HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 10-06-20; 8-a - Minutes 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: October 6, 2020
Action Agenda
Item No. 8-a
SUBJECT: Minutes
DEPARTMENT: Board of County Commissioners
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Draft Minutes (Under Separate Cover) Greg Wilder, Interim Clerk to the
Board 919-245-2130
PURPOSE: To correct and/or approve the draft minutes as submitted by the Interim 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 1, 2020 Virtual Business Meeting
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no Orange County Social Justice Goal impact associated with
this item.
SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT: There is no Orange County Social Justice Goal impact associated
with this item.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: There is no Orange County Environmental Responsibility Goal
impact associated with this item.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board approve minutes as
presented or as amended.
1
1 ATTACHMENT1
2
3 MINUTES
4 ORANGE COUNTY
5 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
6 VIRTUAL BUSINESS MEETING
7 SEPTEMBER 1, 2020
8 7:00 p.m.
9
10 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Virtual Business Meeting on Tuesday,
11 September 1, 2020 at 7:00 p.m.
12
13 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Penny Rich and Commissioners Jamezetta
14 Bedford, Mark Dorosin, Sally Greene, Mark Marcoplos, Earl McKee, and Renee Price
15 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
16 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
17 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Deputy County Manager
18 Travis Myren, Deputy Clerk to the Board David Hunt, and Assistant Deputy Clerk Allen Coleman
19 (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below)
20
21 Chair Rich called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
22
23 Due to current public health concerns, the Board of Commissioners conducted a Virtual
24 Business Meeting on September 1, 2020. Members of the Board of Commissioners participated
25 in the meeting remotely. As in prior meetings, members of the public were able to view and
26 listen to the meeting via live streaming video at orangecountync.gov/967/Meeting-Videos and on
27 Orange County Gov-TV on channels 1301 or 97.6 (Spectrum Cable).
28
29 In this new virtual process, there are two methods for public comment.
30 • Written submittals by email
31 • Speaking during the virtual meeting
32
33 Detailed public comment instructions for each method are provided at the bottom of this
34 agenda. (Pre-registration is required.)
35
36 Chair Rich asked if Board members would spend a moment observing happy memories
37 of Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board, who passed away over the summer.
38
39 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
40 Chair Rich asked if the Board would agree to a roll call format for votes, which is a new
41 requirement of North Carolina General Statutes for virtual meetings. She said she will say the
42 Commissioner's last name, in alphabetical order, and the Commissioner can respond yea or
43 nay to the vote in question.
44 The Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) agreed by consensus.
45 Chair Rich read the public charge.
46
47 Arts Moment— No Arts Moment was available for this meeting.
48
49
50 2. Public Comments (Limited to One Hour)
2
1 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
2
3 Chair Rich asked if Board members wanted to hear from all speakers, or from only the
4 first 20 speakers, due to the hour time constraint.
5 The Board unanimously signaled to allow all 29 speakers the time to speak, regardless
6 of the time overage.
7 Jessica Sheffield thanked the BOCC for allowing her to speak. She said she is the Eno
8 River Association (ERA) Executive Director, and thanked the Board for its capital investment.
9 She asked if the Board would continue to maintain funds for ERA in the future years of the
10 Capital Investment Plan (CIP). She said the ERA works to protect good environmental
11 stewardship in the Eno River watershed. She said ERA has great concerns about the proposed
12 Research Triangle Logistics Park, as it will not protect water quality, and quantity, of Cates
13 Creek and the Eno River. She said 6 acres of the 161-acre proposed project have been
14 designated by the State as Natural Heritage Natural area, and the current plan goes over this
15 land.
16 Chair Rich said the Commissioners have not received this project yet, and it is set to
17 come before the Board of County Commissioners on September 15th from the Planning
18 Department.
19
20 Ronald Sieber read the following comments:
21 My name is Ronald Sieber, and I live in the New Hope Springs neighborhood off of Davis Road.
22 1 live approximately 1 3/4 miles away from the proposed RTLP project, about which I am
23 addressing you tonight. I mention this mileage figure because that cited distance triggered an
24 offhand comment from a Planning Board member at their August 5th meeting which implied that
25 the citizen who was speaking at that time lived too far away from the project to be affected by it.
26 1 am here to assert that ALL of the people who live along Ode Turner Rd. and Davis Rd. use
27 Davis at its intersection with Old NC Hwy. 86 as an entrance/exit to our homes. We will ALL be
28 affected by this project that threatens our rural neighborhoods.
29 I've written several letters about this and other matters related to the process by which decisions
30 so far have been made and how those decisions will affect both the community of which 1
31 speak, as well as the surrounding communities all along Old NC Hwy. 86, because all
32 communities will likely be affected.
33 Although I write as an individual, I am a member of my local neighborhood as well as the larger
34 community of Hillsborough and Orange County. I have listened to what others have said about
35 this issue, and therefore, many of my concerns reflect what others have also voiced. Therefore,
36 in this manner I am speaking for a much larger group than myself alone. And we are all of one
37 mind on this issue: the proposed project is too oversized in its present state and amendments to
38 land use should not be approved that would allow it go forward as proposed.
39 1 ask that the Board of County Commissioners read the concerns expressed in the letters that 1
40 have written, and I implore each commissioner to consider the ramifications of their decisions
41 yet to be made.
42 Thank you for your time. I look forward to the public hearing on September 15th
43 Joan Kalnitsky thanked the BOCC for taking the time to hear from the public. She said
44 she is opposed to the research triangle park redistrict. She said she has written to the BOCC
45 and will do so again prior to the September 15 meeting. She said Davis Road was not built to
46 hand the RTLP, as there are no shoulders and no sidewalks. She said the County allowed
47 Davis Road to be developed as a quiet neighborhood road. She said it is really difficult to wrap
48 her head around the proposed building capacity of 950,000 square feet on an immediate access
3
1 to Interstate 40. She said the project is not significant enough to provide a strong benefit to
2 Orange County. She asked the Board to please leave the zoning as it is, and work within
3 existing parameters, which the applicant should be willing to do if it he serious. She asked the
4 BOCC to please not bulldoze the community's way of life.
5
6 Sarah Shore stood in her back yard to show the land, which is under discussion. She
7 welcomed the BOCC to visit her property. She said this land is residential, with little road traffic.
8 She said she finds it very upsetting to hear an out of state developer is trying to change the land
9 use. She asked the County to consider sensible development. She said she and her neighbors
10 are not against development, but would like the reasons behind development to be seriously
11 considered. She thanked the BOCC for listening.
12
13 Jon Lorusso read the following comments:
14 1 am part of Save Hillsborough, a community organized effort in favor of harmonious
15 development that benefits the community. Our group represents most of 1000 residences in the
16 area whose homes are on either side of the following roads: Orange Grove Road on the west,
17 Interstate 40 on the north, Arthur Minnis Road and New Home Church Road on the south, and
18 Old 86 on the east. We are in favor of increasing local quality jobs and understand the need for
19 increasing Orange County tax revenue. Tonight you will hear an overview of why we think the
20 Research Triangle Logistics Park, as it's currently proposed, will be a detriment to the
21 community. We ask that the commissioners please consider our concerns in making any
22 decisions regarding the permitting and rezoning of the affected parcels.
23 Orange County is known for its high standards, and when someone moves here, there's
24 an expectation that they'll be afforded some level of protection from unsightly and disturbing
25 developments. We expect that the strict county ordinances will shield us from excessive noise,
26 pollution, and aesthetic aberrations. We ask that these strict ordinances be upheld without
27 exception, and that the burden of proof should be placed upon the developers to ensure,
28 beyond a shadow of a doubt, that these ordinances are strictly adhered to. Thus far, the
29 developer has not done their due diligence in any of these matters --far from it! We urge the
30 commissioners to postpone a vote on rezoning until the developers have proven that they will
31 not be in violation of any Orange County ordinances. Furthermore, since a conditional zoning
32 permit will allow for a wide range of development types, we request that the developer is
33 required to prove that these standards will be met, not just for the lowest impact developments,
34 but also for the highest impact developments that are permitted under the conditional zoning.
35
36 Kaila Mitchell read the following comments:
37 1 am part of Save Hillsborough. I have serious concerns about RTLP. After successfully
38 recruiting Medline to invest in a distribution center in the Buckhorn Economic Development
39 District last year, it is probably tempting to build on that success by approving what sounds like
40 a similar project. RTLP is proposed as a distribution center in the Hillsborough EDD, so what's
41 the big deal?
42
43 Unfortunately, the two projects couldn't be more different, and I want to quickly outline just a few
44 of the differences between Medline's "Project Tomorrow" and Barrister's RTLP.
45
46 Density- Medline is building a 1.2 million square foot distribution center on 172 acres. RTLP
47 would pack 2-4 times more building area into a smaller parcel (166 acres).
48 Zoning - Medline optioned land in the existing EDD. RTLP requires rezoning of a rural
49 residential tract.
4
1 Neighbors - Medline occupies land that is sparsely populated, and builds at a density that
2 allows buffers. RTLP will build and pave within 250 feet of existing homes, and send all of its
3 tractor trailers down a driveway within 100 feet of those homes.
4 Uses - Medline will do light assembly and distribution of medical products and lab supplies.
5 Barrister either will not name the tenants of RTLP, or does not have them.
6 Economy- Medline's build-out plan will generate a guaranteed capital investment of$65 million
7 over 5 years. RTLP guarantees nothing.
8 Jobs - Medline is required to create 250 jobs within 5 years. RTLP claims it will create 18 times
9 that many jobs, even though it is also a distribution center.
10 Traffic - Medline's placement allows vehicles to make right turns to access the interstate. RTLP
11 requires every vehicle to take two left-turns onto rural roads not built for tractor trailers.
12 Experience - Medline operates 43 distribution centers across 20 countries. Barrister has a
13 history of stalled projects and speculative development.
14 Environment - Medline's distribution center will be LEED certified and generate up to half of its
15 energy with solar panels. Barrister had to be pushed by the planning board before agreeing to
16 install a handful of EV chargers.
17 Public Perception -When the Board opened the Medline project for public comment, not a
18 single voice rose against it. RTLP, on the other hand, has inspired a community to organize and
19 speak out, with letters, road signs, and hashtags. We are here tonight, not because this is fun,
20 but because we are passionate about finding a project for this site that will allow us all to say, as
21 Commissioner Rich did about Medline in a Daily Tar Heel interview, "It's such a positive
22 company, that fact that we were able to land it here is just amazing,"
23
24 1 ask you to consider the very real differences between these two projects, and to help us find
25 another success worth celebrating.
26
27 Joseph Shore said he lives on Old 86, and his family will be hugely impacted by this
28 proposed development. He said RTL is the wrong thing for this area, and he has literally been
29 losing sleep over this. He said he is very concerned that the Planning Board members do not
30 care about the community, and he is worried about he will get into his driveway. He said he is
31 also concerned about potential ground water contamination, as he cannot dig a new well if there
32 is ground water contamination. He said this proposed project violates the Unified Development
33 Ordinance, and it is wrong for this area.
34
35 Franklin Garland said he has been a farmer since 1977, prior to the area becoming an
36 Economic Development District (EDD). He said several projects have been proposed, and
37 none have been right for the area, and the current proposed project is the same. He invited the
38 Commissioners to visit his property, as he has done so over the decades. He said to date, only
39 one person has accepted his invitation, and told him he had beautiful land that was going to be
40 ruined. He said he is against this proposed development.
41
42 Jo Massey said she has lived in Hillsborough for 30 years in Cornwallis Hills. She said
43 everyone wants to help with the tax base, but this applicant has shown no proof of expected
44 success. She asked the Board to build on the charm of the Town of Hillsborough, which has a
45 great deal to offer. She said flooding and run off water will be a huge issue, and will be
46 dangerous for residents. She said there are many children in this area who will be adversely
47 affected. She is against this development, and thanked the BOCC for its time.
48
49 Myra Gwin-Summers said she lives on Davis Road, two doors down from where the
50 traffic would enter. She said pollution would adversely affect the church and childcare center
51 that are located here, and the childcare center would no longer be able to operate. She said the
5
1 Church has built this childcare center to help with the church's finances. She said she has
2 grave concerns, and this proposed project is not environmentally just.
3
4 Jeremy Edmondson read the following comments:
5 1 am part of Save Hillsborough. I have serious concerns about RTLP.
6
7 On Jan 25, 2017, the 12-acre parcel connecting the 2 large economic development lots to Davis
8 Road, PIN 9862998894, was sold by court order to a local resident for$185,000. From what we
9 understand, the buyer intended to build several houses on this beautiful wooded lot. However,
10 the buyer was unable to obtain county approval for that purpose, one reason being that the land
11 did not "perk" and so would require city water and sewer. The buyer is directly connected to the
12 current owner and has not been able to develop this land.
13
14 We understand also that the RTLP developer has obtained an option agreement for the right to
15 purchase the Davis Road parcel. The property is currently zoned R-1 with a pending request for
16 rezoning to support RTLP requirements.
17
18 For now, use of this Davis Road property as an "access point" is viewed as critical to the viability
19 of the RTLP development--because, according to the NCDOT, the existing Service Road is
20 unsuitable for use by vehicles that would turn left to exit the development toward 1-40. Instead,
21 the developers would force virtually all RTLP traffic to exit the development onto a small rural
22 road close to an intersection. Due to the elevation of the land, it is a substantial climb up to
23 Davis Road from the proposed location of the main warehouses, and the uphill grade will
24 increase the noise and emissions from 18-wheelers and heavy-duty trucks. Once at the top of
25 the hill, the same trucks need to run back down the grade to enter the 1-40 on-ramps, creating
26 additional noise due to engine-braking by the trucks' drivers.
27
28 This Davis Road parcel should not be part of the development! Either the usage of the
29 development needs to be adapted to the available traffic connections to 1-40 or better access
30 points need to be found to make the economic area viable. Spilling over into a rural residential
31 area to solve a site traffic problem needlessly pushes the burden to the local residents. Once
32 city water and sewer are brought to this land on Davis Road it will make a wonderful site for a
33 business more suited to the area that can bring tax revenue rather than as a traffic corridor for
34 the current warehouse proposal. The local residents fully support smart development of the
35 economic development area without using the Davis road lot to push the traffic problems to the
36 local residents.
37
38 Commissioner McKee joined the meeting at 7:37 p.m.
39
40 Daniel Arneman read the following comments:
41 1 am part of Save Hillsborough. I have serious questions concerning RTLP. The Environmental
42 Committee of Save Hillsborough, has identified several environmental impact issues for
43 consideration by our County Commissioners. While economic development is important to our
44 region and our communities, it must be done in a way that fits with existing uses and preserves
45 our natural assets. The 2019 State of the Environment report produced by the Orange County
46 Commission for the Environment highlights Orange County's ongoing commitment to a healthy
47 environment, including: a transition to 100% renewable energy county-wide by 2050;
48 maintaining a Rural Buffer planning zone to limit urban sprawl for over 30 years; actively
49 supporting local, sustainable agriculture; and reaching the goal of conserving 10% of the
50 County's land. We do not think this proposed development helps to meet those County goals.
51 Furthermore,
6
1
2 1. We would like to start by pointing out that the roadway perpendicular to the proposed
3 development is a designated NC Scenic Byway and that the proposed development
4 encompasses 6 acres of Natural Heritage Natural Area, which the design proposes to entirely
5 cover over.
