HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 04-26-2022 Business Meeting 1
APPROVED 617/22
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
BUSINESS MEETING
April 26, 2022
7:00 p.m.
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Business Meeting on Tuesday, April
26, 2022 at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Human Services Center in Hillsborough, NC.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Renee Price, Vice Chair Jamezetta Bedford,
and Commissioners Amy Fowler, Sally Greene, Jean Hamilton, 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.
1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
Commissioner McKee made a motion for the addition of a discussion item on whether
extensions to the state of emergency declarations should require board approval as item 6-d.
Commissioner Greene seconded the motion.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Chair Price dispensed with reading the public charge.
2. Public Comments (Limited to One Hour)
a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board, read an email from Orange County resident Jacquie
Barker, who requested that her comment be included as part of the meeting record:
"There is a big crisis at OCS right now, teachers are leaving, and students are paying the price,
academically, mentally. Who are the biggest losers right now? The students are the biggest
losers, remember at your last joint meeting when Dr. Felder admitted that. The principal at
Cedar Ridge just put in his resignation. My daughter just lost a second IB teacher 2 weeks ago,
right after the best teacher of all her years at OCS left for another school, so another qualified
and talented teacher lost. And parents were not even notified. What now? The students are left
hanging, left in limbo at the end of their senior year with substitutes getting them ready for IB
exams that start this week. They are still learning new curriculums due to the learning loss last
year and overworked teachers. The Latin teacher does not get lunch, he does his planning
during class, he has to be absent for part of the class b/c he is being shuffled between two
schools. Another teacher said that she knows 10 teachers that are not returning to Cedar Ridge
next year.
So what is the problem, why are teachers continuing to leave, what is causing this mass exodus
as teachers are putting it? Have you seen the results from multiple teacher surveys, one of
which the district paid $40,000 for an equity audit to reveal the results. What will be done about
2
it? Why is more money being considered for more SEL from the school districts under your
approval, under the guise of closing the achievement gap when we all know it is just a lever for
the failing equity agenda. How many teachers want to endure more SEL training to their already
heavy workload. Is that one million dollars going to be well spent, ask yourself is that
investment going to retain teachers, is that money going to directly impact our student's
achievement and mental health? Are these Band-Aids or working at the root of the problem?
Let's face the facts that with a 19% attrition rate some things will have to wait until these
priorities are addressed. So we need you to work with the district and come up with a real plan?
Year 1 of the OCS strategic plan has a goal at Cedar Ridge to go from 12% proficiency in Math
1 to 50%, will that goal will be reached with the loses we are seeing?
All these issues happened under your watch, from decisions you helped make, policies and
contracts you all voted for, money that you spent. We need change, the pandemic is over, that
is not a scapegoat anymore. We can't deny there is an increase in mental health issues this
year including self harm and suicide ideation, compare the numbers to last year when kids were
locked down, now they are back to school and mental health is worse. The constant barrage
that kids will die or cause someone else to die from covid, instilling fear of wearing a mask to be
safe, bullying those that don't wear one coming from teachers and students, the propaganda on
walls, doors and floors to vaccinate, keep a distance is harmful to everyone's mental health, it's
all part of the problem. You are going to see mental health data at the joint meeting this week,
it's unacceptable. Why? What is going on? Is it coming from the climate at schools, COVID
polices and protocols the school board has implemented or the loss of amazing teachers? What
can we do to help address these tough issues, our children are failing, their mental health is
declining, teachers are getting out. This is not just a school issue it is a community issue. It's
past time to have open adult conversations with the community immediately. My kids have been
in OCS schools since K, I have seen the changes over the years, why are we off the rails? We
are counting the days til graduation."
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
Commissioners Richards, McKee, Bedford, Hamilton, and Greene had no comments.
Commissioner Fowler gave updates on three meetings that she recently attended. She
said the ABC board is doing well and there are two new stores coming online: one in Southern
Village and one in Mebane. She said the stores have been slightly delayed due to supply chain
issues. She said regarding TARPO, she learned that the National Electric Vehicle Charging
Station's goal is to put one every fifteen miles along interstates. She said she serves on the
Library Taskforce and that they just had their first meeting. She said the goal of the task force
is to develop a Memorandum of Understanding with Chapel Hill Public Library for
interoperability with the county's library.
Chair Price said the groundbreaking for the 203 Project is set for 4 pm on May 5, 2022.
She said she attended the Occoneechee Village rededication on Saturday and that it was a
very nice celebration. She said there are two transportation related items on the meeting
agenda. She said the draft FY23 Orange County transit work program proposal is available for
public comment through May 11, 2022. She asked that this be incorporated with the transit
items for how it all fits together.
3
4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
a. Recognition of County Employee Retirements from January 1, 2022 through March 31,
2022
The Board recognized and expressed gratitude to retirees for their devotion and service to
Orange County and its residents.
BACKGROUND: The following employees have retired in the third quarter of this fiscal year:
First Name Last Name Department Retirement Date Years of Service
DENISE BROWN LIBRARY SERVICES 01/31/2022 23
GEORGE PIERCE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT 01/31/2022 28
TERESA OAKLEY SHERIFF 01/31/2022 18
RICKY HART CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES 01/31/2022 28
ANITA WOODS SOCIALSERVICES 01/31/2022 13
ALFRED YATES EMERGENCY SERVICES 02/27/2022 27
ALOYISUS FRAZIER SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT 02/28/2022 28
CRAIG BENEDICT PLANNING AND INSPECTIONS 03/31/2022 23
The Orange County Board of Commissioners thanks each of these retirees for their service to
Orange County and for their dedication in meeting the primary mission of Orange County, in
serving residents with fairness, respect and understanding.
Brenda Bartholomew, Human Resources Director, introduced the item. She invited the
present retirees to the front to be recognized. She read the names of the retirees. Ricky Hart,
Aloysius Frazier, and Craig Benedict accepted their awards and had their photograph taken
with the Board.
Chair Price expressed her congratulations to the retirees.
Commissioner McKee said the Board appreciates their service.
b. Durham & Orange Transit Plan Governance Study— Interim Update
The Board received an update on the progress of the Durham & Orange Transit Plan
Governance Study and next steps.
BACKGROUND: In the early 2010's, Orange County approved a county-wide transit plan,
which included a joint recommendation for the development of the Durham-Orange Light Rail
Transit (DO LRT) project. In 2013, an interlocal agreement (ILA) was developed and approved
by the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC), the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan
Planning Organization (DCHC MPO) Board, and the GoTriangle Board of Trustees. Upon the
discontinuation of the DO LRT project, it was determined that a new governance framework
(aka ILA) was necessary to guide the implementation of future County transit plans.
Project goals include:
• Creation of a clear, operationally efficient governance structure that ensures that
Orange County priorities are funded and implemented with the County transit taxes and
fees.
• Formation of new levels of accountability, which includes development of an equitable
set of processes, seeking to gain further community trust.
In the fall of 2021, the study team invited the BOCC, as well as others serving on other transit
plan governing boards (GoTriangle & DCHC MPO) and staff, to participate in initial small-group
4
interviews. From those interviews, the team learned about overall needs, and the study process
continued to allow for a facilitated workshop with elected officials from each of the transit plan
governing boards (GoTriangle & DCHC MPO). These needs were defined through five overall
elements to be incorporated into a new governance framework: Representative, Equitable,
Collaborative, Transparent, and Accessible.
From these five elements, the elected officials helped to further weigh-in on just how much
change was necessary to primary elements of the existing framework. The feedback provided
leadership and guidance to develop draft alternatives for consideration in a new governance
framework. Staff from all three parties to the existing governance framework attended a joint
workshop in early March 2022. This workshop focused on critical elements that informed the
foundation of what a new ILA could offer to all parties. Discussion focused on multiple
alternatives of critical elements that comprise the following four areas: Membership, Voting
Structures, Financial Planning, and Program & Plan Development. Initial outcomes of this
workshop indicated:
• Formalizing greater involvement from multiple jurisdictions and entities at the Staff
Working Group (SWG) level and associated representative voting structures (the SWG
is the technical recommending body for plan implementation elements).
• Clearly defining roles & responsibilities for each signatory to the updated interlocal
agreement.
• Solidifying the County's role in annual work program/budget development with the tax
district administrator.
• Defining terminology and language consistently to ensure clarity and transparency for all
parties who will use this updated governance framework for plan implementation in the
future.
• While referencing State Statutes, the updated ILA and supporting documentation will
further define equity as it relates to utilization of tax revenues throughout the county, as
well as accounting for regional transit needs.
During the spring of 2022, staff and agency management reconvened for a second workshop
(See Attachment 1) to discuss outstanding elements and also reviewed draft governance
framework alternatives through an updated ILA between the County, DCHC MPO, and
GoTriangle, as well as draft supportive policies and procedures (updated SWG Bylaws,
Financial Policies, as well as incorporating plan implementation administration/management
elements throughout). County staff working on this study anticipate that draft alternatives can
be formed into a final set of recommendations that may be presented to the BOCC in June
2022.
Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor, introduced the item and began the
presentation.
5
Slide #1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Special Presentations
Items 4.b. and 4.c.
Brief Introduction
Tuesday, April 26, 2022
Slide #2
Separate But Related Presentations
• Tonight,you'll receive two separate presentations
regarding transit planning in Orange County
• The first will focus on the implementation governance
structure between Orange County,Durham-Chapel Hill-
Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization(DCHC
MPO),and GoTriangle
• The second will focus on the specific projects associated
with Orange County priorities between now and 2040
ORANGE COUNTY
Slide #3
4B — Transit Plan Governance Study
• Focus is updating the Interlocal Agreement(ILA)that is
signed between Orange County,DCHC MPO and
GoTriangle
• Aims to prioritize Orange and Durham's efficient use of
tax dollars on transit priorities and promote new levels of
accountability
• The ILAwill identify roles and inform the annual work plan
budgeting process
• Atkins Consulting is presenting tonight
ORANGE COUNTY
Slide #4
4C — Transit Plan Update
• Focus is the additional draft projects that will be prioritized
with the Article 43 transit sales tax dollars and put into
service between now and 2040
• As a function of the scope of the project,the consulting
team is providing check-ins for any feedback and
comments that may help inform the draft plan
• Adoption process of the updated plan is anticipated forfall
2022
• Renaissance Planning is presenting tonight
ORANGE COUfV I Y
6
Adam Howell from Atkins Consulting Group continued the presentation:
Slide #5
o
•.
Durham&Orange Counties Transit Plan Governance Study
Orange BOCC Interim Update
April 26,2022
Slide #6
Update outline
z Project Need&Overview
Project Goals
Study Process to Gate
Major Outcomes from Joint Staff workshops#1 
Topics Resulting in bath Majority&Minority Perspective
ATKINS
Slide #7
Project Need & Overview
FTransit FDO LRT .Updated
s&S iseontinued •Transit Plan GUpdate ce
Transit ItAs Framework
® � Updates
ATKINS
Adam Howell said the first transit planning in the early 2010s was spearheaded by the
one-half cent sales tax for transit. He said that the first interlocal agreement in 2013, which was
primarily centered around the Durham light rail project. He said the light rail project was
discontinued in 2019 and that the current transit plan update started in 2020.
Slide #8
Primary State Enabling Legislation
N.C.G.S.Chapter 160A—defines how a government body exists
�Article 26—Regional Public Transportation Authority Act
N.C.G.S.Chapter 105—defines how a government body is enabled to
raise and provide revenue for necessary uses and purposes.
