
29 Possibility 1 re-assigns a total of 6,143 voters from the current District 1 to District 2. Possibility
30 2 relocates 3,684 voters from the current District 1 to District 2. Attachment G provides inset
31 maps for the areas included in the population shifts from District 1 to District 2.
32
33 Implementation of Possibility 1, Possibility 2 or any other similar election method that a)
34 decreases or increases the number of at large seats, and/or b) changes the number of seats
35 from a district, and/or c) changes the boundaries for the Commissioner electoral districts would
36 require Board action and a countywide voter referendum. Potential changes such as these
37 would necessitate Board approval of a resolution detailing the changes and authorizing a
38 countywide voter referendum on the proposed changes. If the voters subsequently approved
39 the proposed changes, the Board of Commissioners could then consider a resolution
40 implementing the changes. If voters did not approve the change, no further action on the matter
41 would occur. Potential changes of this nature would not require review or approval by the North
42 Carolina General Assembly.
43
44 5) Can staff provide additional information on cumulative voting and non-partisan
45 voting and the potential to consider them as options for Board of Commissioners
46 seats? Attachment H
47
48 At the March 28th work session, Board members discussed cumulative voting and non-partisan
49 voting. County Attorney John Roberts noted that an electoral plan that relied upon cumulative
50 voting would require approval by the North Carolina General Assembly. Several Board
16
1 members expressed concern about pursuing an option that would require General Assembly
2 action, while other members suggested that the Board further discuss the topic.
3
4 County Attorney Roberts also noted that while he was aware that some jurisdictions in other
5 states employed non-partisan elections to elect county commissioners, and that school boards
6 in North Carolina utilized non-partisan elections, he was unaware that any NC county had
7 implemented a non-partisan election method for county commissioners. Mr. Roberts further
8 noted that pursuit of a non-partisan system Carolina General Assembly. County Attorney
9 Roberts has provided additional information on cumulative voting, non-partisan voting, and
10 other related topics in Attachment H.
11
12 6) Does Robeson County utilize a board of commissioners election method similar to
13 the current mixed at-large/district method used by Orange County?- 8:57:37 PM
14
15 Attachment I depicts the current structure of Orange County's election method for the Board of
16 Commissioners. Robeson County does not utilize a similar election method.
17
18 Robeson County Board of Elections Director G.L. Pridgen has confirmed that the eight
19 members of the Robeson County Board of Commissioners are all elected from eight different
20 electoral districts utilizing a district residency/district nomination/district election method. Each
21 of the eight commissioners must reside in their respective districts, must be nominated by only
22 the voters in their respective districts, and must be elected by only the voters in their respective
23 districts. There are no at large commissioners seats, and no commissioners are nominated or
24 elected at any time on a countywide basis.
25
26 Greg Wilder said he thinks voter referendums in counties can only occur in even-
27 numbered years.
28 John Roberts said they can only occur during a primary in which all precincts are open,
29 which would be an even-year primary; in a general election, when all three seats are open; or if
30 the state holds some random election in an odd numbered year.
31 Greg Wilder said given that information, the next opportunity would be May or
32 November 2020.
33 Chair Dorosin asked John Roberts if he could summarize what the Board can do without
34 any additional legislative authority.
35 John Roberts said the Board can change the electoral structure by referendum to the
36 voters of all district, all at-large, or a combination of that. He said in a district residence only,
37 with the entire county electing, there are several of those and as long as it is just electoral
38 structure, the Board can do that via referendum.
39 Chair Dorosin clarified that if the Board wanted to go to a 4-3, or a district
40 primary/district general, the general assembly does not to be involved. He asked if there is a
41 referendum, at the primary election in 2020, when it would become effective.
42 John Roberts said it would be not be effective in November of that year, but at the next
43 election cycle. He said the Board would need to designate which seats are which, and it would
44 become effective as people come up for election.
45 Commissioner Burroughs said she considers the census numbers, and how they play
46 into this. She said if everything is kept the same, except changing to district nominated/district
47 in 2020, then the census data could be reviewed and the change implemented in 2022.
48 Greg Wilder said in 2020 the census data from 2010 would have to be used to develop
49 a map to be voted on in 2020. He said if this was adopted, the map would then have to be
50 revised with the new 2022 census data.
17
1 John Roberts said the map would only need to be revised if there was a significant
2 discrepancy.
3 Commissioner Burroughs said this happened in 2010, and everything was fine in the
4 end.
5 Greg Wilder said the County went through an evaluation process, and there were
6 changes, but they remained within the standard deviation of 5%.
7 Commissioner Burroughs said she is inclined to keep everything the same, except to
8 add the district elected.
9 Commissioner Price asked if this would leave the at-large positions.
10 Commissioner Burroughs said yes, in her thinking.
11 Commissioner McKee said he is supportive of this, and is wary of doing anything that
12 would involve the legislature. He said no one should think that the effective representation rural
13 versus urban is going to change. He said the breakdown of the Board is not rural versus urban,
14 but rather issue-to-issue, with members swinging back and forth. He said going to district-
15 nominate and district-elect will take away the argument of some people in district 2 that say,
16 "we nominate, but the whole County elects." He said there is a perception of unfairness.
17 Commissioner Price said the perception is, "we nominate, and Chapel Hill elects."
18 Commissioner McKee said the most equitable thing is to go to district-nominates and
19 district-elects. He said he thinks it is possible for a republican, independent, or green candidate
20 to win if one can get on the ballot and run a strong campaign.
21 Chair Dorosin asked John Roberts if legislative involvement was required for the County
22 wants to go to 4-3.
23 John Roberts said no, that would not require legislative approval.
24 Commissioner McKee said some options would require legislative involvement.
25 John Roberts said pure districts do not require legislative involvement; the County could
26 go can go to 7 districts and not go to legislature.
27 Commissioner Marcoplos said going with 7 districts would lead to it all going pie shaped
28 towards Chapel Hill, which would be ridiculous.
29 Commissioner Marcoplos said he has immersed himself in this issue more than anyone,
30 and has studied it for many years. He said his goal is to enhance democracy, and the only way
31 to provide fair representation is to go over to proportional representation, instant run off, or
32 cumulative voting, etc. He said FairVote.org gives a lot of information, but this would require
33 going to the legislature, and that would never work. He said the suggested "district-nominate/
34 district-elect" is a waste of money and time, would change nothing, and it does not accomplish
35 the goal of increasing democracy, and, as such, he cannot support it. He said democrats will
36 always win in Orange County for the foreseeable future, which is the root of the issue for folks.
37 He is not in favor of using taxpayer money to address symbolism, and the Board has better
38 things to do with its energy, and should give this up for now.
39 Commissioner Burroughs said Carrboro used to be an incredibly conservative mill town,
40 and has flipped in the last 30-40 years. She said the foreseeable future is not that far.
41 Commissioner Rich said she shared her thoughts over the summer with Chair Dorosin,
42 and she would like to hear from the voters. She said a way to do this is to set up a committee,
43 and have public sessions throughout the County for resident input. She said any type of
44 committee would have to have a charge from the Board of County Commissioners. She said
45 Chatham County is doing something similar, as it is considering increasing its number of board
46 members and the way of doing elections.
47 Commissioner Rich proposed the creation of a committee to research this, noting that
48 when the County went from 5-7 board members, there was an internal committee that came
49 back with recommendations. She proposed creating a committee that does more than hold two
18
1 public hearings. She said a decision is not needed until late 2019, so there is plenty of time to
2 hear from the public.
3 Commissioner McKee said conversation would be good, but he is hell bent on his
4 proposed changes. He agreed that this would be merely symbolic, but Orange County spends
5 money on symbolic issues all the time. He said it will not change the power structure, but it is
6 impossible to have anyone other than a democrat win with the current process of elections. He
7 said district-nominate/district-elect could offer a good candidate, running a good campaign on
8 the issues, instead of ideas, the chance to win, which will level the playing field.
9 Commissioner Marcoplos said if the Board makes this change, he will make a good bet
10 with Commissioner McKee.