6 2. Our next concern is the impact of noise--on the residents, the preschool, and the church, all
7 located within 50 to 1,000 feet of the proposed warehouse complex. According to the developer,
8 the warehouse complex will potentially host between 150 and 200 trucks and cars per hour
9 exiting onto Davis Road and Old NC Highway 86, with the ability for a 3-shift work schedule
10 producing diesel tractor trailer noise at high decibels 24/7. The noise-related long-term health
11 impacts of this proposed activity will be substantial and clearly bear additional study.
12
13 3. Next, the diesel exhaust from these vehicles (mainly trucks), again in close proximity to adults
14 and children of all ages, deserves additional attention due to the potential for serious long-term
15 health impacts, especially for our oldest and youngest citizens. Such emissions-related health
16 impacts clearly bear additional study too.
17
18 4. Next, the vegetative buffers and open space offered by the proposal are not adequate to
19 provide wildlife corridors, nor to decrease the negative visual and auditory impacts on residents
20 in the surrounding area.
21
22 5. Finally, this development proposal does not yet offer appropriate protections for the natural
23 community or for Orange County residents. We stand with the Eno River Association in our
24 concern that a structure built on the headwaters of the Eno River, adjacent to a floodplain, with
25 substantial clear cutting will not protect the water quality and quantity along the 2,500 feet of
26 Cates Creek encompassed within the development that connect watersheds of the Eno River
27 and New Hope Creek. There is of course more to say on this issue--and on stormwater
28 management and mitigation- -but again: further study of the impacts is warranted. The Eno-New
29 Hope Landscape Conservation Plan focuses on the critical importance of habitat connectivity for
30 wildlife in the Eno River and New Hope Creek watersheds that this development encompasses.
31 Please consider this in your questions and considerations of the RTLP proposal.
32
33 Janet Marks read the following comments:
34 1 am part of Save Hillsborough. I have serious concerns about RTLP Traffic is an issue you will
35 hear and read a lot about, and there are two main reasons:
36 1. Added traffic from the RTLP warehouse complex will have a major negative impact, and
37 traffic is what will affect the area and the county as a whole the most. As you review the
38 applicant's proposal, pay close attention to how traffic exists today and what it is proposed to
39 look like. According to the Traffic Impact Summary presented on Aug 19, the RTLP
40 development will generate 3,648 vehicle trips per day.
41 • The existing traffic volume on Old NC86 between Davis Rd. and 1-40 is 6,600 vehicles
42 per day. It is projected that 95% of all inbound and outbound trips will utilize Old NC86 —
43 it would now become 10,065, a 53% increase over the current volume.
44 . For Davis Rd. near its intersection with Old NC86, the developer's summary shows an
45 existing traffic volume of 2,100 vehicles per day. Add 15% of all inbound and 90% of all
46 outbound traffic or 1,915 RTLP-added trips --that is an astonishing increase of 91% of
47 vehicles using this twolane, mainly residential and rural area road. Yet in the words of
48 the developer, Impact will be "Minimal". Doubling the current traffic on a narrow road
49 abutted by homes, a church, a preschool --and yet the developer represents this as
50 "minimal"?When you read into the proposal, please ask yourself: Is even a 91%
7
1 increase in traffic on any road minimal? Not to mention that a large portion of these will
2 be large trucks!
3
4 2. As I'm sure you are aware by now. The applicant's proposal talks at length about
5 manufacturing, R&D, etc., in addition to warehousing, when referring to the scope of the RTLP
6 project, but then it states in the environmental assessment that "no production will take place on
7 these parcels." Further, the Traffic Impact Analysis calculates added traffic based on a land use
8 code of LUC 150, specific to warehousing. Keep in mind, this code results in one of the lowest
9 rates of estimated traffic for this type of development. So the numbers I stated before and those
10 which are listed in the application are the MINIMUM. Any business use that actually is in line
11 with manufacturing, mixed use, etc. will greatly increase the amount of traffic this site would
12 create. The Staff's response to the developer of June 30th even states: "As there will be a
13 myriad of other development occurring within the Project - staff is concerned the Traffic analysis
14 does not adequately anticipate and define impacts." One cannot `cherry pick' the data they use.
15 You have to be consistent. This area will be developed in some way—we understand that— it is
16 a highway intersection. The question is, why do we keep trying to ram a square peg into a round
17 hole? Why do we try and change the whole area to accommodate a plan? Why don't we work
18 within the parameters of this area and find the right fit--one that generates tax dollars, creates
19 jobs AND fits in with the landscape? We know there are traffic concerns around what the
20 Service Road can handle, and we know this plot of land backs up to residential and rural areas-
21 but that doesn't mean it can't be developed in an appropriate way. The highway interchange at
22 1-40 and "new 86" (Exit 266) is the same layout, but the distance there between 1-40 and
23 Eubanks Rd. is actually LESS than the distance at Exit 261 from 1-40 to the Service Road, and
24 yet the new Carraway development is looking like a successful project. There is a compromise
25 to all of this.
26 • Take the 12-acre Davis Road parcel and its driveway off the table. This idea was
27 actually proposed by David Blankfard, Chair of the Planning &Zoning Board!
28 • Do not approve the zoning change; then
29 • Work to develop the parcels that are already in the Economic Development area and
30 have been zoned with a size and scale and a use that keeps the industry and traffic on
31 the service road and close to the highway. You can create a bigger tax base and
32 balance it with the nature of the area around it; we just need to stop trying to jam that
33 square peg in a round hole. Work with the people in the county--not against them.
34
35 Chair Rich advised Janet Marks to send emails to the BOCC email group.
36
37 Rena Mitchell read the following remarks:
38 I'm part of Save Hillsborough and I have serious concerns about RTLP. Growth is great and
39 good. I don't want my town to look like it did in 1776 or 1876 or even 1976.
40
41 1 love seeing changes to our town, from Hillsborough BBQ to the new UNC Hospital. But this
42 warehouse development is a poor fit. It's out of character with the rest of the district, has the
43 potential to damage a significant watershed, and will absolutely increase flooding in the local
44 neighborhood. But the poorest fit of all is the proximity of the development's main exit to a
45 church, preschool and cemetery.
46
47 Let's consider Orange County's plan to guide growth and development: the Orange County
48 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The Plan addresses issues ranging from land use to economic
49 development, to housing, to public facilities, to environmental protection and beyond. As stated
50 in the Plan, an underlying theme is the County's vision of becoming a more sustainable
51 community. To encourage desirable economic development, the Plan set aside 2,450 acres of
8
1 land in 3 areas along 1-85 and 1-40 known as the Buckhorn, Hillsborough, and Eno River
2 Districts.
3
4 The Hillsborough district, all 724 acres of it, is well on its way to completion. Much of this district
5 has already been built and consists of a hospital, a community college, and compact residential
6 housing. According to the Plan, the remaining 200 acres "will require design solutions to buffer
7 neighborhoods from future development." That's what the Plan says! But the RTLP project
8 would cover 65% of this land with 6-story buildings and parking lots. A small part of the
9 remaining 35% will be ornamental trees and bushes as well as some retention ponds. But the
10 developer wants to use the biggest portion remaining--two creeks and their corresponding
11 floodplains--as "buffer" too.
12
13 According to the Eno River Association, this warehouse complex would be built on a critical
14 conservation corridor connecting the Eno watershed with the New Hope watershed. They
15 understand that the site plan does not go far enough to protect water quality.
16
17 Just last year, residents temporarily lost the use of Davis Road when a 50-foot sinkhole split the
18 road, just downhill of the proposed access point. A 7-foot high culvert was installed and the road
19 re-paved several months later while the residents used Orange Grove Road instead of Old
20 NC86. If you examine the topography of this area, the parcels in question sit higher than Davis
21 Road. And we all know that water runs downhill - especially on pavement. What's the design
22 solution for this problem?
23
24 Finally, across the street from this warehouse complex are a church, a preschool and a historic
25 African American cemetery. Diesel exhaust, vibrating engines and squealing brakes are
26 obviously a poor fit. What's the design solution for this problem? Bushes? A few trees? And if
27 Davis Road needs to be widened to manage 18-wheelers trying to exit from the warehouse
28 complex onto this country road, how much easement is available by the cemetery to allow for
29 more road?
30
31 1 know you'll do the right thing and require the developer to come up with better design
32 Solutions to make this a better fit. Thank you for your time and consideration.
33
34 William Mitchell read the following remarks:
35 I'm part of Save Hillsborough. I live at 310 Davis Rd and appreciate the commissioners giving
36 me a few minutes to express my concerns about the proposed RTLP project—and specifically
37 to speak about potential traffic safety issues that we feel have not been adequately addressed. 1
38 will focus on one particularly hazardous situation that will likely arise if this development is
39 approved.
40 As you're probably aware, the plan originally proposed by the developer's traffic
41 engineer was to route trucks exiting from the warehouses directly north to Interstate 40
42 by means of the existing service road adjacent to the 1-40 off ramp. When that plan was
43 rejected by NCDOT, a revised proposal re-routed the exiting traffic to Davis Road, at a
44 spot 1,000 feet from its T-intersection with Old NC Hwy. 86. Trucks would turn out of this
45 Davis Road access point to exit left from the warehouse complex--make another left
46 onto Old NC Hwy. 86--and then make their way to the Interstates (1-40 and 1-85).
47 The NCDOT recommends that, based on the developer's traffic impact analysis, a traffic
48 signal would be installed at Davis and Old 86 in order to manage the large volume of
49 truck and vehicular traffic. What could go wrong?
50 Members of our community who live along this stretch of road can tell you from first-
51 hand observation: there's a blind curve at Jedi Way, which meets Davis Rd. just a little
9
1 over 600 feet from the proposed RTLP exit. It is part of our everyday experience to see
2 drivers coming around that turn from further out in the county, often driving at a speed of
3 55 miles per hour or more until they get closer to the "rural buffer." Within the past year,
4 one driver flipped a car while navigating this turn at Jedi Way.
5 Try to visualize this stretch of road for a moment: If the volume of truck traffic (including
6 18 wheelers) exiting RTLP onto Davis Rd. is anywhere close to the developer's
7 estimate--it's easy to believe that the left-turning RTLP truck traffic--coming out onto
8 Davis Rd.--would result in a long queue of residents' vehicles stopped behind those
9 trucks that are turning--and/or waiting for the light to change at Old 86.
10 That back-up might be a minor inconvenience to eastbound drivers getting held up in
11 that section of Davis Rd., but it could be deadly if the line of cars gets backed up far
12 enough—particularly for an unsuspecting driver coming around the blind curve in
13 question—or for someone who is unfortunate enough to be the last car in held-up traffic.
14 We think it is important for you to understand that those of us who live along this stretch
15 of road are not concerned simply about traffic congestion—or the obvious inconvenience
16 it will cause us—we're also concerned about our neighbors who live further out in the
17 county, and those beyond the immediate impact area as well: people driving into
18 Hillsborough whose lives may be endangered as they travel this road on a daily basis, to
19 jobs, schools, church, the pre school, and elsewhere.
20 • This is only one of a host of safety concerns: in our view, there would be a similar "line-
21 ofsight" issue—and risk of rear-end collisions--for drivers traveling north on Old 86 near
22 the proposed 86/Davis Rd traffic signal--because of the two turns that interrupt their
23 sightline shortly before they reach that light.
24 • If you should drive out here to see for yourself what we are talking about, please keep in
25 mind that Davis Rd. traffic volume is currently way down, compared with pre-pandemic
26 levels—as a result of schools, offices, and numerous businesses being closed.
27
28 For these reasons, we urge you to say no to the proposed Research Triangle Logistics Park.
29
30 Maryanne Ross read the following comments:
31 I'm with Save Hillsborough and have concerns about RTLP.
32
33 The 2030 Comprehensive Plan is a good-faith effort to bring our county into the 21 st century.
34 It's a Plan that required careful thought and planning about economic development and our
35 needs. Developers are able to use this document along with the UDO to guide them. They know
36 we have land available that is zoned for growth. But are they selling us something we want to
37 buy? Or just offering something they want to sell.
38
39 The Plan creates a district to be a new tax base to the city and county. The zoning helps us get
40 just what we need for that growth. Some developers want a quick return on their dollar. Other
41 developers take pride in finding the right fit for the community. If this developer is the right fit for
42 us, they need to step up and show us that they can be trusted. The developer can start by
43 showing us where their money is coming from. Who's backing the development and for how
44 much? A capital investor will do their due diligence requiring a Proforma and an ROI (Return on
45 Investment) before they hand over money. If they have a financial investor lined up already, the
46 developer should be willing to provide those documents proving their good faith. The developer
47 has only invested money in a traffic analysis and a few architectural drawings. They haven't
48 purchased any land --just `options to purchase' property from the landowners. The developer
49 isn't investing their money on infrastructure. The town and county are expected to get water and
50 sewer to the site, a site that shows zero occupants on the application. How can the city
10
1 calculate the cost to upgrade the infrastructure without the developer's projections? The
2 developer isn't investing their money on roads. The town, county and state will be expected to
3 invest our tax dollars on road infrastructure as 18-wheelers tear up roads not designed for them.
4 And the Planning Board's contention that Davis is a `connector road' doesn't mean it's designed
5 to handle that volume of traffic proposed by the developer.
6
7 It seems the developer's contribution is promised improvements on the tax base through
8 employment. Has the developer provided documentation to prove this? What does '4500 global
9 jobs' actually mean? Similar developments have employed less than 10% of that. Is a
10 warehouse the best use of that space in order to increase tax revenue? The capital investors
11 may not care how much tax revenue the development brings but we do. Speaking of investors,
12 the developer should be able to show us how they will make money. Who's lined up to lease
13 space? A capital investor would expect assurances like this before they agree to invest. Why
14 shouldn't we?
15
16 And if the developer is so eager to start building why haven't they provided a construction
17 schedule as required for zoning a Master Plan? Do they have a history of incomplete
18 construction development in another state? How many projects have they completed in a
19 reasonable amount of time besides constructing their own offices in Kentucky? They should be
20 proud to provide details of their successes. Don't they want us to have faith in their intention to
21 complete this project?
22
23 When a developer has so little skin in the game, their intent may be to do as little as possible
24 with their money while compelling the town or county to invest taxpayers money to improve the
25 infrastructure with false promises of an increased tax base. The developer can go a long way
26 towards good faith by answering these questions.
27
28 Ellen Mayer said she lives within 1,000 feet from this projected development. She said
29 she supports development, but not this project. She said she is opposed for many of the
30 previously stated reasons. She invited the Commissioners to visit her property.
