HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 10-05-2021 Virtual Business Meeting 1
APPROVED 11/16/21
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
VIRTUAL BUSINESS MEETING
October 5, 2021
7:00 p.m.
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Virtual Business Meeting on Tuesday,
October 5, 2021 at 7:00 p.m.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Renee Price, Vice Chair Jamezetta Bedford,
and Commissioners Amy Fowler, Jean Hamilton, Sally Greene, Earl McKee, and Anna
Richards
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None.
COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Deputy County Manager
Travis Myren, and Clerk to the Board Laura Jensen. (All other staff members will be identified
appropriately below)
Chair Price called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
A roll call was called; all members were present.
Due to current public health concerns, the Board of Commissioners is conducting a Virtual
Business Meeting on Tuesday, October 5, 2021. Members of the Board of Commissioners
participated in the meeting remotely. As in prior meetings, members of the public were able to
view and listen to the meeting via live streaming video at
http://www.orangecountync.gov/967/Meeting-Videos and on Orange County Gov-TV on
channels 1301 or 97.6 (Spectrum Cable).
In this new virtual process, there are two methods for public comment.
• Written submittals by email
• Speaking during the virtual meeting
Detailed public comment instructions for each method are provided at the bottom of this
agenda. (Pre-registration is required.)
1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
None.
Chair Price dispensed with reading the public charge.
Public Charge: The Board of Commissioners pledges its respect to all present. The Board
asks those attending this meeting to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner
toward each other, county staff and the commissioners. At any time should a member of the
Board or the public fail to observe this charge, the Chair will take steps to restore order and
decorum. Should it become impossible to restore order and continue the meeting, the Chair will
recess the meeting until such time that a genuine commitment to this public charge is observed.
The BOCC asks that all electronic devices such as cell phones, pagers, and computers should
please be turned off or set to silent/vibrate. Please be kind to everyone.
2
Arts Moment— No Arts Moment was available for this meeting.
2. Public Comments
a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
Delores Bailey said she is the owner of a home located at 203 N. Graham Street in
Chapel Hill; a stone house built in 1942 by the Campbell brothers. She said her family has lived
there since 1975. She said she is speaking tonight due to the taxes on this home. She said
the tax assessor and her staff responded to the distress of families living in Northside, and she
is one of those people. She said she completed an appeal application for her home and
participated in several talks with residents of Northside, and other areas of Orange County, who
were experiencing high tax increases. She said she followed all the appropriate steps, and in
her letter, she requested someone come by her home while she was there so she could walk
through her home and property with them to understand the tax value. She said she did not get
a visit and did not receive notification of anyone having come by her house. She said when her
tax bill came she called the tax office because she knows and followed the process. She said
her concern is that in 2019 her house, which is a 3 bedroom stone house that has not changed
very much in its lifetime, was valued at $192,000. She said when she received the letter from
the county on August 26, her home is now valued at $233,000, which is a 21% increase. She
said she called the tax assessor and was told staff did what they were supposed to do. She
said she told the tax assessor that she did not receive a visit and did not have anyone talk to
her. She said she appreciates the tax assessor's office efforts around the matter, but this
process did not help her and she does not understand why her 1400 square foot house on of
an acre is valued that high. She said there is something wrong with that.
Chair Price said she is sure staff will follow up with Ms. Bailey about her comments.
b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
(These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda
below.)
3. Announcements, Petitions and Comments by Board Members
Commissioner Hamilton said she attended the Eno Arts Mill grand opening on Friday,
October 1 st, which was a great time. She said there were lots of people and beautiful art, and
she is looking forward to see how it grows and the county's ability to support local artists and
increase access to the art for residents, especially in the Northern part of the county. She said
on September 29, she attended the board meeting for the Orange County Partnership for
Young Children. She said, just like the school system, preschools are facing shortages of
teachers and struggling to deal with COVID. She said she was surprised to hear the price of
cybersecurity insurance is going up because of more hacking, and some of the funding issues
make it hard for providers to survive. She said all should be aware young children are at risk of
not getting the services they need and the Partnership is doing everything it can to make sure
there is funding and support for providers and children.
Commissioner Hamilton petitioned to have a subcommittee of the Board of County
Commissioners (BOCC)work with staff to establish a temporary workgroup of community
partners to look at how Article 46 Sales Tax money has been spent and determine the county's
priorities moving forward. She said the BOCC agreed, in 2011-2012, to split Article 46 sales tax
proceeds 50-50 between schools and economic development. She said 10 years is up and it is
time to look at how the money is being spent.
3
Commissioner Greene said she also attended the Eno River Mill event and found it
delightful. She said it is wonderful that there is a lot of space for studio artists now, something
that has been needed in the county for a long time. She said October is also National Arts
Month, celebrated by Americans for the Arts, as well as National Endowment for the Arts. She
said the latter founded it in 1985, as a way to celebrate the ways arts bring value to our lives.
Commissioner Fowler said she attended the Chamber of Commerce's State of the
Community report on September 30 and found it very interesting. She said Orange County has
grown by 11% over the past 10 years, which is above the state average of 9%, but below
neighboring counties. She said she also attended the Juvenile Crime Prevention Council
(JCPC) meeting on October 1, and there is an unallocated balance of$36,000 that will be given
out again to current organizations and programs, as funds not allocated by the end of
December will return to the state. She said the group heard updates from various organizations
like the Dispute Settlement Center, Exchange Club, Volunteers for Youth, and Wren House and
all are providing services to slightly fewer clients than they had estimated, but increased
compared to prior six months of COVID. She said there is a new DPS area consultant,
Tasheena Wiggins and she reported that the State bill 207 was passed and signed by the
Governor, which raised the age for violent crimes for children by a few years. She said bill 615
also passed, which requires all juveniles with suspected mental health issues to have a
comprehensive clinical assessment. She said another ongoing bill would raise age of dropping
out of school from 16 to 18. She said she also attended the Eno arts event and is glad there is
additional space for arts and classes.
Commissioner Bedford petitioned the County Manager to determine next steps to review
the three county community centers facility needs, particularly an expansion to Rogers Eubanks
Neighborhood Association (RENA). She petitioned the county to develop an Orange County
Climate Plan that is integrated across all departments. She said the commission for the
environment says it is beyond its capacity and a third party consultant may be needed. She
said Carrboro and Chapel Hill have a plan, and Hillsborough is about to finalize its plan. She
petitioned the Manager to bring next steps and possible processes to develop a county climate
plan. She said she has attended three Climate Council meetings, and petitioned that the group
be reviewed and restructured. She said it could be done like the review of the climate tax, when
three commissioners met after the first year to do work or some other arrangement.
Commissioner McKee said he had no comments.
Commissioner Richards said she also attended the Eno River Mill event and looks
forward to spending more time there. She echoed the petition made by Commissioner Bedford
for the Orange County Climate Plan.
Chair Price said she was at the Eno River Mill grand opening and gave kudos to Katie
Murray, Arts Commission Director, and the Arts Commission for putting the event together. She
said she has been meeting with Mayors Hemminger and Lavelle and staff about the Greene
Tract. She said conversations are moving along and a community meeting should be possible
soon for awareness and feedback. She said she attended the Durham Technical Community
College Board of Trustees meeting today and one of the things they are looking at is affordable
housing near campus for students and other residents. She said this is Breast Cancer
Awareness Month and she highlighted the Health Department's newsletter discussing the topic.
She said Monday is Indigenous Peoples Day, and local indigenous tribes asked that this
observance continue.
Chair Price said the Board retreat happens every year in January, and she has asked
Commissioner Bedford, Commissioner Hamilton, and Commissioner Fowler to work on the
retreat and they have all agreed. She said Commissioner Bedford has done this before, and
she will take the lead. She encouraged the Board to contact Commissioner Bedford with any
ideas.
4
4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
a. Hispanic Heritage Month Proclamation
The Board considered approving a proclamation designating September 15-October 15,
2021 as Hispanic Heritage Month in Orange County.
BACKGROUND:
Hispanic Heritage Week began in 1968 under President Lyndon Johnson. President Ronald
Reagan extended Hispanic Heritage Week to 30 days in 1988. Hispanic Heritage Month starts
on September 15, as that date is significant to several Latin American countries. Independence
Day for the Latin American countries of Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and
Nicaragua is September 15. In addition, Mexico and Chile celebrate their independence days
on September 16 and 18, respectively. Dia de la Raza, recognized throughout Spanish-
speaking countries, celebrating Latin American heritage and cultural diversity occurs on
October 12.
In 1987, when Representative Esteban Torres of California proposed extending the week-long
celebration to a month, he noted that supporters of the legislation "want the Amerian people to
learn of our heritage. We want the public to know that we share a legacy with the rest of the
country, a legacy that includes artists, writers, Olympic champions, and leaders in business,
government, cinema, and science." Representative Torres' bill died in committee, but the
Senate passed a similar bill, and President Ronald Reagan signed it into law.
The 2021 theme for Hispanic Heritage Month is "Esperanza: A Celebration of Hispanic Heritage
and Hope." The theme invites everyone to celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month and reflect on
how great tomorrow can be if we hold onto our resilience and hope. The theme encourages
everyone to reflect on the Hispanic community's past and future contributions.
Annette Moore, Human Rights and Relations Director, reviewed the background
information for this item. She introduced Marlyn Valeiko, Language Access and Outreach
Coordinator, who is well respected in the community. She said Marlyn Valeiko found out that
there was a big need for masks in the Hispanic community and was instrumental in over 5,000
being distributed to community members.