11 Chair Dorosin said a committee involving citizens is a good idea.
12 Chair Dorosin said any change the Board can make to make this more democratic is
13 good, and he suggested adding the cumulative voting issue to North Carolina Association of
14 County Commissioners (NCACC) legislative agenda. He said he would go further than what
15 Commissioner McKee proposed, and eliminate the at-large seats, which have traditionally been
16 used as tool for advancing majority voting interests against minority voting interests.
17 Chair Dorosin said having 4-3 is more democratic than having 3, 2 and 2.
18 Commissioner McKee said he is not opposed to that.
19 Chair Dorosin said the committee would need to have all the facts as to what requires
20 legislature action and what does not. He said this is not just symbolic as perception is reality,
21 and if people perceive they are not being represented, then that has value.
22 Chair Dorosin said there is huge amount of unaffiliated voters in each district, and they
23 need to be moving toward 7 districts.
24 Commissioner Jacobs said he hopes, as part of this committee, the idea of cumulative
25 voting will at least be introduced to the public. He said the at-large seats are the ones that
26 represent everyone. He said Orange County has tried to ethically represent everyone, whether
27 in their districts or not. He said the at-large seats provide a buffer between the political district
28 war between the people who live in different parts of the County. He said the people in the
29 middle represent everyone by their very nature.
30 Commissioner Price said it is important to hear from the community, and what she hears
31 is that the at-large positions are controlled by Chapel Hill, whether one lives in Chapel Hill or
32 not.
33 Commissioner Price said in other areas districts have actual blocks, and wonders what
34 this would look like here.
35 Commissioner Marcoplos said you have to have 5% margin of error, so you have to dip
36 down into the urban population density to make every district within 5% population of the other.
37 Commissioner Marcoplos said he agreed with Commissioner Jacobs about the at-large
38 positions. He said he has run in District 2 and at-large, and if one is campaigning for an at-
39 large seat, one will go all around the County. He said if there are districts, one will be inclined
40 to stay in one's own districted area.
41 Commissioner Marcoplos said this proposed change is based on ignorance, and will not
42 change anything. He suggested waiting to see what the legislature will do. He said this was a
43 big issue in 1993, after he ran in 1992, and many felt unrepresented. He said Moses Carey had
44 a citizens committee that came out with a report that recommended going to districts or
45 cumulative voting. He suggested getting that report.
46 Commissioner McKee said there is no way that Orange County can increase the animus
47 that the General Assembly has for Orange County.
48 Commissioner Price said under the current system, she was forced to campaign in
49 District 1, which was helpful because the issues that the Board deals with cross over district
50 lines.
19
1 Chair Dorosin asked Greg Wilder if Orange County is the only county in the State that
2 has the district primary, and at-large general.
3 Greg Wilder said there are three counties that do something similar, but not exactly the
4 same. He said Orange County is the only one in the State that does it exactly this way.
5 Chair Dorosin said historically, what was the rationale to have the primary for districts,
6 and county-wide for the general election.
7 Commissioner Jacobs said because they had been all at-large seats, and it was
8 basically to force people to interact across the entire County.
9 Chair Dorosin said he is tired of acting out of fear of what the legislature will or will not
10 do, but realistically getting the authority to enact cumulative voting is a long reach, but it is good
11 to introduce this and be a leader.
12 Chair Dorosin said there is a majority willing to set up to a committee to do public
13 hearings, etc. He asked if staff would come back with a charge, or outline of a charge, for this
14 committee, timeline, membership, etc.
15 Commissioner Price said to add the concept of cumulative voting.
16 Commissioner Marcoplos said to have the committee look at instant run-off and
17 proportional representation.
18
19 3. Discussion on Proposed Nonprofit Capital Funding Policy and Criteria
20
21 DEFERRED
22
23 4. Board of Commissioners - Boards and Commissions Appointment Process
24 Discussion
25
26 DEFERRED
27
28 The meeting adjourned at 9:33 p.m.
29
30 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
31
32 Mark Dorosin, Chair
33
34 Donna Baker
35 Clerk to the Board
1
I Attachment 3
2
3 DRAFT MINUTES
4 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
5 REGULAR MEETING
6 September 20, 2018
7 7:00 p.m.
8
9 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Thursday, September
10 20, 2018 at 7 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, N.C.
11
12 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Dorosin and Commissioners Mia Burroughs,
13 Barry Jacobs, Earl McKee, Mark Marcoplos, Renee Price and Penny Rich
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Deputy County Manager
17 Travis Myren and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other staff members will be identified
18 appropriately below)
19
20 Commissioner Rich called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
21 Commissioner Rich said Chair Dorosin would be late this evening.
22
23 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
24
25 Commissioner Rich noted the following items at the Commissioners' places:
26 - 4-c: Legislative Priorities- yellow hand out - exhibits
27 - 6-b: PowerPoint for non-profit capital funding
28 - 7-c: PowerPoint for Local Fest
29 - Item 9- Manager's Report- Letter from Town of Hillsborough
30
31 Katie Murray, Arts Commission Director, has requested that the Arts Commission
32 appointment (item 11-b) be moved up to beginning of meeting, due to the fact that she has to
33 leave early to attend another Arts event this evening.
34
35 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to
36 move this item up to item 4-a.
37
38 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
39
40 Commissioner Rich said the September 27th Joint Meeting with schools has been
41 postponed.
42 Commissioner Rich reminded the Board of Chair Dorosin's email from earlier today
43 noting that the October 2"d regular meeting is canceled.
44
45 PUBLIC CHARGE
46 Commissioner Rich dispensed with the reading of the Public Charge.
47
48 Katie Murray presented the following Arts Moment:
49
2
1 Arts Moment—Will Stewart, representing Hear&After. Hear&After is a group of individuals,
2 former youth poets, activists, musicians, and community organizers who have come together to
3 create spaces for community art and expression. They seek to empower the people through the
4 tools of spoken and written word, performance, and artistic expression. Based in Chapel Hill,
5 and serving the Triangle area, Hear & After's goal is to provide a platform for both its members
6 and the community it serves.
7 Will Stewart read a piece of his work.
8
9 2. Public Comments
10
11 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
12 None
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 if the meeting with Chapel Hill had been rescheduled.
20 Bonnie Hammersley said she and Donna Baker are working with the Chapel Hill Town
21 Manager on possible dates.
22 Commissioner Jacobs asked if the "environmental impacts" will be added to the meeting
23 agendas going forward.
24 Commissioner Rich said this has not been talked about in agenda review.
25 Bonnie Hammersley said her recollection was that it was not determined yet, but she
26 would do research.
27 Commissioner Jacobs said Commissioner Marcoplos made the request, and the Board
28 agreed.
29 Commissioner McKee arrived at 7:08 p.m.
30 Commissioner Burroughs said there was an article about the Camelot Apartments,
31 which encouraged people to donate to the Friends of the Department of Social Services (DSS).
32 She asked if the Board has a role in contributing from the social justice fund to these residents
33 who suffered hurricane damage. She said she would like to know the extent of the problem,
34 and if there is a role for the County.
35 Bonnie Hammersley said staff will be report on the hurricane event at the October 16th
36 meeting, and can address this issue at that time.
37 Commissioner Price said she was also going to address that issue. She said she
38 contacted Orange Congregations in Missions (OCIM) to determine the situation in Orange
39 County, and she found out that there were evacuees from the east coast living in this area for a
40 time. She listed items that were needed. She said some evacuees are being moved from
41 shelter to shelter in other counties, which is sad.
42 Bonnie Hammersley said she would work with the Emergency Services director on that.
43 Commissioner Price said there is a Suicide Prevention walk in Gold Park tomorrow night
44 at 6:30 p.m.
45 Commissioner Price petitioned to proclaim October Dysautonomia Awareness Month, as
46 requested by an Orange High School student.
47 Commissioner Rich said it is on the October 16th agenda.
48 Commissioner Price petitioned to recognize Jaki Shelton Green as the North Carolina
49 Poet Laureate.
3
1 Commissioner Marcoplos said while watching the hurricane last week, he wondered
2 about the Board's ability to really impact climate change, and he read a comment from the
3 United Nations Secretary General, Antonio Gutierrez: "If we do not change course by 2020, we
4 risk missing the point where we can avoid runaway climate change. Climate change is the
5 defining issue of our time, and we're at a defining moment. Scientists have been telling us for
6 decades, over and over again, far too many leaders have refused to listen."