�Article 43—Local Govemment Public Transportation Sales Tax Act
N.C.G.S.Chapter 153A—defines enumerated powers and responsibilities
for Counties,but also defines the County role with levying revenue sources
to support public transportation services (property tax assessment)
ATKINS
Adam Howell said there are three primary chapters that allow the transit process to go
forward.
Slide #9
Project Goals
Creating a clear, operationally efficient governance structure
that ensures that Durham&orange Counties' priorities are
funded and implemented with the County transit taxes and
fees
Forming new levels of accountability, that includes
development of an equitable set of processes which seek to
pain community trust.
ATKINS
Adam Howell said this study was a result of a long listening process, including the Board
and their partners in the project. He said this process seeks to gain the communities input and
trust.
8
Slide #10
Study Process to Date
• Initial Stakeholder Interivew
Oct '21
• Joint Elected Officials
Workshop
M • Peer Interview
ATKINS
Adam Howell said they met with over seventy people in September and October 2021.
He said the first conversation with elected officials took place in November 2021. He said they
had a conversation as to what transit should look like and to determine their priorities. He said
in December 2021 they interviewed the Wake Transit Program.
Slide #11
Study Process to Date
• Alternatives Development
• Joint Staff Workshop
#1
■ ir '22 Joint Staff Workshop#2
ATKINS
Adam Howell said that his team focused on developing a series of alternatives in
January 2022. He said they developed a draft interlocal agreement, as well as policies and
procedures to support the interlocal agreement. He said they had their first joint staff workshop
in March 2022, and that the conversation was continued in April 2022.
9
Slide #12
Major Outcomes from Joint Staff Workshops#1 &42
JnIM 9k.h.Wd6rVR,k.FV Yl IM 9r.• AlfVVOr sF_Y2 IApr'221
A DurhamCOEnty Primary Agreement(ILA[
L
Ofange County Pr.mary Agreement(ILAi Orange County SWG{SWG Bylaws)
EDUrharn County SWG{$WGBylaws)
Ckame County SWG{SWG Bylaws)
Durham SWG{I LA Dellnedi
ClirsngaSWG{ILA.DeBnedi
SWGquorcrn iSWGe we Orange County SWG{ILA defined;SWG Bylaws)
SWGChair&Assign4nentRole(SWG Bylaws}
rb Ming an Annual Wark Program(&Budget)ARpraval
_ ('LAI
Con ha ryM auo-n;ILA
Consensus by all ARpropriateParties Tabrgd for Further Discussion'
on PropDwd R4corprner�dation
ATKINS
Adam Howell said membership and voting structures are the primary elements for
determining who needs to be part of decision-making.
Slide #13
Ivlajor Outcomes from Joint Staff Workshops 41 & #
JoMltSalwholdrr 1M2 rr'22 JOFMSukehoWerVftr Q r'23
Critical Definitions—fkwenue{I LAY
�r Crikal Definitions—htoN&Finarkial Plan Equitable Use of Net Praeeeds
c (ILA)
n Equ table Use Of Net Prcfueeds(ILAF
Process DeMltlons—Rnantlal Model&Pian
2 Development I I LA) Su ppOrting lncreased(ast of Disking Serviixs
Fr■antial Palicy Needs{supporting policy
outline)
* r,nL,l[I-year F9ai7❑raelapalent Amendment Process&T resnolus for
9 +nikiativnfARproNal
multi-Year vlslon Plan update—Elelriera&
P—ssl l LAY
Annual Work Program Amendment Proress&Threshddsforlritiatlon
E E for lnikiation}Approaal
Annual Work Program Elements Defir.ad(lLft)
Conser`sus by am Appropriate
Parties on Proposed Tabled for Further f)isnrssion•
Recvmrnandation 0 J
Adam Howell said the other three elements they focused on during the workshop were
financial planning, multi-year plan development, and annual work program development. He
said the annual work program draft came out today.
10
Slide #14
Topics Resulting in both Majority & Minority Perspective
Orange County SING Membership &Associated Voting Structure
Confirmed Alternative GoTriangle Preferred Alternative
From March 11 Workshop
Voting Members: Voting Memhers:
craree[aLrrly aaau wurrr
tdm .Irr.�6V6m.,N ,ra. r:.Q,a a+, Leprld
x x 2 Z M
CwTrr�r - 6eTn.r1. M6.0.6.r+q--
+ ran al cwpel HI ch-1 Nil T.r.N, S�i401y '
aJmnlir.ron&{M wg=2'kisf 0
' T9 ,d Kllkb. Nen•Rh6 ri.arKeh
Th 11 HlkhttalllN
Cnvd rJ.rann Han-wiOi;membe S-
= TY_OG
k4S.J 141rtidr Iy1C-0rlpel H11 NM'w95KkrbNS
har.Wi=L wte cu[N T_of Cry nil
T'_.1 GrRara
tow-VPtir4E Members: - T_of Nil.aeey.
nom {ty ala ryry
* uHC[h4.1 HII
ATKINS
Adam Howell said one topic that resulted in both a majority and minority perspective
was who is formally invited and codified as part of the staff working group, as well as who is
allocated a vote for making recommendations. He said the alternative voting structure from the
March 1st workshop identified a need to give Chapel Hill two votes because they are a primary
transportation provider. He said that formal invites have been sent to the towns of Carrboro,
Mebane, and Hillsborough to participate. He said that TJCOG and UNC would be at the table
but as non-voting members. He said two of the three parties prefer an alternative voting
structure. He said GoTriangle's preferred alternative structure would have only transit
operators with a formal say.
Slide #15
Topics Resulting in both Majority & Minority Perspective
Voting on Annual Work Program & Budget Approval Process
Recommended language would provide.
The County first opportunity to consider approval oftheAnnual WorKProgram as
recommended by the staff Worxing Group.
County would have oversight to'Approve,'or'aeny'
Upon Approval,GoTrangle SOT would receive County Work Program(which includes
budgets).
GoTrangle would not be able to make any changes,but could approve or deny while
producing a list of Significant Conoerns or tech nicaI issues
This+arrguagelprocess was confirmed by both Counties.as well as OCHC-MPQ.
GoTriangle raised concerns over schedule related to how the annual worry program and
budget should reach Go Triangle 80 T with the BOCC now being recommended to review first,
ATKINS
11
Adam Howell discussed how they are going to expand collaboration with the partners.
He said that this process will give the county the first right to review the annual work plan. He
said that GoTriangle raised concern over this because of the schedule shift and related tax
documentation.
Slide #16
Durham & Orange Counties Transit Plan Governance Study
Orange County Travis Myron Atkins Project Manager
Staff Contacts Tam Altmi.AICP Adam Howell,AICP
Tom Ten Eyck
Commissioner Fowler asked how the differences of opinion on voting structures would
be rectified.
Adam Howell said they will draft an interlocal agreement that has both formats of
recommended language from each perspective. He said it would then go to the attorneys
before adoption.
Chair Price referred to slide #12. She said that Orange County stands out and asked
why the staff working group bylaws are in bright pink for the county.
Adam Howell said the reason is because there was not an agreement in the first
workshop, and they carried it to the second. He said the issue was lack of agreement on who
should be a formal member on the staff work group.
Chair Price asked if it was still in question.
Adam Howell said yes.
Chair Price asked if the MPO and GoTriangle voting members are staff members.
Adam Howell said they are all staff seats and part of the technical group.
Chair Price said that each jurisdiction also has people engaged and asked how balance
is achieved if Chapel Hill has two votes, Carrboro and Mebane only get one vote, and then a
person from the MPO or GoTriangle is also from Chapel Hill.
Adam Howell said that is not part of this process and can change from year to year. He
said that is up to the staff group to work out through a subsequent process.
Commissioner Richards asked which alternative will be chosen.
Adam Howell said the majority of the parties are leaning towards the left option on slide
#14. He said that it has been a collaborative process. He said that GoTriangle's concerns, and
thoughts have been considered. He said that staff from each group are talking all of the
alternatives through. He said both alternatives are still on the table and will be discussed.
Travis Myren said that by operation of statute, the three parties that will have approval
power will be the county, the MPO Board, and GoTriangle. He said that is where the ultimate
approvals will come in.
12
Commissioner Richards clarified that two of three prefer the option on the left.
Travis Myren said staff representatives from the county and the MPO prefer the more
inclusive option, as shown in the left on slide #14.
Commissioner Richards asked when the decision will be made.
Travis Myren said June or December.
Commissioner Richards asked if the discussion of the alternatives will be resolved by
June.
Travis Myren said it may or may not be.
Commissioner McKee said he is curious as to what GoTriangle's arguments are.
Adam Howell said GoTriangle feels that transit operators outside of the three primary
signatories should be the only ones responsible for making the decisions. He said the option on
the right on slide #14 allows only those that are in charge of operating transit services having a
decision-making role.
Commissioner McKee said he disagrees because GoTriangle does not exist without
county funding. He said he has no issue with GoTriangle managing the system and driving the
buses.
Commissioner Bedford asked at what point the commissioners will be asked what option
they prefer.
Travis Myren said that was one of the reasons they are bringing it tonight and if they
have preferences, they can let them know.
Commissioner Bedford said she preferred the option on the left that includes the towns.
She said that for the annual work program and budget approval process, she hopes they can
move forward with the change to see the responsibilities for both parties.
Commissioner Greene said she appreciated the effort and transparency that has went
into the work already. She said that she prefers the alternative that is more inclusive and on the
left side.
Chair Price said as a member of the board of trustees for GoTriangle, one of the issues
they have focused on is being more inclusive. She said she is in favor of the option that is more
inclusive, the one on the left of slide #14. She said that the option from staff is counter to what
the board of trustees would support. She said they are talking about focusing on the community
and what they need versus the project.
Commissioner Hamilton said she liked the priorities, and they clearly reflect her view of
accountability and gaining community input. She said that the more inclusive alternative is what
she would be in favor of. She said she would like the annual work plan to come to the
commissioners.
Adam Howell said the county was the priority in receiving the update, but that
GoTriangle and the MPO will be receiving this same update next month.
c. Orange County Transit Plan Update Presentation
The Board received information on the Orange County Transit Plan (OCTP) Update process
and draft recommendations for new bus operations and capital projects for any preliminary
feedback and comments that may help inform a draft plan.
BACKGROUND: In 2012, the Orange County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) along
with the Durham-Chapel Hill Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization (DCHC MPO) and
GoTriangle adopted Orange County's first comprehensive Transit Plan. This Plan was funded
using a newly adopted Article 43 Half-Cent Sales Tax, and it included investments in new and
expanded bus service and new capital infrastructure projects such as the Chapel Hill North-
South Bus Rapid Transit Project, the Hillsborough Train Station, and the Durham-Orange Light
Rail Transit (DO-LRT) Project. The Plan was updated in 2017 to meet federal requirements
associated with the DO-LRT Project.
13
In March 2019, the DO-LRT Project was discontinued. This project was central to the Transit
Plan, was the Plan's primary investment, represented a critical partnership between Durham
and Orange counties, and served as the transit infrastructure around which other transit
services and growth strategies were planned. In response to the discontinuation of the light rail
project, a staff team began the process of creating a potential planning framework to create a
new Orange County Transit Plan that prioritizes investments, funds service improvements, and
improves the resiliency of the public transit network.
At its November 17, 2019 meeting, the Orange County BOCC approved the planning
framework for updating the Orange County Transit Plan. The framework included a Policy
Steering Committee (PSC) composed of two (2) Commissioners serving as Co-Chairs, and one
representative each from Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Hillsborough, and Mebane to lead the process.
The County and/ or municipal appointees are intended to represent the interests of GoTriangle
and DCHC MPO.