Marlyn Valeiko read the proclamation:
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
HISPANIC HERITAGE MONTH PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS, Hispanic Heritage Month heritage began as Hispanic Heritage Week, established
by legislation sponsored by Rep. Edward Roybal of Los Angeles and was signed into law by
President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1968; and
WHEREAS, in 1988, the commemorative week was expanded to a month — September 15 to
October 15 — by legislation sponsored by Rep. Estaban Torres, amended by Sen. Paul Simon
and signed into law by President Ronald Reagan; and
WHEREAS, September 15 was chosen as the starting point for the commemoration because it
is the anniversary of the Cry of Dolores, early morning of 16 September 1810, which marked
the start of the Mexican War of Independence and thus resulted in independence for the New
5
Spain Colony, now Mexico, Guatemala, Belize, el Salvador, Costa Rica, Honduras and
Nicaragua in 1821; and
WHEREAS, throughout the year and especially during Hispanic Heritage Month, Americans
embrace, honor and celebrate the Hispanic community and its traditions and contributions; and
WHEREAS, Orange County has a diverse population and Hispanic residents constitute the
largest ethnic group in Orange County; and
WHEREAS, the Hispanic residents in Orange County are a diverse group with roots stretching
throughout North, Central, and South America, and many trace their heritage to the original
indigenous peoples of Latin America and Africa; and
WHEREAS, many Hispanic people came to this country as immigrants and have fought for
state and national initiatives providing pathways to citizenship and protecting the right to vote —
i.e., Dreamers, Temporary Protected Status holders, farmworkers, and essential workers; and
WHEREAS, throughout the history of the United States, members of the Hispanic community
have helped shape the social, political, and economic landscape of this Country and our
community; and
WHEREAS, in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic, members of the Hispanic community
helped keep our neighborhoods and communities vibrant and prosperous as our front-line
workers, teachers, business owners, scientists, soldiers, farmworkers, first responders, artists,
activists, colleagues, and friends;
NOW, THEREFORE, the Orange County Board of Commissioners does hereby proclaim
September 15 through October 15, 2021, as Hispanic Heritage Month in Orange County,
affirming the 2021 theme of"Esperanza: A Celebration of Hispanic Heritage and Hope," and
calls upon all residents of Orange County to celebrate this month through activities and
programs that enlighten and inspire our understanding of the amazing heritage of our Hispanic
families, neighbors and friends.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this the day of October 2021.
Renee A. Price, Chair
Orange County Board of
Commissioners
A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler, seconded by Commissioner Hamilton, to
approve the proclamation designating September 15-October 15, 2021 as Hispanic Heritage
Month in Orange County.
Roll call ensued
VOTE: Unanimous
6
5. Public Hearings
None.
6. Regular Agenda
a. Presentation of Final Report from the BOCC Elections Advisory Group (BEAG)
The Board received the Final Report on the Process for Electing County Commissioners
in Orange County from the BOCC Elections Advisory Group.
BACKGROUND:
At the Board of Commissioners' April 7, 2020 Virtual Business meeting, a request/petition was
presented that the Board discuss and potentially change a portion of the process under which
some or all Board members are elected.
The Board subsequently discussed the issue at its May 5, 2020 Virtual Business meeting and
voted to:
1) Establish a committee to study alternative methods of election;
2) Select members for the committee no later than January 31, 2021;
3) Have the committee review options and report back by July 31, 2021; and
4) For the Board to review the recommendations, and if necessary conduct public
hearings and make a decision in time for the March 2022 primary election.
The Board subsequently discussed the proposal further at its September 10, 2020 work
session. Staff requested direction from the Board on:
• the total number of members the committee should include;
• whether the committee should consist entirely of residents;
• whether election or other experts would be considered/appointed;
• whether there should be representation from nonprofit entities;
• whether there would be a formal application process; and
• any other details regarding the establishment of the committee.
Based on direction given at that meeting, the Clerk's Office solicited applications from Orange
County residents for fifteen (15) seats for the BOCC Elections Advisory Group, with
appointments to be made by January 31, 2021. The Group materials noted that the purpose is
to "study alternative methods/districts to elect the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) and
make a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners."
Staff advertised the application opportunity on the county website and also published two Public
Service Announcements regarding the Group. The opportunity to apply to serve was shared on
WCHL radio station. An announcement also occurred at the Board's October 20, 2020
Business meeting that the county was recruiting for potential appointees to the BOCC Elections
Advisory Group and that applications were available on the county website under Board of
Commissioners -Volunteer Advisory Boards & Commissions. The county received applications
from twenty-three (23) interested individuals.
At its February 2, 2021 Business meeting, the Board of Commissioners appointed fifteen (15)
members to the BOCC Elections Advisory Group. The Board directed the Group to select Co-
Chairs, with one individual from the District 1 electoral area of the county and one individual
7
from the District 2 electoral area of the county. The Board also approved a charge and timeline
for the Group, with the Group to provide its report back to the BOCC by July 31, 2021.
The BEAG subsequently convened seven times, with its first meeting on February 25, 2021.
Retired District Court Judge Jay Bryan joined the Group as its Facilitator at the Group's second
meeting on March 25, 2021. At that same meeting, Group Members Lisa Hazirjian and Patrick
Mulkey were elected as the Group Co-Chairs from Districts 1 and 2, respectively.
In concert with the BOCC's May 18, 2021 agreement by consensus to extend the BEAG's
report deadline to August 15, 2021, the BEAG approved its Final Report on the Process for
Electing County Commissioners in Orange County at its last meeting on August 5, 2021. That
Final Report, which is attached, details the Group's activities, discussions and materials
reviewed, and provides recommendations for BOCC consideration.
BEAG Facilitator and Retired District Court Judge Jay Bryan will be joined at the meeting by
Group Co-Chair Lisa Hazirjian and Group Co-Chair Patrick Mulkey to present the Final Report
to the Board. Other Group members may also be present to help address any questions.
Greg Wilder, County Manager's Office, noted that Patrick Mulkey is present for this
item, but is joining by telephone and will not have video. He reviewed the background
information for this item.
Judge Jay Bryan, Dr. Lisa Hazirjian, and Patrick Mulkey made the following PowerPoint
presentation, with Judge Jay Bryan starting:
Slide #1
BOCC ELECTIONS ADVISORY GROUP
Process for Electing County Commissioners
!n Orange County
FINAL REPORT
Presentation to Orange County Board of Commissioners
October 5, 2021
8
Slide #2
Members of the BOCC Elections Advisory Group (BERG)
were ApUg(nW by the Orange County Board of
Commissioners in February 2021 based on submitted
applications. The BEAD membership reflects geographic,
ethnic, racial and political diversity from across Orange
County.
GROUPMEMBERS
Patrick UUJK Y4—District 2,Co-Chair
Dr.Lisa ?—District 1,Cc-Chair
District 9 Susana VaWy,
Kathy Arab Dr.Krishna Ik1pjXW
Nicholas Batman ❑r.Jonathan r
(M,j;l rA as of May;2021) District 2
Dr.Nathan Boucher Brian Crawford
Dr.Jennifer Bremer Martha Jenkins
t1 Wft& Alicia Reid
Slide #3
Jenn Sykes
Rex'Xil liarns
BOCC Elections Advisory Group
Charge
To review,research,and evaluate the current method of electing commissioners.
as well as any altemative electoral methods or models,including but not limited tc
single member districts,aligning primary and general election methods,much-sea!
elections,and the number of commissioners.The Advisory Group shall assess al
options and altematives pursuant to the following crilaria=
i Constitutional and statutory requirements and voting rights law;
i Proportionality
i Equity
i Uniformity
i Simplicitylclarity
i Maximizing voter engagement
The Advisory Group's assessment should incorporate, to the extent possible.
anticipated population distribution changes based on the 2020 census.
9
Slide #4
The Advisory Group may consider options that require enabling legislatior
however, it must present to the SCCC options that do not require sucl
authorization.
Slide #5
CURRENT VOTING METHOD FOR ELECTING
MEMBERS OF THE GRANGE COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
Currently Orange County elects seven (7) commissioners_ Twc
commissioners are elected at-large, meaning candidates must reside
somewhere in Orange County, and voters from the entire county vote or
these candidates in both primaries and general elections_ There are twc
multi-member districts_ District 1 encompasses the Chapel Hill anc
Carrboro area and has three seats. District 2 includes the rest of Orange
County and has two seats. Candidates far these seats must reside in the
district in which they are running_In prim4ries,voters living in District One
vote only on District One candidates, and voters from District Two vote
only on District Two candidates. In general elections, voters from the
whole county can vote in both District One and District Two races.
10
Slide #6
Election Methods for County Commissioners
Authorized by North Carolina General Statute
• Single-member districts where voters in a district choose one represenlauv€
for their district
• Mull-member districts where voters in a district choose multipl€
representatives fortheir district.
• At-large seats voted on by all voters in the county.
• A combination of single-member districts and at-large.
■ A combination of multi-member districts and at-large-
Slide #7
RESOURCES AND INFORMA710N REVIEWED
• Presentation and information from Professor Robert Jayce and the UNC School of Govemmer
regarding legal options used in other counties and the legal options available to Orange County
Presentation and informaton slides from DirecbDr far.Rebecca �and the UNC Denwgraph
Cent2f an demag raphic features of Orange county;
Demographic iinfarmaiian related to-the urban and rural populations,and changes since the 201,
Census;
Information an areas currently experiencing growth,or areas expected to-experienr=g oMh far
example being the Mebane+Efland area);
Information on recently approved and proposed lafge residential developmenis in the County;
• Demographic inrormation on the two oounly school systenns.and county funding 1EYe15 far ead
district (Hate: the Chapel Hircarrboro Schaals have addhanal funding Chased on a vote
approved tax surcharge Thal is dedicated to the schools assessed on the residents of the schoc
doinct.);
Populatian information for Orange county broken down by precinct;
Cunrent method for electing members of the Orange County Board of Commissioners
Election resultB from 200C through 2020 from the North CaraJina Board of Elections and Orang-
County Board of Elections for seats on the Orange County Board of Commissioners;
• Information from the NGrth Gararana Associafion Df county Commissioners(NCACG)on electiar
methads for all 1 Do Narih Carolina counties;
• www.faircountiesnc.ora
htlp:JMwww.neacc.orail9WElection-Results—Campiled by NCACC—Provides caunty-by-count
elections demographics(race,gender,and paitical parry)for boards or comraissianers For Nord
Carolina's'30 cxwnti--
Public Inp-?Survey �i_=maanted by t-=-_EAG.