31
32 Bob Bundschuh said he understands the BOCC has not received the full packet of
33 information, but he has great concerns with this project. He said traffic problems are being
34 underestimated, and it will be a big issue. He said the Planning Department staff has even
35 acknowledged this. He said the neighborhood is not opposed to development, but there must
36 be a better plan than the one that has been proposed. He echoed several previously mentioned
37 concerns.
38
39 Christine Poole read the following comments:
40 I'm with Save Hillsborough. Many of you who have travelled on Old NC Hwy. 86, not far off
41 Interstate 40, know the beauty of the thick forests and rolling hills along this road. You
42 understand why it is a designated Scenic Byway. Starting at Exit 261 from 1-40, you are now on
43 a historic road less known as "The ScotsWelsh Heritage Byway" dating back to the 1700's. Prior
44 to its being mentioned in historical records, this was a Native American trail and was also used
45 by early Settlers.
46
47 The following is taken from the NC DOT description of this road: "This Byway travels through
48 Orange County along trade roads used by American Indians and early backcountry pioneers.
49 The king of England gave much of the land along this byway to 18th century Scotch-Welsh
50 settlers. Generation after generation has lived and farmed this land, each leaving its own mark,
11
1 making this byway a unique journey through American history. Old N.C. 86 appears on colonial
2 maps dating back to 1770."
3
4 Per NC DOT descriptions of Scenic Byways.... "Motorists will see little or no development along
5 the routes, enhancing the natural character and quality of the byways. They will experience
6 North Carolina's history, geography, and culture, while also raising awareness for the protection
7 and preservation of these treasures."
8
9 Please limit the traffic using this historical route and preserve an important landmark. I am for
10 Economic Development, but any development near this area should be mindful of what is
11 harmonious with the surrounding land and rural neighborhoods.
12
13 When people drive east on 1-40 from Alamance County, this exit is the first impression they get
14 of Hillsborough. Do we want the Gateway to Orange County and Hillsborough represented by
15 vast Warehouses full of truck bays?
16
17 Keith Poole read the following comments:
18 1 am part of Save Hillsborough. I have serious questions concerning RTLP.
19
20 In this part of the county (including south Hillsborough), we are very fortunate to have a Hospital
21 nearby. Davis Road and Old NC Hwy. 86 provide our access to this Hospital and also to
22 Interstate 40. ...So far, so good.
23
24 Now picture people in passenger cars on 1-40 westbound coming from Chapel Hill and being
25 stuck in slower traffic on a busy day. They need access to our local hospital. The exit is not far,
26 but once you get to it there is a line of 18-wheelers backed up on the off-ramp. The trucks are
27 backed up because they can't make a left to go to their warehouse destination. There is no
28 traffic light.
29
30 The car drivers can't make a right toward the hospital, because they can't see around the left-
31 turning stopped traffic (mainly tall trucks). Many cars and trucks that are now released from the
32 two traffic lights situated at Davis Road and the Eastbound exit ramp are barreling towards
33 them. They can't even get into the free-flowing right turn lane on Old 86 because the exit ramp
34 is narrow leading to this lane.
35
36 There is no way for these car drivers to drive around to pass the backed-up trucks; if one did try,
37 they are putting their life and others in danger.
38
39 You can SEE the hospital campus.... You just can't get to it in a timely manner! Please vote no
40 on the RTLP project. I am for economic development in our area. I am just asking that we put in
41 smart development, with all of the traffic angles thoroughly investigated beforehand.
42
43 Jackson Poole read the following comments:
44 I'm part of Save Hillsborough and also have concerns with the RTLP as proposed.
45
46 The steps I had to take to speak at this meeting tonight were quite involved. To share Kaila
47 Mitchell's experience, from the time she looked up how to join this meeting on Orange County's
48 website on Aug 23rd to the time she finally received the zoom link to join, the process took 6
49 different steps over 8 days while submitting her information to 3 different places. I share this, not
50 to blame the County Commissioners for the process, but to make you aware of the difficulty to
51 make our voices heard today.
12
1
2 1 also want us to recognize the privilege that those of us on this call have, including access to
3 technology and access to information. We continue to encounter residents that know little to
4 nothing about the proposed RTLP project and how it will impact their lives. There are residents
5 that aren't aware that they can participate by phone on this zoom call. And people can't call in if
6 they don't know how to get this information in the first place.
7
8 We have been in a state of emergency since March 13th because of Covid-19. Just last month
9 you all, the Board of County Commissioners, extended the state of emergency through October
10 31st. Let us all recognize the significance of that. Shannon Casell, Special Counsel to NC
11 Attorney General Josh Stein, wrote an advisory letter talking about local public bodies
12 conducting open meetings electronically. She recognized that electronic meetings are
13 reasonable for local governing bodies. She did, however state, and I quote, "When meetings of
14 public bodies are not necessary for immediate ongoing governance, I would encourage
15 postponing that meeting until a future time when the meeting can occur in-person". Does a
16 decision on the RTLP project meet this standard?
17
18 Because we are in a Pandemic and in a state of emergency, I urge you to please approach this
19 matter with social responsibility in mind. Please postpone a decision on rezoning until there is a
20 process where ALL voices can be heard, not just those that hold privilege.
21
22 Bryan Brice said the BOCC has an important decision to make about this project, and he
23 wonders if the project is worth the damage that it may cause by proceeding. He said he is
24 concerned about the environment, and wonders if all laws and ordinances will be complied with.
25 He encouraged a moratorium on the project until all environmental issues have been fleshed
26 out, and the applicant can show all permits have been properly obtained.
27
28 Bill Ward voiced concern about the long-term environmental impacts of climate change.
29 He says Orange County has the ability to make a real impact on environmental issues, and thus
30 improve public health.
31
32 Matt Mitchell made the following comments:
33 I'm part of Save Hillsborough. I'm in favor of developing this area, but have serious concerns
34 with the RTLP as proposed.
35
36 Many members of our group were in favor of the Settler's Point project. It proposed a mixture of
37 retail and business development, much of which would have benefitted the surrounding
38 neighborhoods, and would likely have increased property values for many homeowners in the
39 surrounding area. However, RTLP, as it currently stands, presents a very different situation. The
40 size of the development is more than double that of Settlers Point and the buffers are smaller to
41 accommodate such large structures. And most importantly, Settlers Point did not include the
42 rezoning of a residential property to allow for massive amounts of vehicular and truck traffic.
43
44 The impact of this development on local homeowners is a topic that comes up consistently, and
45 mitigation is in no way mentioned by the developer or the county. When the question came up
46 at the last planning board meeting, the developer suggested that this development might
47 actually increase property values. However, it's hard to make that case when they're planning to
48 install their primary access point 30 feet from a resident's property line. Furthermore, the
49 planned buffers are minimal and insufficient to protect the surrounding properties from the 60
50 foot tall monolithic buildings.
51
13
1 The county goes to great economic lengths to attract development and business, but there is no
2 mechanism to mitigate material monetary impacts on the use and enjoyment of one's home
3 when a high-density economic development is inserted into one's rural residential community.
4 As it stands, it seems as though these potential financial impacts will simply be considered
5 collateral damage. What can we do to ensure that these potential financial impacts will be
6 mitigated for the dozens of surrounding residents?
7
8 And speaking of collateral damage --what will be the impact on the Church and Pre-school
9 across the street on Davis Rd? What will happen when parents pull their kids out of the
10 preschool because their driveway is potentially blocked by a long queue of diesel trucks? The
11 Church relies on the revenue from the preschool to stay afloat; so, will the church and preschool
12 also end up as collateral damage? I urge the commissioners to seriously consider these impacts
13 when making their decision, and to strongly consider eliminating the use of the Davis Road
14 parcel as part of this development.
15
16 Additional Issue to consider: NOISE: Orange county Noise ordinances state: "It shall be
17 unlawful for any person to make, create, permit, or to continue any source of unreasonably loud
18 and disturbing noise in Orange County." Orange County doesn't allow noises above 60 decibels
19 during the day and 50 decibels in the evenings at residential properties. The noise generated
20 from a diesel truck is between 96 and 104 decibels, 42 times louder than the ordinance allows in
21 the evenings. Additionally, diesel trucks typically use engine braking that creates an extremely
22 loud machine gun-like noise, up to 105 decibels. There are residents whose property is as close
23 as 30 feet to the proposed driveway. (This distance is taken from the Orange County GIS). With
24 only 5 trucks in the queue, the resident immediately beside the proposed access point on Davis
25 Rd will experience 81 decibels of sustained noise, the equivalent of standing next to a lawn
26 mower 24/7, and loud enough to cause hearing damage at 2 hours of exposure according to the
27 CDC. Orange County also specifically prohibits the use of lawn equipment after 9 pm. How can
28 they possibly allow diesel trucks operating overnight, creating noise more than 5 times louder
29 than gas powered lawn equipment? It seems impossible that this development could comply
30 with Orange County noise ordinances, and yet the developer has not provided a noise analysis.
31 The county must act to prevent the potentially massive disruptions to the sleep, hearing, and
32 peace of the dozens of residents, church, and preschool children in the surrounding area.
33 Please do not allow the rezoning of the Davis Rd parcel. The use of this land as the primary
34 access point will cause irreparable harm to the surrounding residents. It may take some effort
35 and/or creativity, but the developer can and should find alternative methods of dealing with their
36 traffic load. NCDOT has already laid out potential improvements that could be made to allow for
37 a full movement interchange at Service Rd and Old 86, but the developer has declined to
38 pursue this path. Rather, it seems they have chosen the path of least resistance and lowest cost
39 to them, at the great expense of the surrounding residence and community.
40
41 Jessie Kaufmann said the Orange County Schools Board of Education released a letter
42 imploring that Broadband Internet be provided. She asked the BOCC to consider using the
43 proposed land for broadband. She asked if the BOCC would wait to make a decision about the
44 land until after the presidential election. She said she is not in favor of the proposed project.
45
46 Justin Mitchell said he owns several acres of land on Davis Road, adjacent to his family,
47 where he one day hopes to live. He said the appeal of that dream will disappear if this
48 proposed project goes ahead. He said water runoff is of great concern, as there is already
49 excessive run off in this area, and the proposed project would only increase this problem.
50
14
1 Bill Aucoin thanked the Board for the opportunity to speak tonight. He said his family
2 has lived in Becketts Ridge for the past 20 years, and they are excited about potential
3 development and is frustrated by the community speaking out against it. He said it is just a
4 smear campaign and he finds it very frustrating. He said he is not alone in his support of this
5 project, but those voices are not being heard. He said Orange County is full of protected green
6 space, and there are not many options for development like this project. He said he supports
7 the project, and the jobs and revenue that it will bring.
8
9 Daniel Yarborough said he concurs with the previously mentioned concerns, and he is
10 against this project. He said the enormous amount of traffic is of particular concern.
11
12 Chair Rich said the BOCC will review this project at its September 15t" meeting, and will
13 have a public hearing where the public will be welcome to speak.
14
15 b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
16 (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda
17 below.)
18
19 3. Announcements, Petitions and Comments by Board Members
20 Commissioner Bedford said she attended meetings for the Department of Social
21 Services, GoTriangle Advisory Board, JCPC, and the Visitors Bureau Board. She said the
22 Visitors Bureau's budget will be redone. She said she greatly appreciated County staff and
23 Chair Rich for their time.
24 Commissioner Greene said she received a question from a resident about voting in the
25 context of eviction within 25 days of the election. She said Representative Meyer said this
26 would not be a problem, as long as one still resides in North Carolina. She asked if staff could
27 follow up on this information, and publicize the information.
28 Commissioner Greene noted the sad passing of writer Randall Kenan.
29 Commissioner McKee petitioned for staff to bring to the Board a report about the
30 measures to provide countywide broadband, and to identify funding of up to $30 million dollars
31 that can be moved to afford this effort. He asked if this information could be provided by
32 October 31, 2020.
33 Commissioner Price said the 2020 Census will end on September 30, which is a month
34 early. She thanked staff for helping get the word out about the Census, and encouraged people
35 to fill out the form.
36 Commissioner Dorosin said he appreciated Commissioner Price bringing up the census.
37 He said a legal challenge has been made against the Trump administration for terminating the
38 census process early. He said he shared Durham Tech's new Equity, Inclusivity and Diversity
39 Action Plan, which is a powerful document. He commended the new Durham Tech president
40 and the Durham Tech Board for its creation. He said there was a hearing in the ongoing
41 Leandro case regarding school funding, and Judge David Lee said he was going to sign a new
42 order first year implementation plan, specifically targeting funds for at risk students, special
43 education, and limited English proficiency learners. He said funding for these students is
44 critical, especially during COVID.
45 Commissioner Marcoplos said he attended Orange County Transit Planning meetings
46 over the summer. He said there is an upcoming Community Engagement campaign, which will
47 be really interesting. He said he has also been involved with GoTriangle. He said commuter
48 rail will not be coming to Hillsborough, due to ridership and cost issues. He said negotiations
49 continue between NC Railroad and GoTriangle. He said there are new CEOs at North Carolina
50 Railroad and GoTriangle. He said he is optimistic that commuter rail will exist between Durham
51 and Raleigh.
15
1 Commissioner Marcoplos said the Orange County Climate Council has continued to
2 meet over the summer, and will soon be announcing a one-year public event, which will occur in
3 October. He said it has been a really good year, and it is inspiring to hear from people all
4 across the County.
5 Chair Rich said it has been a really busy summer, especially surrounding the opening of
6 the University of North Carolina (UNC).
7 Chair Rich said the North Carolina Housing Crescent Award went to Habitat. She said
8 this was the first time Habitat has received an award for senior housing, and it used some of the
9 2016 BOCC bond money.
10 Chair Rich said she sent the Board a copy of a draft letter to Attorney General (AG) Josh
11 Stein in support of the postage service. She thanked Commissioner Dorosin for adding three
12 paragraphs to the letter. She said she would like to send this to AG Stein, with the Board's
13 approval, along with the NC Senators and Congressmen.
14 Chair Rich petitioned the Board to name the Whitted Meeting Room after Donna Baker.
15 She said she received the naming policy from the Manager's Office, and this naming fits into
16 that policy. She said former Commissioners have asked that, if this naming goes forward, the
17 event be held live so that all can attend.
18 Chair Rich said she sent a resolution, for the Board to consider at its next meeting, to
19 decriminalize marijuana.
20
21 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
22
23 a. Resolution Honoring and Remembering Donna Baker, Clerk to the Orange County
24 Board of Commissioners
25 The Board considered voting to adopt a resolution honoring and remembering Donna
26 Baker, Clerk to the Orange County Board of Commissioners.
27
28 BACKGROUND:
29 On July 31, 2020, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners Donna Baker passed away
30 unexpectedly at her home in Orange County. Ms. Baker had served as Clerk to the Board for 18
31 years since her appointment in June 2002.