7 Commissioner Marcoplos said this is a moment in time to challenge themselves as
8 elected officials. He said Orange County does a lot in regards to sustainability and climate
9 change, but the County needs to push the envelope a bit, and this issue is greater than cost
10 benefit. He said Orange County has the potential to be a leader in the state, and this is a
11 crucial time in history.
12 Commissioner Jacobs asked if staff could include a summary of which places were
13 flooded during the hurricane, and those that have been flooded before, when staff gives a
14 report on the damage. He said the County needs to see what is repeatedly being built in flood
15 plains, and perhaps considering discontinuing construction in areas that are known to flood.
16 Commissioner McKee said he spoke with Nancy Coston, DSS Director, yesterday, and
17 there are some local residents in shelters in Orange County. He said in talking about these
18 housing units, which keep getting flooded, he asked the Manager to research funding from past
19 storms that may have been available to buy out some of these flooded affordable housing units.
20 He said Orange County dodged a bullet with Hurricane Florence.
21 Commissioner Price said in response to Commissioner Jacobs' comments about the
22 areas of flooding, there is no longer any building there, but the residents have no other place to
23 go.
24 Commissioner Price said more affordable housing units are needed.
25 Commissioner Jacobs said there was some FEMA money through Congressman David
26 Price for Heritage Hills, and it has been done, but it has been sporadic. He said people cannot
27 continue to be put in the same dilemma.
28 Commissioner Rich said staff is working on some of these requests, and will bring back
29 information on October 161"
30 Commissioner Rich thanked the deputies in the room that went down east to help.
31 Commissioner Rich said a committee has been created to come back with some
32 elections options, and a Commissioner needs to be added to that committee. She said she
33 would like to nominate Commissioner Marcoplos.
34 Commissioner Rich said tonight's meeting is occurring on a Thursday evening, since
35 this past Tuesday was Yom Kippur.
36
37 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
38
39 11 b-Arts Commission appointment
40 b. Arts Commission —Appointments
41 The Board considered making appointments to the Arts Commission.
42
43 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to
44 appoint the following to the Arts Commission.
45
46 Position 3 for Evan Linnet At-Large (UNC Student Representative for a Partial Term
47 ending 03/31/2020.
48
49 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
50
4
1 5. Public Hearings
2
3 a. NCDOT Public Transportation Division/Public Transportation — 5307 Program
4 Grant Applications for FY2018
5
6 The Board will:
7 1) Conduct a public hearing to receive public comments on the 5307 Program — Operating,
8 Planning, Capital Funding / Durham Chapel Hill Carrboro Urbanized Area allocation
9 (Large Urban) and Burlington Area Small Urbanized Governor's Apportionment (Small
10 Urban) grant applications by Orange County Public Transportation (OPT) for FY 2019;
11 2) Close the public hearing;
12 3) Approve the Small and Large Urban 5307 Grant application for FY 2019 in the total
13 amount of$1,069,157 with a local match total of$534,577 to be provided when
14 necessary;
15 4) Approve and authorize the Chair to sign the 5307 Small and Large Urban Program
16 Resolution and the Local Share Certification for Funding form; and
17 5) Authorize the Chair and the County Attorney to review and sign the annual Certifications
18 and Assurances documents.
19
20 Theo Letman, Transportation Director, presented this item:
21
22 BACKGROUND:
23 Each year, the NCDOT Public Transportation Division accepts requests for operations and
24 capital needs for county-operated community transportation programs. OCPT is eligible to
25 make application for both operations and capital funding. The FY 2019 application includes
26 funding allocations from prior year apportionments that had not been applied for
27
28 Grant funds for administrative purposes will continue to be used to support overall transit
29 systems management and operations and will continue to promote general ridership. The public
30 hearing (see Notices at Attachment 2) provides the opportunity for public comment before the
31 Board takes action on the Local Share Certification (Attachment 3). These grants were
32 accepted / approved previously by the State on June 1, 2017 for#18-SU-056A and June 29,
33 2017 for#18-LU-056B.
34
35 FINANCIAL IMPACT:
36 The NCDOT 5307 Program — Operating, Planning, Capital Funding / Durham Chapel Hill
37 Carrboro Urbanized Area allocation (18-LU-056B) and Small Urbanized Governor's
38 Apportionment (18-SU-056A) require a 50% local match (18-SU-056A— $337,189 and 18-LU-
39 056B — $197,388) for operating, planning, and capital expenses. The department will utilize
40 currently available carryover funds from Article 43 Transit Tax proceeds to cover the required
41 local match, and will address this in a future Budget Amendment for consideration by the Board
42 of Commissioners.
43
44 Commissioner Price referred to point#3 in the recommendations, and asked if the
45 grants will be drawn down in increments.
46 Theo Letman said yes, this will be done by reimbursement.
47 Commissioner Price said asked if any funds will be used for bus shelters.
48 Theo Letman said these funds can only can be used for operations, but there are capital
49 funds available under the tax district, which will be used for capital expenditures like bus stop
50 improvements.
5
1 Commissioner Marcoplos asked if this is a menu of options that may occur.
2 Theo Letman said yes.
3 Commissioner Marcoplos asked if is known has far the funds can stretch.
4 Theo Letman said he will try and go for all of these options.
5 Commissioner Jacobs said it was this item that reminded him of adding the
6 environmental impacts to the abstracts.
7 Bonnie Hammersley said John Roberts looked up the minutes from the meeting
8 regarding the inclusion of environmental impacts, which said that the Manager would bring back
9 options on this issue. She said staff will try to do that soon.
10 Commissioner Marcoplos asked if this is somewhat made possible by the article 43
11 transit tax.
12 Theo Letman said no, this is an apportionment that Orange County gets every year from
13 the federal government.
14 Commissioner Marcoplos asked if the matching funds would come from the article 43
15 taxes.
16 Theo Letman said yes.
17 Commissioner Marcoplos said this would be an instance article 43 tax funds serving
18 local transportation, and not just going towards the light rail project.
19 Commissioner Rich referred to the fare cards, and asked if these will allow additional
20 funding streams to open up as data regarding fares will be tracked.
21 Theo Letman said yes. He said this technology will bring the transportation system into
22 the 21 sc century, and will allow easy tracking of fares and ridership.
23 Commissioner Rich said it is important for the Board representatives on the Metropolitan
24 Planning Organization (MPO) to follow up on this.
25
26 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs for
27 the Board to open the public hearing.
28
29 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
30
31 NO PUBLIC COMMENT
32
33 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs for
34 the Board to close the public hearing.
35
36 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
37
38 A motion was made by Commissioner Burroughs, seconded by Commissioner Price for
39 the Board to approve:
40
41 1) Approve the Small and Large Urban 5307 Grant application for FY 2019 in the total
42 amount of$1,069,157 with a local match total of $534,577 to be provided when
43 necessary;
44 2) Approve and authorize the Chair to sign the 5307 Small and Large Urban Program
45 Resolution and the Local Share Certification for Funding forms; and
46 3) Authorize the Chair and the County Attorney to review and sign the annual Certifications
47 and Assurances documents.
48
49 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
50
6
1 Commissioner Rich clarified that this money has always been available, but the County
2 has been unable to take advantage of it until now.
3 Theo Letman said yes.
4
5 b. North Carolina Community Transportation Program Administrative and Capital
6 Grant Applications for FY 2020
7
8 The Board will:
9 1) Conduct a public hearing to receive public comments on the North Carolina Community
10 Transportation Program (CTP) grant application by Orange County Public
11 Transportation (OPT) for FY 2020;
12 2) Close the public hearing;
13 3) Approve the Community Transportation Program Grant application for FY 2019 in the
14 total amount of$244,609 with a local match total of$33,272 to be provided when
15 necessary;
16 4) Approve and authorize the Chair to sign the Community Transportation Program
17 Resolution authorizing the applicant to enter into an agreement with the North Carolina
18 Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and the Local Share Certification for Funding
19 form; and
20 5) Authorize the Chair and the County Attorney to review and sign the 2019 Certifications
21 and Assurances document in Attachment 2.
22
23 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs for
24 the Board to open the public hearing.