Dr. Lisa Hazirjian continued the PowerPoint presentation. She said the group decided it
needed to rely heavily on this survey for public input, due to pandemic. She said a lot of time
was spent preparing and revising the survey:
11
Slide #8
PUBLIC INPUT SURVEY
The BEAD developed a 16-question Public Input Survey to solici
feedback from the general public regarding the election of count.
commissioners in Orange County. There were 413 completed survey!
submitted in the two-week response period- Some of the aggregates fron
Survey responses were as follows:
Demographic Responses
- 89.3%of respondents said they always vote
- 16.46%said their voices were often heard,37.29%said sometimes,28.5$
said rarely and 17-60%said their voices were never heard
• 35.53%said they arrived at the polls surprised at who they were voting foi
64.4%were not surprised
• RaceJEthnicity of respondents- 69-76%white,3.98% African Americar
2-92%Hispanic,2.12%multi-racial,2-12%Asian and 1-59%another race
17.51%preferred not to answer.
Co-Chair Patrick Mulkey continued the PowerPoint presentation:
Slide #9
Election Method Responses
23.95%said they were satisfied with the current election method,41.0595
said they were not satisfied and 35%were unsure
•30.79%preferred single member districts;18.95%preferred a combinatior
of single member districts and at-large seats; 15.26% preferred
combination of multi-member districts and at-large seats;14.47%preferrec
multi-member districts with no at-large seats;and 10.79%preferred all at
large seats.
80.37%said they thought only people living in a bistrict should vote for tha
district's commis loner
Dr. Lisa Hazirjian continued the PowerPoint presentation:
Slide #10
BOCC ELECTIONS ADVISORY GROUP
RECOMMENDATION WINDINGS
1) The current system of mixing multiple representabveE
and at-large districts, where people vote in the
primaries in the districts,and the whole county votes fol
district representation in the general election, i�
unsatisfactory and not acceptable based an the
Group's research, 5MBMyN9,n�ft responses, anc
experiences of members as voters and precinct chairs
12
Dr. Hazirjian said the current system is among the worst legal options. She said at-
large elections are largely discouraged due to discriminatiroy impacts on racial minorities. Multi
district seats are confusing, and survey respondants agreed that only residents in the district
should vote for those who represent them.
Patrick Mulkey resumed the PowerPoint presentation:
Slide #11
2) The BEAD recommends seven single membe
residency districts where candidates living in the distric
are voted on in both the primary and general electioi
by only the voters in the respective districts (TruE
Election District)_ One member voted against thi-
option, believing that the county could benefit fron
some at-large districts.
Dr. Hazirjian continued the PowerPoint presentation. She said only BOCC has the
authority to adopt new distict maps. She said many see it as a conflict of interest when elected
officials can draw own district maps, so an independent party would help with this. She said
there are many experts in this area locally.
Slide #12
3) The BEAD strongly recommends that the Board at
Commissioners establish a multi-partisarVnen-partisar
independent advisory group and process in order to create
the seven single member districts. The BERG recommends
that the criteria outlined in the Charge (Constitutionality,
statutory requirements; voting rights law, proportionality,
equity, uniformity, §j� clarity and maximizing voter
engagement)be paramount in drawing districts_ In addition,
the drawing of districts should keep communities of interesl
intact (geographic, socio-economic and racial-ethnic) anc
avoid splitting precincts.
13
Patrick Mulkey continued the presentation. He said he agrees with making running for
office more affordable. He said there should be a number of public hearings, and he is not a
fan of zoom, as his internet is unreliable. He said his would like for people to see each other in
person and give their comments to the BOCC personally.
Slide #13
4} The BEAD recommends that the BOCG hold a series o
public meetings and listening sessions to allow public input
and that the BOCG act in time to allow for a public
referendum in 2022.
Slide #14
THANK YOU
QUESTIONS???
Chair Price asked if the BEAG members could be named aloud.
Dr. Hazirjian listed the members, noting that Nicholas Batman had to resign.
Commissioner Fowler thanked the group for its efforts and appreciated the rubric of
criteria. She asked if the group received any information or tutoring before filling out the rubrics
or if answers were based on opinions. She said multiple districts are considered inequitable,
but in that case people can single shot and that way minority groups have a better chance of
being elected. She said most indicated that this system was inequitable, and asked if there was
basis for that.
Judge Bryan clarified that Commissioner Fowler is talking about the decision-making
grid. He said the criteria were discussed as part of a motion by the board that approved it
without any definition of what those criteria meant. He said he did research but since he was
14
not part of the group and had no understanding of what the proponent of the group meant by
those simply, he created this with staff so there was some way to understand how to use the
criteria versus the different methods. He said the questions were designed to help people think
about what the issues were.
Dr. Hazirjian said she cannot necessarily parse what went into everyone's calculations,
but there was a great deal of discussion over the course of meetings about economic barriers
to service, issues related to having a great deal of population density in one area of the county
and spread out in other areas, etc. She said, in theory, at-large districts can give people an
opportunity to be represented by a local person, but in this particular county, due to how the
population is divided, it is thought to be a foregone conclusion that the person elected is very
likely to be from District 1.
Patrick Mulkey said he is from the rural area of the county and there are different things
to deal with there. He said there is no garbage truck to pick up trash or recycling, as there is in
the towns, and if the water does not work, rural residents do not call the water department, they
have to call a plumber because they are all on well systems. He said these are some of the
things in rural areas, for which residents do not call upon government, and taxes go up, but no
one knows who is listening on the county commissioner level. He said with a single member
district, residents could pinpoint that person and give them a call.
Commissioner Richards thanked the group for the thought it put into this report. He said
part of her goal is learning more about District 2, because she lives in, and is more familiar with,
District 1, but sees herself as a commissioner for the whole county. She asked if there is
thinking about what provincial single districts are versus commissioners who look at the whole
of the county. She asked if there are any thoughts about how a "One Orange" approach may
be discouraged by having the separate districts. She said if she were to be representing just
Chapel Hill, for example, her motivation to learn about the rest of the county may be different.
Patrick Mulkey said a lot of discussion dealt with confusion that voters have in trying to
figure out whom to call and who will represent them. He said he understands the issue that
single member districts will not create a unified Orange County, which he thinks is unrealistic.
He said it will come down to the character and trust in candidate, just like every election, and
being able to hold a candidate accountable, which he thinks is more easily done with single
member districts. He said it is a hard thing to negotiate at the county commissioner level, and
cited the difference in per pupil funding between the two school districts.
Dr. Hazirjian said in the group's discussion, several people, including herself, felt there
is value in at-large districts because those elected at-large are supposed to be thinking about
the whole county.
Dr. Hazirjian exited the meeting due to technical issues.
Commissioner Hamilton thanked the group for its thoughtful work. She said she is
concerned about the evidence used to reach the conclusions.
Dr. Hazirjian's connection was re-established and Chair Price invited her to finish her
comments.
Dr. Hazirjian said there is the concept that there is a closer tie between single member
districts and the members they serve, but everyone is entering into conversation with fellow
Commissioners with concern about the whole county. She said it comes down more to who is
elected, rather than whom they represent. She said in a system where there is no at-large,
there is a sense that the people representing the districts are not just about their districts but
also think about what is better for the whole.
Commissioner Hamilton said she was thinking about the evidence that supports the
recommendations of the BEAG and has a number of concerns, one being the public input
survey. She said 413 individuals divided by the number from the 2010 census of folks over 18
years of age is 0.3% of the county, which is not a sample that would be considered
15
representative. She said the breakdown by race, ethnicity, age or voting, may not actually
represent the viewpoints of the county, so for her it does not provide the evidence that
necessarily supports the conclusions. She said given that the survey was conducted over two
weeks in June during COVID, it is understandable why there is a small sample and why it may
not be representative. She said there is also a lack of analysis of past elections and election
results to demonstrate who is or is not being represented under the current system, under the
previous system when there were only five at-large commissioners, etc. She said a historical
perspective would help identify the problem that needs to be fixed. She said if the problem is
voters not being educated that is something that can be dealt with without having a new
system. She said it is nice and important that the viewpoints of the group and experience are
brought to the table, but she hopes experience is used to get evidence that is more objective
and understanding of the pros and cons of the different voting systems that are out there. She
agreed that single district commissioner, might not view the county as a whole, and it is
important to get more information about how this works in other counties and around the
country. She said she sees the time and effort put into this and the careful deliberations and
would think the evidence brought forth to support it could be more robust than what is seen.
Chair Price said the report was so thorough and she gave kudos to the group and staff
for their work. She said she holds a district 2 seat and, in one sense, the general election
allows people to say "I voted for you" and she knows she is working for the whole county. She
said the work of the BOCC has countywide impact so she definitely tries to think of the entire
county. She said she has special passion for District 2 and acknowledged that Chapel Hill and
Carrboro have town councils to represent them, but many parts of District 2 do not. She said
she also gets calls from District 1 residents and helps all the same. She said her concern with
single districts, and no at-large seats, is the possibility that Commissioners would feel they only
represent their specific district, rather than the entire county. She thanked the group for
attempting outreach and getting community input. She said it is often hard to get the
community to take a survey. She said she is uncertain about it right now, because she wants to
avoid the domination of one area over others.
Commissioner Fowler asked which rubric would represent the possibility of the current
system, minus the at-large positions.
Dr. Hazirjian said the county currently has blended districts with at-large on top of that.
She said there are only two counties in the State with a combination of at-large and multi-
member districts. She said it is very unusual.
Commissioner Fowler said it looked like there were others that had both districts and at-
large.
Chair Price said Orange County is different in having voting in the district for the primary
and everyone votes in the general elections.
Commissioner Fowler said since she is an at-large representative, she agrees that at-
large positions may benefit Chapel Hill-Carrboro area over the rest of the county, although in
past elections folks from District 2 have won that seat. She said she can see how getting rid of
that might make things more equitable geographically. She said her concern is how different is
one side of Chapel Hill is from another. She said if Chapel Hill and Carrboro were split up into
some sort of pie, it could make it even worse for the county in terms of equity. She said, as an
at-large candidate, she did have to campaign across the entire county and get to know people
she was representing across the county.