The PSC is aided by a staff team which is led by County staff and includes representatives from
the same organizations as well as staff support from the Triangle J Council of Governments
(TJCOG), the Triangle Area Rural Planning Organization (TARPO), and the University of North
Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC). Both the PSC and the staff team provide direction and guidance
to the consulting firm whose tasks include analyzing data, facilitating public input processes,
soliciting feedback from specific stakeholders, and drafting the Transit Plan. The new Plan is
intended to outline transit investment priorities through 2040.
In January 2020, Orange County Planning staff began work with Renaissance Planning, Inc.,
the consulting firm chosen to update the Orange County Transit Plan. Over the past two years,
Planning staff and the consulting team have established key project deliverables and the
timetable for their delivery, defined the scope of the consulting work, established a project
website (www.octransit2020.com), created the public participation and outreach plans, and
conducted regular meetings with the PSC, transit service providers, and key stakeholders with
updates on the plan's progress.
Following is a list of key process milestones carried out by the consultant, PSC, transit service
providers and staff teams:
• Held bi-monthly meetings with progress updates for the PSC during the 2020 calendar
year (May 2020)
• Received the Transit Choices Brochure (TCB), a visual document that illustrates the
concepts and continuums of transit planning, and the Regional Connections Opportunity
(RCO) Report, a technical assessment of key issues and opportunities for effective
transit service (July 2020)
• Held the first Transit Summit over the Zoom platform and received a memo of key
themes from the summit discussions and first public survey (October 2020)
• Met with Durham City and County representatives to discuss progress of Durham
Transit Plan Update relative to the Orange County Transit Plan Update (November
2020)
• Received draft versions of conceptual scenarios and graphics with an accompanying
memo (January 2021)
• Held recurring monthly PSC meetings over Zoom with updates for first half of 2021
(January 2021 — June 2021)
14
• Received final versions of conceptual scenarios and graphics with an accompanying
memo (May 2021)
• Held an in-person Transit Summit for PSC members to discuss core values and visions
for the fiscally constrained plan and learned of aspirational future projects (July 2021)
• Received draft recommended network and plan as well as draft conceptual vision map
for transit service provider feedback and scheduling of future PSC meetings (October
2021)
• Held PSC Work Session #1 to look at the final recommended network and conceptual
vision map with purpose of permitting project management team to begin round two of
public outreach (January 2022)
• Created public outreach opportunities with a second round of surveying (where over
1,000 surveys were collected) and two focus groups (held on February 8t" and February
16t") that included local stakeholders (February 2022)
• Held PSC Work Session #2 to look at the feedback received from public outreach and
assess the draft network, which resulted in a request to provide check-in presentations
to the local elected boards (March 2022)
Key takeaways from the public outreach include the overall approval of projects as they were
outlined and an agreement of the need for more regional projects in the future. After discussing
the need to wait for the Transit Plan Governance Study to conclude prior to the Transit Plan
Update's adoption, the PSC advised the project management team to begin scheduling check-
in meetings with the municipalities in the local government as well as the BOCC.
Remaining Consultant Deliverables — Next Steps
Attachment 1 is a memo from Renaissance Planning that, among other items, outlines its
remaining work and next steps of the Transit Plan Update. Generally, these items include:
• Additional check-in meetings with Carrboro, Chapel Hill, and Hillsborough;
• Final PSC Work Session; and
• Delivery of a final report to the Orange County staff team.
Adoption Process
The 2017 Orange County Transit Plan was adopted by the Orange County BOCC on April 27,
2017 before it was adopted by DCHC MPO and the GoTriangle Board of Trustees on April 28,
2017. The final Plan will be presented to the Orange County BOCC after the summer break,
and Orange County staff will guide the 2022 Transit Plan Update through the adoption process
following the critical path outlined below:
Orange County:
• Orange Unified Transportation Board recommendation
• BOCC Public Hearing
• BOCC adoption consideration
DCHC MPO:
• Technical Committee recommendation
• Board adoption consideration
GoTriangle:
• Board adoption consideration
15
Caroline Dwyer, of Renaissance Planning, introduced the item.
Slide #1 _
... r r
7
r —
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
UPDATE
ORANGE COUNTY TRANSIT PLAN UPDATE
April 26,2022
ORANGE /
COUNTY RENAISSANCE
Slide #2
PROJECT TEAM
Vt.p Project Manager.Caroline Owyar.AICP
RENAISSANCE cdwvery�cn6esthahvork.com
PLANNING sts-a3a-5o32 zaat
T`rv�
Caroline Dwyer said their team includes world-renowned partners.
Slide #3
AGENDA
,Project Overview&Schedule
..Transit Plan:What's included?
Engagement
..Projects
.Conceptual Transit Vision Map
..Plan Documentation
Next Steps
16
Slide #4
PROJECT OVERVIEW & SCHEDULE
i
• r- r
--`P" 6Um/n6r Fal Mnler Sum,rer Fall 4Mnl -`.er- FN Fall
2020 2020 2021 2p2i 2021 2021 2022 2022
Caroline Dwyer said that input from the decision makers and the public has been very
important to the project development. She said the draft plan is almost ready to present. She
said there were two phases of public engagement. She said that hopefully the plan will be
adopted in the fall of 2022.
Slide #5
TRANSIT PLAN UPDATE:
WHAT'S INCLUDED?
• P r'o g ra m me d projects are Expencrwrcs,Rea nues.and&alance tiFY22 -401
carried over: capital ���°°
investments and service
improvements in previously
adopted transit plans },
(2012, 2017) excluding L T
• Now projects: capital
investments and service
improvements) funded with
unallocated transit tax . .'. . . . ' '
revenues �Tc+A1xtlMu� —eMme9elR8yerue _eelr� oenn�
Caroline Dwyer said that the first plan was in 2012 and this new project includes
revenues above and beyond the previous revenues for new projects in Orange County.
17
Slide #6
ENGAGEMENT
TWO PHASES
Phase 1 (Fall 2020)
Goal-Identify Needs&Priorities
•Methods:Virtual Transit Summit, --
online survey
Phase 2(WintertSpring 2022)
•Goal-Vet Proposed Projects
•Methods:Virtual focus groups, ---•-�
online survey, pop ups at transit
stops
Caroline Dwyer said they vetted the proposed projects to make sure they were useful.
She said over 1,000 people responded to the online survey and she felt they got good
representation geographically. She said they heard is that people want more readily available
transportation options.
Slide #7
PROJECTS: SELECTION
•Funded using projected transit tax • ••
revenues (rather than taking on debt)
•GoTriangle financial model forecasts used •'
to determine available future revenues • •
•Already-programmed capital and service
improvements are included in expenses
Caroline Dwyer said many of the projects are funded primarily through local funding.
Slide #8
PROJECTS: SELECTION
For each potential project,we considered: •, • #
1. Is the project identified as an unfunded or •
emerging priority by transit service providers?
2. Does the improvement meet needs expressed by ••
public? •
3. Does the improvement reflect values identified by
PSG?Fqurty,en�ironmenfa7 sustarnability,a nnomic prosperity,
arlordable and attainable quality al Rle.transpoAatton and aaesa for
all
4. Does the project support the conceptual transit
vision or fill a regional connectivity gap?
Caroline Dwyer said they held a summit in July 2021 with the policy steering committee
that allowed them to identify values for project selection. She said they will be documented in
the transit plan. She said that improving service will incrementally support the conceptual
transit vision.
18
Slide #9
INCLUDED PROJECTS: SERVICE AND CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS
TYsntitPrvjecV t iElk twNsw Addlomml peak
Rawenue Heure yg&l"
Serw1re ImFiruvernirill
C h apc I Hi 11 Tr a rl si1 CW:improve weekday midday eervicetc 3O morrias. 1.500 0
ChupcIHi11T1alveitNS:add waekendserrice with 1 bus(70 min frequency)(Sem until 6:30pm) 1.177 0
Orange County Pubic Transpor Mon Motlit"nrDwnandService 3.200 0
Chapel Al Tramr At HS;Imprava morn%peak fm"ncy to Rvery a m.xrloz.Pmode 3aturd W sm1co until 2.300 3
11 PM and Sun aarwe umll 9 PM.
us 15-501 ProjectBundle
Go7rianpg q 40(Y405.Caneoidate nto ane pattern via Manning Drta CmFbcm and Jonee Ferry Perk and Ride. 20,067" Z—
Schedule effective 1 Sa&Rga service midday,and improved Sunday and evening service.
Ch HfiTWA0.EM@rbd sooleato Patleraan PWeobd pmvWoSourday aaraxw untl S PM. i 5,31)0 1
Chap*WffiTran&ti .Improvorn m n po*fwrmncy W ovv 10m+ariozandofferl5•minutsurn*umll 3,200 2
noon.ProvidaSetwda s4rwevMII11PM and Suoda servlceunt+9PM.
Capkalknpraveffma
Ford ekSphewsCrK+KnW-prowewAsf4DOID'FConn"llon)
Fardranv Ammiig Guerra Jump end Shoulder Running IFnprmTffbanb3
1d 9q 4#
"H.Y arf.—revenue h--aid-vas are asnmied b fK e:%.Id.0❑urban 0—r .
Caroline Dwyer said that a queue jump line helps a bus avoid traffic and stay on
schedule.
Slide #10
- -- ------- --- -- ------------ - -------- -- -
• - -� CONCEPTUAL
TR❑❑N IT VISION
O A 1
.ra..r.. -- �m� Represents
aspirational,
*' currently
■ unfunded,
*; LE4EH0 longer-term
transit
la MErp— investments
G4
.�• Hihboiwrk Fxlrnr Transit plan
r<.._ .-,•.-. {, �m�mE,�� documentwill
explicitly connect
1--0°rpr proposed
er7
:=`-•" K"EV investments/
N projects tofuture
All transit corridors
Caroline Dwyer said most of these plans lay the groundwork to move towards projects in
the future. She said that this is a very long timeline and requires a lot of coordination. She said
the goal is to have an idea and that the concepts help guide future work.
Commissioner Fowler said she did not see a stop for the 15-501 BRT at the south end
near the UNC hospital.
Caroline Dwyer said NS BRT is not shown on the map, but it would connect between
Southern Village and Caraway. She said there is an opportunity to connect in the middle by
connecting the 15-501 BRT to the NS BRT. She said at this time it is conceptual and not a
19
solidified route. She said this shows a general idea of what it looks like, and they can more
clearly show that.
Commissioner Fowler said it appears that the 15-501 route ends without a connection.
Caroline Dwyer said it kind of does, because they don't have an exact endpoint at this
time but more of a general area. She said there is a possibility that they could make a
connection to Highway 54 and the possibility it could go a different direction if it heads down
Franklin St. She said an alternatives analysis would hammer down some of those specifics.
She said she would make sure that the non-draft version depicts the possible connections more
clearly.
Commissioner Richards asked if the infrastructure bill has opportunities for transit.
Caroline Dwyer said yes and that there are two kinds of funding. She said one is
formula funding to states based on size and that it will be up to the state for how that is spent.
She said the second is discretionary grant programs and which have to be applied for and
require a local match. She said there will be more opportunities than there have been in the
past. She said a regional strategy would be useful so that entities are not competing against
one another.
Commissioner Richards asked how they might go about the priorities and possibly
moving some of the projects in sooner, if they are only depending on the tax.
Caroline Dwyer said only depending on the tax would make it a long process. She said
they would have to acquire some federal funding. She said it is worth a conversation the DCHC
to have a regional plan for that instead of everyone competing with each other. She said
everyone working regionally is better for everyone because it is a very competitive environment.