25
26 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
27
28 Theo Letman presented the following information:
29
30 BACKGROUND:
31 Each year, the NCDOT Public Transportation Division accepts requests for administrative and
32 capital needs for county-operated community transportation programs. OPT is eligible to make
33 application for both administrative and capital funding.
34
35 The total CTP funding request for FY 2020 is $176,215 for community transportation
36 administrative expenses and an additional $68,394 for capital expenses. This draft grant
37 application is made for expenses totaling $244,609.
38
39 Grant funds for administrative purposes will continue to be used to support overall transit
40 systems management and will continue to promote general ridership. Administrative Grant
41 funds include a percentage of wages and benefits for the following positions: Transit Director
42 (60%) - $79,300; Transportation Administrator (60%) - $67,000; Business Officer 1 (60%) -
43 $59,382; and Transit Dispatcher/ Scheduler (40%) - $31,855. Grant funds for capital items
44 include: an addition of one (1) LTV (light transit vehicle) bus to support growth in ADA services
45 associated with new route.
46
47 A public hearing (see Notice at Attachment 3) provides the opportunity for public discussion and
48 comment before the Board takes action on the resolution (Attachment 1). The acceptance of
49 these grant funds requires compliance with the annual certifications and assurances, for which
50 the signature pages are attached (Attachment 2). (Note: The attached signature pages are for
7
1 the certifications and assurances for FY 2018 as an example. The FY 2019 certifications and
2 assurances signature pages are very similar to those for FY 2018. However, the County has not
3 yet received those documents from NCDOT. When received, they will be forwarded to the
4 County Attorney and Chair for review and signatures.)
5
6 FINANCIAL IMPACT: The NCDOT CTP FY 2019 grant requires a 15% local match ($26,432)
7 for administrative expenses and a 10% local match ($6,839) for capital expenses for a total of
8 $33,272. The required local match is currently included in the department's approved FY 2018-
9 19 budget.
10
11 The indicated local match amounts for FY 2020 will be requested in the upcoming FY 2019-20
12 budget cycle and must be committed from Orange County's budget for the performance period
13 of July 1, 2019, through June 30, 2020 (FY 2020), as indicated in the attached Local Share
14 Certification for Funding form (Attachment 4). This will require Orange County to obligate
15 funding in its next budget cycle for these expenses. A total of$33,272 would come from the
16 County's general operating budget.
17
18 Commissioner Jacobs asked if the type of vehicle and engine could be identified.
19 Theo Letman said it is a 20-passenger van with a diesel engine.
20 Commissioner Price asked if an electric van would be possible.
21 Theo Letman said a charging station would be necessary, and he could look into this.
22
23 NO PUBLIC COMMENT
24
25 A motion was made by Commissioner Price. seconded by Commissioner Burroughs for
26 the Board to close the public hearing.
27
28 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
29
30 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs
31 for the Board to approve:
32
33 1) Approve the Community Transportation Program Grant application for FY 2020 in the
34 total amount of$244,609 with a local match total of$33,272 to be provided when
35 necessary;
36 2) Approve and authorize the Chair to sign the Community Transportation Program
37 Resolution authorizing the applicant to enter into an agreement with the North Carolina
38 Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and the Local Share Certification for Funding
39 form; and
40 3) Authorize the Chair and the County Attorney to review and sign the 2020 Certifications
41 and Assurances document in Attachment 2.
42
43 Commissioner Jacobs thanked Theo Letman, and said the County needs to reexamine
44 the way it does vehicles, and have the infrastructure to use electrical vehicles throughout
45 Orange County government.
46 Theo Letman said there are other federal grants available that the County could pursue
47 to help fund this infrastructure.
48 Commissioner Price asked if there are any programs to take advantage of the
49 Volkswagen settlement.
8
1 Theo Letman said he received a letter from the NCDOT Public Transit Director in
2 reference to this. He said he would forward the letter to the Board.
3 Commissioner Price said she would like to see how the County can pursue electric
4 vehicles.
5
6 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
7
8 6. Regular Agenda
9
10 a. Orange County's Recommendations Regarding Goals for Inclusion in the North
11 Carolina Association of County Commissioners' (NCACC) 2019-2020 Legislative
12 Goals Package
13 The Board considered approving a Resolution Detailing Orange County's
14 Recommendations Regarding Goals for Inclusion in the North Carolina Association of County
15 Commissioners' (NCACC) 2019-2020 Legislative Goals Package; and authorize the Chair to
16 sign.
17 Greg Wilder, County Manager's office, presented the following information:
18
19 BACKGROUND:
20 Every two years, the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners (NCACC) organizes
21 a process to develop a legislative goals package. The purpose of the package is to develop a
22 consensus of broad support on legislative goals and issues for matters affecting North Carolina
23 counties that may be addressed by the North Carolina General Assembly during the next two
24 calendar years. The goals and issues included in the package, with their broad support, guide
25 and strengthen NCACC representatives and staff as they converse with individual legislators
26 and committees on legislative matters.
27
28 NCACC began the process to develop its 2019-2020 Legislative Goals Package in July 2018.
29 North Carolina counties have been asked to submit proposed legislative goals for consideration
30 for inclusion in the package by a September 21, 2018 submittal deadline.
31
32 The County's Legislative Issues Work Group (LIWG), including Commissioners Mark Dorosin
33 and Penny Rich, County Attorney John Roberts, and County Manager's Office staff, has
34 recently met. The LIWG developed a draft resolution for Board consideration that outlines
35 several proposed legislative goals for inclusion in NCACC's 2019-2020 package. The LIWG's
36 draft resolution is provided at Attachment 1. The content of the draft resolution substantially
37 duplicates Orange County's 2018 Resolution Regarding Legislative Matters (Statewide
38 Matters). That Resolution was approved by the Board on June 5, 2018 and presented to
39 Orange County's Legislative Delegation for the 2018 General Assembly Session. The Board will
40 likely want to discuss the draft resolution and possibly add to, delete from, and/or revise the
41 language of the proposed goals included in the draft.
42
43 Greg Wilder said there are two items at the Commissioners' places that are part of the
44 abstract.
45 Commissioner Rich said these items are not in order of priority, and the Board is
46 permitted to send in as many goals as it would like.
47 Commissioner Burroughs said these are equally weighted, but she would ask that the
48 non-partisan redistricting process for elections item be moved to #1 (it is currently#45).
49 Commissioner Marcoplos agreed.
9
1 Commissioner Price said #46 is similar to #42, and she thought Chair Dorosin wanted to
2 combine these two. She said the only difference seems to be that#46 indicates reducing the
3 pressure of cash bail, while she would hope to eliminate it.
4 Commissioner Price said the two seem similar, but the goal is the same. She said her
5 concern is that#42 goes towards replacing money bail, while #46 calls for a judge to consider a
6 person's financial situation when setting bail.
7 Commissioner Jacobs said #42 better represents what the Board wants, and if the
8 trademark could be left out, then #46 would be subsumed in that.
9 Commissioner Jacobs said saluted Animal Services Advisory Board (ASAB) for#43, as
10 it is a more humane approach.
11 Commissioner Marcoplos said #26 is entitled Solar Energy, but solar is not mentioned in
12 the paragraph, and renewable energy is a better title. He said wind energy is very useful in
13 North Carolina, and should be promoted. He said there was a recent study done that showed
14 that more people respond favorably to renewable energy as compared to solar energy.
15 Commissioner Rich summarized: #45 will be moved to #1, and vice versa; #26 will be
16 renamed renewable energy; #42 will be named Bail Reform, and delete #46.
17 Commissioner Price said if you wanted to combine these two items, and leave out three
18 days count name.
19 Greg Wilder said he will revise this.
20 Greg Wilder said if the name "Three days count" is eliminated, then the yellow handout
21 would be eliminated.
22 Commissioner Price said she is fine either way, and if the name is deleted to make it
23 sound better she can accept that. She said if it rises to the level of discussion at the NCACC
24 they will know what it is.
25
26 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to
27 approve the revised Resolution Detailing Orange County's Recommendations Regarding Goals
28 for Inclusion in the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners' (NCACC) 2019-2020
29 Legislative Goals Package (Attachment 1); and authorize the Chair to sign the resolution as
30 presented or amended; and direct the Clerk to the Board to forward the approved resolution
31 and any other related materials to NCACC by the September 21, 2018 deadline.