Dr. Hazirjian said the concern about the pie option, is why the group said to keep
communities of interest together and avoid splitting precincts. She said she is not sure how the
map would be most equitable. She said in terms of population there would likely be four
districts carved out of something close to district 1 and three out of something close to District
2. She said it would not guarantee more representation for District 2.
16
Commissioner McKee said he has deja vu reading some of the comments in the
appendices because they are similar to those brought up during discussions when the current
system was being developed. He said he was involved in that process many years ago and, at
one time, he might have made those comments himself. He agreed that representation is
heavily weighted toward urban areas of the county, because that is where people live. He said
he still agrees with the belief that single member district is beneficial for accountability. He said
holding a district 2 seat demands more accountability to those who have lived in Orange County
for generations, as well as those who have just moved here. He said he does not agree that 7
separate districts would create a more divisive board, but it may encourage more discussion.
He said he holds a rural seat, and if he had not spoken out against light rail because he saw no
benefit to those in the rural areas, while the tax burden would have applied to whole county, it
would not have allowed for a fairly robust conversation over a multi-year period. He said he is
open to healthy discourse as long as it is not vicious. He said if the BOCC can figure out how
to draw the districts, he can see benefits to single member districts. He said he strongly
supports District nominated, District elected. He said it makes no sense to be nominated by
District 2 and voted on by the whole county. He said in Orange County, winning the primary
equals winning the election. He said the question for him is how to draw districts and how to
ensure if a change is made, it allows for a broader range of political views to be present.
Commissioner Greene thanked the group and staff for the thorough and informative
report. She said the only thing she is really clear on right now is that, whether there are only
districts or combination with at-large, district candidates should be nominated and elected only
by one district because current process is confusing. She said in a way it is causing
commissioners to serve two masters. She agreed with Commissioner Hamilton that more
public input is needed before a referendum.
Chair Price said to be clear, the Board will not be doing an up or down vote on anything
soon, until a group is put together to look at how to draw the districts, which would require
public input.
Commissioner Greene said seven districts may not even be the right number, and more
conversation is needed.
Chair Price agreed.
Commissioner Bedford asked if the group had more time, is there anything else it would
have wanted to study or explore.
Patrick Mulkey said possibly nonpartisanship, but to him, that is a joke, as there is no
way to really hide one's political leanings.
Judge Bryan said a couple of members discussed needing more time, but because of
deadline from the Commissioners, the group did not really discuss other potential paths
because it was trying to meet the deadline for the referendum. He said a person in a district
seat should think about the county as a whole, and commissioners could take a pledge
promising to do so. He said there was good conversation about what at-large could provide
and what seven districts and no at-large would provide. He referred to the question from
Commissioner Hamilton about desiring more substantial evidence of what the group found to
support this recommendation, and said more information can be gathered.
Commissioner Bedford thanked the board and staff for their hard work. She agreed with
other commissioners that the survey sample size of 413 is a little weak, and just means more
public outreach and representation is necessary. She said she is not sure that the public was
demanding this discussion. She said the previous discussion was not about districts, but really
focused on methods that do require general assembly approval, especially district nominate,
district elect, with which she agrees. She said she is in District 1, and has struggled with some
of the recent zoning requests. She said it felt that there was more pressure on the two District
2 and two At-Large Commissioners, and she felt less accountable. She said when
17
Commissioner Dorosin and Commissioner Rich presented this they were more focused on
having the two District 1 candidates in that one election, and the fact that they lost and single
shot voting. He said in talking with Commissioner Dorosin and trying to get him to explain it, he
argued that typically single member districts help minorities get elected. She said that that logic
here does not hold water because a Black woman just won by over 2000 votes. She said other
reasons were put forth but she said it was from two commissioners who had lost a race and not
from the public that brought this forth at this time, and she voted against it because she did not
want to spend a lot of time and money and concern on this from sour grapes. She said all this
work has been done, and she thinks far more public outreach would be needed. She said with
the General Assembly drawing districts, now is not the time to be doing this. She said if
pandemic numbers come down and children can be vaccinated, that opens up a window later to
have the real public outreach, the in person meetings and in-depth study that would truly be
needed for everyone. She said it is pretty bad that people do not know whom to call. She said
the survey shows more voter education is needed on that, but she is not persuaded either way.
She said she thinks the Board should wait and see, and really consider whether or not to
proceed with any additional changes, or whether to proceed incrementally by just focusing on
district nominate, district elect as a first step and get public input on that.
Commissioner McKee said his main concern is that if a change is made, he wants to
make sure it is to a better system. He said if it goes to seven districts, he is concerned about
how those districts will be drawn, and if it will have an impact on how well people feel they are
represented. He said there are no uniform worldviews in Orange County, and neighbors of all
kinds are living peaceably with each other. He said if these discussions happen, they need to
happen in public, in multiple places across the county, and the group chosen to redraw the
districts has demographic, geographic, and political diversity.
Chair Price said Commissioner Dorosin brought this up last, but the issue has come up
many times in the past. She said it is confusing and residents of District 2 want to feel they are
choosing their representative, and not Chapel Hill.
Chair Price said there is a need for further information, before moving forward with
possibly redrawing districts.
Commissioner Hamilton said before having a group redraw districts, she wants more
input from the community to see if it even wants to visit this topic.
Commissioner Bedford said she would like to wait to discuss next steps because the
BOCC will receive an update on the census in October. She suggested adopting 1-4 at this
time.
Commissioner Greene agreed with Commissioner Hamilton and Commissioner Bedford.
Commissioner McKee said before moving forward, there should be in person meetings
in various places across the county for the public to attend.
Chair Price said there seems to be no urgency to get this on the 2022 Ballot. She said
the report should be widely distributed and feedback gathered. She said the BOCC has heard
the desire for a change in the system for years. She asked if the Board wanted to sunset this
committee or use it for future discussions.
A motion was made by Commissioner Bedford, seconded by Commissioner Green, to
accept the Manager's recommendations 1-4.
Commissioner Fowler asked who the BOCC would use to gather more community input.
Chair Price said it would be staff.
Commissioner Greene said this can be decided at a future meeting.
Chair Price said, in short, it would be staff as this committee is being sunsetted.
18
Roll call ensued
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Chair Price thanked the BEAG for its service, and said the Board looks forward to
reviewing the census information.
Greg Wilder said the 2020 census information is available, and staff has evaluated the
numbers given the current electoral districts. He said the BOCC will review this at the October
19t" business meeting, per the recommendation of the County Attorney. He said the BOCC will
be looking at the census given the currently electoral districts, not any potential districting
changes.
A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler, seconded by Commissioner Greene, to
take a 3-minute break at 9:01 p.m.
Roll call ensued
VOTE: UNANMIOUS
A motioned was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Hamilton,
to reconvene the meeting at 9:04 p.m.
Roll call ensued
VOTE: UNANMIOUS
Bonnie Hammersley suggested the Board postpone item 7-a to the next business
meeting, in the interest of time.
A motion was made by Commissioner Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to
move Item 7-a to the October 19, 2021 Business Meeting.
Roll call ensued.
VOTE: Unanimous
b. Longtime Homeowner Assistance (LHA) Program
The Board considered approving the implementation of the proposed program design
for the Longtime Homeowner Assistance Program.
BACKGROUND:
At its June 15, 2021 Business meeting, the Board of Commissioners allocated $250,000 in
American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds for a new program to assist households affected by
revaluation of property tax bills. The current staff proposal creates a program to cover the
increase in property taxes due to revaluation and would serve Orange County homeowners
who:
• are at least 50 years old;
• earn below 80% of the area median income;
• have lived in their home for at least 10 years; and
• experienced an increase in property taxes during the 2021 tax revaluation
19
Staff from the Orange County Housing and Community Development Department (OCHCD),
Tax Department, and Finance and Administrative Services Department met over the summer to
coordinate, design and begin implementing the proposed program. Staff created a draft
program application (Attachment 1), a proposed plan for reviewing and approving applications
and outlining each department's role in process (Attachment 2), and a proposed
communications and outreach strategy to share information about the program with County
residents (Attachment 3).
Housing and Community Development Department staff will be primarily responsible for
administering the LHA program — collecting applications and supporting documentation from
applicants, and verifying program eligibility for each applicant. The Orange County Housing
Helpline will play a key role in assisting county residents with completing applications and
gathering documentation. The Tax Department will provide some of the eligibility verification
details to Housing and Community Development Department staff during application review.
Once an application is approved for assistance, Housing and Community Development
Department staff will coordinate with the Finance and Administrative Services Department and
Tax Department to issue a credit towards the taxpayer's property tax bill. The program has a
proposed launch date of October 8, 2021. All applications must be received by 5:OOpm on
December 15, 2021 to allow time for processing.
Corey Root, Housing and Community Development Director, reviewed the background
information for this item. She said $48,400 is 80% AMI for a single person and $69,100 for a
family of four. She said the current proposal allows people to layer different types of
assistance, and thus could qualify for the Jackson Center program, as well as this program
through the county. She said, due to tax deadlines, the goal is to have this up and running by
October 8, 2021 if approved. She said staff will have online and physical copies of applications
available in multiple areas of county for easy access. She said partner agencies will be
available to assist residents with completing applications, and applicants can also receive
assistance by called the Housing Helpline. She said due to a conflict of interest, the Tax Office
cannot receive these applications, so the Housing and Community Development Department
will play that role. She said there is currently no award cap, realizing that could be an equity
measure. She said staff has a robust communication plan for the program, if approved, to get
information to residents who need it.
Nancy Freeman, Tax Administrator, said the amount of the award would be based on
the difference in the amount of county tax from 2020 to 2021, as opposed to it being based on
the full tax bill. She said this program seeks to cover the county portion of tax bill, which was
impacted by the revaluation.