She said having the planning done will help you be ready for when the opportunities are
announced.
Commissioner Richards said she is assuming the efficiencies are included, such as
energy savings.
Caroline Dwyer said there are different ways to make transportation more sustainable.
She said that the best thing to do is land use plans that make it easy to use transit to reduce
vehicle trips.
Commissioner Fowler asked how committing to this plan affects the ability to use federal
funds.
Caroline Dwyer said that this set of projects will have a huge impact on the ability to
compete for federal funding. She said there are opportunities to fund some studies but those
are not so large that you would be precluded from pursuing those opportunities.
Commissioner Fowler asked where the funding would come from if dollars are
committed to this plan.
Caroline Dwyer said they will have to produce alternative sources of funding such as an
increase in transit tax or public-private partnerships.
20
Slide #11
IMPLEMENTATION
TransltPri4mServlce Ops(Annuall CapkalCcst Impt.Year
Cost
8 s ry it e I mp rev sine l'ds
ChapGl Hill TransitCW:Impravewaekday midday aervicetr330mixdes. $181,425 NIA FY23
Chapel HIII TraimA HS:add*@Oendaerwce w4h 1 4us(70mm r aqueacy}(9 air wWl $152.326 N+A FY23'
0,34 �
Orange CovrMy Public Tran*pcoaWn Ktah+ly-on'D►ma d Sernaa $226.616 FY24
C mel HIII Tea A NS'Impmve+n4rning peak frequency l4 every 6 m.xMIs.Provlde SN9,675 V A55.W FY26
Sehoday aerweumll 11 PAt and Sunday sool4euntd 9 PM.
U515.6+01 Profs s IG4Trlengie 004K Chapel N+Translt d;Chapel Hm Tron*It J) E2,4E9,461 1t2,746,47r- FY20
Capkalkn rovemerlts
For0vAVEpheusCh,Mchl r4verouMs 4KOFConn"llon) N?A 56,400,000 FY26,26
Fa Queue Jum and Sho,Mder Runnln Improvemoms I N+A I ffi6,0ODA00 I FY20-26
'By ee*wcVasdb F V23 VVWt Pftt
rrurrYx an m J.err aeernx]fo hr rrtl fy.
cenown I riles
0perrlr4 Coal Annual Wabon Fedor 250%
ffim
urerrl cost per hour
Gurc9nl noel Or Oo-T per hour 313370
GurcBnl coel Or CHT w nour 311894
os1 rrrhKk
Caroline Dwyer said there was more money than they thought this year to begin
improvements. She said that the CW route is in the DCHC 2023 plan. She said the latest
project is for US 15-501.
Slide #12
PLAN DOCUMENTATION
- Transit equity—woven throughoutthe plan,in all sections
• Executkae summary(also functions as a standalone document describing the plan update and
projects)
About the Plan
• Purpose,values,and goals
' Key players and parties
Planning history and process_Inc IudIngengagement
• Regional and County Snapshots
Socloeconomlc drivers
• Spatial trends and dynamics
• Transit inventory and performance
• Project Descriobons
- Unfunded PrioritiaslProjects
r Budget,Implementatlon Plan,and Schedule
• Next Steps
Caroline Dwyer said this is basically a table of contents for the plan. She said this is the
first update they have provided but will be doing the same to all of the jurisdictions.
21
Slide #13
NEXT STEPS
• Project updates to Boards and Commissions(April-May 2022)
= Completlon of draft Orange County Translt Plan Update Documentatlon(April 2022)
Final Policy Steering Committee Meeting(May 20,2022)
Receive PSC comments and feedback(untllJune 3,2022)
• Final Orange County Transit Plan Update documentation(61WI22)
• Orange County Transit Plan Update approval and adoption(Fall 2022)
Caroline Dwyer said that they will be back in the fall to work this through the adoption
process.
Slide #14
QUESTIONS & COMMENTS
On behalf of the project team,we thank you for your time and consideration.
Renaissance Planning
Project Manager
Caroline Dwyer.AICP
cdwyerAcitiasthatwork,Corr' RENAISSANCE
919-636.6032 x 401 PLANNING
Commissioner McKee asked about what types of transportation will be used for the
Mobility on Demand system.
Caroline Dwyer said they are using a standard minivan.
Commissioner Bedford asked if it was wheelchair accessible.
Commissioner McKee asked if it was like Uber.
Caroline Dwyer said it is similar to an Uber rideshare.
Commissioner McKee said he has advocated for an Uber-like service for the rural part
of the county. He said that a doctor's trip to Chapel Hill can be an all-day trip. He said that a lot
of citizens need service. He said that his concern is getting those citizens access to
transportation. He asked about the reverse circulator for the Hillsborough route and asked if
that was still in discussion.
22
Caroline Dwyer said she would have to follow-up on that.
Chair Price said it has been under discussion for years. She said they have been trying
to figure out how to have two routes.
Caroline Dwyer said she was not sure if there is a project that addresses that.
Travis Myren said they would get back to the Board on that.
Commissioner McKee asked what the balance is of the transit tax.
Caroline Dwyer said she does not know the fund balance.
Chair Price asked about Mobility on Demand. She said there was one that only
operated on Friday and Saturday and not one that would operate during the day.
Caroline Dwyer said the pilot was only available two days a week, but this would be an
expansion to five days a week.
Bonnie Hammersley said the demand was high enough to expand.
Chair Price said slide #11 showed no capital funding
Caroline Dwyer said there was no allocated funding for additional vehicles.
Chair Price said even if the plan goes to year 29 there will be no funding allocated.
Caroline Dwyer said that was correct but does not mean that it cannot be if more
funding becomes available.
Chair Price said that since this is going to be used in the rural areas, they will need
additional vehicles and maintenance.
Commissioner Hamilton asked what the term "net new revenue hours" means.
Caroline Dwyer said there is a current amount of revenue hours on each route. She said
net new revenue hours" are hours that go above what is existing and would be provided in the
new plan. She said that the use of transit tax funds can only be used for improvements and not
existing transit service. She said this is a way to document that it is in addition and not an
enhancement to an existing service.
Commissioner Hamilton asked if the transit tax is only to be used for enhanced service
each year, how is the existing service paid.
Caroline Dwyer said it is still funded through the transit tax. She said they are just
looking at a little tiny piece of it — the amount that has not already been spent on something
else. She said they know how much it costs for all current service, and they add an inflation
factor so they know how much it will cost over time. She said the update is about spending any
additional money and that has to be used to fund the new service.
Commissioner Hamilton said they generate about $8 million per year and the FY 23
implementation year only has a couple of projects.
Caroline Dwyer said that is correct because most of that $8 million has already been
spoken for.
Commissioner Hamilton asked how the capital will be paid for in projects like the US 15-
501 project.
Caroline Dwyer said it is included in the transit tax. She said you do not have to find new
funds because these projections include capital, updates, and maintenance. She said the
projects on 15-501 will include a cost-share with Durham.
Commissioner Hamilton asked if the plan has a way to pull the federal dollars and
planning that is needed.
Caroline Dwyer said it is not in the plan. She said they could start planning for it, but it
does not have to be paid for through a transit tax. She said the county could go to DCHC to tap
into their federal and state funds.
Commissioner Hamilton said that transit has more acronyms than anything. She said
that this is a draft plan, and it will come back to formally approve. She asked if it has to go to
the other boards as well.
23
Caroline Dwyer said that is true but that she does not know exactly what that process
looks like. She said there will be a joint adoption of the plan. She said they have worked closely
with the transit providers and that nothing in this plan is not a surprise.
Commissioner Fowler asked what the units are for net new revenue hours.
Caroline Dwyer said it is an hour and is a standard unit of measurement in the industry
to calculate service cost.
Commissioner Greene said this process has been very helpful and thanked Caroline
Dwyer for her work. She said there should be an emphasis of what the unfunded ideas will look
like. She said she sees the document as a framework that needs to be fleshed out. She said it
will be a multiyear and multi layered investment. She asked how the plan will articulate the
importance of connecting land use planning and transportation planning.
Caroline Dwyer said the combination is inherent in the work her firm does. She said in
the plan itself, they try to be explicit, and it is a complimentary relationship. She said that using
the land use and transit plans together they integrate into transit plan. She said that they
integrate this in the document. She said you cannot look at transit in a vacuum.
Chair Price said she would like to look at going from east to west and west to east. She
said that Hillsborough is the center of the county and that there is Durham Tech. She said there
is quite a bit of travel from Mebane into Durham. She said most of the plan is Chapel Hill and
then Chapel Hill going to Durham - other than the Mobility on Demand service. She said she
would like Hillsborough to be considered going forward.
Caroline Dwyer said she sees those trends in the analysis that they have done. She
said the advice in the plan is to keep an eye on those and to make sure they are being
considered for transit and land use plans.
Tom Altieri said staff has been taking notes and they will follow up with the Board on
several items.
Commissioner Bedford said integrating the land use and transit plans support the
governments of having the towns be a part of the voting staff because it brings additional
perspectives.
5. Public Hearings
a. Public Hearing on FY 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan for the HOME Investment
Partnerships Program
The Board conducted a public hearing on the Annual Action Plan for the HOME Investment
Partnerships Program.
BACKGROUND: Every year, state and local governments ("Participating Jurisdictions") that
receive HOME Investment Partnerships Program ("HOME") funds from the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") are required to complete an Annual Action Plan that
lays out how they will allocate HUD funds for the upcoming program year in order to address
the goals and priorities in the Consolidated Plan. A summary of the draft Annual Action Plan for
FY 2022-2023 is in Attachment 1.
For FY 2022-2023, Orange County anticipates receiving the following HOME resources:
Estimated FY 2022-2023 HOME Funds $ 378,743
10% Program Administration $ 37,874
Estimated FY 2022-2023 HOME Funds Minus 10% Admin $ 340,869
HOME Program Income $ 13,306
Local Match $ 85,217
Total Allocation + Program Income + Match $ 439,392
24
The above amounts are estimates and may be adjusted according to the actual allocation
received from HUD.
Orange County is a special type of Participating Jurisdiction, called a Consortium, consisting of
Orange County and the Towns of Carrboro, Chapel Hill, and Hillsborough. Orange County
serves as the lead entity for the Orange County HOME Consortium. The Consortium has
drafted the FY 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan based on the HOME award recommendations
made by the Local Government Affordable Housing Collaborative, detailed below.
The Local Government Affordable Housing Collaborative (the "Collaborative"), comprised of
one (1) elected official and staff members from Orange County and the Towns of Carrboro,
Chapel Hill, and Hillsborough, reviewed the received applications for the FY 2022-2023 HOME
Program on March 3, 2022 and made the following funding recommendations for consideration
by each of the jurisdictions' elected bodies:
Applicant and Project Funding Funding
Requested Awarded
Community Empowerment Fund — Homebu er Assistance $50,000 $50,000
EmPOWERment— Rental Acquisition $105,000 $105,000
Gateway— Refinancing Debt & Rental Rehab $771,800 $0
Habitat for Humanity— Homebu er Assistance $475,000 $134,392
Rebuilding Together of the Triangle - $150,000 $150,000
Administration 10% of HOME Funds, per statute $ 37,874 $ 37,874
Total $1,551,800 $439,392
As the chart above shows, all applicants except for the Gateway project received either full or
partial funding. The Gateway application requested debt refinancing and unit upgrades for a
project-based Section 8 apartment complex in Hillsborough and requested more funding
($771,800) than the Consortium expects to have for all projects for the FY 2022-2023 HOME
Program ($439,392). Discussions with the applicant revealed that partial funding for this project
would not be a viable option, because the debt refinancing must be paired with the renovations.