32
33 Donna graduated from high school in Georgetown, SC and subsequently from Clemson
34 University with Honors in 1978. Ms. Baker built a lifelong career of community service from her
35 early work with parents and children at The Ronald McDonald House of Chapel Hill, to positions
36 with Georgetown, SC County Government, and her most recent position as Clerk to the Orange
37 County Board of County Commissioners.
38
39 Donna was blessed with two children — Jeremy and CeCe—who are now older with families of
40 their own. She was an accomplished learner and reader, and was also a true lover of animals,
41 including adopting several rescue pets over time.
42
43 While she greatly loved Orange County, Donna also held a special place in her heart for the
44 South Carolina beaches, especially the Georgetown/Pawley's Island area. She spent many
45 years and vacations there enjoying the sea and surf.
46
47 Commissioner Dorosin read the resolution:
48
49 RES-2020-043
50
51 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
16
1 RESOLUTION HONORING AND REMEMBERING DONNA BAKER,
2 CLERK TO THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
3
4 WHEREAS, Donna Baker, Clerk to the Orange County Board of Commissioners, passed away
5 unexpectedly at her home in Orange County on July 31, 2020; and
6
7 WHEREAS, Donna Baker was appointed Clerk to the Board in June 2002 and served as Clerk
8 for over 18 years; and
9
10 WHEREAS, after graduating from Clemson University with Honors in 1978, Ms. Baker built a
11 lifelong career of community service from her early work with parents and children in need at
12 The Ronald McDonald House of Chapel Hill, to positions with Georgetown, SC County
13 Government, and to Clerk to the Orange County Board of Commissioners; and
14
15 WHEREAS, Donna was blessed with and continually expressed love and support for her two
16 children —Jeremy and CeCe; and
17
18 WHEREAS, Donna loved Orange County and at the same time claimed a lifetime fondness for
19 Pawley's Island, South Carolina where she spent many years and vacations on the beach
20 enjoying the beautiful sunshine and relaxation of the South Carolina sea, sound, and surf; and
21
22 WHEREAS, Donna served the residents of Orange County and a total of 18 different members
23 of the Board of Commissioners as a dependable, smart, dedicated, steadfast, and calming
24 spirit; and
25
26 WHEREAS, former County Commissioner Moses Carey commented, "She was so good to all of
27 us. She treated County residents with special warmth when they came to her for help. She was
28 a real friend and dedicated public servant, especially to the Board of Orange County
29 Commissioners;" and
30
31 WHEREAS, former County Commissioner and North Carolina State Senator Valerie Foushee
32 shared, "I knew Donna for 40 years, and she remained the same person for that entire period of
33 time: bright, respectful and caring. She was the most trusted, respected county employee during
34 my time as a commissioner, and I suspect to the end. She made every commissioner feel like
35 he/she was her favorite. That's a gift;"
36
37 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that we, the Orange County Board of Commissioners,
38 on behalf of County residents, officials and employees, honor and remember Donna Baker for
39 her spirit, her energy and her innumerable contributions to Orange County and beyond; and
40
41 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board extends its condolences to Jeremy, CeCe, and all
42 of Donna's family and friends; and
43
44 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Orange County Board of County Commissioners
45 expresses its sincerest appreciation and commends Donna Baker for her lifetime of service.
46
47 This the 1st day of September, 2020.
48
49 Penny Rich, Chair
50 Orange County Board of Commissioners
51
17
1 A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Price to
2 adopt the Resolution, and authorize the Board Chair to sign the Resolution.
3
4 Chair Rich asked Commissioners to accept a roll call form of voting and called names
5 accordingly.
6
7 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
8
9 b. Resolution of Recognition for Judicial District 15-B Chief District Court Judge
10 Joseph Moody Buckner Upon His Retirement
11 The Board considered voting to adopt a resolution recognizing Judicial District 15-B
12 Chief District Court Judge Joseph Moody Buckner upon his retirement.
13
14 BACKGROUND:
15 Judge Joseph M. Buckner was elected as a district court judge in 1994 and was re-elected by
16 the residents of Orange and Chatham counties six more times after his initial election. In 1996,
17 the Chief Justice of the North Carolina Supreme Court appointed Judge Buckner as the Chief
18 District Court Judge in Orange and Chatham counties and he has served in that capacity since
19 that time.
20
21 Judge Buckner also previously served as President of the N.C. Conference of District Court
22 Judges and Chief District Court Judges as well as serving as a member of the N.C. Governor's
23 Crime Commission and the Commission on Juvenile Crime.
24
25 Judge Buckner has served the residents of Orange and Chatham County tirelessly and with
26 distinction for close to 30 years as a district court judge, and announced over the summer his
27 retirement.
28
29 The following resolution was presented by BOCC Chair Penny Rich at Judge Buckner's
30 retirement event in late July 2020, and staff requests that the Board formally adopt the
31 resolution recognizing Judge Buckner for his service.
32
33 Chair Rich read the resolution:
34
35 RES-2020-044
36
37 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
38 RESOLUTION OF RECOGNITION FOR JUDICIAL DISTRICT 15-B
39 CHIEF DISTRICT COURT JUDGE JOSEPH MOODY BUCKNER
40 UPON HIS RETIREMENT
41
42 WHEREAS, Judge Joseph M. Buckner has served as the Chief District Court Judge in Orange
43 and Chatham counties since 1996, when he was appointed by the Chief Justice of the North
44 Carolina Supreme Court; and
45
46 WHEREAS, Judge Buckner has served as a district court judge since his election in 1994 and
47 has been re-elected by the residents of Orange and Chatham counties six more times; and
48
49 WHERAS, Judge Buckner previously served as the President of the N.C.
50 Conference of District Court Judges and Chief District Court Judges as well serving as a
51 member of the N.C. Governor's Crime Commission and the Commission on Juvenile Crime; and
18
1
2 WHEREAS, Judge Buckner supervises the administration of more than 50,000 cases per year,
3 in addition to supervising the magistrates and the trial and judicial assignments for all the court
4 sessions; and
5
6 WHEREAS, Judge Buckner oversees the Clerk of Superior Court in the discharge of duties,
7 administers the drawing of jury panels, the setting of specialized court sessions including
8 criminal dockets, domestic issues, traffic, family violence, child support, mental health and
9 substance use commitments, juvenile delinquency, child abuse and neglect and felony pleas;
10 and
11
12 WHEREAS, Judge Buckner has been a champion for individuals with mental health and
13 substance use disorders in our community, and started North Carolina's first mental health
14 diversion court (Community Resource Court) over twenty years ago, with CRC remaining a
15 model for the state; and
16
17 WHEREAS, Judge Buckner started and has strongly supported the District's first
18 drug treatment courts: Recovery Court and Family Treatment Court; and
19
20 WHEREAS, Judge Buckner created and sought funding for a Juvenile Court School Liaison
21 position that operates to ensure communication and services by the school system forjustice-
22 involved youth; and
23
24 WHEREAS, Judge Buckner has been a champion for individuals with mental health and
25 substance use disorders in our community, and started North Carolina's first mental health
26 diversion court (Community Resource Court) over twenty years ago, with CRC remaining a
27 model for the state; and
28
29 WHEREAS, Judge Buckner started and has strongly supported the District's first
30 drug treatment courts: Recovery Court and Family Treatment Court; and
31
32 WHEREAS, Judge Buckner created and sought funding for a Juvenile Court School Liaison
33 position that operates to ensure communication and services by the school system for justice-
34 involved youth; and
35
36 WHEREAS, Judge Buckner started weekly Child Planning Conferences for children and families
37 involved in abuse and neglect cases, which has improved outcomes by providing early
38 interventions; and
39
40 WHEREAS, Judge Buckner has initiated countless improvements, innovations and
41 reorganizations in the court system that have resulted in an increase in efficiency and just
42 resolutions; and
43
44 WHEREAS, in 2004, Judge Buckner commissioned a set of historical murals by
45 Michael Brown that grace the main courtroom in the Orange County Courthouse showcasing
46 Orange County history and informing and delighting visitors and court attendees; and
47
48 WHEREAS, Judge Buckner has served the residents of Orange and Chatham
49 County tirelessly and with distinction for close to 30 years as a district court judge, and his
50 compassion and experience have touched the lives of so many individuals that have appeared
19
1 before him and he has influenced and trained numerous people that work beside him in the
2 justice system;
3
4 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Orange County Board of
5 Commissioners expresses its congratulations upon Judge Buckner's retirement and extends its
6 deepest appreciation, gratitude and respect for his leadership and service throughout the court
7 system for the residents of Orange County.
8
9 This the 1st day of September 2020.
10
11
12 Penny Rich, Chair
13 Orange County Board of Commissioners
14
15 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Price to
16 adopt the Resolution, and authorize the Board Chair to sign the Resolution.
17
18 Chair Rich asked Commissioners to accept a roll call form of voting and called names
19 accordingly.
20
21 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
22
23 c. Proclamation Recognizing the Services and Contributions of Retiring Major David
24 Lewis Caldwell, Jr.
25 The Board considered voting to approve a proclamation recognizing Retiring Major
26 David Lewis Caldwell, Jr. for his services to Orange County.
27 Sheriff Blackwood, in a pre-recorded video, made the following presentation.
28
29 BACKGROUND:
30 David Caldwell has been a lifelong resident of Orange County, a champion for environmental
31 justice, a career member of the Orange County Sheriff's Office and a respected leader
32 throughout the Orange County community.
33
34 David Caldwell was one of the founding members and served on the Rogers-Eubanks
35 Neighborhood Association (RENA) as a Project Director.
36
37 David Caldwell retired from the Orange County Sheriff's Office, for a second time, in 2020 as a
38 Major of Support Services and Community Outreach.
39
40 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
41 PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE SERVICES AND CONTRIBUTIONS
42 OF RETIRING MAJOR DAVID LEWIS CALDWELL, JR. OF THE
43 ORANGE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
44
45 WHEREAS, Major David Lewis Caldwell, Jr. is retiring from the Orange County Sheriff's Office;
46 and
47
48 WHEREAS, David Caldwell grew up in the Rogers Road area on the outskirts of Chapel Hill;
49 and
50
20
1 WHEREAS, after graduating from Chapel Hill High School, Major Caldwell graduated from
2 North Carolina Central University on a basketball scholarship with a degree in Recreation
3 Administration; and
4
5 WHEREAS, Major Caldwell proudly served the United States Army as a Military Police Officer,
6 a Town of Carrboro as a Police Officer, and the residents of Orange County as a deputy sheriff
7 for a combined 40 years; and
8
9 WHEREAS, in 2008, David Caldwell retired the Orange County Sheriff's Office and worked with
10 Orange County Government supporting community centers focusing on minority and rural
11 outreach; and
12
13 WHEREAS, David returned to work for the Orange County Sheriff in 2016 as a Major in Support
14 Services, Community Outreach, retiring again in 2020; and
15
16 WHEREAS, in carrying out his law enforcement duties, Major Caldwell jeopardized his own
17 safety and well-being to protect the lives and property of others and represents the finest
18 example of dedication to public service; and
19
20 WHEREAS, Major Caldwell has, in his personal capacity, served as a leader in his community
21 fighting for the rights of those not in a position to fight for themselves; and
22
23 WHEREAS, David Caldwell was one of the founding members and served with the Rogers-
24 Eubanks Neighborhood Association (RENA) as a Project Director; and
25
26 WHEREAS, Major Caldwell has served as a mentor to the youth of the community by giving of
27 his time and money to develop and foster youth athletic, academic, and afterschool programs to
28 enhance their opportunities in life; and
29
30 WHEREAS, Major Caldwell has worked tirelessly in partnership with the Orange County
31 Department on Aging, S.A.L.T., and countless other volunteer organizations to make certain the
32 lives of the senior population of Orange County were afforded the opportunity to age in place
33 with dignity, respect, and care; and
34
35 WHEREAS, David Caldwell has been a lifelong resident of Orange County, a champion for
36 environmental justice, a career member of the Orange County Sheriff's Office and a respected
37 leader throughout the Orange County community;
38
39 NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Orange County Board of Commissioners, do hereby recognize the
40 contributions of Major David Lewis Caldwell, Jr. for his unwavering service to the people of
41 Orange County, and express our heartfelt appreciation and gratitude for his numerous and
42 invaluable contributions to the improvement and well-being of the Orange County community.
43
44 FURTHERMORE, the Orange County Board of Commissioners determines Major David Lewis
45 Caldwell, Jr. is authorized to possess, and presents him with, the side-arm he carried while
46 serving as a member of the Orange County Sheriff's Office.
47
48 AND FURTHERMORE, the Board profoundly thanks Major David Lewis Caldwell, Jr. for his
49 uncompromising commitment, dedication, and distinguished service to humanity and to the
50 residents of Orange County and wishes him a most enjoyable new journey in the next chapter of
51 his life.
21
1
2 This 1" day of September, 2020.
3
4 Penny Rich, Chair
5 Orange County Board of Commissioners
6
7 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Dorosin
8 to approve the Proclamation, authorize the transfer to Major Caldwell of his service side-arm,
9 and authorize the Board Chair to sign the Proclamation.
10
11 Chair Rich asked Commissioners to accept a roll call form of voting and called names
12 accordingly.
13
14 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
15
16 Sheriff Blackwood, in a pre-recorded video, presented Major David Caldwell with his
17 service weapon.
18 Major David Caldwell said it has been his pleasure to serve Orange County, and he will
19 continue to serve this county in the years to come. He thanked all those with whom he served.
20
21 d. Resolution Celebrating the 55th Anniversary of the Voting Rights Act of 1965
22
23 The Board considered voting to adopt a resolution celebrating the 551" Anniversary of the
24 passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which occurred on August 6, 1965.
25 Annette Moore, Human Rights and Relations Director, made the following presentation:
26
27 BACKGROUND:
28 On August 6, 1965, President Lyndon Johnson signed the Voters Rights Act of 1965,
29 considered the most crucial piece of legislation of the Civil Rights movement. A bi-partisan
30 Congress has strengthened the Act by amending and reauthorizing the provisions of the Voting
31 Rights Act five-time throughout the years.
32
33 Congress enacted the Voting Rights Act to guarantee rights granted under the 141" and 15`"
34 Amendments of the United States Constitution so that no one, including state, federal, or local
35 government, could stop citizens from registering to vote or voting because of their race or
36 ethnicity. The Voting Rights Act contains numerous provisions for regulating elections laws.
37 Regulations in the Act: a) prohibited tests and other devices that were used to keep people from
38 voting; b) prohibitions against voting laws that would discriminate against a racial or ethnical
39 minority; and c) included a preclearance requirement that prevented specific jurisdictions from
40 making changes to their voting laws without prior approval from the U.S Attorney General of the
41 U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. There is also a provision specifically for ensuring
42 that jurisdictions having significant language minority population provide language access
43 services including providing bilingual ballots and other election materials.
44
45 In 2013, the United States Supreme Court in Shelby County v. Holder struck down Section 4 of
46 the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which contained the formula used to identify the state and local
47 governments that have to comply with the preclearance requirements. The Supreme Court,
48 while striking down the formula, left the preclearance requirement provision intact. Therefore,
49 none of the jurisdictions covered by the formula has to comply unless Congress enacts a new
50 formula to determine whom it covers.