Chair Price said when she proposed this program back in June, she was thinking of
ways to help homeowners regardless of age, because the goal is neighborhood preservation, in
addition to keeping people in their homes. She said with criterion here of having to own the
home for 10 years, the youngest anyone would probably be to benefit would be about 30 or 31.
She said she is thinking about younger families, and wants to be able to protect them as well.
She suggested eliminating the age requirement and moving forward with the other criterion.
Commissioner Fowler asked for clarification that there is no limit to the value of the
home for assistance.
Corey Root said that is not currently part of the proposal.
Nancy Freeman said capping the value of the home was not something staff observed
in other programs while researching.
20
Commissioner Fowler reiterated that this program is designed only to cover the
difference in tax bill from 2020-2021, so would benefit only those residents with increases from
the revaluation.
Nancy Freeman said yes.
Public Comment
Delores Bailey said she supports this proposed program and applauds the Board for its
effort; however, this program will not apply to people like her and she wonders how many other
people also fall in this same category. She said this program misses those in the middle. She
said EmPOWERment is a HUD certified counselor and has been talking to homeowners about
how this program may benefit them. She said her concern is for people who, because of AMI,
do not qualify for this. She said the difference in her taxes between 2020 and 2021 is $40,000.
Chair Price asked if a different AMI level would be better.
Delores Bailey said she applauds the program, but if her taxes increase by the same
amount again next year, she will not be able to hold onto her home.
George Barrett, Executive Director of the Marian Cheek Jackson Center for Saving and
Making History, said he has been an Orange County resident for over eight years. He said the
Jackson Center is located in the Northside Community, one of three historically Black
neighborhoods the center works with. He said the Board is aware that in April, the new
inequitable revaluations were seen in Northside, disproportionate to other communities. He
said he supports the work to continue correcting the inequitable system, and he thanked county
staff for the considerations made with this program so it can have the most impact. He said he
appreciates 80% AMI limit, as well as ability to layer relief because concentration of
development in these areas has caused increased tax burden to residents. He said the Board
should continue to listen to residents and leaders who are talking about inequities like this that
burden residents. He said he is excited to move forward with this program.
Commissioner Richards asked if Ms. Bailey's valuation or tax bill is up 21%.
Bonnie Hammersley said the payments through this program are for the increase of the
tax bill, not the increase in the valuation. She said a $41,000 property value increase would
equate to a $340 increase in the county portion of the tax bill.
Commissioner Richards thanked the Manager for clarifying, and said she has been
trying to understand the age requirement. She said if the goal is to support residents who have
experienced the increase, she supports the 10 year home ownership because it is geared
towards long term homeowners, but would support removing age requirement.
Commissioner Hamilton thanked staff for its work on this. She asked if the application
should have more than one space for homeowner name.
Corey Root said that is a great point and the application can be adjusted to reflect that.
She also noted that the date of birth question would be removed if the age requirement is
removed from the criteria.
Commissioner Hamilton said otherwise, she felt the application was clear. She said she
also supports removing the age criteria. She asked if community centers, schools, libraries,
and senior centers will be included in outreach efforts.
Corey Root said those groups are on the current distribution list and staff will do a
special push for them.
Chair Price said the Department on Aging has a good listserv, as well as churches and
other faith communities.
Commissioner McKee asked if the current AMI in Orange County can be identified.
Corey Root said it changes based on the number of people in the household, but a
house of 4 is $69,100.
21
Commissioner McKee asked if the number of many homeowners that would be eligible
for this could be identified.
Travis Myren said there are about 10,000 households that have owned a home for 10
years or more, and experienced an increase in the tax bill due to revaluation. He said using the
countywide percentage of people making 80% AMI or higher, it leads to a number of 1378 and
average increase among that group was $158, equaling $218,000 in estimated exposure. He
said he feels less confident that this cohort represents income distribution of the entire county,
but this was the best estimation staff could measure to determine if the allocated $250,000
would be sufficient.
Commissioner McKee said this would mean $218,000 per year escalating and ongoing.
He said every time there is a revaluation in Orange County values will increase, minus a
catastrophic event. He said even if values do not go up, the county can expect $200,000 plus
in ongoing costs for this program. He said this will be paid with ARPA money this year, and
asked if this will have to come from county funds going forward.
Travis Myren said it will be a board policy decision of how to fund the program in future
years.
Commissioner McKee said it would likely be funded through other sources. He said he
owns and runs a farm, and benefit from a lower tax rate due to him farming the land. He said if
he sells the land, the money has to be paid back. He asked if the homeowner passes away
and house is sold, is there a clawback provision on this tax advantage. He asked if the home
is handed down to the next generation of family, will this be a generational subsidy to the family
over time. He said the original proposal did not have an age limit, but asked if the Jackson
Center age limit was 65.
Travis Myren said the age limit for that program is 62.
Chair Price said this program would not decrease the value of the property, so it is
dependent on the homeowner, and the next generation will be liable for the value of the home.
Commissioner McKee said he understands. He said there is a subsidy to the taxes
paid, and he gets an advantage of paying a lower tax rate on his farm, for which he would
required to repay should he sell the land.
Chair Price said Commissioner McKee's benefit is due to the use of his land, as
opposed to his income.
Commissioner McKee said he is asking these questions because he does not believe
this program will stop, nor should it, once started due to the gentrification seen across the
county. He said he wants to think about the long-term implications of the program.
Chair Price said she wants to hear from George Barrett on the Jackson Center's
program.
Commissioner Greene said the Jackson Center uses age 62, but it is flexible based on a
formula that they use. She said she understands why Chair Price wants to decrease the age to
at least 50, and she has gone back and forth herself. She said Commissioner Richards has
brought up a good question about the basic purpose of the program. She is on the side of
getting rid of age limit in favor of preserving community. She said Commissioner McKee has
brought up some good questions about the sustainability of the program and she wonders if
there should be a clawback provision. She said if someone is going to buy a property at a
gentrified inflated price, why not have a provision where the county would get maybe three
years of the tax back, and let the buyer and seller work it out about who pays.
Chair Price said her original intent was to help preserve the neighborhood, and perhaps
with an extra push for seniors who may have lived there for half a century.
George Barrett said there is no age limit in the Jackson Center property tax program. He
said age is taken into account and is used it to weigh the award amount. He said the
22
community did not want to include age limit when creating the program, because there are
people across age groups dealing with these issues.
Commissioner Richards said the issue of heir's property came up while she was looking
into this program. She said the idea of a clawback is something that might be included if the
home in sold to developer or investor, instead of being passed down to an heir if concern if
neighborhood preservation is the goal. She said this is a way to sustain the program once
ARPA money is gone. She said part of concern with age is if there is a 25 year old that inherits
a property and wanted to stay in the neighborhood, the tax impact will be the same to them.
She said for future funding it could be treated one way if it is an heir property, even though it
would require more investigation for county staff. She said this would have to apply across the
county. She said she thinks this is an interesting concept if the property will be sold for
investment.
Nancy Freeman said if the property is being sold or passed down, there is still the
requirement that the property has been owned for 10 years, and that time clock would start over
again at that time.
Commissioner Hamilton said she looks at this program as a way to help people who
barely make enough to make ends meet, and to stretch money more. She said for these types
of residents clawbacks are needless complications, and each homeowner should be considered
on their own income. She said she understands the point of funding the program in the future.
She said this program can be viewed as a pilot and, based on impact, the Board can determine
whether to continue funding or not.
Commissioner McKee said he appreciated Commissioner Greene clarifying the
clawback on farm use, as it is not necessarily the seller who pays it, and is quite often the
buyer. He said the reason he brought that up because if the home is sold for development, it is
coming out of what the goal of the Board is. He said he doubts a buyer in Chapel Hill or
Carrboro will flinch at a few thousand more dollars for the necessity of covering the payback of
the subsidy. He clarified he is not interested in a generational clawback. He said he thinks the
program is trying to maintain the ability of residents to stay in their homes, while their home
values are increasing. He said he is glad to hear the reminder from Commissioner Richards
that this will be a countywide program, because a lot of discussion surrounds urban areas. He
said his only issue with program is the age requirement, and he would like to keep the focus on
the aging population near retirement age
Chair Price said she would like to see this program without age limits, since there are
other relief options with age requirements.
A motion was made by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Hamilton,
to approve the proposed Longtime Homeowner Assistance program design, with the removal of
the age requirement.
Commissioner Bedford asked for clarification on whether or not the calculations Travis
Myren mentioned earlier only included those over age 62.
Travis Myren said no.
Commissioner Greene said she is struggling with the age, and age 50 could be a
compromise. She said since this is a pilot, would it be better to start with less restrictions and
add more later, if necessary, or have age limit now and open it up in the future.
Chair Price said she wants to keep people in their homes, regardless of age. She said
there are young families who may have lost jobs over the past year, but want to stay in the
same home. She said gentrification may continue, and it may be difficult to maintain income.
She said the point of the program is to keep people in homes regardless of age.
23
Commissioner McKee said if someone qualified based on AMI, and then changes jobs
to a higher salary, they be removed from the program. He asked if the 10-year ownership
requirement would reset at that time, and if all four criteria have to be met.
Commissioner Richards said that was her understanding from talking with staff. She
said if funds are available and this is a pilot, it should be open to more people since the
calculations were not limited to an age group.
Corey Root said the requirements all have to be met, but the 10-year requirement only
applies to home ownership. She said it does not require that someone make less than 80%
AMI for 10 years, for example.
Commissioner McKee said that information answers his question.
Nancy Freeman said this application would need to be redone on an annual basis to
ensure qualification.
Corey Root said yes, for income verification.
Commissioner Bedford said Commissioner Greene's question is important and she does
not have an exact answer, but because of pandemic she wants to "go big", recognizing that the
ARPA funding will be gone after this year. She said it is hard to cut back on programs after
they have started, but the Board has to be prepared to make changes after getting data from
the pilot program about future funding.
Roll call ensued
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Chair Price said the social justice fund is another possible source of funding for the
future.
c. Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization 2050
Metropolitan Transportation Plan
The Board received a presentation from Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro (DCHC)
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) staff on the 2050 Metropolitan Transportation Plan
(MTP) Alternatives Analysis.