32
33 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
34
35 Commissioner Jacobs said to incorporate the title and say, "also known as three days
36 count," which would allow for the resolution to be included.
37
38 b. Discussion on Proposed Nonprofit Capital Funding Policy and Criteria
39 The Board considered discussing a proposed policy and criteria for providing loans to
40 nonprofits for capital projects and provided direction to staff.
41 Gary Donaldson, Chief Financial Officer, presented this item:
42
43 BACKGROUND:
44 At the June 12, 2018 BOCC meeting, a request was made to develop a County nonprofit capital
45 funding policy and loan criteria. This request was based on a pending$100,000 capital
46 campaign request from the Inter-Faith Council for Social Services, Inc. with funds earmarked
47 from the County's Social Justice Fund. The Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill have not
48 indicated any capital funding for the Inter-Faith Council to date.
49
10
1 The proposed funding source for nonprofits that meet the County loan criteria is the Community
2 Loan Fund. The Community Loan Fund is an existing County revolving loan fund that could be
3 expanded and capitalized further through our annual capital financing borrowings. The use of
4 financing proceeds to capitalize a loan fund is a permissible use of proceeds under the North
5 Carolina statutes.
6
7 The Community Loan Fund was established in FY 2012-13 through appropriated General Fund
8 balance appropriation of$100,000 to provide no interest loans for residents to obtain water and
9 sewer connections. The loans to residents ranged from $3,500 to $10,000 with a maximum
10 term of 10 years. The Community Loan Fund received additional funding of$200,000 in FY
11 2017-18 from capital financing proceeds; and there is a current balance of $282,837 earmarked
12 for loans to residents for utility connections.
13
14 Staff recommends that the nonprofit loan program be capped at $500,000 annually and no
15 individual loan to a nonprofit entity would exceed $100,000. There would be no minimum loan
16 threshold. If the revolving loan balance remained stagnant with no borrowers over a three year
17 period, then staff would recommend to the Board that the loan balance be repurposed for other
18 County capital project use through a Budget Amendment.
19
20 The proposed nonprofit capital timeline and process would be implemented parallel to the
21 Outside Agency Operating Budget timeline and process as indicated below:
22
23 November County Posts Applications on Websites
24 November-January Outside Agency Prepares Applications
25 December-January Question &Answer Sessions
26 End of January Outside Agency Applications are Due
27 March-May Application Review & Outside Agency Presentations
28 June Outside Agency Approval by Board
29 July Contracts Executed & Programs Begin
30
31 Nonprofits seeking a capital loan would make a formal written loan request to the County
32 Manager by the end of November.
33
34 The Department of Finance and Administrative Services has proposed the following capital
35 funding policy and loan criteria for consideration.
36
37 Proposed capital funding policy:
38 1) Loans Not to Exceed $100,000 and subject to available Revolving Loan Balances
39 2) BOCC approved loan agreement; recourse, default and nonprofit bylaw dissolution
40 provisions
41 3) Loans secured by Deed of Trust
42 4) Revolving loan structure to recapitalize County funding source
43 5) Five to ten year maturities at no interest; maturity term contingent on loan amount;
44 and monthly repayment
45
46 Proposed loan eligibility criteria:
47 1) Current Outside Agency recipient with three-year average score of at least 85%
48 2) Clean Audit opinion
49 3) Three years Audited Financial Statements for completion of Nonprofit Financial
50 Capacity Review
11
1
2 The Inter-Faith Council has met the proposed loan eligibility requirements and has a three year
3 average score of 86% from its Outside Agency applications.
4
5 Nonprofit Financial Capacity Review
6 A review of the nonprofits audited financial statements will be used to complete the Financial
7 Capacity Review which assists in determining the nonprofits ability to repay County loans. Key
8 performance indicators (KPI) 1) Quick (Liquidity) Ratio, 2) Debt Ratio, 3) Expense Efficiency
9 Ratio, and 4) Operating Reserves Ratio are often used by public, private entities and financial
10 institutions to determine financial condition and ability to repay short and long-term obligations.
11
12 The below chart indicates that Inter-Faith Council has the financial capacity to repay a $100,000
13 County loan based on the four Financial KPI measurements. For purposes of the proposed loan
14 eligibility criteria, a nonprofit organization that meets all four of the KPIs would successfully
15 meet the County Nonprofit Financial Capacity Review.
16
17 FINANCIAL IMPACT: The proposed Inter-Faith Council loan of$100,000 would be funded
18 from the Social Justice Fund. The Social Justice Fund balance is currently $328,199. If the
19 Board approves a proposed policy and criteria for subsequent loans, then the Community Loan
20 Fund is the staff recommended funding source and would be funded up to $500,000.
21
22 Gary Donaldson made the following PowerPoint presentation:
23
24 Proposed Nonprofit Capital Funding Policy and Criteria
25 September 20, 2018
26 BOCC Regular Meeting
27
28 Background
29 • At the June 12, 2018 BOCC Meeting Board Directed Staff to:
30 ➢ Develop Capital Funding Policy for Nonprofits
31 ➢ Establish Loan Eligibility Criteria for Nonprofits
32 ➢ Determine terms for$100,000 loan to Inter-Faith
33 Council for Social Services, Inc.
34 ➢ No indication of funding from the Towns
35 ➢ Identify future funding sources for Revolving Loan structure; Finance
36 recommends Community Loan Fund
37
38 Community Loan Fund
39 ➢ Established in FY 2012-13 with $100,000 General Fund balance appropriation
40 ➢ Provide no interest loans for Residents to make water and sewer connections
41 ➢ Loans range from $3,500 to $10,000 with repayment terms up to 10 years
42 ➢ Loans secured by Deed of Trust
43 ➢ Five Loans Outstanding; Tax Office bills each of these residential parcel owners
44 annually
45 ➢ FY 2017-18 additional $200,000 transferred to the fund via Budget Amendment 10 to
46 support additional sewer connection loans
47 ➢ Current balance in the Community Loan Fund is $282,837
48
49 Proposed Nonprofit Capital Funding Policy
12
1 1) Individual Loans Not to Exceed $100,000 and subject to available Revolving Loan
2 Balances
3 2) Loan Program amount capped at $500,000; no minimum amount stipulation for a
4 nonprofit
5 3) BOCC approved loan agreement; recourse, default and nonprofit bylaw dissolution
6 provisions
7 4) Loans secured by Deed of Trust
8 5) Revolving loan structure to recapitalize County funding source
9 6) Five to ten year maturities at no interest; maturity term contingent on loan amount; and
10 monthly repayments
11 7) Nonprofits make formal written request to County Manager by November each year to
12 coincide with Outside Agency Process and Timeline
13
14 Proposed Nonprofit Loan Eligibility Criteria
15 1) Current Outside Agency recipient with three-year average score of at least 85%
16 2 Clean Audit opinion
17 3 Three years Audited Financial Statements to complete Nonprofit Financial Capacity
18 Review
19 4 IFC Outside Agency three-year average score of 86.6% and meets proposed loan
20 eligibility requirements
21
22 Nonprofit Financial Capacity Review (table)
23
24 IFC Nonprofit Financial Capacity Review (graph)
25
26 Outside Agency Timeline and Process (table)
27
28 Questions/Next Steps
29
30 Commissioner Marcoplos referred to the revolving loan, and asked if could be further
31 explained.
32 Gary Donaldson said as they go through a three year budget cycle, staff would come
33 back to the Board in the ensuing year's budget and recommend that it be repurposed. He said
34 if the Board wished to keep it in the loan fund, staff would do so.
35 Commissioner Marcoplos said they could keep it all, or use some.
36 Gary Donaldson said yes.
37 Commissioner Price offered a hypothetical: 5 nonprofits could use the all the funds, and
38 leave none for residents.
39 Gary Donaldson said yes, non-profits could use all the funds, but in a community loan
40 fund there is an existing loan structure for residents that is separate. He said the $500,000
41 would be over and above this.