51
22
1 The United States Department of Justice's data indicates that from 1982 to 2006, 750 Section 5
2 preclearance objections blocked approximately 2,400 discriminatory voting changes. Over half
3 blocked more than 400 cases with specific evidence of intentional discrimination. Section 5 also
4 deterred more than 205 voting changes were withdrawn after the Department of Justice
5 requested additional information. The Department of Justice brought 650 successful lawsuits
6 under Section 2 of the Voting Right Act in covered jurisdictions.
7
8 Since Shelby v. Holder, many states have adopted restrictive voting laws that impact
9 communities of color. These restrictions such as strict photo ID requirements, limitation on who
10 can provide assistance in polling places, the curbing on early voting days, and closing of polling
11 places has had the effect of suppressing the votes of people of color. Other measures include
12 purging of voter rolls and drawing election districts to dilute the power of and influence of people
13 of color.
14
15 RES-2020-051
16 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
17 RESOLUTION
18 Celebrating the 55t" Anniversary of the Voting Rights Act
19
20 WHEREAS, on February 26, 1869, the United States Congress passed the Fifteenth
21 Amendment to the United States Constitution and subsequently ratified the Amendment on
22 February 3, 1870, to grant African American men the right to vote; and
23
24 WHEREAS, African American males exercised the franchise and held political offices in many
25 states, particularly Southern states, throughout the 1880s; and
26
27 WHEREAS, in the 1890s, literacy tests, grandfather clauses and other devices to
28 disenfranchise African American men were written into the constitutions of former Confederate
29 states; and
30
31 WHEREAS, with the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment, African American women were
32 granted the right to vote along with white women; and
33
34 WHEREAS, African Americans who attempted to register to vote experienced harassment,
35 intimidation, economic reprisals, physical violence and murder, including by lynching; and
36
37 WHEREAS, African American men and women nevertheless sought to secure their right to vote
38 through such organizations as the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
39 and the National Urban League, as well as through the efforts of people such as A. Philip
40 Randolph, W. E. B. Dubois, Booker T. Washington, Fannie Lou Hamer, Ella Baker and Septima
41 Clark; and
42
43 WHEREAS, in the 196os, the widely broadcast irreprehensible violence against demonstrators
44 brought heightened attention to the issue of voting rights— including the murders of Chaney,
45 Goodman and Schwerner on June 21, 1964, and the attack on March 7, 1965, known as Bloody
46 Sunday; and
47
48 WHEREAS, on August 6, 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act, an
49 "act to enforce the fifteenth amendment to the Constitution," ninety-five years after it had been
50 ratified; and
51
23
1 WHEREAS, the Voting Rights Act outlawed literacy tests and provided for the appointment of
2 federal examiners with the power to register qualified citizens to vote in those jurisdictions
3 covered according to a formula provided by the statute; and
4
5 WHEREAS, Section 5 of the Act required covered jurisdictions to obtain preclearance from the
6 District Court for the District of Columbia or the United States Attorney General for any new
7 voting procedures and practices; and
8
9 WHEREAS, Section 2 of the Act, closely following the language of the 15th Amendment, applied
10 a nationwide prohibition on the denial or abridgement of the right to vote on account of race or
11 color; and
12
13 WHEREAS, by the end of 1965, a quarter of a million African Americans had registered as new
14 voters, and by the end of 1966, four of the thirteen southern states had less than fifty percent of
15 African Americans registered to vote; and
16
17 WHEREAS, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was extended in 1970, 1975 1982, and 2006, and
18 efforts currently are underway to restore certain provisions of the Voting Rights Act;
19
20 NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Orange County Board of Commissioners does
21 hereby support the passage of the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of 2020 and hereby direct
22 the Chair to have sent a copy of this Resolution and a letter to both North Carolina United
23 States Senators encouraging them to support the passage of the John R. Lewis Voting Rights
24 Act of 2020; and
25
26 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Orange County Board of Commissioners, on behalf of
27 the people of Orange County, does hereby commemorate the fifty-fifth anniversary of the
28 signing of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and in so doing, acknowledge the sacrifices made in
29 order to establish and maintain full and equal rights for all citizens of the United States.
30
31 This the Vt day of September, 2020.
32
33 Penny Rich, Chair
34 Orange County Board of Commissioners
35
36 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Greene to
37 approve the Resolution and authorize the Board Chair to sign the Proclamation.
38
39 Chair Rich asked Commissioners to accept a roll call form of voting and called names
40 accordingly.
41
42 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
43
44 e. Orange County Preparedness Month Proclamation
45 The Board considered voting to approve a proclamation declaring September 2020 as
46 "Orange County Preparedness Month".
47 Dinah Jeffries, Emergency Services Director, said Kirby Saunders, Emergency
48 Management Coordinator, is on parental leave
49 Sasha Godwin, Emergency Management Planner, was recognized
50 Sarah Pickhardt, Interim Emergency Management Coordinator, made the following
51 presentation.
24
1
2 BACKGROUND:
3 National Preparedness Month is recognized each September to promote family and community
4 disaster planning now and throughout the year. The theme of this year's National Preparedness
5 Month is "Disasters Don't Wait. Make your plan today."
6
7 North Carolina has experienced an unusually high volume of disasters this year, to include the
8 ongoing Coronavirus pandemic, tornadoes, earthquakes, and hurricanes. To date, Orange
9 County has experienced over 30 watches and warnings issued by the National Weather Service
10 for severe weather, flooding, and tornadic activity. The Orange County Emergency Operations
11 Center (EOC) has set records for activation length this year at well over 200 days. The EOC
12 remains activated to respond to the ongoing Coronavirus Pandemic as well as monitor for
13 potential threats from the 2020 hurricane season, which is predicted to be extremely active.
14
15 Sarah Pickhardt read the proclamation.
16
17 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
18 PROCLAMATION
19
20 Orange County Preparedness Month
21 September 2020
22
23 WHEREAS, it is critical for every community, business, family, and individual in Orange County
24 to be prepared for natural and man-made disasters, including tornadoes, flooding, and
25 hurricanes, as well as disease outbreaks like COVID-19; and
26
27 WHEREAS, Orange County has seen a high activity of severe weather during 2019, with the
28 National Weather Service issuing 23 Severe Thunderstorm Warnings, two Flash Flood
29 Warnings, one Flood Warning, and eight Tornado Warnings; and
30
31 WHEREAS, Orange County experienced an estimated $2.1 million in estimated damages from
32 severe weather in 2019; and
33
34 WHEREAS, in 2018, Hurricane Florence brought significant rainfall in September, followed by
35 Tropical Storm Michael in October, and both storms caused widespread power outages and
36 flooding, with Florence resulting in more than $26 million in damages while Michael exceeded
37 $500,000; and
38
39 WHEREAS, on March 13, 2020, the Chair of the Board of County Commissioners declared a
40 State of Emergency to coordinate the County's response and protective actions to address the
41 COVID-19 public health emergency and provide for the health, safety, and welfare of the
42 Orange County community; and
43
44 WHEREAS, community members can take a few simple steps— creating an emergency supply
45 kit, making a family disaster plan, and staying informed —to help make preparedness a personal
46 responsibility and improved health a priority in our community; and
47
48 WHEREAS, Orange County Emergency Services Emergency Management Division, along with
49 emergency managers throughout the nation, have collaborated to recognize September as
50 National Preparedness Month, and encourage Orange County community members to stay
51 informed and prepared;
25
1
2 NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Orange County Board of County Commissioners, do hereby
3 declare September 2020 as "Orange County Preparedness Month."
4
5 This the 1st Day of September 2020.
6
7 Penny Rich, Chair
8 Orange County Board of Commissioners
9
10 A motion was made by Commissioner Bedford, seconded by Commissioner Price to
11 approve the Proclamation and authorize the Board Chair to sign it.
12 Chair Rich asked Commissioners to accept a roll call form of voting and called names
13 accordingly.
14
15 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
16
17 f. Update on COVID-19 Response and Funding Allocations
18 The Board received an update on the County's response to the COVID-19 pandemic
19 with a focus on the use of supplemental State and Federal funding.
20
21 BACKGROUND:
22 Since March, all County operations have been adjusted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
23 County employees have been asked to work from home if possible, and those employees who
24 are reporting to a physical work location are providing services using new protocols and
25 procedures to minimize person to person contact and avoid potential exposure to COVID-19. A
26 summary of the current operational status for each County department is included as
27 Attachment 1.
28
29 The Health Department has guided the County's response efforts. At a policy level, the Health
30 Department has provided recommendations on local regulations, general public health
31 protocols, personal protective equipment, and re-opening strategies. At the clinical level, the
32 Health Department has executed communicable disease protocols and case investigations and
33 organized community testing events. The Department has led the County's public information
34 and education campaign by producing daily text messages and social media content,
35 maintaining a Countywide website and dashboard, and issuing weekly newsletters.
36
37 The Emergency Services Department has coordinated emergency support functions through the
38 Emergency Operations Center. The Emergency Operations Center (EOC) has been activated
39 on a continuous basis since March 9, 2020. The EOC has responded to over 1,012 resource
40 requests from municipal and community organizations and provided over 121,000 items.
41 Emergency Services has also facilitated daily briefings for key staff members, organized a multi-
42 jurisdictional information sharing meeting, and through the Emergency Support Functions, the
43 Department has supported direct services related to food distribution, community testing, hotel
44 occupancy for the homeless population, and continues to track, report, and request federal
45 reimbursement for related expenses through the Federal Emergency Management Agency
46 (FEMA).
47
48 This update focuses on the application of supplemental State and Federal resources designed
49 to respond to the pandemic. These allocations are included in Budget Amendment #1 which is
50 on the consent agenda for the September 1 meeting. This report does not include direct COVID-
26
1 19 related expenditures for which reimbursement is expected through the Federal Emergency
2 Management Agency (FEMA).
3
4 CARES Act Funds Allocated by the County
5 The County received two funding allocations through the Corona Virus Aid, Relief, and
6 Economic Security Act or CARES Act. CARES Act funds were distributed to counties based on
7 population. CARES Act funding must be used to fund expenses directly related to the County's
8 response to the pandemic. These funds cannot be used to supplant currently budgeted
9 expenses or to replace revenues such as sales tax or occupancy tax that have suffered as a
10 result of the pandemic. The CARES Act funds must be used by December 31, 2020, or they will
11 be reverted to the State.
12 Orange County's allocation in each round of funding was $2,665,753 and $2,881,614 for
13 a total of$5,547,367. Of that total amount, the County retained $3.2 million while $2.3 million
14 was distributed to Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Hillsborough, and Mebane based on a per capita
15 allocation.
16 For the first round of funding, the Towns submitted requests for the use of funds to the
17 County. In general, approximately $400,000 was used for emergency housing assistance,
18 $600,000 was allocated to personal protective equipment, $500,000 was allocated to personnel
19 expenses, and the remaining amount for technology to support remote working and economic
20 support to local businesses. For the second round of funding, municipalities are required to
21 report their use of funds to the County by the end of August.
22
23 Approximately $1.4 million or 42% of the County's total CARES Act allocation is dedicated to
24 support housing needs and prevent evictions and foreclosures.
25 • Another $1.2 million or 36% is being used to protect employees and facilitate remote work.
26 • The remaining funds are allocated to other services directly impacted by the pandemic
27 including: o Assisting residents who must navigate the Courthouse under new safety
28 protocols and access community services differently,
29 • Acquiring and distributing food, including locally raised dairy and produce products,
30 • Supporting childcare and reemployment services,
31 • Reimbursing the County for employee leave time taken by employees who are required to
32 isolate or quarantine,
33 • Reimagining and producing tourism and marketing materials in response to changing travel
34 restrictions and preferences,
35 • Supplementing the revaluation effort that was delayed during stay at home orders, and
36 • Funding consulting services to plan for the County's long term recovery and resiliency.
37
38 COVID-19 Related Funds Awarded to Specific Programs
39 In addition to the CARES Act funding directed to the County for local distribution decisions,
40 other CARES Act or Corona Virus related funding has been directed to specific County
41 functions:
42 • The Department on Aging received an additional $200,000 from the Area Agency on Aging
43 for food distribution programs.
44 • The Board of Elections received $153,766 to prepare for and respond to impact of COVID-
45 19 on the 2020 election cycle. These efforts include cleaning and sanitizing polling places
46 and supporting an anticipated increase in mail-in ballots.
47 • The Partnership to End Homelessness was awarded a COVID-19 Emergency Solutions
48 Grant to hire a 1.0 FTE Rapid Rehousing Case Manager to expedite permanent housing
49 solutions for residents who are homeless or in danger of becoming homeless. The grant
50 runs through June 30, 2022.
27
1 The Partnership to End Homelessness and the Criminal Justice Resource Department were
2 awarded an additional COVID related Emergency Solutions Grant to implement a Harm
3 Reduction and Street Outreach program. These funds will support a 1.0 FTE Harm
4 Reduction Clinical Coordinator and 2.0 FTE Peer Specialists. These positions are designed
5 to serve individuals in the community who are experiencing homelessness and/or
6 behavioral health issues. The program is intended to increase access to housing, provide
7 consistent case management, address individual clinical needs, increase deflection from
8 the criminal justice system, and facilitate the transition into housing and community-based
9 treatment programs. This grant runs through June 30, 2022 and fills a long standing gap in
10 the homeless service system.
11 The Department of Social Services received supplemental funding to support staffing needs
12 in child and adult protective services. This $66,787 award adds 3.0 FTE for six months
13 ending on December 31, 2020.
14 The Health Department has received a total of$298,647 to hire additional case
15 investigators, COVID-19 testing technicians, and a temporary data analyst to monitor,
16 analyze, and report on COVID-19 statistics and trends.
17
18 County Economic Development Funds
19 Finally, the County has consolidated and reallocated small business funds to create an
20 Emergency Small Business Loan and Grant Program. This program has opened for two rounds
21 of applications and has awarded a total of$135,000 in loans and $385,000 in grants to 78 small
22 businesses located in Orange County. The program has a balance of$329,583.
23 Budget Amendment#1 proposes to reallocate $50,000 of that balance to the Arts
24 Commission to fund a supplemental grant program for arts organizations. The County and its
25 community and municipal partners are also conducting an economic impact assessment and
26 will use the results of that survey to recommend further distribution of funds consistent with the
27 needs expressed in the survey. Survey results will be available in early September.
28
29 Long Term Recovery Planning
30 Although the response effort to COVID-19 is ongoing, the County and its municipal
31 partners have allocated a total of$175,000 to retain a consultant to support long term recovery
32 planning. As part of the effort, the County has organized over 150 community organizations and
33 representatives to help create recommendations that will promote an expeditious and long term
34 recovery and improve resiliency. These organizations are organized into seven Recovery
35 Support Functions focused on the local economy, the health system, human services, housing,
36 natural and cultural resources, community planning, and public information. With the assistance
37 of the consulting group, these support functions are being asked to characterize and quantify
38 the impact of the pandemic, create a framework for building recovery strategies and priorities
39 using a social justice and racial equity perspective, and develop strategies for consideration by
40 local governing boards for consideration and implementation.