BACKGROUND:
The DCHC MPO is responsible for long-range transportation planning for Durham County
and parts of Orange and Chatham counties, and the organization is updating its MTP. In
Orange County, the DCHC MPO planning area covers the areas around Hillsborough,
Chapel Hill and Carrboro delineated by a blue line in Attachment 1.
The MTP, which is required by Federal law, recommends major transportation projects,
policies and strategies designed to maintain existing transportation systems and to plan for
the region's future travel needs. The Plan must be fiscally constrained, which means that
projected revenues must cover the anticipated costs. Projects must be in the 2050 MTP to
receive any state and federal transportation funding through the State Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP). Projects are selected from the MTP and processed through
the State's prioritization process (SPOT) for inclusion in the STIP, which is a 10-year funding
program. This requires several steps over a multi-year timeframe, and not all projects listed
in the MTP will be included in the final STIP.
24
There are several steps involved in the MTP Process (Attachment 2), and the current focus
is on the Alternatives Analysis. Goals and objectives were identified previously, and the
Deficiency Analysis and Needs Assessment were completed in May 2021. An Alternative is
a combination of improvements to a transportation network. This includes a set of highway,
transit, other transportation improvements (such as bicycle and pedestrian improvements),
and a land use scenario that depicts the distribution of population and employment for the
year 2050. These Alternatives are then analyzed using the Triangle Regional Model (TRM),
which forecasts future travel statistics based on assumptions concerning the highway
network, transit service and other transportation facilities. It is very unlikely that one of the
Alternatives in its entirety would be advanced as the Preferred Option. Most likely, the final
MTP will be a combination of the various Alternatives.
Attachment 3 provides the full schedule of MTP Local Input meetings on the Alternatives
Analysis. Press releases and public engagement events have been posted on the county's
website throughout the planning process. More information on the 2050 MTP can be found
on DCHC MPO 2050 MTP website.
MPO Next Steps
Over the next few months, the DCHC MPO Board will use comments collected from the
public and local governments to direct the development of a Preferred Option. The Preferred
Option becomes the Draft 2050 MTP, which is anticipated to be released in October 2021.
The Final 2050 MTP is tentatively scheduled to be adopted by the MPO Board in December
2021.
Staff Involvement
Orange County Transportation Planning staff attends bi-weekly meetings at Triangle J
Council of Government (TJCOG) where TJCOG, the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill
Institute of Transportation Research and Education (UNC ITRE), the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), the
Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO), DCHC MPO, and local technical
staff discuss every aspect and detail of the Community Viz model and the Triangle Regional
Model (TRM). Both programs analyze the transportation network in a comprehensive and
multimodal manner. The TRM is vetted by multiple agencies including UNC's ITRE (ITRE),
TJCOG, CAMPO, and DCHC MPO technical staff. Throughout the planning process, Orange
and Durham County staffs worked with local jurisdictions and regional agencies in multi-step
data review including:
• Community Viz— Current and Future Land Use parcels, including Certificate of
Occupancy
• Network Analysis — Road network data review, including lane and shoulder width
• Employment Analysis — Point data for all places of employment
Attachment 4 is a list of Orange County (including municipal) major highway projects in the
Alternatives Analysis. Any specific comments on the list are welcome at this time and may
assist with the selection of highway projects to be included in the Preferred Option (Draft
2050 Plan). Transit, bicycle and pedestrian project lists are not yet available from the MPO.
However, it is expected that the Orange County transit projects will be initially taken from the
Orange County Transit Plan (2017) and any new or different projects resulting from the
Transit Plan Update (2021) will be incorporated at a later date.
Key highlight in Draft 2050 MTP highway projects:
25
• Due to the financial constrained nature of the MTP, when highway projects are
removed, they are replaced by other highway projects per state and federal transportation
funding regulations.
o Example: Orange Grove Road extension (2045 MTP) was removed from the State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). This allows for Orange County's priority— NC-
86 improvement from US-70 to NC-57 —to be added to the 2050 MTP.
OUTBoard Action
On September 15, 2021, the Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard) provided the
memo at Attachment 5 for the BOCC's consideration. Highlights of OUTBoards comments
are provided below:
• The OUTBoard recommends that Orange County collaborate with other local
jurisdictions to add off-street bicycle and pedestrian corridors within Orange County to
the MTP, with an emphasis on linking parks, population centers, and other
destinations.
• Recreational facilities available for the public use in a manner that is multi-
generational and accessible to all county citizens at both the countywide and
community level. (Orange County Comprehensive Plan - Park and Recreation Goal
#3)
• An efficient and integrated multi-modal transportation system that protects the natural
environment and community character. (Orange County Comprehensive Plan -
Transportation Goal 1)
• A multi-modal transportation system that is affordable, available, accessible to all
users, and that promotes public health and safety. (Orange County Comprehensive
Plan - Transportation Goal 2)
• A countywide and regionally-integrated, multi-modal transportation planning process
that is comprehensive, creative and effective. (Orange County Comprehensive Plan -
Transportation Goal 4)
Nishith Trivedi, Transportation Planner II, introduced the item and Andy Henry.
Andy Henry, Transportation Planner DCHCMPO, gave the following PowerPoint
presentation:
Slide #1
ZURH:`.H 'H:\fiEL HILL \FREE k
DCHC
ME IROPOLRAH ALP.NNING--UN
2050 Metropolitan Transportation Plan
— Alternatives Analysis —
www.h1tJy12050MTP-A1tsAn
26
Slide #2
O TRM Boundary
What is DCHC
MPO Area?
-ram ` ,1x ASS y
9CHC n—N—
Selry G.—fa[em ) W
Slide #3
Transportation Planning Framework DCHC
pliwil
preHemlre skatr nquln nt}cr MP,;N and RPOr,
—I them pl.M ed&—Mn
pareatEan Plen n M
.Y..r MPO R.alir.d}.d.n11Y(-MP4r m07'
fit-Pulil.n ixlutln/lu keenebeik
.porkaHm Plan
iriarivaauan p.x.x-#h.patmaY
In6nfhe STP
10•Yfir Starf
ranvpo•rtarinn
_Pro� enr Fund..prohcFs,
r9sr—i5TkP) 1nrl.&i M➢0's Tile plug rural prgl fit
yaara•Mi—ysr r, Feeeral Rppa L-f flratq Ye
yeers-tlevelopmenlal
snl]
MTP is fiscally constrained.thus,it
will be a subset of the CTP
Slide #4
Previous Public Comment DCHC
Before Myiaw Deficiency Analysis data,remember what public has already told us
MPO Goals Survey 1 MPO Goals Survey
Highest ranked policies: Most common themes:
• Encourage biking and walking - Reduce personal vehicle
• Increase transit service dependence
• Coordinate land use and - Protect environment-, increase
transportation sustainability
• Increase car pools and ride - Support low-income&minority
shares populations
- Enhance transit connectivity
- Increase bicycle and pedestrian
See Goals web page(click here) I infrastructure
for Goals&Objectives and
survey response details.
27
Slide #5
Demographics DCHC
20?0 NC TRIANGLE REGION ESTIMATED MP0
2650 POPULATION&JOBS GROWTH DCHC
. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .
t it
19 mllllon 1.3 mnlan 3.111�n Cew�i 3P16 '2a5» ] %change
C Fatlmm• i6,r61 +may'+ 51,141 flats
yy ol.nem 3oo,sas ysaao6 157,967 sx�
M.678 199,a77 49,799 15%
T "&59 1 ]33,729 2ffm Sm
t nulat ese,om tf6 mllllon M` 1
Wl+n 3P36 iwP 4W295 K9191g!
CF11Fa r' -1,3S8 24,,426 1_„O 215%
13- n7.114 D'.Ma IMMA 85Y.
Om a 71,516 116,M 45,I53 69%
r�r 2x,9ea s�63 2y;37s a1n
.x�wo-nara�w,m nm.xwr d�
Slide #6
Alternatives Analysis DCHC
Purpose: staff, public and Board discuss different
land use and transportation possibilities
Preferred Option likely to be mixture of the
assumptions and projects from Alternatives
Analysis scenarios
Alternatives not fiscally-constrained
Today's presentation has overview-- Full
complement of tables and maps on Web site
Slide #7
The Scenarios DCHC
Plans&Trends Scenario +Includes N-3 BRT,CRT pur•Ral
Also known as business-as-usuol,this scenario distributes 2050 population ;Inoludee 1-05widertnp,and US 70
and employment based an Current land use plans and policies,and creates and NC 54n odernI atop
an improved transportation system based an the current long-range
transportation plan.
Shared Leadership Scenario
This scenario Could called the we-con-do-betterscenario.It increases
the intensity and mix of land use at major employment hubs and travel
corridors,and assumes additional transportation funding for transit
facilities,services,and a few roadway improvements. 4 Rdd15.641 BRT.Nh CRT Pw•Rod
All Together Scenario
This scenario increases the intensity and mix of
land uses at major employment hubs and travel corridors,and works to
link minority,low-income,and zero-car households to jobs.This scenario
Scenario descriptions—LJnk focuses on biking and walking facilities,and provides transit services in
major commuting corridors,often instead of increased roadway capacity.
Add CRT to Mebane NC 54 BRT High—I'm High-I'ma to P'boraHboro C—Oute Streets
28
Slide #8
Metrics: VMT and VHT DCHC
To l Daly VMT B VHT C—p—dto E.0 • Compared to the E+C scenario(No
Build):
� � • VMT(vehicle miles traveled)
increases except for the All
• Together scenario.
• VHT(vehicle hours traveled)
decreases in all three scenarios
• At the regional and MPd level,there is
M little difference among the three
scenarios in VMT,VHT,travel time,
travel distance,overall congestion,and
mode share. All Together has slight
• Fal tablo of msssur of Ef%ccmnass(MOEs)—Link advantage,e.g.lower VMT and VHT.