42 Commissioner Price said there are some water and sewer projects nearing completion
43 in Orange County, and asked if he anticipates the residents needing loans for hook ups.
44 Gary Donaldson said that is why staff did a budget amendment of$200,000 in June for
45 requests like this.
46 Commissioner Price said it is her opinion that the County should serve the residents no
47 matter where they live, even if the Towns decline to contribute.
48 Commissioner Jacobs said he appreciated this, and finds it to be a doable solution. He
49 asked if it is known who will generate the audit opinion.
13
1 Gary Donaldson said it will be an independent audit, and in the case of InterFaith
2 Council (IFC), their auditor provides that opinion.
3 Commissioner Jacobs asked if a small non-profit wants to apply, would the audit
4 expense prevent them from being able to do so.
5 Gary Donaldson said staff would look at the rest of the financial statements, but it would
6 be best practice for a non-profit to have an independent audit.
7 Commissioner Jacobs said when the outside agency funding applications are created
8 this fiscal year, he would recommend inquiring how many of those entities conduct an audit.
9 Gary Donaldson said he has already looked into this, and believes that all already
10 conduct an audit.
11 Commissioner McKee said the balance in the loan fund is now $282,000, and asked if
12 that is reserved for the community loans, and the $500,000 would be in addition to that for non-
13 profit loans.
14 Gary Donaldson said yes.
15 Commissioner Rich asked if there is an advertising plan for this process.
16 Gary Donaldson said staff can engage their Community Relations Director and other
17 outlets.
18 Bonnie Hammersley said she will share this with all outside agencies during the outside
19 agency process. She said of the outside agencies, to which she has spoken, there has been
20 no interest in a loan, but having it available would be nice. She said all non-profits would prefer
21 a contribution.
22 Commissioner McKee asked if there is a way to keep this from being a contribution. He
23 said this is his concern, and he sees no reason to go through the song and dance. He said he
24 would prefer to just call it a grant from the beginning, knowing that non-profits will request debt
25 forgiveness.
26 Gary Donaldson said there would be a loan agreement with a security of a deed of trust
27 that would indicate the monthly repayment schedule.
28 Commissioner McKee said this in no way prevents this, or a future board, from forgiving
29 a loan.
30 Gary Donaldson said that is correct.
31 Commissioner Jacobs said he shares this concern, and the Board would have to
32 reiterate that this is a loan, not a grant. He said non-profits may not currently be interested, but
33 this has never been an option before, and this is a lot like a conservation easements, which no
34 one wanted to try. He said it may take one or two non-profits being willing to try the program to
35 see the benefit of a loan.
36 Commissioner Price asked if a loan is defaulted upon, would the County have ownership
37 of the property.
38 Gary Donaldson said there would be a legal process to determine liens, and the
39 recourse available to the County.
40 Commissioner McKee said a conservation easement is a giveaway program, and he
41 sees this loan process the same way.
42 Commissioner McKee asked if the number of outside agencies currently being funded is
43 known.
44 Gary Donaldson said 55.
45 Commissioner McKee said if 20% of those agencies meet the eligibility criteria, there will
46 be insufficient funds available. He asked if there is a process in place to determine who gets
47 funding.
48 Commissioner Marcoplos said one would go through a process, and may get funding or
49 may not.
14
1 Commissioner McKee said he has seen churches and organizations with large
2 endowments be less aggressive in their efforts as they were prior to receiving the endowment.
3 He said he is opposed to this, and it is an unnecessary work around.
4 Commissioner Jacobs said it never occurred to him that conservation easements were a
5 giveaway program, and helping farmers capitalize their operations it is an economic
6 development incentive. He said protecting water supplies and natural resources benefits
7 everyone in the County.
8 Commissioner Rich asked if the conversation has been helpful to staff.
9
10 Chair Dorosin arrived at 8:17 p.m.
11
12 Bonnie Hammersley said this option was requested by the Board, and there was the
13 issue of providing a grant to IFC. She said staff can bring forth an abstract at the next meeting
14 about adopting this policy, or the Board can pause to think about where it wants to go with this.
15 She said Chapel Hill and Carrboro chose not to provide funds to the IFC capital campaign at
16 this time.
17 Commissioner Rich referred to page 11 on the PowerPoint and the timeframe to which
18 the Manager is referring. She said the Board should decide if this should go into an abstract, or
19 if more conversation is needed.
20 Commissioner Jacobs said he would like staff to put this into an abstract for an approval
21 or denial, without other options.
22 Commissioner Burroughs agreed with Commissioner Jacobs, and does not agree with
23 using social justice funds for a grant for IFC, due to the fairness issues with other non-profits,
24 but this option is ready to be voted on.
25 Commissioner Marcoplos agreed. He said it is a well thought out program, and believes
26 that abuse is unlikely.
27 Commissioner Price agreed.
28 Commissioner McKee opposed.
29 Chair Dorosin asked for summarization, which was provided to him.
30 John Roberts said it sounds like the Board is in agreement, and could take action
31 tonight.
32 Chair Dorosin said he would like a policy for grants, but it sounds like there is not
33 agreement within the Board. He said an outside agency can apply for funding for rent through
34 the outside agency process, and he sees a grant for ownership as no different.
35 Commissioner Burroughs said renting and owning are different, and renting provides
36 flexibility to growing organizations in a way that owning does not. She said owning is not
37 always an advantage for a non-profit, and she is fine with providing funds for rent via the
38 outside agency process, and having a different standard for organizations that want to pursue a
39 capital campaign.
40 Commissioner Price she did not realize that a grant was even a possibility.
41
42 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Marcoplos to
43 approve the proposed nonprofit funding policy and criteria.
44
45 VOTE: Ayes, 5 (Commissioner Marcoplos, Commissioner Burroughs, Commissioner Rich,
46 Commissioner Jacobs, Commissioner Price); Nays, 2 (Chair Dorosin and Commissioner
47 McKee)
48
49 7. Reports
50
15
1 a. Orange County Partnership to End Homelessness —2018 Data Update
2 The Board received updated data about homelessness in Orange County submitted to
3 the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) earlier this year.
4
5 BACKGROUND:
6 The Orange County Partnership to End Homelessness (OCPEH) was created in 2008 to
7 coordinate funding and activities to end homelessness in Orange County. OCPEH is jointly
8 funded by Orange County (39%) and the Towns of Carrboro (15%), Chapel Hill (41%), and
9 Hillsborough (5%).
10
11 Homelessness in Orange County is up 13%. OCPEH Coordinator Corey Root will present the
12 updated data and discuss how current increases relate to identified gaps in the homeless
13 service system, including rapid re-housing and street outreach programs. The Coordinator will
14 also discuss how another identified gap, an accessible and housing-focused homeless shelter,
15 would be filled if changes to the Good Neighbor Plan are adopted by the Town of Chapel Hill
16 this fall.
17 Corey Root, Homeless Programs Coordinator, made the following PowerPoint
18 presentation:
19
20 2018 Data Update
21
22 September 20, 2018
23 Point-in-Time count conducted each January
24 • Long-standing measure
25 • Great way to get involved/learn more about homelessness
26 • Perfect? No, but
27 • Does give us info
28 • HUD uses extensively
29
30 Point-in-Time count numbers are up compared with last year and over time
31 Nationwide & statewide, numbers are down; in Orange County, numbers are up
32 ✓USA
33 • 13% overall decrease
34 • 47% decrease in veteran homelessness
35 NC
36 • 24% overall decrease
37 • 31% decrease in veteran homelessness
38 Orange County
39 0 13% overall increase
40 0 200% increase in veteran homelessness
41
42 People experiencing homelessness are disproportional IV people of color
43
44 Great progress towards ending chronic homelessness in Orange County (graph)
45
46 Let's take a peek at our systems map (map)
47
48 Corey Root said it is possible to reverse the direction of homelessness.
49 Commissioner Marcoplos referred to transitional housing, noting people are in good
16
1 shape once they get into housing. He asked if there is any data that compares giving a house
2 to someone versus the cost to the community to service homelessness.
3 Corey Root said there are numbers from other communities, and homelessness costs
4 more than purchasing housing. She said medical services, hospital stays, transportation,
5 support services, etc. are expensive, and it is more cost effective to house individuals and
6 provide services.