41 The Recovery Support Functions had an initial orientation and convening over the
42 summer. These groups are now meeting individually. An economic impact assessment survey
43 has been distributed to the business community. This survey is open until the end of August. A
44 public values survey is currently under development and will be distributed in early September
45 that will offer additional community context for the work of the Recovery Support Functions. The
46 first work product, an initial COVID-19 Impact Assessment is due in the coming weeks. Final
47 work products, including recommendations, will be presented to local governing boards in early
48 2021.
49
50 FINANCIAL IMPACT:
28
1 The County has received a total of$6.4 million in COVID-19 related funding as of the end of
2 August.
3
4 Quintana Stewart, Orange County Health Director, reported the following information:
5
6 • 2,305 confirmed lab cases as of today
7 • Actively monitoring 135 cases
8 • Total of 50 deaths
9 • As of 8/26 37,705 people tested (25% of County population)
10 • Percent Postive 12.4% last week, going down to 10% as of today. Goal is 5% or less.
11 • Orange County received additional testing from "Star Med," who is holding testing events
12 around the County.
13 • Plan to hosting testing events weekly in various locations.
14 • Plan to have a consistent test site in Hillsborough once a month
15 • Governor's briefing has changed these plans and 2 mass-event testing sites will be
16 required weekly.
17
18 Quintana Stewart said the CDC put out a new recommendation last week stating that
19 those asymptomatic people who have had close contact with a COVID positive patient, do not
20 need to be tested. She said Orange County is not adhering to that, and will continue to test
21 those who have been in close contact with a COVID positive patient, whether symptomatic or
22 asymptomatic.
23 Quintana Stewart summarized today's Governor's briefing: all are still safer at home, but
24 phase 2.5 will take effect on 9/4/20 at 5:00 p.m. She said many of the state percentages are
25 declining, but remain too high and the state will not yet enter into phase 3. She said the
26 Governor changed mass gathering limits: indoors is 25 (opposed to 10), and outdoors is 50
27 (opposed to 25). She said play grounds are now open; museums can open 50% capacity;
28 gyms, bowling allies may open at 50% capacity; and bars and night clubs, amusement parks will
29 still remain closed— large venues are still subject to the mass gathering limits. She said skilled
30 nursing homes and facilities can now have outdoor visitation, as long as the facility is not in a
31 current outbreak status, and has a testing plan in place.
32 Chair Rich said Orange County's order is slightly different from the Governors order.
33 She said she spoke to the Mayors, and they will determine how closely to align to the
34 Governor's order. She said the goal is to align the order with the Governor's so it does not
35 confuse people, but tailgating is one area of concern.
36 Chair Rich said Orange County is one of the lowest in the state, and the return of the
37 UNC students caused a spike.
38 Commissioner Marcoplos thanked Quintana Stewart for her leadership and masterful
39 communication with UNC. He said she saved a lot of people from getting sick.
40 Commissioner McKee thanked Quintana Stewart for setting up a testing site at the
41 northern side of the County. He asked if the percentage rate was lower prior to UNC student
42 returning.
43 Quintana Stewart said confirmed cases were at 2.4% prior to the return of UNC
44 students.
45 Commissioner Price thanked Quintana Stewart and Chair Rich for all their work.
46 Commissioner Dorosin echoed everyone's high praise. He said he has heard concerns
47 about students whose homes are outside of Orange County and test positive, but are not
48 included in Orange County numbers. He asked if this is accurate, and will Orange County know
49 of these numbers, especially if students are remain here in off campus housing.
29
1 Quintana Stewart said initial student test results go to their home county. She said all
2 students signed an agreement, prior to returning to school, that they would report their cases to
3 Campus Health. She said students have cooperated. She said the Health Department gets the
4 numbers from campus health first, and does also eventually get the numbers transferred back
5 from the home county.
6 Commissioner Dorosin asked if a student lives off campus in Carrboro, is that the same
7 process. He asked if the result would go to Duplin County, for example, and then be sent back
8 to Orange County.
9 Quintana Stewart said possibly. She said most students that live off campus will list their
10 local off campus address as their residence. She said the bulk of the students whose results
11 are going back to their home county are undergraduates.
12 Commissioner Dorosin asked if the daily totals are regularly updated to included even
13 those students whose results are initially sent to an alternate home county.
14 Quintana Stewart said yes.
15 Chair Rich said this is a great question, and sometimes numbers do not align, and this is
16 the reason why.
17 Commissioner Greene asked if on campus students' results are counted in Orange
18 County numbers.
19 Quintana Stewart said yes, it shows up on the UNC dashboard immediately, and will
20 eventually show up as an Orange County positive.
21 Commissioner Marcoplos asked if the Health Department had considered holding a
22 testing event in the White Cross area (southwest rural part of the County).
23 Chair Rich thanked Quintana Stewart for the update.
24 Travis Myren made the following PowerPoint presentation:
25
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROUNA
CARES Act Funding Impacts
September 1,202D
Virtual Meeting
26
27
Summary of CARES Act Funds
• Corona Virus Aitl,Relief,entl Eanomic SecurMAd(CARES Art)
-Federal LnJSRsoibu[eao Sams
-WrtM1famlina 5stibuoel Lnaem Laumig baseAon popuLwn
-oraaaememyo�nbema
28
ORWJME COUNTY
29
30
Building Modifications,Signage,
Sanitation
Total Ab.t—-i580,600
-Sgnaaeb allwurrty FaGlli�
-Saniatonofibting Preoiw5-EI�,D]E
-ware Foumaln FauceSm Fll wpsam aolEaa
��n�eaeatoasa,s�el�-iRROa�
1 ORAfJ�E COUNTY
2
Building Modifications,Signage,
Sanitation
Just-Cute'
3 JR4N�GE CWNTY
4
Building Modifications.Signage,
Sanitation
• Pla��my ago maPmm�s
5 CR4N„EC UHTY
6
Building Modifications,Signage,
Sanitation
• s�y�aye
de
7 OIwN�cxE mux rr
8
Employee Support
Total NI—tion-5503,143
-Permnal Pntxti�e FqupmemtFPE)
-awwumye�ywyceawomrci revery
-Fu4a�M1aM LapXPreverrian
9 Oam cE counry
10
31
Employee Support
-Relirturmmem br YaMamryeuaranfre and kdafon
-Appknental nevaluaton StaRiq
1 s ORANGE COl1MY
2
Court Navigation
-men Ha»aaor'�acnmaai�ea'eeR�eree LEpanmem
Evmp—rk
3 a oRm�E�o��
4
Human Services
r�anwe�e ab oabtl�noe-arm.ox
-�rae,•rarrse.�-��,
-aw uwa.e ardAMSapwn-ms.ox
5 re oaa��s mu�Tv
6
Housing
—42%of Total gutty Funds Al—tedto Housng Inte—dons
-Errae�rgw�aa��a afz5az�
EmAm
-Leyl Gomsel kr EJrttn Prermuon E115.i50
Gerd icetlHwsirg HxIAGra GIz and Emaiz by YorM
Ge'srtHffe Hogan AM1rirumfrn
pans Corhi.rd®-j4I®bMrmiwa6ar `�'-
7 .. ORAw XE COl11Jtt
8
Emergency Housing Assistance
—llnique Households served
11-.Smrd hVEHA 4'WoM
6H rJniWeHous�oltls Orer Bhbn Ms
9 ORANZE COUNTY
10
32
Emergency Housing Assistance
—Income and Demographics of Households Served
sHAby EHA by Ri-ii,ii
Unique NousehuHs
1 s ORANGECWNrr
2
Emergency Housing Assistance
—Amount of Assistance Uf Month
ENA by mb
SaBf,,551 Ora BAbntls
3 - o �pcouNrr
4
Emergency Housing Assistance
—Amount of Assistance by Location and Pu rpose
EH A by Ju nstlir;t.. EHA by Purpose
ORANGE COUNTY
6
Long Term Recovery Planning
—How ones the community Recover,Transform,and Thrive?
—Funded through Multijurisdictional Partnership-$175,000
•Per capaa am�tms
•Lountys Share-$101,566
—Communiitywide Participation
•15a LommunityM embers antl0yaniffitions Representetl
•Oryeniaetl in Recovery5uppoH Functions
- �,.tiuzrn,oiruareUeirtaourer,mmmuny
e nnq worn nnmaane�
—Social Justice and Racial Equity Focus
GPRE Team M embers Representod on Each Re�vvery Support Funclon
7
OE cmaurx COUNTY
s RANG troaxv
8
33
Long Term Recovery Planning
f
0 ®
Ofi GE COUNTY
1 N��ar��aa, .,
2
Long Term Recovery Planning
3 w,o 1 u�.�Nn
�a�„ mc�a
4
5
6 Commissioner Price stated her questions were in a different report. She asked if the
7 Meals on Wheels program is taking care of any gaps within food distribution.
8 Travis Myren said yes, Meals on Wheels has been very active.
9 Commissioner Price referred to housing community and development, and said the link
10 is rather indirect. She asked if staff would look into this.
11 Travis Myren said yes.
12 Commissioner Dorosin referred to page 22 (electronic version), under the County
13 Economic Development Funds, and said there is a balance of—$325,000 in Emergency Loans
14 and Grants program. He asked if the plan is to give those funds out, continuing on a rolling
15 basis. He asked if these funds are being publicized.
16 Travis Myren said the County is distributing the funds in rounds, and has already gone
17 through two rounds. He said a third round would have to be opened to distribute more funds.
18 He said, of the remaining balance, $50,000 is recommended to fund an Arts support program,
19 since they did not apply for the small business grants program. He said the Economic Impact
20 survey has been distributed to the private sector, and about 300 responses have been received.
21 He said staff recommends using this data to create and execute a round 3 distribution.
22 Commissioner Dorosin encouraged the County to keep moving forward and get the
23 funds into people's hands as quickly as possible.
24 Commissioner Dorosin said the report notes a plan to use $175,000 to hire a consultant
25 to help with long term recovery plans, but this evening's presentation intimated that these funds
26 would be used for the actual recovery process. He asked if staff could clarify, as the County
27 has a recovery coordinator.
28 Travis Myren said the County does not have a recovery coordinator, and these funds
29 have been used to hire Haggerty Consulting to project manage the recovery support functions.
30 He said this consultant will serve in the long term recovery coordinator position.
31 Commissioner Dorosin pointed out a line item that has —$105,000 allocated to a
32 recovery coordinator.
34
1 Travis Myren said this is one and the same with the Consulting firm, and he apologized
2 for the confusion. He said the County has paid -$105,000 towards the total $175,000 and the
3 Towns will pay the balance.
4
5 5. Public Hearings
6
7 a. NCDOT Public Transportation Division/Public Transportation - 5307 Urbanized
8 Area Formula Grant Applications for FY2021
9 The Board held a public hearing on the North Carolina Urbanized Area Formula grant
10 application by Orange County Transportation Services (OCTS) for FY2021. In addition, the
11 Board considered to:
12 • Approve the grant application which includes the resolution previously adopted by the
13 Board authorizing the applicant to enter into an agreement with the North Carolina
14 Department of Transportation (NCDOT); and
15 • Authorize the County Attorney to review and complete the necessary 2021 certifications
16 and assurances when they are received (2020 versions attached as examples).
17
18 Theo Letman, Transportation Services Director, reviewed the following information:
19
20 BACKGROUND:
21 Each year, the NCDOT Public Transportation Division accepts requests for operations and
22 administrative needs for county-operated Urbanized Area Formula Grant applications. OCTS is
23 eligible to make an application for both operations and administrative funding. NCDOT has
24 allotted $580,654 in funds, to be divided between State funding of$290,327 and local funding of
25 $290,327. Article 43 Transit Tax proceeds will cover the required local match, and will propose
26 the allocation of these funds in a future Budget Amendment for consideration by the Board of
27 Commissioners.
28
29 Commissioner Price asked if the Department of Transportation (DOT) allotted $580,654,
30 with the State giving half and the County giving half. She asked if clarification could be
31 provided.
32 Theo Letman said the total grant application amount is $580,654, with 50% coming from
33 Federal funds, and 50% coming from State/local funds.
34
35 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Bedford, to
36 open the public hearing.
37
38 Chair Rich asked Commissioners to accept a roll call form of voting and called names
39 accordingly.
40
41 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
42
43 PUBLIC COMMENT:
44 NONE
45
46 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Greene to
47 close the public hearing.
48
49 Chair Rich asked Commissioners to accept a roll call form of voting and called names
50 accordingly.
51
35
1 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
2
3 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Bedford to:
4
5 • Approve the Urbanized Area Formula Grant application for FY2021 in the total amount of
6 $580,654 with a local match total of$290,327 to be provided when necessary;
7 • Approve and authorize the Chair to sign the Local Share Certification for Funding form;
8 and
9 • Authorize the County Attorney to review and complete the necessary 2021 certifications
10 and assurances when they are received (2020 versions attached as examples).
11
12 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
13
14 6. Regular Agenda
15
16 a. Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendments— Clarification of
17 Setbacks from the West Fork on the Eno Reservoir
18
19 The Board considered receiving the Planning Board recommendation and prior public
20 comment, and consider action on Planning Director initiated Unified Development Ordinance
21 (UDO) text amendments revising/updating existing guidelines associated with the enforcement
22 of reservoir setbacks for structures and septic systems.
23
24 NOTE: This item was continued on April 7, 2020 to this date due to COVID. Staff(including the
25 Planning Director) provided requested information to BOCC within a few weeks of the original
26 item to clarify the amendment. Specifically, the amendment seeks to establish the effective date
27 for the expansion of the West Fork on the Eno reservoir. If approved, the amendment will create
28 an exemption for parcels and development (i.e. structures and septic systems) established prior
29 to the creation/expansion of the reservoir, specifically February 12, 1997.
30
31 The amendment also updates existing references to the final normal pool elevation (NPE) of the
32 reservoir, which according to the Town of Hillsborough is going to be 642 feet. In the summer of
33 2019, the Town indicated the NPE for the reservoir was going to be 643.9 feet and staff
34 proceeded with an amendment based on this information. After being notified of the updated
35 NPE, the amendment now references a NPE of 642 feet.
36
37 Craig Benedict, Planning Director, and Michael Harvey, Current Planning and Zoning
38 Supervisor, made the following presentation.
39
40 BACKGROUND:
41 Section 6.13.4 Minimum Buffer Widths for Watershed Protection Overlay Districts of the LIDO
42 establishes a 150 ft. wide setback around reservoirs. This area is intended to be left in an
43 undeveloped state. Additionally, Section 4.2.9 Water Supply/Sewage Disposal Facilities of the
44 LIDO establishes a 300 ft. setback for septic tanks from a reservoir.
45
46 Section 4.2.2, specifically subsections (F) through (1), of the UDO establishes the applicability of
47 watershed protection standards including establishing criteria defining those properties
48 (developed and undeveloped) considered to be 'grandfathered' with respect to applicable buffer
49 (i.e. stream and reservoir) standards.