• Key MOE gephe—Link
Slide #9
Jobs Grmyth
Metrics: - - - BEEN
-
Key Measures
DEFICIENCIES PLANS& SHARED ALL
&NE€05 TRENDS LE APEeSEgr TOOET—
Measure: ISASELINe1
As we invest more,the measures move in a __ * "— II* III * - III
positive direction. AA * „ 1110 INI. 7u.11l�
However,the ~" ro"
movement is not large. "" ;::W WOWage �
Measure values are IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINA =+I 0+�
very similar.
..,»„.... IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEA �+I♦
i04444444 !!W44W 444ltt4tti444
C 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
�— $ gas s : $ss
Slide #10
2050 Shand L—de h,e
Metrics: Congestion Maps
—000ep�.r nwn
ee-te6wneKi
�o i x�cwwwi
• This is the congestion map for the Shared — •�e°wn,
Leadership scenario,which has the highest
highway investment among the scenarios,
• Congestion will persist on the interstatesand major _
commuting corridors.
J
- r
29
Andy Henry said the orange roads mean the volume of the roadway equals the capacity.
He said red roads mean the volume of the roadway equals 120% of the capacity.
Slide #11
Metrics: Equity Measures DCHC
.... ..............
On .o
lower vehicle ownership rates,
live forther frorn work.
ucrnorelikclytodepc!ndenpLiblictransportafion,and,
are more likely to be involved in a crash as a pedestrian.
10,
Slide #12
Metrics DCHC
Measure of Effectiveness (MOEs} —.......`. �a.,.....................................................................................
—!a-
. ..... ...,
,.wu....=•,rc�M'.x-x.�zxnixrt.x..............A0.........d1.......AA4..........Uk.........Rk
Current measures: safety; travel time;and
TOM program '77
Travel Choice Neighborhoods [in
development]
Isochrone maps
Travel Time
WlanCVl�N L A e3 p e W
Slide #13
Schedule & Public Engagement DCHC
Released July 29th Web page —ClirkAlternativestab at this link
(wdh CAMPO)
Comment Period: Survey --iink
7129121 through Online workshops (withCAINPo)
9115121 (exceeds42•eay
policy) Present to local boards and commissions, list
on web page
Four Focus groups for community of concern
Public hearing at September 151 Board
meeting
Notifications: Email service; public affairs notices;
social media
30
Slide #14
Next Steps DCHC
Complete public engagement activities and review feedback
Joint DCHC MPO and CAMPO Board meeting,September 29
Release Preferred Option in October,two versions:
Follows vision of Goals such as multi-modal,fight climate
change and equitable
Follows funding restrictions,thus majority of investments in
roadways
Coordinate with Durham and Orange county transit plans
Commissioner Greene thanked staff for the presentation. She said she watched the
September 1st meeting when the elected officials in the room had pointed comments about the
three alternatives, and them being all highways and lacking in the shared values of public
transportation, walkability and green spaces. She said the presentation tonight shows that this
feedback was heard, and she looks forward to seeing the proposal.
Commissioner Richards began having technical issues.
Commissioner Bedford asked if there is an opportunity to mix and match between the
two alternatives.
Andy Henry said yes.
Commissioner Bedford said because of funding shortfalls and increased costs of
construction, there has been a stop in the concentric circles, and MPOs are reevaluating
current projects with the funds that are available.
Nishith Trivedi said the draft STIP should be coming out in 2022.
Commissioner Bedford said due to fiscal constraints, all must consider the different
options. She said safety needs have to be blended in with population growth and area values.
She said some road improvements are still needed as well. She said land use decisions
interrelate with all of this.
Commissioner Fowler said she reviewed the OUTBoard recommendations and agrees
with adding off street bicycling and pedestrian corridors. She asked if the Board's endorsement
of these suggestions would have any impact.
Nishith Trivedi said there is a chapter in the MTP about Bike/Ped projects. He said the
MTP is broken down into transportation modes. He said a preferred plan will be sent out
including all modes of transportation.
Commissioner Fowler clarified that the Board's endorsement of the OUTBoard
suggestions may impact the MPO's plans.
Nishith Trivedi said yes.
Commissioner Fowler said the second bullet is recreational facilities and asked how that
relates to transportation
Nishith Trivedi said it refers to greenways. He said there are bike routes in Orange
County, which are also used for transportation.
Chair Price asked if this is similar to the American Tobacco Trail.
Nishith Trivedi said yes, something like that, or the river walk, or Mountains to Sea Trail.
Commissioner Fowler said since it was a different bullet point it seemed like it was
different.
31
Andy Henry said it may have been classified as recreational because bike lanes and
sidewalks are in the right of way of a roadway. He said a path for bikes that do not run beside a
roadway would be considered recreational.
Commissioner Fowler said these types of pathways would not necessarily help someone
commute to work.
Chair Price said it depends on where you work.
Commissioner Bedford asked if staff could change the wording from recreational or
elaborate on it to make it clearer.
Nishith Trivedi said the wording could be revised during public review period
Commissioner Hamilton asked if"modernization of roadways" could be defined.
Andy Henry said in rural areas that normally means widening roadways and shoulders,
which makes them safer. He said in urban areas it means sidewalks, bike lanes, a side path,
traffic signals, turn lanes, etc. He said it is basically trying to bring the roads up to standard. He
said it does not mean adding any more lanes, just improving what is there.
Nishith Trivedi said many Orange County roads are one lane and undivided. He said
many are not wide enough, and are unsafe. He said the wear and tear due to population
growth has had an impact. He said the NCDOT is trying to further define modernization, but
the goal is to improve the roads, especially in rural areas.
Commissioner Bedford referred to the projects in attachment 4, and asked if there is a
good representation of projects across the county.
Nishith Trivedi said this list is just the highway list of projects
Commissioner Bedford asked if this list is constrained by cost, or if it includes all of the
projects.
Nishith Trivedi said the list includes all projects with current costs.
Chair Price asked if the BOCC is prepared to endorse the recommendations of the
OUTBoard.
Commissioner Greene said she is happy to endorse the OUTBoard's recommendations,
and she is interested in seeing a plan that reflects a vision that gets away from highways and
towards multimodal, climate sensitive transportation options.
A motion was made by Commissioner Greene, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to
endorse the OUTBoard comments (Attachment 5), as modified by, to reflect BOCC comments
for staff to convey to the DCHC MPO Board.
Roll call ensued
VOTE: Ayes, 6 (Commissioner McKee, Commissioner Hamilton, Commissioner Greene,
Commissioner Fowler, Commissioner Bedford, Chair Price)
Commissioner Richards did not vote because her meeting connection was lost.
d. Proposed Performance Agreement Provision Requiring that Non-profit
Organizations Receiving Funds through the County's Outside Agencies Process
Provide the Opportunity for Public Comment at Regular Meetings
The Board considered approving a proposed Performance Agreement provision
requiring that non-profit organizations receiving funds through the County's Outside Agencies
Process provide the opportunity for public comment at regular meetings.
32
BACKGROUND:
At the September 2, 2021 Board of Orange County Commissioners (BOCC) Business meeting,
a petition was submitted by Commissioner Earl McKee for the Board to consider a policy
requiring any entity receiving county funds include on their regular meeting agendas an
opportunity for public comments.
Each year Orange County allocates over $1 million to local non-profits to provide various
services and meet needs across the community. Applications for funding are submitted by the
non-profits through the County's Outside Agency process. The applications are assigned to
appropriate county advisory groups and staff based on subject matter, and reviewed and
scored based on an established matrix. As part of the county's annual budget process, the
Manager then makes funding recommendations for each non-profit to the Board of
Commissioners, and the Board approves the final funding amounts for each entity.
Recipient organizations subsequently sign performance agreements with the county agreeing to
utilize the funds as proposed and in compliance with other provisions. It is proposed that the
Board consider a Performance Agreement provision requiring that the non-profit organizations
receiving funds through the County's Outside Agencies Process provide the opportunity for
public comment at their regular meetings.
Bonnie Hammersley reviewed background information for this item.
Commissioner McKee explained the basis for his petition. He said the county provides
over $1 million of taxpayer funds to nonprofits to help the county with the provision of services.
He said he is petitioning that these non-profits allot time on their regular agendas for public
comment. He said he is not asking the non-profits to engage or reply to the commenters, just
allow people to speak, with the parameters left up to the agencies themselves. He said he is
aware that there are some outside agencies that deal with highly emotionally charged issues,
and they may be excluded from the provision if the Board approves. He said he is convinced
anyone spending public money should be obligated to accept public comment.
Chair Price be clarified that the request is for public comment to be taken at the board
meetings, as opposed to a staff meeting for example.
Commissioner McKee said yes.
Chair Price asked if this would be only for agencies who are part of the outside agencies
funding process, or any non-profit that the county funds.
Commissioner McKee said he proposed it with outside agencies in mind, and would
stick with that.
Commissioner Greene said the county does give money to nonprofits outside of the
outside agency funding process, and Chair Price's question needs to have a clear answer. She
said it will be very hard to carve out the agencies that are sensitive in nature, and it would make
more sense to limit it to organizations where people who they serve are the direct beneficiaries
of the service. She said a nonprofit does not represent or serve the entire county the way
government does. She said this petition is a very dramatic departure from way nonprofits
ordinarily function, but she does see the logic of taxpayer money being used. She credited
Commissioner Richards for considering which agencies that do something for the county that is
really important, i.e. provide housing. She said those agencies have tenants or homeowners
that may have very legitimate complaints. She said it is reasonable to ask that subset of
nonprofits to create a grievance procedure that's viable for those that are being served. She
said this could be done in a variety of ways. She said she understands the impulse to say it is
public money, so public comment should be accepted, but she is coming from perspective of
nonprofits who do not operate that way traditionally. She proposed to focus this on nonprofits
33
that house residents, but to not act on this tonight. She said she would like to invite nonprofits
to come to the Board to discuss how they currently handle grievances and help craft a
reasonable way forward.