7 Commissioner Marcoplos asked if staff is aiming towards providing housing with
8 services.
9 Corey Root said yes, and this is part of what it would mean to end homelessness. She
10 said there are 70 people on the list waiting for housing, and deleting this list will end
11 homelessness.
12 Commissioner Marcoplos said he would like to know what homelessness costs Orange
13 County apart from other services.
14 Commissioner Rich said there are folks that will eat at shelters, but do not want to
15 receive housing, and would rather stay outside, and asked if there are numbers for this
16 population in Orange County.
17 Corey Root said traditionally this was viewed as a population that is choosing to be
18 homeless, but this is being considered differently now. She said HUD is not viewing this
19 population as choosing not to go to a certain program, but rather is asking questions about the
20 set up of the program. She said data is showing that if one receives housing, with no barriers
21 attached, and high quality case management, one will often choose this option. She said street
22 outreach programs are also very helpful, and Orange County has a gap in this area. She said
23 many people previously deemed "unhouseable" now have housing.
24 Commissioner Burroughs asked Corey Root if she could comment on the impact of
25 losing affordable housing stock from things like flooding.
26 Corey Root said a lot of people are housed in Camelot, so she does not envy the Board
27 of County Commissioners having to decide whether to continue housing programming on land
28 that is known to flood. She said the HUD programs are scattered site funding, and they also try
29 to partner with housing developers.
30 Commissioner Marcoplos asked if there were any identifiable climate refugees from
31 Hurricanes Matthew or Florence.
32 Corey Root said she did not think there was coordination in place to participate with
33 Matthew. She said FEMA and HUD are working together and learning from other natural
34 disasters.
35 Chair Dorosin asked if there are specific priorities going forward.
36 Corey Root said she is seeking fully funded rapid re-housing, street outreach, and
37 accessible housing focused shelter.
38 Chair Dorosin asked if funding is the biggest impediment to achieving these goals.
39 Corey Root said yes, but there are other indicators as well such as where to house a
40 program, who will staff it, etc. She said the Partnership to End Homelessness does not do any
41 direct service.
42 Commissioner Price asked if residents are coming from particular areas/situations.
43 Corey Root said the database asks for the zip code, and most are from Orange County
44 and Durham. She said many residents are sent out of the County for services.
45 Commissioner Price said she wanted to know what is causing the homelessness in
46 Orange County, beyond those who are perpetually homeless.
47 Corey Root said it is a mix of three things that people are lacking: income, services, and
48 affordable housing.
17
1 Commissioner Price said if the numbers were to increase it is likely due to gentrification,
2 lack of employment, etc., and she would like to see data collected about the causes of
3 homelessness in Orange County.
4 Corey Root said there has been great success in housing those who have been
5 chronically homeless.
6
7 b. Update on Orange County's Website Redesign
8 The Board previewed the newly revised Orange County Government Internet website.
9
10 BACKGROUND:
11 For the past year, a team of staff has been working to review and improve the County's official
12 website page. The process began in fall 2017 with the solicitation of proposals from website
13 vendors. Several firms responded, including the company that had been hosting and providing
14 design services for the website. A team of 15 staff members from various departments
15 reviewed four proposals and ultimately chose a new vendor, CivicPlus.
16
17 CivicPlus is based in Manhattan, Kansas, and provides design and hosting services to more
18 than one thousand local government clients in the United States, including the Town of
19 Carrboro and many counties in North Carolina. The new website will offer more functionality
20 and improved design and navigation for residents as well as a more robust tool kit for staff to
21 maintain the site. Residents will be able to register with the site and create personalized
22 notifications so they will be made aware whenever new or revised information is posted to the
23 website.
24
25 Todd McGee, Community Relations Director, presented this item and previewed new
26 website online. He said the new website will go live on September 271H
27 Commissioner Burroughs said she really liked that idea of highlighting employees,
28 sharing their stories and appreciating them.
29 Commissioner Rich asked if the departments have individual websites.
30 Todd McGee said yes, and the link will directly access their websites. He said the
31 Visitors' Bureau uses the County website as a gateway to its website.
32
33 c. Update on the First Annual Orange County Local Fest
34 The Board received an update to the Board on preparations for Orange County's First
35 Annual Local Festival.
36
37 BACKGROUND: The FY2018-19 Budget authorized up to $50,000 in Article 46 sales tax
38 proceeds to produce an Orange County Local Festival. The County retained Evan Hatch as the
39 Event Planner. Mr. Hatch has fifteen years of experience in folk arts and cultural programming
40 which includes experience in event planning and festival production. Mr. Hatch has been
41 working closely with a group of Orange County departments to produce Local Fest.
42
43 Orange County Local Fest is intended to be a local, grassroots festival that celebrates and
44 promotes Orange County's commitment to its heritage, diversity, culture, sustainable living and
45 agriculture. The event will be held at the Blackwood Farm Park on Saturday, September 29,
46 2018 from 10:OOam to 6:OOpm.
47
48 Revenue generated by the event is proposed to support the Breeze Farm Incubator. To date,
49 sponsorships have raised $2,000. Additional revenue is expected from vendors contributing a
50 portion of their sales during the event and booth rentals.
18
1
2 The programming element of Local Fest will include music, agricultural, food and craft
3 demonstrations, local artists, educational opportunities for children, and revenue generating
4 activities, food, and beverage sales. Music and dance stages will feature a diverse mix of local
5 musicians and artists. Agricultural and food demonstrations will include a demonstration
6 kitchen, sheep herding, fabric weaving and dying, and quilting. The County will has contracted
7 with musicians, vendors and demonstrators, and artists have been juried by the Orange County
8 Arts Commission staff. A complete program and schedule for the event is available at
9 www.orangecountylocalfest.com.
10
11 Food and beverage sales will be provided by a local food truck rodeo and beer garden. The
12 County has contracted with three breweries, a cidery, and ten different food vendors. A list of
13 the individual food and beverage vendors is also available at www.orangecountylocalfest.com.
14 The County has also completed a detailed transportation plan that will facilitate all attendees to
15 park offsite. Orange County Public Transportation will provide six options for residents and
16 guests to park and ride to the event. These stops include Cedar Grove, the Department of
17 Social Services in Hillsborough, Durham Technical Community College, Eubanks Road Transit
18 Parking Lot, Fairview Park, Mebane, the Hillsborough Walmart, and Weaver Street Coop.
19
20 Travis Myren provided some highlights of the process for this festival, which is 9 days
21 away.
22 Evan Hatch, Event Planner, made the following PowerPoint presentation:
23
24 Orange County LocalFest
25 Saturday, September 29, 2018
26
27 What's At LocalFest 2018?
28
29 • An Introduction to Orange County's Blackwood Farm Park
30 • 12 Musical and Dance Acts on 2 Stages
31 • Work of 20 Local Artists
32 • Work and Demonstrations of 20 Local Tradition Bearers
33 • 5 Strong, Creative, Active Children-Centric Activities
34 • 12 Community Groups
35 • 5 Animal Centered Attractions
36 • 11 Food Trucks
37 • 4 Beer Garden Participants
38
39 www.orangecountylocalfest.com
40 -Over 6,000 Page Views
41 -Over 2,500 Unique Users
42 -Web Traffic up 25% during September
43 -Facebook, Google, Orange County Visitors Bureau are biggest referrers
44
45 Inter-Departmental Partnerships (graph)
46
47 SPONSORSHIPS
48 • PHE, Inc.
49 • Weaver Street Market
50 • PEMC
19
1 • Sports Endeavors
2 • Durham Technical Community College
3 • NC Choices
4 • Orange County Food Council
5 • WHUP
6 • Orange County Visitors Bureau
7 • Music Maker Relief Foundation
8
9
10 WHAT DOES LOCALFEST BRING TO OUR COMMUNITY?
11 • Celebration of local agriculture and business and a thank-you to its rural, agrarian
12 contributions
13 • Great Showcase for the beauty of Orange County's Natural Resources
14 • Template for a successful festival to grow in 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022
15 • The roots of a new tradition for Orange County
16 • A valuable opportunity for Commissioners and other public personas to meet their
17 constituents
18 • An amazing array of talent that is authentically representative of Orange County
19 traditions that a lot of folks don't know about
20 • A unique, Inclusive way of celebrating Orange County assets traditionally underserved
21 • A model for other communities to start their own unique, relevant "county fair"
22
23 Commissioner Jacobs suggested having a site interpreter at Blackwood Farms to talk
24 about the history of the site.