The applicant asked if partial funding could be guaranteed over a 5-year period, but HOME
funds do not allow for multiyear allocations. Staff is working with this project applicant to pursue
other funding streams to preserve affordable housing resource at Gateway.
In accordance with HUD requirements and the Orange County Citizen Participation Plan, the
Orange County HOME Consortium must hold a public hearing to obtain residents' comments
and feedback on the draft Annual Action Plan during the public comment period, from April 1 —
May 2, 2022.
Notice of this public hearing was published in The Herald Sun and La Noticia. Copies of the
draft Annual Action Plan were posted on the Orange County Department of Housing and
Community Development website, and a link to the website and draft plan were circulated by
public notice in the newspapers listed above, as well as email outreach to more than 100
relevant stakeholders to include local service providers, nonprofit organizations, government
entities, elected officials, and interested residents.
25
All comments received during this hearing, and anytime during the public comment period, will
be incorporated into the final Annual Action Plan to be submitted to HUD. Before submitting the
final plan, the Board of Commissioners will consider the approval of the Annual Action Plan and
the FY 2022-2023 HOME Program Design (funding recommendations) later in 2022. The
governing boards for the Towns of Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Hillsborough are also scheduled
to consider the approval in 2022, in order for the final plan to be submitted to HUD by the
federal deadline in July 2022.
Corey Root, Housing and Community Development Director, introduced the item. She
said that HUD did not have the award amount available yet and she would be coming back to
the Board when the award is known in May. She said usually they know this amount by March.
She said the notice they received from HUD regarding the change was not sufficient enough to
cancel the public hearing since it had already been noticed. She reviewed the material in the
agenda abstract.
A motion was made by Commissioner Bedford, seconded by Commissioner Hamilton, to
open the public hearing.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Douglas Call, of Habitat for Humanity, said his organization helps homeowners with
down payments. He said these down payments are getting larger and larger due to the increase
in values. He said in FY17 they were given $285,000 and they helped twelve families. He said
that in FY20 there was less money available at $131,000, and that helped six families. He said
that last year, $450,000 was allocated to help fifteen families at $30,000 each. He said they
have nineteen homes they plan to close on this year. He said they hope to serve affordable
housing community as much as possible. He said that it will allow only $7,000 for each family.
He said they had requested $475,000 but these requests were made before the conflict in
Ukraine. He said there are a lot of changes in the amount of money that is allocated from
federal dollars. He said he was here to give details on how they use the funding and if further
monies become available, he will return to make a request to add to that amount. He said that
some homes built in Hillsborough that were assessing for $180,000 3-4 years ago are now
assessing at $300,000.
A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Fowler,
to close the public hearing.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Chair Price said this would be up for approval at a future Board meeting
6. Regular Agenda
a. Approval of a Network Development Agreement for Broadband Deployment
The Board approved a Network Development Agreement with North State Communications
Advanced Services, LLC to deploy broadband service in unserved locations in Orange County
and to allocate an additional $5 million, for a total of $10 million, in American Rescue Plan Act
funds to fully fund the Agreement.
26
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for households in Orange
County to have access to broadband internet, which is defined as twenty-five megabits per
second (mbps) download speed and 3 mbps upload speed Broadband has become a necessity
to fully participate in educational instruction, commerce, and civic life. This need is particularly
acute in the rural parts of Orange County where low density impedes the ability of internet
service providers to recover the cost of a significant capital investment.
In recognition of this need, the Board of Commissioners created a Broadband Task Force in
November of 2020. The Task Force was charged with discussing broadband solutions that will
improve the quality of high-speed internet services to Orange County residents and to
recommend a plan to the Board of Orange County Commissioners that will expand reliable high
speed internet services to all county residents and businesses. The Task Force is co-chaired
by Commissioners Sally Greene and Earl McKee and includes representation from the County
Manager's Office, both School Districts, Durham Technical Community College, and five at-
large community members.
Broadband Task Force Members
Doug Noell Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schls. Super. (Designee)
Earl McKee Board of Commissioners- 1
Erica Bryant County Manager(Designee)
Patricia Hull Orange County Resident-At-Large
Paul Cardillo Orange County Resident-At-Large
Ryan Miller Orange County Schls. Super. (Designee)
Sally Greene Board of Commissioners-2
Terri Buckner Orange County Resident-At-Large
Todd Broucksou Orange County Resident-At-Large
Vasu Kilaru Orange County Resident-At-Large
Victoria Deaton Durham Technical Community College Repr.
The American Rescue Plan Act also recognized the necessity of high-speed internet
connections throughout the nation and specifically named broadband expansion as one of the
eligible uses for funds distributed to local governments through this program. The Board of
Commissioners originally reserved $5 million of the County's $28.8 million direct allocation from
the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) to fund a broadband infrastructure design and
implementation program.
The Broadband Task Force reviewed different models to deploy broadband technology and
chose to seek alternatives that delivered upload and download speeds of at least 100 mbps,
consistent with the terms of the American Rescue Act Plan. The Task Force designed a
request for proposal (RFP) to seek providers that could meet that standard and serve the
County's unserved and underserved homes. The Task Force also created a detailed scoring
matrix and appointed a member to serve on the evaluation and contract negotiation team. The
RFP was issued on September 13, 2021, with one amendment added on October 11, 2021.
In November 2021 the NC General Assembly expanded County authority to provide grants for
the purpose of accelerating broadband service in unserved areas. As part of the Appropriations
Act (SL 2021-180), state and federal grant funds were now allowed to be used under this
authority (as opposed to only unrestricted general funds previously) and the potential providers
27
expanded except by limiting any location where a private provider has been designated to
receive funds through State or federally funded programs designed specifically for broadband
service deployment (i.e. the G.R.E.A.T. grant fund).
The County received four proposals from internet service providers in response to the RFP.
The evaluation team scored the proposals and began contract negotiations with North State
Communications Advanced Services, LLC. The information below summarizes the major
provisions contained in the attached contract.
1. Network and Coverage
North State Communications will engineer, build, operate, and maintain a fiber to the
premises (FTTP) network in Orange County consisting of over 615 miles of fiber that will
enable connections to approximately 9,898 unserved locations. The network's coverage is
depicted on a map in Attachment A. The precise address points served are listed in
Attachment B (138 Page Document Only Available at:
www.orangecountVnc.gov/servicesites). Any address points that were inadvertently omitted
from Attachment B, but are in the coverage area, will be added to the list of addresses
covered automatically. The provider will be responsible for procuring all easements and
rights of way and will continue to make best efforts at reaching blocked locations for five
years after the completion of construction.
The network will offer up to two gigabit per second (gbps) symmetrical fiber broadband
internet access to every home and business passed. The minimum level service offered to
each home and business will be 100 mbps symmetrical.
The network covers all of the homes identified by the County as unserved with the
exception of approximately twenty (20) households south of Chapel Hill. Since the North
State project will not provide coverage in the Chapel Hill-Carrboro area, building the network
out to these homes would add significant cost. Several other broadband providers serve
this area, so a less expensive solution may be available given the proximity of these homes
to Chapel Hill. Staff will examine alternatives to serve these homes. An additional unserved
address identified by the County in the eastern portion of the County will be served by North
State Communications through a construction project outside the scope of this agreement.
2. County Contribution and Timeline
The cost to build the entire network is approximately $45 million. The agreement requires
Orange County to pay up to $10 million in American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds as a
grant to North State in three installments:
• $1,000,000 within 30 days of contract execution
• $3,000,000 after enabling connections to 3,000 homes no later than December 31, 2023
• $6,000,000 after enabling connections to the remaining 6,898 homes no later than
December 31, 2024
Some of the households defined as unserved are located in areas where a different
provider was awarded Rural Digital Opportunity Funds (RDOF). State law currently
prohibits the use of other State or Federal funding sources to be applied in areas where
RDOF was awarded. Therefore, none of the County's funds will be used to serve
households in those areas. However, North State will build the network and serve the
28
homes in those areas using the company's own funds. A detailed timeline for construction
activities is included in Attachment C. Assuming that the contract is executed by April 30,
2022, the construction timeline would make services available to homes according to the
following schedule.
Phase Homes Added Date
1 2,000 A ri12023
2 2,000 July 2023
3 2,000 October 2023
4 2,000 January 2024
5 1,000 A ri12024
6 898 July 2024
TOTAL 9,898
3. Reporting and Inspections
North State Communications is required to provide at least monthly progress reports to the
County. These reports will contain:
• Nature of work completed during the preceding period;
• Estimated percentages of physical completion for the network;
• Number of route miles of fiber constructed and activated;
• Overall project schedule status;
• Overall project budget status;
• Number of locations passed by network section;
• Number of residential subscriptions by service type added in that quarter, and to date;
• Any delays that have occurred, or are continuing to occur, with a detailed explanation
and plan to address such delay;
• Any anticipated delays in the work, with a detailed explanation;
• Responses to particular requests for information from County;
• Any proposed changes to the work; and
• Other information reasonably requested by County.
4. Service Costs
Under the terms of the agreement, North State will offer a low-cost service with a minimum
speed of 200 mbps symmetrical for no more than $40 per month, prior to any federal or
state subsidies available, until at least two years from the date construction is completed.
Consistent with the terms of the American Rescue Plan Act, North State must also
participate in the Federal Communications Commission's Affordable Connectivity Program
as long as it is available.
The contract further provides that the standard rates that are in place at the time of first
customer activation will not increase by more than ten percent (10%) per year for any
service levels until at least January 1, 2026.
29
5. Connections to the Network
North State will install services to any residence passed by the network. Connections of up
to 1000 feet in length will be installed at no additional cost to the customer.
6. Network Quality and Reliability
North State has agreed to maintain a reliable, high-quality network as detailed in
Attachment E. The network will meet or exceed the performance standards detailed in the
attachment for service speed, packet loss, and latency to guarantee a high performing
network.
7. Customer Service
North State has also agreed to response time and customer service standards as detailed
in Attachment E. These standards include a 24 hour a day, seven day a week call center
with performance metrics for answer times as well as performance standards for customer
appointments, customer activations, service restorations in the event of an outage, and the
ability for the County to access customer complaint reports and monitor complaint
disposition.
8. Broadband Service to County Facilities
The County has identified 34 County owned or leased public facilities, including volunteer
fire stations that will be passed by the network. North State has agreed to provide free
services to those facilities at no charge until June 30, 2028. A list of those facilities is
contained in Attachment F.
Communications Plan
If the Board approves the agreement, the County's Community Relations Department, in
cooperation with North State, has prepared press, social media, and marketing materials to
communicate the program to the public. In addition, the Broadband Task Force will hold a
series of Town Hall meetings to inform the public of the program and allow North State
representatives to address questions or concerns.
Travis Myren, Deputy County Manager, introduced the item.