Commissioner Hamilton said she is concerned about making a decision too hastily and
echoed Commissioner Greene's idea to get input from the nonprofits about how it would impact
their service to residents. She said she also thinks it is a good thing for the public to come to
BOCC with these issues so it hears about how things are going and can hold agencies
accountable. She said she is not ready to vote on this petition.
Commissioner Fowler said she also needs more information before a vote. She said
she wants to know if there is currently an opportunity for any public comment, what are
grievance procedures, how the policy would affect them if there are none already in place, etc.
She said she wants to know if such a process would be helpful.
Chair Price said this petition came as a result of a nonprofit that did not have a
mechanism in place for public comment.
Commissioner Bedford said the issue with exempting groups with sensitive topics is that
sensitivity fluctuates, so it would not be consistent and difficult to put in writing. She said
considering agencies that have direct recipients and looking at existing grievance procedure
would be helpful. She said there is a Sheriff present at BOCC meetings, which provides a layer
of safety. She said this petition could create a safety and logistical burden on these non-profits,
but also understands the logic behind receiving county funding should equate to ensuring the
opportunity for public comment. She said this type of issue has not often been raised, and
wonders if creating a policy over one instance is going to be a burden to other funded agencies.
She said perhaps the Board should suggest this one organization that is having issues go to
mediation, or create a grievance process. She said it is definitely worth talking to this agency.
Commissioner Richards said she has a couple of concerns. She said when contracting
with nonprofits, the county is empowering them to act on its behalf and expects them to deliver
service with same values as the county, including honoring people and communication. She
said she struggled with the idea that people do not have the right to come and speak to a
nonprofit, because that does not reflect the county's values and practices. She said this all
speaks to the county's expectation of the agencies it funds, and how those agencies act with
residents of Orange County.
Commissioner McKee said he will not make a huge fuss over this issue, but he is
dedicated to the notion that any entity that is spending tax money, they are obligated to hear
public input. He said this circumstance is not a one-off. He said has attempted to address this
issue without making it a public issue, and even tried to attend a meeting himself and was told
he could not speak. He said this is important enough to him that he will not let it loose.
Chair Price said she has been a part of non-profits, and some are very open to allowing
guests to speak while others are more closed. She said the idea that non-profits would need to
have a Sheriff's deputy there, etc. is going beyond the issue of this proposal. She said she
doubts there would be issues of public safety, but she could be wrong. She said she sees the
value in looking at a sampling of organizations to see how they handle the public, if at all. She
said if this petition is not approved tonight, maybe there is another way the Board can hold
organizations accountable when receiving public money. She said something needs to be
done.
Commissioner Bedford said some of these boards could have very controversial
members of the public show up to make a point.
A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Richards, to
direct the County Attorney to bring to a future work session, the wording of a possible provision
in performance agreements requiring that non-profit organizations receiving funds through the
34
County's Outside Agencies Appropriation provide the opportunity for public comment at regular
board meetings and include more information on outside agencies or other entities spending
public funding that might need to be exempted.
Bonnie Hammersley recommended changing the word process to appropriation in the
motion.
Commissioner McKee agreed.
Commissioner Greene asked from whom the data and information will come.
Commissioner McKee said he wants the attorney to bring wording to a work session on
a performance agreement requiring that agencies that receive funding through the outside
agency process be required to receive public comment.
Commissioner Greene said she will not vote for this until the Board hears from non-
profits.
Commissioner Fowler agreed with Commissioner Greene.
Chair Price said the attorney can bring some possible wording as a starting point.
Bonnie Hammersley said there is only one more work session for the year, in
November, and the next viable work session would be in February or March. She said the
outside agency process begins in March 2022, and she can gather this information through the
outside agency process, and it should be asked for from all of them.
Roll call ensued
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
7. Reports
a. Orange County Partnership to End Homelessness —2021 Data Update
The Board reviewed updated data about homelessness in Orange County submitted to
the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) earlier this year.
BACKGROUND:
The Orange County Partnership to End Homelessness (OCPEH) was created in 2008 to
coordinate funding and activities to end homelessness in Orange County. OCPEH is jointly
funded by Orange County (39%) and the Towns of Carrboro (15%), Chapel Hill (41%), and
Hillsborough (5%).
OCPEH Manager Rachel Waltz will present the updated data and discuss how current data
relate to identified gaps in the homeless service system.
This item was postponed until the October 19, 2021 Business Meeting.
8. Consent Agenda
• Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
None.
• Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Bedford, to
approve the consent agenda.
35
Roll call ensued
VOTE: UNANMIOUS
• Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
None.
a. Minutes
The Board approved minutes from the September 2, 2021 Virtual Business Meeting, and the
September 9, 2021 Virtual Work Session.
b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds
The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release motor vehicle
tax values for six taxpayers with a total of twelve bills that will result in a reduction of revenue.
c. Property Tax Releases/Refunds
The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, to release property tax
values for eighteen taxpayers with a total of twenty-one bills that will result in a reduction of
revenue.
d. Applications for the Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion
The Board adopted a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, approving three untimely
applications for exemption/exclusion from ad valorem taxation for three bills for the 2021 tax
year.
e. Amendment to Personnel Ordinance, Section 28-38(j) Regarding Special Separation
Buyout for Law Enforcement Officers
The Board considered approving an amendment to the Orange County Code of Ordinances
providing an option to elect a lump sum buyout of the Special Separation Allowance for
qualifying Law Enforcement Officers for early retirement or in the event of disability.
f. Performance Agreement Between the Town of Chapel Hill and Visitors Bureau
The Board approved the 2021-22 performance measure between the Town of Chapel Hill and
the Chapel Hill/Orange County Visitors Bureau.
g. Approval to Transfer Properties Back to West Orange Fire Insurance District from
Cedar Grove Fire Insurance District
The Board approved the transfer of fifty-five properties back to the West Orange Fire Insurance
District that had previously been transferred to the Cedar Grove Fire Insurance District.
h. Updates to the Assistance Policies for the 2021 North Carolina Housing Finance
Agency (NCHFA) Urgent Repair Program (URP21)
The Board approved and authorized the County Manager to sign the URP21 Assistance Policy.
i. Advisory Boards and Commissions—Appointments
The Board approved the Advisory Boards and Commissions appointments as reviewed and
discussed during the Board's September 9, 2021 Work Session.
9. County Manager's Report
Bonnie Hammersley reminded the Board of the joint meeting with the Fire Chief's
Association on Thursday, October 7, followed by a work session, and she reviewed the agenda
for that meeting.
10. County Attorney's Report
John Roberts said in a previous closed session, the Board authorized the pursuit of a
settlement in Russell Griffin v. Orange County. He said the Board would not usually see
settlements in amounts discussed here, but because it was discussed in closed session,
36
General Statute requires him to provide an update to the Board. He said the case settled for
$50,000, with insurance covering most. He said Orange County is required to cover$12,500,
which will be paid to the insurance provider, who has already distributed the funds to the plaintiff
in exchange for a voluntary dismissal of the case.
Commissioner Richards said she made a mistake, and did not realize that the Board
does not discuss items in the consent agenda unless a Commissioner pulls an item.
Chair Price said that is correct. She said if Commissioner Richards has additional
questions staff can help answer them.
Commissioner McKee asked if the item could be brought back to a future meeting.
Chair Price said the Board has already voted.
Commissioner Richards said she was interested in item 8-e, and has already spoken to
staff, which was very helpful, but she wanted to talk to the Board as well.
John Roberts said the Board can revisit an item if someone from the winning side of the
vote makes a motion to reconsider it.
A motion was made by Commissioner Bedford, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to
reconsider item 8-e.
Commissioner McKee suggested the item be discussed at a future meeting.
Commissioner Fowler said if the item was pushed to another meeting, the current vote
would stand for people to act on.
Commissioner McKee withdrew his comment about pushing the conversation to a future
meeting, and seconded the motion as stated by Commissioner Bedford.
Roll call ensued
VOTE: Ayes, 6 (Commissioner Fowler, Commissioner Greene, Commissioner McKee,
Commissioner Richards, Commissioner Bedford); Nays, 2 (Commissioner Hamilton,
Chair Price)
Motion Passes
Commissioner Richards said she questioned staff about item 8-e, and staff was very
helpful. She said no other county in North Carolina has a similar benefit, and she was
concerned whether Orange County is competitive in its pay structure for law enforcement. She
said staff provided information and Orange County is competitive to nearby surrounding areas.
She said surrounding areas use bonuses to attract good candidates to come in the first place,
as oppose to the end of a career. She said since 2016 only three law enforcement officers
have retired, so this is not likely to affect a large group. She questioned what the county is
incentivizing, and should this be reconsidered given the fact that no other county offers this.
Chair Price said it is not to incentivize, but rather it is beneficial to law enforcement as
well as the general public when law enforcement takes early retirement, due to the demands of
this kind of work. She said this benefit would serve as a bridge to those who retire but are not
yet eligible for other forms of retirement benefits (such as social security).
Bonnie Hammersley said the Sheriff would make the recommendation to the County
Manager and it would have to be approved by the County Manager. He said it is not a given
that all law enforcement would receive it. She said the County Attorney's office and human
resources would also be involved. She agreed that this benefit is a bridge for those who may
37
be in a situation where they are not fit for duty, and it would be best for public to provide this
benefit.
Commissioner Hamilton asked if it would have been acceptable for the Board to reopen
this item at a future meeting.
John Roberts said yes, the Board could have voted to withdraw that vote and put this off
to another meeting.
Commissioner Hamilton said she asked the question because when topics are visited
after 11:00 pm, it is hard to focus on and if there is more flexibility, the Board should take it.
11. *Appointments
None.
12. Information Items
• September 2, 2021 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List
• Memo Regarding Administrative Updates to the Eno River Voluntary Water
Management Operations Plan (WMOP)
13. Closed Session
None.
14. Adjournment
A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler, seconded by Commissioner Greene, to
adjourn the meeting at 11:19 p.m.
Roll call ensued
VOTE: UNANMIOUS
Renee Price, Chair
Tara May
Deputy Clerk to the Board
Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board.