25 Evan Hatch said this is not part of the plan, but agreed this would be nice to have.
26 Bonnie Hammersley said Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks and
27 Recreation (DEAPR) staff will be present, and can help with this.
28
29 8. Consent Agenda
30
31 Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
32
33 Commissioner Price— g
34 Commissioner McKee —f
35
36 Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
37
38 A motion was made by Commissioner Rich, seconded by Commissioner Price to
39 approve the remaining items on the consent agenda.
40
41 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
42
43 • Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
44
45 f. Amendment to Emergency Debris Removal and Processing Services Agreement
46 The Board considered approving an amendment extending an agreement between
47 Orange County and Ceres Environmental Services, Inc. through October 1, 2019 for the
48 purpose of providing a resource for Emergency Storm Debris Removal and Processing
49 Services and authorize the Manager to sign.
20
1
2 Commissioner McKee said section 6 of this item refers to Gayle Wilson as the Solid
3 Waste director, and he has retired.
4 John Roberts said that can be changed, and anything would be referred to the new
5 director.
6
7 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to
8 approve an amendment extending an agreement between Orange County and Ceres
9 Environmental Services, Inc. through October 1, 2019 for the purpose of providing a resource
10 for Emergency Storm Debris Removal and Processing Services and authorize the Manager to
11 sign.
12
13 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
14
15 g. Health Services Agreement Amendments for the Orange County Detention Center
16 The Board considered voting to ratify a 2011 Amendment and to approve Amendment
17 #2 to the Health Services Agreement for the Orange County Detention Center and authorize the
18 Chair to sign.
19
20 Commissioner Price said the abstract states that this health contract is based on
21 population of up to 180, and asked if this number is frequently reached.
22 Bonnie Hammersley said this contract originated in 2008, and the number is one that is
23 the highest it could be. She said there have been times when this number may have been
24 reached, but it is not common.
25 Commissioner Price said she is concerned that if there is a detention center that does
26 not even hold 180, is it necessary to have a contract that serves that many.
27 Bonnie Hammersley said this contract will be re-bid next year, and she said this number
28 is seldom met.
29 Commissioner Price said health care for women, and it states that no abortions will be
30 permitted at all. She asked if this is true even if a woman's life is at risk.
31 Bonnie Hammersley said the County covers the cost, and there are situations where an
32 inmate would be taken to the hospital.
33 Commissioner Price said she is concerned about this.
34 Bonnie Hammersley said she would share these concerns with the Sheriff.
35 Commissioner Price said she assumed audits are done.
36 Bonnie Hammersley yes, and if they have not been done, they will be.
37 Commissioner Burroughs said if an inmate wanted an abortion, she believes she should
38 have access to a one, and if there is something preventing this, she would like to know what it
39 is.
40 Bonnie Hammersley recommended approving this contract, and if an amendment is
41 needed, it can be done. She said the County is operating under this contract currently, and if
42 an agreement cannot be reached with this contract, an alternative method would have to be
43 found and a re-bid of a health contract is extremely timely.
44
45 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by to Commissioner Burroughs
46 ratify a 2011 Amendment and to approve Amendment#2 to the Health Services Agreement for
47 the Orange County Detention Center and authorize the Chair to sign.
48
49 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
50
21
1 a. Minutes
2 The Board approved the minutes from June 7, 2018 as submitted by the Clerk to the
3 Board.
4
5 b. Approval of Senior Lunch Caterer Contract with Nantucket Cafe, Inc.
6 The Board approved the food service caterer contract with Nantucket Cafe, Inc. to
7 provide noon meals for the Home and Community Care Block Grant-funded Senior Lunch
8 Program at the Seymour and Passmore Centers for the period July 1, 2018 to June 30, 2019
9 with an optional one-year extension and authorize the Chair to sign.
10
11 c. FY 2018-19 Home and Community Care Block Grant for Older Adults Funding Plan
12 The Board approved the recommended Home and Community Care Block Grant
13 (HCCBG) for Older Adults Funding Plan for Fiscal Year 2018-19 and authorized the Chair to
14 sign
15
16 d. North Carolina Department of Transportation Rural Operating Assistance Program
17 (ROAP) Grant Application for FY 2019
18 The Board approved the annual FY 2019 ROAP grant application and certified
19 statement and authorized the Manager to sign.
20
21 e. Lease Renewal Option: Department of Social Services - Hillsborough Commons
22 Campus
23 The Board approved a five (5) year lease renewal option of the Department of Social
24 Services spaces within Hillsborough Commons for a term beginning January 22, 2019 through
25 January 21, 2024 and authorized the Chair to sign on behalf of the Board of Orange County
26 Commissioners.
27
28 f. Amendment to Emergency Debris Removal and Processing Services Agreement
29 The Board approved an amendment extending an agreement between Orange County
30 and Ceres Environmental Services, Inc. through October 1, 2019 for the purpose of providing a
31 resource for Emergency Storm Debris Removal and Processing Services and authorized the
32 Manager to sign.
33
34 g. Health Services Agreement Amendments for the Oranqe County Detention Center
35 The Board ratified a 2011 Amendment and to approve Amendment #2 to the Health
36 Services Agreement for the Orange County Detention Center and authorize the Chair to sign.
37
38 h. Creation of a Permanent 1.0 FTE Information Technology Analyst Position in the
39 Orange County Sheriff's Office
40 The Board created a permanent 1.0 FTE (full-time equivalent) Information Technology
41 Analyst position in the Orange County Sheriff's Office.
42
43 i. Library Daily Deposit Waiver
44 The Board approved an exemption for Library daily deposits of cash up to $500, as
45 required by North Carolina General Statute 159-32.
46
47 9. County Manager's Report
48 Bonnie Hammersley said at there is a letter at the Commissioners' places from the
49 Town of Hillsborough, in reference to the Economic Development District (EDD,) and she said
22
1 the Town staff wants to work with the County but cannot make any guarantees since they are
2 staff and not elected officials.
3
4 10. County Attorney's Report
5 NONE
6
7 11. *Appointments
8
9 a. Affordable Housing Advisory Board —Appointments
10 The Board considered making appointments to the Affordable Housing Advisory Board
11 (AHAB).
12
13 Sherrill Hampton, Housing Director, said there was a lot of interest from Orange County
14 residents, and the AHAB met a couple of weeks ago and presents the following
15 recommendations:
16
17 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to
18 appoint the following to the AHAB:
19
20 • Position 3 Allison Brown At Large First Full Term ending 6/30/2021
21 • Position 4 Nannie Richmond At-Large Partial Term ending 06/30/2019
22 • Position 6 Tammy Jacobs At-Large Second Full Term ending 06/30/2021
23 • Position 9 Arthur Sprinczeles At-Large First Full Term ending 06/30/2021
24 • Position12 Blake Rosser At-Large First Full Term 06/30/2021
25 • Position13 Olivia Fisher At-Large Partial Term 06/30/2019
26 • Position 15 Cain Twyman At-Large First Full Term 09/30/2021
27
28 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
29
30 c. Arts Commission —Appointments
31 The Board will consider making appointments to the Arts Commission.
32 DONE ABOVE as 4a
33
34 12. Information Items
35
36 September 4, 2018 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List
37
38 13. Closed Session
39
40 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Rich to go into
41 closed session at 9:42 p.m. for the purpose of:
42
43 "Pursuant to G.S. § 143-318.11(a)(3) "to consult with an attorney retained by the Board in order
44 to preserve the attorney-client privilege between the attorney and the Board."
45
46 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
47
48 RECONVENE INTO REGULAR SESSION
49
23
1 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to
2 reconvene into regular session at 10:35 p.m.
3
4 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
5
6 14. Adjournment
7
8 A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Burroughs to
9 adjourn the meeting at 10:35 p.m.
10
11 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
12
13 Mark Dorosin, Chair
14
15 Donna Baker
16 Clerk to the Board
17