Slide #1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Agreementwith North State Communications
for Broadband Deployment
board of Orange County Cornmissi4nBf9
April 26,2022
30
Slide #2
Background
Broadband Task Force-November 2020
— Discuss broadband solutions that wit improve the quality of high speed intemet
servl.ces to Orange County resldents;
Recommend a plan Io Ihle aoara or Orange County COmmisslOW1,that wit
expand reliable highspeed Urtemet servlcAs to all oounly resldertts and
businesses,
Membership
•ra dbmdTaak Nb MvAmm
M.t¢Ncen [hrFrtHIII Earr"o[Ity SAS Super-iPestral
Esrl NdEras-to-+LYalr 9oaN eR^---' -----i
E:i[a Bryarn iounry Marigeelaarlgrce�
Pxr{a V. UnnCeCrc6"Rebiall-At-Lwr
pa,Carduo OranFeCou PQQSwn-At-Ufp
R,,.1.1.y 4ranNG.[ ly5rhlf.5�pIoeeynevl
Eafi4 Jrr ZED•Azalr wm MCErlila7rWei-2
T�r.%dner I4ranpeC?v+ty }ianl-At-Lwr
TodGMmurk— Oranpec_"Readenl-At-L�w /''gyp,�t�/'
Varu Nllw 8ranga4o-rnYWasA�rn-AbL ORANGE COUNTY
Wdor4 Dnbm I Dxhfi TtafinlrWComhrrlYC~Pepr M01M r CAROLINA
Slide #3
Background
American Rescue Plan Act Allocation-June 2021
— 55 million reservation of funds
Request for Proposal-September 2021
Expansion of County Grant Authority-November 2021
— Allows for use of State and Federal Funds for braadt3ana aoceferallon grants
• Four Responses Received- December2021
• Contact Consideration-April 2022
ORANGE COUNTY
.L,17k4I'll t ARul.L`-0:5
31
Slide #4
North State Coverage
* 9,898 locatlons served
Lack access 10 25mbpa
dovnIkedby 8 mhps aphaad
• Fiber to the Premises
(Home)Network
. ica"Pme
Min lmum speeds of 100
megablt per second
upload and download
(symmetrlcal)
* Up to 2 glgablt per second
upload and download
speeds
�4
ORANGE COUNTY
NOF93 I CARDLINA
Travis Myren said residences that are in the blue area will be added to the service area
list.
Slide #5
Locations Served
Available electronically-www,oranlaecounWw govlservlcesites
."'.`w.'40.vim'..'w a■.au. rite inwY
xa�v owaw xux xx xniw ,,"••••'
rmawo�c• o�.a uK w nwuw -.�
r mitl1�diair °o w i[ .er:eo. FI:
�wn rnecr owdw.� �i� .�nww K.Z
North State wwrw.north state.net websitewill be updated with
address search tool
Residents can sign up for email updates
Addresses fnadvertentfy omitted but m service area
are aulomaticallyadded ORANIF C�_CJ_L.NTY
tiI II{I II i:A ki 11.1 N,
Travis Myren noted again that homes will be added to service even if the address does
not appear on this list, but it is inside the blue shaded area on slide #4.
32
Slide #6
Construction Timeline
• Services will be available on staggered schedule
Phaw HumesAdd�d w•
1 2000 M2023
u
E2.9CU 0ddaer29Q3
20p] r1262ni 22B9B Joh 2624
• North State has installation resources and materials available
• Reference checks indicated no concerns about budget or schedule
in similar projects
• Payment schedule is back loaded to provide financial incentive for
full completion
ORANGE COUNTY
W')F ]I CAROLIN,,�
Slide #7
County Contribution
• Full network build will cost—$45 million
County contribution-$10 million over three installments
— $1.000,00-Dwkhin30d3yeofcantractaxecufico
— $3,D0D,000 after enabkVconne-domW$.DODhoawsnoraisrteae December 31,2d23
— $B4O00,000eRerenablKconnectionsto the remaining 6,888homeeno later tun December
31.2024
County funds not applied to locations awarded Rural Digital
Opportunity Funds(RDOF)
— North State to hullo out to those Watlons with Company funding-1,9001ooallons
• Recommend additiona 1$5 million in American Rescue Plan Act
(ARPA)funds
— Spec ifically+lotedas priority for ARPAapendirig
One time grant
$12.2 millon balance after North Slate grant ORANGE COUNTY
WOWrl I CAROLINA
33
Slide #8
Service and Connection Costs
• 200 megabit per second service for no more than W per month
— Two yearn from completion of construclion-2028
Participation in federal Affordable Connectivity Program that
subsides subscription costs
• Standard rates will not increase by more than 10%until 2026
• Service connections
FTTP connteflm up to 1,000 reel at no cost to the customer
— Network design ao that 85%of locations are<1,OW feet
• Public service fac i I ity connections
— 94 County fac llltle9.EMS 9ubmali4ns,volunteer fire walion3
— No charge until June 30,2028
�w
ORANGE COUNTY
140R73 1 CARDLIN:z
Travis Myren said that North State will participate in the Affordable Connectivity Program
with a $30 a month subsidy for internet subscriptions for families below 200% of the federal
poverty threshold, which is $55,000 for a family of four.
Slide #9
Customer Service and Network
Performance
Customer$ervice
Call Center—24X7
Appoinune nts—specHlc Illns or 4 hour window
Activatlon—within 10 days
— Customer Complaint Report—number and dexription with resolution
• Network Performance
— Network lautage—begin work in under 24 hours
— Service Interruption—80%resolved in 5 days or tess
Speed—60%of adveNsed speed
Packet Lass-a1%(Microsoft recoumnendation for busi ness class video
conferencing)
— Latency-<AO milliseconds (Microsoft reconu ends <50ms for video
conferenclilg)
ORANGE COUNTY
34
Slide #10
Communications Plan
• Email notice to 130 residents interested in Broadband
• Press,social media prepared to go out tonight
Broadband Task Force Town Hall Meetings
— Norlh State particlpatlon
• North State marketing including mailers to home addresses
�4
ORANGE C01.:NTY
�,l7ki I11 CA1RL III ti
Slide #11
Manager's Recommendation
• Approve and authorize the County Managerto sign the oontractand
any amendments that do not exceed the contract amount with North
State Communications Advanced Services,LLC
• Allocate an additional$5 million in American Rescue Plan Act funds,
fora total of$10 million, to fully fund th 1 s ag reement.
ORANGE COUNTY
NOFM I L.AR.C)1.LNA
Chair Price asked if in the motion the Board should state the date of approval.
Travis Myren said it was not necessary.
Commissioner Richards asked what the communication plan is for the other 120 homes
or 9,000 people.
Travis Myren said the representative from North State will discuss the marketing plan.
Commissioner McKee said those 120 have been communicating with the Board for
years on the issue. He said that their concerns about current providers have been voiced and
they were part of the conversation.
Commissioner Hamilton asked about the network outage time frame and what the
industry expectations are.
Travis Myren said that realistically the outage would be taken care of well within the time
frame, but that it represents a little better than industry standard.
Chair Price asked if North State would take care of the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund
(RDOF).
35
Travis said the county is prohibited from spending funds in those areas. He said that a
different provider will cover those areas but that the timeline is long and uncertain. He said that
North State agreed to cover those customers with their own money.
Derek Kelly introduced colleagues and made the following presentation:
Slide #1
Orange
LiVi ' NorrhSrate
Derek Kelly thanked the board for their efforts in broadband and noted that he recalled
their efforts many years back with Century Link, as well.
Slide #2 I
Heritage of Customer Service Lv �'s Af Northstate
Lurms EOT Annourrceg
bagnsbuilding acgra4on orLu-ncs Lu-nos and Sprit ECTAmounces gale
Fiherxaahe-Hmie In Hemorks fFebl and Inlegrale and Rehrand of Segra Cornneroal
Virginia Inquisition of Spril as EegrR. Janl + phl) Onsed On er
;Ea try Adopia y GWgi
L'._RCawns
:
2006 2011 2017 2019 2021 OfIt
2021
,of North State
HorlhEtale Urmg and WMSlaM
Wgimbuilding Ltrnos gp1119 morn Seca acq.ues amounced as standalone fiber
Fiber-mZeJimm In nTelos and ma.ras kr4al HpghEcale f0e[I hroadbandgrab&pladomt.
North Cazdina R.Mc Ortering;IFO] closed in Ma9 2020 -----------------
;EartyAdtpler� f Wderrrarfae"4litltiWa
u+HPEtd Arend.
2
36
Derek Kelly said that North State started in North Carolina. He said they are operating
as Lumos and North State, but they will have a singular brand soon.
Slide #3
NarthState
.( r+FartnSt$ze
r�a.k w./r wrF.4]�rJM—wi4�.a I'Y CMi4
o'sw u�+r161} 1.+•rr.�n iiwrlr+lyw�tirSJrqu lOkYY�MYN MFFM1 M6^r•..••
An JL�.JhnlncM r.H.rlX'1 n}R15rRosnra Irr A{xrv,,i^.1.q 1o.M
AFr+ir�rY�11-•+r+�r�.�.+.+.rM+•Nrr Mh FY nn+4m Vnd a!d'a
111is�1�a�rwa rl YrOr Nxl l.+rrrww.owl xR'uwaY1Y
r„rrxer y4MYtwldw+Y r,ru�lr.,v...J.ar.yn.r,.,J s.w....�.x1,.u,.t
irl.kFe+Kr14 r4+V Flf M1.i11.ld�(tyr 44.L+Mtn kV+Wrti14+FM+M+
4���r.+�•u 46��arn.y.,�'+�„SF.�i &M4 W416W-Mw �011 I++QIu+1N#M.Ph YW.b#.{a IIhY-W
M1xu�y.W1xr.lurwtiw.�+W d.Y...Yr M.u!\hxss tilw.r 1n�e V1Ra nw�wtlil Ro.aselasaslb�xle.�ldws..e b.avwti
wwY MFr w.rrt fiwA xd w A.w�w.x R 11:irr.M•rn n.+w
4��hfl.�.•140.' r+r++. 1w.gad
xss.
North State
Nm-lhbtatr expandkng ifs YOb1r fiber-aptx nrrwark aria
+Vmmwrre,GarJJard Orange arrd Wayne Counldla
MPr{trl Prl S�ObP 9ddlfNnPl�3+'*='nnn..<n.y{F n'P nn.0.v:::<MUIRP'jfllf PP'rp{ed WlT{r
6V1nr1r.26)1
NO ft&k.W Irag9,2624—h srapldigc inuing mpallsron d Its ulershrglr-spwd fAwr
hAe"*1sH'.loe,HanhisateanwP€eR O-6et .viks.ronewtom. ohhlesof+I~Ke,
Swlrord,Orange,e+rd Wer-e Co,. ie's i'Nash Carolre.a"more dw'53NO r•anes end
businesses and m than Ea4 miles nA liter to its rww"k by nid-2023.
J
Slide #4
uccessft,l Public Private Partnerships L:.:. . S . NortnState
Lumos partners with the Allegheny
Highlands,VA to build"Future Proof Fiber '
Internet with 100% Coverage In Serwiae
Area
_ g
• Leveraged USDA Rural Utilities Servioe
Initlative In collaboration with local
lesdersh i pin the aou M,airy and towns s
• Com pletion of fiber expansion ma rke an
increaseof mor+ethan 12,000fiber-
ca pable addresses a n d more than 650
rourte miles offi ber
• PartneringwltliAlieghenyHlghlarids
Chamber of Commerce on 'Live Uniquely,
WorK Remotely°campaign
• UnlverseI coverage announcement event
held In November 2021
Derek Kelly said they have a longstanding history of partnering with government entities.