50
36
1 In the 1990's The Town of Hillsborough began the necessary permitting processes at the State
2 level to construct the West Fork on the Eno reservoir within the Cedar Grove Township of the
3 county.
4
5 Work was broken down into two phases, with Phase 1 including the Town purchasing property
6 to expand the reservoir. The final boundary of the reservoir was established on February 11,
7 1997 with the recording of plats within the Orange County Registrar of Deeds Office denoting
8 the Town's purchase of property along the West Fork of the Eno. Attachment 1 contains maps
9 of the existing reservoir boundary, based on 2017 aerial photographic data, denoting the
10 aforementioned 150 ft. (structure) and 300 ft. (septic) setback areas.
11
12 Phase 2 of the project involves the actual clearing of property and expanding the existing NPE
13 of the reservoir. The Town has already begun Phase 2 of the project, including land clearing
14 and increasing the elevation of the dam.
15
16 While the Town purchased sufficient property to accommodate the approved expansion of the
17 actual reservoir, the required reservoir setback could still potentially impact adjacent parcels of
18 property. Adjacent property owners have expressed concern the UDO does not specifically
19 reference the expansion of the reservoir, thereby making their properties potentially
20 nonconforming to applicable watershed management regulations (i.e. required reservoir
21 setbacks).
22
23 In an effort to address this concern, staff proposed a text amendment (Attachment 6) to
24 reference the expansion of the West Fork on the Eno from the date the Town secured property
25 allowing for the approved expansion. In consultation with the County Attorney's Office, staff has
26 determined this date is February 12, 1997. While property owners are still required to abide by
27 applicable setbacks per Section(s) 4.2.9 and 6.13.4 of the UDO, owners will have greater
28 latitude in demonstrating compliance with applicable standards. This amendment will not
29 necessarily allow for additional development of structures closer to the actual reservoir. It will,
30 however, recognize the conforming status of existing development and not arbitrarily make
31 same non-conforming. The status can be important with respect to property transactions and
32 mortgage applications.
33
34 This proposal was reviewed at the November 6, 2019 Ordinance Review Committee (ORC)
35 meeting. Notes from this meeting are contained within Attachment 2.
36
37 Analysis: As required under Section 2.8.5 of the UDO, the Planning Director is required to: `...
38 cause an analysis to be made of the application and, based upon that analysis, prepare a
39 recommendation for consideration by the Planning Board and the Board of County
40 Commissioners'. The amendments are necessary to address current inconsistencies within the
41 UDO relating to the definition of what constitutes `existing lots' and/or `existing development'
42 with respect to compliance with applicable reservoir setbacks. This amendment should likely
43 have been completed in 1997 when the Town was purchasing property to establish the
44 reservoir.
45
46 Planning Board Recommendation: At its February 5, 2020 regular meeting, the Planning Board
47 voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Statement of Consistency and the proposed
48 UDO Text Amendment. Excerpts of the minutes from this meeting, as well as the Planning
49 Board's signed Statement of Consistency, are included in Attachment 3.
50
37
1 Agenda materials from the meeting can be viewed at:
2 https://www.co.orange.nc.us/AgendaCenter/Planning-Board-26.
3 It should be noted the amendment presented to the Planning Board referenced changing the
4 NPE for the West Fork on the Eno from 643 feet to 643.9 feet. This was based on data from the
5 Town. The amendment package now reflects the Town's corrected NPE for the reservoir of 642
6 feet resulting in a slight the reduction in the 150 ft. (structure) and 300 ft. (septic) setback areas
7 around the reservoir.
8
9 Planning Director Recommendation: The Planning Director recommends approval of the
10 Statement of Consistency, as contained in Attachment 5, and the UDO Text Amendment, as
11 contained within Attachment 6.
12
13 As a reminder, staff was directed to provide additional information related to development
14 opportunities and constraints for a parcel of property located at 2520 Carr Store Road (PIN
15 9848-51-5777) owned by Mr. Robert Bush and Ms. Tabetha Trogdon. This information, supplied
16 at the original public hearing, is contained within Attachment 8.
17
18 FINANCIAL IMPACT:
19 Consideration and approval will not create the need for additional funding for the provision of
20 County services. Existing staff, included in the Departmental staffing budget, will accomplish the
21 work required to process this amendment.
22
23 Commissioner Dorosin referred to page 11 in the electronic documents, and asked if the
24 difference between 4.2.2.f (regarding existing developments) and 4.2.2.i. (regarding existing
25 lots) could be clarified.
26 Craig Benedict said one has to do with a lot that was created, and does not need a
27 house at all. He said "existing lot" has to do with a lot of record, which has abilities to be
28 developed at a later time. He said, "existing development" does have a house on the land, and
29 what can be done with it (expansion, additional bedroom, etc.).
30 Commissioner Dorosin asked if the February 1997 date applies to both.
31 Craig Benedict said yes.
32 Commissioner Greene said she was one of the Commissioners that was not ready to
33 vote last time, but she is now satisfied that all is fine.
34
35 A motion was made by Commissioner Greene, seconded by Commissioner McKee to
36 approve the Statement of Consistency (Attachment 5) and the LIDO Text Amendment
37 (Attachment 6).
38
39 Chair Rich asked Commissioners to accept a roll call form of voting and called names
40 accordingly.
41
42 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
43
44 b. Resolution to Adopt Juneteenth as a County Holiday
45
46 The Board considered voting to adopt Juneteenth as a paid holiday for Orange County
47 Government thus providing an opportunity to cherish freedom, but also poignantly acknowledge
48 the history of slavery in the country.
49
50 BACKGROUND:
38
1 Many people in the United States recognize Juneteenth as the holiday that celebrates
2 Emancipation Day, the day in history when the last state ratified the Emancipation Proclamation.
3 This date marks the time when African Americans in Texas received notice from President
4 Abraham Lincoln that slavery had been abolished, a declaration that was codified in the 13th
5 Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. June 19th also marks the day
6 that African Americans in the southern states exercised independence from those who
7 benefitted from their labors in the founding of this nation.
8
9 The journey of African Americans represents both great achievements and great hardship, and
10 the nation continues to witness the injustice of the African American journey. This injustice has
11 existed far too long. This Juneteenth celebration weighs heavily on hearts and minds in the
12 aftermath of the murder of George Floyd in 2020, and is a reminder of others who have not
13 been treated equally under the law.
14
15 The Governor of the State of North Carolina encourages people to observe Juneteenth as an
16 opportunity to reflect, rejoice, and plan for a brighter future as society continues to address
17 racial injustices. Juneteenth is not a federal holiday, but many states and the District of
18 Columbia recognize it as a state or ceremonial holiday.
19
20 Juneteenth will be observed on June 191h each year. If June 191h falls on a Saturday, the holiday
21 will be observed on Friday, June 18th, and if June 19th falls on a Sunday, the holiday will be
22 observed on June 20th
23
24 FINANCIAL IMPACT:
25 The total annual cost for FY2020-2021 for permanent salaries, social security, Medicare and
26 retirement is $63,733,708. A daily cost of$245,129. The financial impact of adding an extra
27 holiday (changing from a regular workday to a holiday) is on average approximately $61,000.
28
29 Commissioner Price read the resolution:
30
31 RES-2020-045
32
33 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
34 RESOLUTION DESIGNATING JUNETEENTH AS AN
35 OFFICIAL COUNTY PAID HOLIDAY
36
37 WHEREAS, on January 1, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation
38 Proclamation, a document that declared: "all persons held as slaves within any State or
39 designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United
40 States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free;" and
41
42 WHEREAS, the Emancipation Proclamation, primarily a wartime measure, intentionally
43 excluded people in the slave-holding border-states and the areas of the Confederacy that
44 already had come under Union control; and
45
46 WHEREAS, on April 9, 1865, General Robert E. Lee surrendered to United States General
47 Ulysses S. Grant at the Appomattox Court House in Virginia, and on April 26, 1865, US Major-
48 General W. T. Sherman and General Joseph E. Johnston finalized the terms of surrender at the
49 Bennett Farm House in Orange County [now Durham]; and
50
39
1 WHEREAS, on June 10, 1865, Major General Gordon Granger was given command of the
2 Department of Texas, and on June 19, 1865, two and one-half years after the signing of the
3 Emancipation Proclamation, the Union soldiers led by Major General Granger arrived at
4 Galveston, Texas with the long-awaited news that the Civil War had ended and that enslaved
5 people were now free; and
6
7 WHEREAS, upon his arrival in Galveston, Major General Granger read General Order Number
8 3, which began: "The people of Texas are informed that in accordance with a Proclamation from
9 the Executive of the United States, all slaves are free. This involves an absolute equality of
10 rights and rights of property between former masters and slaves, and the connection heretofore
11 existing between them becomes that between employer and free laborer"; and
12
13 WHEREAS, Juneteenth — also known as Freedom Day, Jubilee Day, Liberation Day, and
14 Emancipation Day— has become a special day among African Americans to celebrate the day
15 when all the enslaved sons and daughters of Africa in America realized their freedom; and
16
17 WHEREAS, only the State of Texas currently recognizes Juneteenth as an official state holiday;
18 and
19
20 WHEREAS, in June 2010, Governor Beverly Eaves Perdue proclaimed the observance of
21 Juneteenth in North Carolina, and on June 19, 2020, Governor Roy Cooper proclaimed
22 Juneteenth Day in North Carolina; and
23
24 WHEREAS, members of the United States Congress, including Senator Kamala Harris of
25 California and Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, recently have introduced legislation to
26 recognize Juneteenth as a federal holiday;
27
28 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Orange County Board of
29 Commissioners hereby designates Juneteenth as an official County paid holiday, thus providing
30 the opportunity for employees and the community-at large to join together with the descendants
31 of enslaved Africans to observe the end of slavery and the liberation of all people in the United
32 States of America; and
33
34 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Orange County Board of Commissioners urges state
35 and federal legislators to sponsor legislation making Juneteenth an official state and federal
36 holiday; and
37
38 BE IT MOREOVER RESOLVED, that the Orange County Board of Commissioners directs the
39 Clerk to the Board's Office to forward a copy of this resolution to the Chapel Hill Town Council,
40 the Carrboro Town Council, the Hillsborough Board of Commissioners, the Chapel Hill Carrboro
41 City Schools Board of Education, and the Orange County Schools Board of Education.
42
43 This, the 1s' Day of September 2020.
44
45 Penny Rich, Chair
46 Orange County Board of Commissioners
47
48 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Dorosin to
49 approve and authorize the Chair to sign the proposed Resolution recognizing June 19,
50 Juneteenth, as a paid holiday for Orange County government employees effective upon
40
1 approval by the Board, and approve the attached revision to Article IV— Employee Benefits
2 Section 28-33— Holidays and Holiday Pay of the Orange County Code of Ordinances.
3
4 Chair Rich requested that the Board send this item to all County Clerks in North
5 Carolina.
6 Commissioner Marcoplos requested that a copy be sent to the City of Mebane.
7 Chair Rich asked Commissioners to accept a roll call form of voting and called names
8 accordingly.
9
10 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
11
12 Travis Myren requested that the Board specifically authorize the approval of the code of
13 ordinances for employees.
14
15 A motion was made by Commissioner Greene, seconded by Commissioner Price to
16 approve the attached revision to Article IV— Employee Benefits Section 28-33 — Holidays and
17 Holiday Pay of the Orange County Code of Ordinances.
18
19 Chair Rich asked Commissioners to accept a roll call form of voting and called names
20 accordingly.
21
22 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
23
24 c. Veterans Memorial Construction Approval
25 The Board considered reviewing and approving the certified budget and project design
26 for Phase 11 of the Veterans Memorial project at the Southern Campus; authorize construction of
27 the project; authorize the County Manager to sign the construction contract and any
28 amendments/change orders up to the $137,542 budgeted amount; and review and authorize the
29 County Manager to sign the Ownership, Operations and Maintenance Agreement.
30 Steve Arndt, Asset Management Director, reviewed the following information:
31
32 BACKGROUND: Over the past several years, interested Orange County residents and
33 supporters have organized in an effort to raise funds for the construction of a Veterans Memorial
34 to honor the contributions and service of Orange County military veterans.
35
36 At the May 5, 2015 Board of County Commissioners Business meeting, the board voted to:
37 1) Approve the site for a Veterans Memorial on the former Hoyle home site at the Southern
38 campus.
39 2) Authorize the Manager and staff to participate in the ongoing project planning process.
40 3) Reserve the right of final construction approval contingent upon Board approval of:
41 a) Ownership of the Memorial
42 b) Design
43 c) Budget and certification of adequate development and construction funds raised; and
44 d) Ongoing operations and maintenance agreement for the Memorial.
45
46 Phase I of the project was completed in 2016 at a cost of$13,000. It was comprised of an
47 information kiosk, gravel path and a temporary, telescoping flag pole.
48
49 Over the past five years, fundraising efforts have progressed and funds accumulated now total
50 $137,542. Attachment 1 provides a certification of adequate development and construction
51 funds.
41
1 Swanson &Associates, a local Landscape Architecture firm, prepared design drawings for a
2 flagpole, concrete and stone plaza and stone bench that would comprise Phase II of the
3 memorial. Attachment 2 provides an overview of the design.
4
5 The project was placed out to bid in early October 2019 and bids were opened on October 15,
6 2019. Unfortunately, the apparent low bid received was $232,425. Subsequent value
7 engineering efforts failed to reconcile the difference between available funding and the
8 scope/cost of work. The architect then revised the design and on April 30, 2020, obtained two
9 additional quotes with the low bidder, Custom Stone NC provided a quote of$98,000. The
10 architect received a separate quote of$10,000 for associated electrical lighting.
11
12 Attachment 3 is an agreement for the Ownership, Operations and Maintenance of the Veterans
13 Memorial. The agreement stipulates that upon completion of construction, the Memorial will
14 become the property of Orange County and the County will be responsible for operations and
15 maintenance of the Memorial and surrounding site. The agreement also requires the Orange
16 County Veterans Memorial, Inc. to provide Orange County with $500/year for ongoing
17 maintenance and upkeep of the Memorial.
18
19 Bruce Runberg, Veterans' Memorial Co-Chair, said this has been a wonderful
20 partnership. He said the contractor has proposed a very reasonable fee for the project, and the
21 committee is eager to proceed. He said the site will be beautiful, and he thanked the
22 Commissioners for their support.
23
24 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Bedford to:
25
26 1) Approve the certified budget and project design (Attachment 2) for Phase II
27 of the Veterans Memorial project at the Southern Campus;
28 2) Authorize construction of the project, and authorize the County Manager to sign the
29 construction contract and any amendments/change orders up to the $137,542 budgeted
30 amount; and
31 3) Authorize the County Manager to sign the Ownership, Operations and
32 Maintenance Agreement (Attachment 3).
33
34 Chair Rich asked Commissioners to accept a roll call form of voting and called names
35 accordingly.