37
Slide #5
Successful Public Private Partnerships L" Nprth$t to
Lurnos partners wl#h Botetourt Oounfy,vA and puns to
reach universal coverage ahead of schedule by
EOY2023feerly 2024
Lun&mhasixovidedfll)er-Wlieai6he&eivicesmiTKdfet S.000
ikweholdslli B otetOWT0tllitir
• FCC BCAVpcgrernprovbesfundingtareerir3,700hmto
mWVlxdr eU huuse�w rLh over 2-900 4ellig in Wemr[
County
AM flrrdlrog ariousy intendEd to prov!]eF-TH overa ter year
per a2 w reach those addresses 3Dut LumoeaDwihmEftsd to burd
Tiba to 41 a1irem6-- rrleaning 2024 ws 2M
BocetowiCoiwywasawai0ed6 2025 VdTI gent teumore V684
500 addresses and true county reoenrad a second 2022 VATI grant
for 400 HHs which wd bring univeirael fiber broadtsnd coverage to
BoietourtGminty
LumnsalsnwofledwM Be~le�tolilanhrdkirrg
parts of Countythat colr pet for did rot have plane to pursue
a
Derek Kelly said that the Virginia project is similar to the Orange County design and that
they will be finishing four years before their federal requirement.
Slide #6
Heritage of Customer Service & Innovation Li.s ' nrthState
First to marltet,n successfully depioying FTTH slnce
2006 in Viriinia and North Garolina
Expanding on nea rly 200A residential and business
locations,the majority served with scalable h igh.
bandwldth fiber and current 00pa1:i1lity up to 8G
symmetrical speeds u.ra a
Getttrafesteir ..-.--.
IrMernet far ur
r More than 5,000 route miles offiberand growing uuasaacxW
3chaol waxes-
Nearly 400emplcyeea
customer sa#rs wton ratriga#90%
Multiple AGcoiades as one of the top FTTH
providers:
Broatltiantl Gorrilnur,n�;Magnnne FgSer-TaTlie-Hone Tap
200three years running
Bronze Beat of BusinessAvard,Lynchburg BusinsEs A1W
Best Internet Prowler,Hier Point,K eleven years Fuirw g
4
Derek Kelly said that their customers get someone from the United States with each
customer service call. He said they value customer service even more highly than the contract
reflects.
38
Slide #7
LS NorthState
Polygon Legend,
EluePolygon ■Orange Fi ber Service Contract
Boundary{axciudmg ROOF Iccat+ons)
Green Polygons■NorthState future build area
Purple Polygon ■ NorthState AlarnanceCounty
project{pending erioneeri rig arid
construction}
• Whlte Polygon=North State future build area
Point Legend=
• Red Points=underserved Addresaes provided
by Orange County
• Yellow Points = ROOF Addresses within
Orange County that North state wi I I serve,but
not in contract
• Orange Points=Sell-Reported Undemerved
Address from Orange County(95)
Derek Kelly said they were looking to provide services to 28,000 homes in the county.
He said that most companies are looking for the unserved areas for grant application and other
companies are just interested in the city. He said his company is interested in doing both.
Slide #8
Gamrnunication 8 Marketing LJ .:S + NorthState
Is North State Fiber IMernet available for your home?
721W 4w.RS.4xx ns.SMr+ 4
Ix+xw,�.fo..-.r x i.ki ni»r Xutl H4 f M<•m k}wrKYa�rru.M..W»+
Vlslt.
http://www.northstate.net
erg•.n
ww�•
S
Derek Kelly said when people sign up on the website, they will get a notification via
email and regular mail letting them know when North State will begin digging in their area. He
said they are also working on an Orange County specific website.
Commissioner Greene asked for information on the staggered implementation process.
She asked how areas will be selected to go first.
39
Derek Kelly said that will be known after a detailed engineering process. He said the first
customers will be coming online next year. He said there will be a number of things to get
through in the permitting phase. He said that the installation and location of the fiber distribution
hubs (FDHs) will serve between 100-400 homes. He said the engineers are finalizing the
location plans and then the construction schedule will be established. He said they have
committed to focus on the unserved areas first to get everything completed in two years. He
said that sometimes the work will overlap into both areas at one time.
Commissioner McKee asked what the installation process will look like.
Derek Kelly said most of the network will be underground, but some areas could be
aerial. He said that conduit is installed, and areas require boring, plow, or open trench
methods.
Commissioner McKee said some people are sensitive about their property and
landscaping. He said boring is much less intrusive and this will be as unobtrusive as possible.
He said that some property may be dug up during the installation and the county should
highlight that while noting they will try to be unobtrusive.
Derek Kelly said boring is much more expensive, but they have a good track record of
putting everything back together as it is supposed to be on disturbed property. He said they
want happy customers for a long time.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Laura Evans thanked the commissioners for considering the proposal. She said that her
26-home neighborhood is in approval. She asked that the contract be approved. She said they
have a 5MB internet plan and sometimes cannot even download a webpage. She described the
various methods they have researched to try to get a higher speed more reliable internet. She
said that either those efforts failed because either the provider wanted too much money or
relied on cell service which is very weak in her neighborhood. She said families are dependent
on the internet, and they do not have it. She said that homes and land will not sell without
broadband. She said they have been handicapped and disadvantaged. She said that internet
is important to livelihood. She said that she appreciates that specific addresses are listed. She
said that North State looks like a great fit, and that they seem to be appreciated by customers
and their prices are reasonable. She said that without the county's funding, they would be in
the dark ages. She specifically thanked Jim Northrup and Travis Myren for their assistance.
She said thanks to the board, they now have hope for high-speed internet.
Vann Evans said they have lived on Marion's Ford since 1975 and this is one of the best
things that has ever happened. He said the company can do whatever they want to get internet
so they can go to doctor's appointments and the children can do homework assignments.
Marcus Thrathen, an attorney with the firm Brooks Pearce, said he was speaking on
behalf of the North Carolina Cable Telecommunications Association. He said that one of their
members is Spectrum and that they are pleased to be a broadband provider in the area. He
said the Evans' testimony is what their members hear about all the time and his members want
to be part of the solution. He urged them to pause and make sure this is done right because
this is a unique opportunity to marry federal monies to this project. He said that regarding this
specific proposal, the counties authority to spend the grant funds is only to those unserved
areas. He said that is the one caution they have. He said that when Spectrum has looked at the
addresses, there appears to be substantial overlap with existing operations. He said that the
NC Department of Information Technology published their list they found 1,500 unserved
homes in Orange County. He said that the county's RFP found 5,000 homes. He said that the
contract will fund 10,000. He said that he knows the intent is to only serve unserved homes with
those grant funds. He said that he said that this is a process of not going through the state
process established by the General Assembly.
40
Marston Youngblood said he lives on Marion's Ford Road. He said that he did not sign
up to speak but wanted to after hearing from the Spectrum representative. He said they went
to all the providers — and the results were unsustainable and had unaffordable prices. He said
they are deeply grateful to the county for going with the North State providers and that this will
be done in a legally valid way.
Chair Price thanked the Broadband Task Force for their work on the issue. She said
this has been a longtime coming to get this far. She thanked staff, everyone that has been
involved, and North State. She thanked Jim Northrup for all his work on the issue.
Commissioner Fowler asked if Travis Myren or North State wanted to respond to the
legality of the contract.
John Roberts, County Attorney, said the county fully intends to comply with state law to
verify that there are no violations, and he will report back to the board and their next meeting.
Commissioner Bedford thanked the staff, the task force, the commissioners that have
worked on this, and Jim Northrup. She said that the pandemic exposed the needs for this utility
service, and she supports the County Manager's recommendation.
Commissioner McKee asked if there should be two motions, one on the project and one
on the allocation of the funding.
John Roberts said no.
Commissioner Greene said she and Commissioner McKee have worked on this since
March 2021 and met every two weeks. She listed the members of the Broadband Task Force.
She said a lot of things came together while the task force worked to get to this point.
A motion was made by Commissioner Greene, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to
approve and authorize the County Manager to sign the attached contract and any amendments
that do not exceed the contract amount with North State Communications Advanced Services,
LLC to construct, operate, and maintain a fiber to the premises network in unserved parts of
Orange County, and to allocate an additional $5 million in American Rescue Plan Act funds, for
a total of $10 million, to fully fund this agreement.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Commissioner McKee said the task force members were extremely dedicated. He said
when he made the petition for the task force in Fall 2020, he thought it would be $30 million.
He said the idea started off due to virtual schooling and feeling like children were not getting
what they needed. He said he did not have strong enough internet at his home to attend Board
meetings virtually. He said the Board stepped up with the investment. He thanked staff, the
Board, and the federal government for the ARPA funding.
b. Proposal to Name a Conference Room at the Orange County Visitors Center as "The
Lee Pavao Conference Room"
The Board discussed naming a Conference Room in the Orange County Visitors Center to "The
Lee Pavao Conference Room".
BACKGROUND: A number of community leaders (letters attached) have requested that the
Board of Orange County Commissioners consider naming a conference room in honor of the
late Lee Pavao.
Lee Pavao was a well-respected resident of the Orange County community for many years.
41
Lee Pavao served for eight years as an elected official on the Chapel Hill Town Council,
including two years as Mayor Pro-Tem.
Lee Pavao worked closely with Orange County leaders, the Board of County Commissioners
and Visitors Bureau, the Seymour Center, and many Orange County staff on community related
projects.
Lee Pavao was a champion of economic development and tourism and worked closely with
Orange County and Chapel Hill to establish a welcome center with associated programs.
In 2012, Lee Pavao received a standing ovation when he became a recipient of the Order of the
Long Leaf Pine award for his 30 years of volunteer service in Orange County.
Lee Pavao received many honors for his volunteer service including the Chapel Hill Historical
Society's 2014 Town Treasure Award, the Chapel Hill/Orange County Visitors Bureau's Tourism
Leadership Award and dozens of additional accolades.
In memoriam and appreciation of Lee Pavao, the proposal to name a conference room in the
recently relocated Orange County Visitors Center as "The Lee Pavao Conference Room" is
presented to the Board of Commissioners for consideration.
Bonnie Hammersley, County Manager, introduced the item.
Chair Price said it was well-deserved.
By consensus, the Board stated its intent to consider adopting a resolution at a future
business meeting to name a conference room at the Orange County Visitors Center "The Lee
Pavao Conference Room."
Commissioner Greene said the Laurie Paolicelli was in the audience and that Lee Pavao
was a special friend of hers.
c. Report of the Climate Council Review Sub-Committee
The Board discussed the report and recommendations of the Climate Council Review Sub-
Committee and authorize staff to draft an intergovernmental memorandum of understanding
that details the membership, charge and boundaries of work, meeting frequency, appointment
process, and staff responsibilities of the Climate Council as outlined below.
BACKGROUND: The Board of Commissioners created a Climate Council Review Sub-
Committee to review the Orange County Climate Council in the Fall of 2021. The Board
appointed Commissioners Jamezetta Bedford, Amy Fowler, and Anna Richards to serve on the
Sub-Committee. The petition that initiated the Sub-Committee stated that the Sub-Committee
may recommend a restructuring of the Climate Council because of this assessment.
The Sub-Committee reviewed background materials, conducted a survey of current and former
climate council members, interviewed Climate Council members, and reviewed other models for
intergovernmental information sharing and coordination. This work is described in detail in the
Sub-Committee Report (attached).
Based on the research conducted by the Sub-Committee, the Sub-Committee is recommending
a reorganization of the Climate Council that is modeled after the Intergovernmental Parks Work
Group. This new structure and charge would be codified in an intergovernmental Memorandum
42
of Understanding (MOU) that details the membership, charge and boundaries of work, meeting
frequency, appointment process, and staff responsibilities.
The Sub-Committee also offers the following specific suggestions regarding the content of the
MOU. These suggestions are more fully described in the attached report.