36
37 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
38
39 Commissioner Greene thanked Bruce Runberg and James Merritt for their ongoing time
40 and investment in this project.
41
42 d. Discussion Regarding the Recital of the Pledge of Allegiance at Board of
43 Commissioners' Meetings
44 The Board considered the recital of the Pledge of allegiance at Board of County
45 Commissioners' meetings.
46 Bonnie Hammersley reviewed the following information:
47
48 BACKGROUND:
49 The Board of Commissioners has previously received petitions requesting that the Board
50 consider reciting the Pledge of Allegiance at all Board meetings. This item responds to those
42
1 requests and gives Board members an opportunity to discuss the potential recital of the Pledge
2 at meetings.
3
4 If the Board determines to move forward with reciting the Pledge at some or all meetings, staff
5 will incorporate the Pledge recital into future meeting agendas as appropriate and will also draft
6 an amendment to the Board's Rules of Procedure, to be considered at a future meeting, to
7 formalize the practice.
8
9 RECOMMENDATION(S):
10 The Manager recommends that the Board discuss the potential recital of the Pledge of
11 Allegiance at Board of Commissioners' meetings and provide any direction to staff as
12 appropriate.
13
14 PUBLIC COMMENT:
15 Riley Ruske read the following comments:
16 Human beings are imperfect, and thus their actions are imperfect; however human
17 beings of goodwill and character can achieve great things. 244 years ago, an imperfect, but
18 courageous, group of men announced the declaration of independence. This started the
19 journey of the creation of a great nation. 232 years ago that declaration resulted in the
20 ratification of the Constitution of the United States, and 229 years ago that resulted in the first
21 10 amendments to the constitution. The continued existence of this nation depends on the
22 commitment of its citizens to protect and preserve it, and the foundations upon which it stands,
23 while also constantly working together to improve it. If our citizens no longer fulfill this civic duty,
24 our nation will flounder and eventually dissolve, as have so many nations throughout history. It
25 is therefore helpful to continually remind our citizens and government officials of that essential
26 duty. 78 years ago the US Congress adopted the pledge of allegiance. One year ago the
27 BOCC was petitioned to recite the pledge of allegiance at every one of its meetings. The words
28 of the pledge not only remind out citizens and government officials of a civic duty of allegiance,
29 but also remind us of the aspiration of achieving liberty and justice for all. The meetings of the
30 BOCC are part of their duty to protect and preserve our nation and its foundations. The
31 Commissioners' oath of office requires an affirmation of, "that I will support and maintain the
32 constitution and laws of the United States." In fulfilling that oath, it is appropriate that
33 Commissioners and citizens, present at those meetings, recite the pledge of allegiance. Let's
34 start today.
35 Commissioner McKee said he put forth the petition to have this discussion, and he has a
36 prepared motion to present, or the BOCC can have a general conversation.
37 The Board agreed to hear the motion.
38
39 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Greene to
40 open the first calendar meeting of the year, usually in late January; the last meeting before the
41 summer break (mid-June); the first meeting of the fall term (early September), and the
42 organization meeting (early December)with an invitation for the Commissioners and the
43 members of the public in attendance to join in the recitation of the pledge of alleigiance, should
44 they so choose. If approved, this practice would begin after the BOCC discontinues virtual
45 meetings.
46
47 Commissioner Dorosin asked if the motion is to recite the pledge four times a year,
48 because he does not think the BOCC holds an organizational meeting each year, rather only
49 does so after an election.
50 Commissioner McKee said the organizational meeting does occur every year.
43
1 Commissioner McKee said yes, he would like to recite the pledge four times a year. He
2 said he sees no need to do so at every meeting, but he feels blessed to live here, and it seems
3 appropriate to recite the pledge to mark the beginning and end of the BOCC seasons
4 Commissioner Greene said she supports this motion, and she has been considering that
5 democracy is at risk currently, and it is important to remember the foundation of the nation. She
6 said the history of the pledge goes back over 100 years, and was started to teach school
7 children the importance of liberty and justice for all. She said she is gratified to have learned the
8 history of the pledge. She said Commissioner McKee's motion is more than reasonable.
9 Commissioner Marcoplos said his perspective is different, and he sees this as a divisive
10 power play to get the BOCC to recite the pledge. He said the BOCC works on real issues that
11 will affect those in the future. He said there is no need to say a few words to communicate any
12 patriotism, or wear it on one's sleeve, as actions speak much louder. He said this seems like
13 theatre to him, and the BOCC expresses its patriotism in its very service. He said it is time to
14 move on.
15 Commissioner McKee said wearing patriotism on one's sleeve would be reciting the
16 pledge at every meeting, and that is why he is only recommending doing so 4 times a year. He
17 said the pledge holds meaning for him. He said he is not forcing anyone to recite it, as his
18 motion specifically says doing so is optional. He said he does not disparage anyone who
19 chooses not to recite it.
20 Chair Rich stated that Commissioner Price asked if staff would look at how other local
21 boards handle the recitation of the pledge, and staff discovered that no other local board does
22 so.
23 Commissioner Dorosin said he appreciates the conversation, and has thought a lot
24 about this topic. He said he, too, is grateful to live in this country, and takes his obligations to
25 the Board and the County very seriously. He said foremost among the rights given by the
26 constitution is the right to dissent. He said reciting the pledge at BOCC meetings has a
27 compulsory air to it, and risks alienating those that choose not to do so. He said it would place
28 pressure on those in attendance to participate. He said when the statement "under God" was
29 added in 1954, the pledge went from being a secular statement to an endorsement of religion,
30 and, in his opinion, violated the separation between church and state. He said in 1943, the US
31 Supreme Court struck down a law compelling students to recite the pledge. He said he feels a
32 great allegiance to this country, but does not feel residents should be required to make
33 compulsory pledges.
34 Commissioner Marcoplos said he agreed completely with Commissioner Dorosin's
35 comments.
36 Commissioner Greene said the motion does not require participation, and this will not be
37 a group of impressionable school children, but rather adults who can do as their hearts convict.
38 She said reciting the pledge allows a reclaiming of the roots of what this country stands for. She
39 said the pledge should not have been captured by the right in culture wars, and her position is
40 unchanged.
41 Commissioner Price said she can go either way, and she has never felt compelled to say
42 the pledge. She said she has never experienced stigma for not reciting the pledge, and she
43 feels Commissioner McKee's proposal is a compromise. She said North Carolina Association of
44 County Commissioners (NCACC), National Association of Counties (NACo) meetings and
45 Democratic Party meetings start with the Pledge.
46 Commissioner Bedford said she is torn. She said the original presentation of this item
47 had an air of shame about it, but the current motion is a compromise. She said she would recite
48 the pledge, but would do so on her own.
49 Commissioner Rich said she is not one that supports saying the Pledge of Allegiance,
50 and has often felt judged for not doing so. She said the addition of"under God" made it
51 problematic for her to recite. She said this item was brought to the Board as a scolding, and
44
1 she does not like that. She said there is not justice for all in this country, and the pledge is not
2 changing that. She said she loves her country, but will not support this motion.
3 Commissioner Greene said there was once a debate over flag burning, and she is happy
4 to uphold one's right to do so as a matter of political protest. She said the pledge is full of words
5 that promote unity and aspirational ideals for which the BOCC is fighting.
6 Commissioner Price said her agreement to compromise was not in support of the
7 original petitioner, but rather in support of Commissioner McKee's reasonable compromise.
8 Commissioner Bedford said if this issue is deeply upsetting to some, she would rather
9 respect that by voting no. She said those in favor of reciting the pledge can do so whenever
10 they feel moved.
11 Chair Rich asked Commissioners to accept a roll call form of voting and called names
12 accordingly.
13
14 VOTE: Ayes, 2 (Commissioner McKee and Commissioner Greene); Nays, 5
15 (Commissioner Bedford, Commissioner Dorosin, Commissioner Marcoplos,
16 Commissioner Price, and Chair Rich)
17
18 MOTION FAILS
19
20 7. Reports
21 None
22
23 8. Consent Agenda
24
25 • Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
26
27 Chair Rich pulled item 8-f.
28
29 • Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
30
31 A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Bedford to
32 approve the remaining items on the consent agenda.
33
34 Chair Rich asked Commissioners to accept a roll call form of voting and called names
35 accordingly.
36
37 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
38
39 Discussion and Approval of the Item Removed from the Consent Agenda
40
41 f. Chair Rich said more money was requested from the ABC Board than was received.
42 She said Criminal Justice Resources department was awarded $25,000 from ABC board for
43 funds, despite requesting $32,500. She asked if Commissioner Dorosin would follow up with
44 ABC Board as to why the full funding was not received, as he is the BOCC representative to the
45 ABC Board. She said higher amounts were given in previous years, and she recalls ABC sales
46 being up this year, and she would like more information.
47 Commissioner Dorosin said he did not remember this item coming up at an ABC Board
48 meeting, but he would follow-up.
49 Chair Rich said the ABC board will provide a final report. She said drug treatment court
50 is important, and if sales are brisk, the BOCC should pressure the ABC board to give the full
45
1 funding. She asked if she can pull 12 out of the amendment. She said the County will take the
2 $25,000, but she would really like to get the additional amount.
3 John Roberts said the BOCC can pursue additional funds at any time.
4 Bonnie Hammersley recommended that the BOCC approve the $25,000, and have the
5 Chair submit a letter to the ABC Board requesting the additional funds.
6 Commissioner Dorosin said he supported this approach.
7 Commissioner Price said the ABC Board has a similar approach to the BOCC for
8 distributing funds. She asked if elected officials are allowed to vote on the use of these funds.
9 John Roberts said there is a way to address that, and staff will help work on this.
10
11 Approval of Items Pulled from the Consent Agenda
12
13
14 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Dorosin to
15 approve consent agenda item 8-f, Fiscal Year 2020-21 Budget Amendment#1.
16
17 Chair Rich asked Commissioners to accept a roll call form of voting and called names
18 accordingly.
19
20 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
21
22 a. Minutes
23 The Board approved the draft minutes from May 28, June 2, June 4, June 9, June 16,
24 July 7, and July 14, 2020 as submitted by the Deputy Clerk to the Board.
25 b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds
26 The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release motor
27 vehicle property tax values for six taxpayers with a total of seven bills that will result in a
28 reduction of revenue in accordance with NCGS.
29 c. Property Tax Releases/Refunds
30 The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release property
31 tax values for forty-eight (48) two taxpayers with a total of fifty-seven (57) bills that will result in a
32 reduction of revenue in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 105-381.
33 d. Applications for Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion
34 The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to approve tax
35 exemptions/exclusions from ad valorem taxation for twelve (12) bills for the 2020 tax year.
36 e. Tax Collector's Annual Settlement for Fiscal Year 2019-20
37 The Board received the tax collector's annual settlement on current and delinquent
38 taxes, approved by resolution the accounting thereof, and approved and approved the Order to
39 Collect for Fiscal Year 2020-2021, and authorized the Chair to sign the Order.
40 f. Fiscal Year 2020-21 Budget Amendment #1
41 The Board voted to approve budget, grant, and capital project ordinance amendments
42 for fiscal year 2020-21 for Coronavirus Relief Funding; South Orange Fire Service District;
43 Board of Elections; Small Business Loan Program; Animal Services; Housing and Community
44 Development; Department of Social Services; Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks
45 and Recreation; Department on Aging; Criminal Justice Resource Department; County
46 Manager; Library Services; Solid Waste Program Fees; and Health Department.
47 g. Approval of Eno-Haw Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan
48 The Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign the attached resolution adopting
49 the Eno-Haw Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan as approved by the NC Division of Emergency
50 Management.
51 h. Approval of Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan
46
1 The Board approved the Orange County Public Transportation's Agency Safety Plan, a
2 new requirement for transit agencies and sub-recipients who receive federal funds under the
3 Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) Urbanized Area Formula Grants, and authorized the
4 submittal of the Safety Plan to the NC Department of Transportation.
5 i. Change in BOCC Meeting Schedule for 2020
6 The Board approved changes to the Board of Commissioners' meeting calendar for
7 2020.
8 j. Performance Agreement Between the Town of Chapel Hill and Visitors Bureau
9 The Board approved the 2020-21 performance agreement between the Town of Chapel
10 Hill and the Chapel Hill/Orange County Visitors Bureau.
11
12 9. County Manager's Report
13 Bonnie Hammersley said there is a work session on September 10.
14
15 10. County Attorney's Report
16 John Roberts said the legislature is returning tomorrow, with the primary stated focus of
17 COVID relief.
18 John Roberts referred to the Research Triangle Logistical Park information, which was
19 discussed at length earlier this evening. He said the BOCC has received a great deal of
20 information/communication about this topic, some of which is false and inaccurate. He said it is
21 unusual to have a rezoning project with such community interest, especially prior to the BOCC
22 even receiving the project materials. He encouraged the Board to keep an open mind.
23 Commissioner Marcoplos thanked John Roberts for his report. He asked if more
24 information can be included when notices are sent to neighbors, to better explain the process of
25 BOCC decisions.
26 John Roberts said the Planning Department gives much more information than is
27 required by law in its letters, but he will follow up with the exact details.
28 Commissioner Marcoplos said perhaps too much information is being sent out.
29 Bonnie Hammersley said staff is putting together an FAQ.
30 Travis Myren said it will be ready tomorrow.
31 Chair Rich said to refer the public to that page.
32
33 11. * Appointments
34 NONE
35
36 12. Information Items
37
38 • June 16, 2020 and July 14, 2020 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions Lists
39 • Tax Collector's Report— Numerical Analysis
40 • Tax Collector's Report— Measure of Enforced Collections
41 . Tax Assessor's Report— Releases/Refunds under$100
42 • Memorandum Regarding Nature of Orange Photography Contest
43
44 13. Closed Session
45
46 A motion was made by Commissioner Greene, seconded by Commissioner Marcoplos
47 to go into closed session "To consider the qualifications, competence, performance, character,
48 fitness, conditions of appointment, or conditions of initial employment of an individual public
49 officer or employee or prospective public officer or employee;" NCGS § 143-318.11(a)(6).
50
47
1 Chair Rich asked Commissioners to accept a roll call form of voting and called names
2 accordingly.
3
4 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
5
6 The Board moved into closed session at 11:18 p.m.
7
8 A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Greene to
9 return to open session at 12:28 a.m. (September 2, 2020)
10
11 Chair Rich asked Commissioners to accept a roll call form of voting and called names
12 accordingly.
13
14 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
15
16 14. Adjournment
17
18 A motion was made by Commissioner Dorosin, seconded by Commissioner Price to
19 adjourn the meeting at 12:28 a.m. (September 2, 2020)
20
21 Chair Rich asked Commissioners to accept a roll call form of voting and called names
22 accordingly.
23
24 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
25
26
27
28 Penny Rich, Chair
29
30
31 Allen Coleman
32 Assistant Deputy Clerk
33
34 Submitted for approval by Gregory A. Wilder, Interim Clerk to the Board.