• Decrease the overall size of the Council from thirty-one to sixteen members
• Focus membership on public sector entities
• Clarify that the Council's charge:
o Provide opportunities to engage with the community on concerns and ideas
regarding climate change and climate justice;
o Gather and exchange information on climate change mitigation and prevention;
o Maintain and update an inventory of climate change initiatives of the entities
represented on the Council;
o Promote communication between the municipalities and the County on future
opportunities and collaborative efforts;
o Provide updates on the Climate Action Plans of the entities represented on the
Council;
o Provide feedback on public education and public outreach conducted by the entities
represented on the Council or any collaborative education and outreach activities as
requested by those entities.
• Establish a meeting frequency of three times per year consistent with the
Intergovernmental Parks Work group.
• Charge each entity with appointing its own members
• Clarify that, as an intergovernmental entity, the Climate Council should not be
considered an advisory board of any of its constituent entities.
• County staff will work with the appointed County representatives to prepare agendas
and coordinate meetings. Each entity represented on the Council will be responsible for
providing individual agency updates and engaging in collaborative activities.
Importance of a County Climate Action Plan
The Sub-Committee also recognized the need for the County to create its own Climate Action
Plan to identify the County's goals and strategies. The creation of the Plan would be led by the
County's Sustainability Coordinator and advised by and facilitated through the Commission for
the Environment. This Plan is a prerequisite to successful information sharing and
collaboration with other jurisdictions
Travis Myren, Deputy County Manager, introduced the item and made the following
presentation:
43
Slide #1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Report of Climate Council Review
Sub-Committee
guard of Orange County Commissioners
April 26,2022
Slide #2
Sub-Committee Background
• Created by Board of Commissioners-Fall 2021
• Commissioners Bedford,Fowler,and Richards appointed to serve
on the subcommittee
• Charge
— Review the structure and funelion 004nate C4xmil
May recommend reslructurinbg Chmate Council
ORANGE COUNTY
NORT]I CAROLINA
44
Slide #3
Climate Council Background
• Assembly of Governments-January 2019
— Idea to create multijudsdictioral C male Council
• Governing Board Action-Spring 2019
— No single consistent action across jurisdiclions on membership and composition
• Current Organization-31 members
County and Towns
School districts,VNC. Durham Tech.Cooperaliwe Extension
Orange Waler and Sewer Authority(CWASA). UNC Hospital
Chapel Hin-Carrboro and Northern Orange NAACP
— orangerChatham Sierra Club
At large appointments
Average of 15.9 members all meetings in 2021
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTI r CAROLINA
Travis Myren said that the first idea of the Climate Council came about at an Assembly
of Governments meeting in 2019.
Slide #4
Climate Council Background
• Mission Statement
— To accelerale joint action addressing the climate emergency by sharing
successful stralegles and identifying equitable opporlunitles to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions,provide stewardolp or the natural world,and proteol
of County resbdems Pm ellmate Impacts_
Climate Council Request for Memorandum of Understanding(MOU)
-December2021
• Mayors and Chair request to draft MOU using Intergovernmental
Parks Wort Group as model
ORANGE COUNTY
N,oRTt r r.ARG rN:x
Travis Myren said the Climate Council asked the governments to formalize the Council
and the legal councils drafted the memorandum of understanding.
45
Slide #5
Sub-Committee Research
Survey to current and former rnembers
— 70%%aidClimate Council added value
Collaboralion,relationships primary benefit
Ro clear uneerstaneing of misslon,Inconsistent parheipation primary
weaknesses
— Need Io define 59ecific charge, responsibilities,and relationship wish nwater
goverMWIS
Review of Existing Models
— I nlergovernmcnlal Parks Work CroEV
InformationshaFig and collaboration
— Parmwrhip Io End Homelessrrass
Formal role as con&xmm of care+mulh*uiedictionel fuAding*dedicated staff
— Food Council
Muft@w dic6onel rundrirg+deckaledstafr _
ORANGE COUNTY
N3OWrl I CAROLINA
Travis Myren said that twelve surveys were returned. He said that the unclear
understanding of mission and participation were weaknesses.
Slide #6
Sub-Committee Recommendation
Use Intergovernmental Parks Work Group Model
Not an advisory board of the County
Sixteen (16)members representing institutions
- County,Towns_OWASA, UNC and UNC Health, Cooperative Extenslon,
Durham Tech,Chamber of Commerce
Charge
- Share information,engage with community,identify opportunities for
collaboration
Meeting frequency
- Three times per year
ORANGF COUNTY
Travis Myren said they recommended decreasing the membership numbers and
meeting less frequently.
46
Slide #7
Sub-Committee Recommendations
Appointments
- By participating instktutlon with Clerk coordination
Staffing
- County staff and County-appolntedrepresentatives coordinate agenda
County ClimateAction Plan
- Identify County s goals and strategies
Important to information sharing and collaboration or Climate Council
ORANGF CQl,;NTY
;i 1�I 11 C AW 11ANA
Travis Myren said the county would offer staff support with the entities selecting their
own representatives. He said the county should also develop an independent climate action
plan. He said that staff is working on a proposal for that now.
Slide #8
Manager's Recommendation
Discuss the recommendations of the Sub-Committee
• Authorize staff to draft an intergovernmental memorandum of
understanding thatdetailsthe membership,charge and boundaries
of work, meeting frequency,appointment processes,and staff
responsibilities of the Climate Council as outlined
ORANGE COUNTY
WORT][CAROLINA
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Melissa McCullough, current chair of Orange County Climate Council, expressed
disappointed at the sub-committee process and recommendations. She said that she is well
47
versed in local climate action and bureaucracy. She said that the Climate Council was not
notified when these recommendations were released. She said that the Chapel Hill elected
representative asked for a delay in the presentation and she was told no. She said that the
Climate Council spent a better part of a year discussing these issues that are in the
recommendations. She said that along with the draft bylaws that addressed the issues, there
was also a background document that explained how they settled on them. She said that does
not appear to have been considered at all. She said that the subcommittee shows a lack of
recognition at what the council has done. She said that the Climate Council brings together a
group of diverse and very invested people. She said it needs input by so many in the
community and that these perspectives are represented on the council. She said that with the
recommendations, she believes that the subcommittee is stepping back from climate urgency.
She said that she believes that the recommendations neither solve the issues nor give climate
action the attention that it warrants. She suggested that they accept the Climate Council's
recommendation from 2021. She said that the group could draft an MOU formed by those that
have been involved in the process and that it would be more practical and effective.
Commissioner McKee said he appreciated the work of the sub-committee, and the
direction of the recommendations are correct. He said he has had concerns with the group
and that they were going out of scope. He said that he supported the recommendations.
Commissioner Greene said she has been outside of the subcommittee discussions and
that she was troubled by Melissa McCullough's comments and the disappointment that she
expressed. She said she knows that the people on the subcommittee are good people but that
she does not know what she thinks. She said that she wants to hear more about how the sub-
committee made their recommendations. She said it is not obvious as to why the public is
shutout. She said that they have a tiered process in mind. She said she agrees the Food
Council and Partnership to End Homelessness are not good models, but that they do both
have a structured way of reaching out into the community and getting input. She said that she
is not satisfied that they have reached the right answer and would like to hear from the
subcommittee members.
Commissioner Bedford said she started attending Climate Council meetings after
former Commissioner Dorosin left. She said that he had not been attending meetings for a
while. She said that there was sporadic attendance and that it was hard to achieve a quorum.
She said that it was an all-white, all retired, and not diverse group. She said that she does not
think the input has been anything other than erratic. She said they are interested in being more
like a non-profit or a department. She said that our own representative said that if changes
were not made, he would resign in December. She said that is one of the reasons she
petitioned to investigate the group. She said that another reason is the redundancy with the
Commission for the Environment. She said that it caused confusion to the public with why there
are two and which group is doing what. She said that some things that they do is hard to
explain. She said that it is also odd that they will allow a former commissioner to speak the
whole time but not allow any time for public comment. She said it is almost so functionally bad
that it needs to be reorganized. She said that they presented last May and the County Attorney
said they do not have the ability to appoint people. She said the few times that she attended
there were not appointments made, but that she watched a meeting during which they were
making appointments without any input from elected bodies. She said the fact only twelve
members filled out a survey supports that this is not a functional council. She said when they
looked at other models, the Intergovernmental Parks Work Group seemed workable. She also
said they determined that they need a county climate action plan. She said they were not
fulfilling any need to collaborate. She said that sometimes a member would bring something in
and only to present it to the council before they released it as a council document. She said the
48
meetings were a waste of time. She said that one of their own planners said her biggest fear
was that one of their subcommittees would actually bring back "big hairy ideas" that would
require her time and actually take her away from her job working on climate. She said that is
when the alarm bells were going off for her and she realized it was time to reorganize this
group.
Commissioner Richards said the abstract does talk about the accomplishments of the
council. She said that what the recommendations are trying to do is take those things and
focus the charge to leverage and engage with the community, to gather and exchange
information, promote communication between county and municipalities on future
opportunities, and provide feedback on public education. She said that it is oriented on how we
engage the community and staff. She said that the goal is to take the strong things the council
accomplished and put the focus on actions that can move the needle and collaborating with the
community. She said the hope is to take the achievements and leverage them moving forward.
Commissioner Fowler said she wanted to acknowledge the accomplishment that council
members were able to achieve. She said when she first joined, she was trying get started on
the county's climate action plan. She said a climate action plan is foundational and they need
to know this before collaborating and complimenting others' work. She said they have not
made progress because they do not have their own plan. She said she found the structure of
the Intergovernmental Parks Work Group useful. She said she understood the confusion of
who is actually on the council. She said they need an MOU to make sure they are following
processes. She said that groups cannot develop their own decisions on how things should be
run. She said that council reached a point where they were looking for funding in order to do
communications rather than use the county's communications. She said there was a lack of
following governing rules that was concerning to her. She said she agreed that climate was
urgent and needs to be a focus. She said she finds it hard to collaborate until they have their
own climate plan.
Chair Price said that over the past year there have been expressed concerns about the
climate council. She said that there were concerns about attendance. She said that is why
there was a subcommittee formed to look into it. She said the work that has been done has
shown the need for a county climate action plan. She said that she has spoken to the County
Manager about the Committee for the Environment possibly revising their focus and taking on
climate change instead of just environmental protection. She said she appreciates what the
subcommittee has done in looking into the group and developing those recommendations. She
said that the recommendations seem to be a reasonable way to address climate change and
the urgency of it. She said that the Intergovernmental Parks Work Group seems like a
reasonable model to follow. She said that some people are wondering if the group needs to be
abolished but that for now, she thinks the recommendations are a reasonable solution.
Commissioner Greene said she agrees that the county needs to create its own climate
plan. She said that she wondered if there should be a council right now or if the people that are
engaged should be asked to work with the county. She said that she understands that it is not
functioning well, and she is not sure that the solution offered is the best solution. She said she
was not sure the recommendations are the right solution. She said this feels like a top-down
process rather than a more engaging process. She said she does not have a fully formed
decision, but maybe this is not the time for an inter-jurisdictional group to exist since the county
needs to concentrate on its own work in creating a plan.
Commissioner Hamilton said she wondered why we had a Commission for the
Environment and the Climate Council. She said the Commission for the Environment should
be the place to give input to the Board because it is a clearly established advisory council. She
said when she looks at the things the council has recommended that it really should be the
Commission for the Environment. She said if there is a Climate Council to help the
49
municipalities talk then it should be more like the Intergovernmental Parks Work Group. She
said it seems like a more efficient way to get the governmental roles on what can be done. She
said that she agrees that maybe there should not be a group right now and that it needs to be
clear who is doing the work that the board wants. She said it would be nice to get this on a
work session night so they can review the item before being asked to make a decision.
Chair Price said she noticed that the changes to membership take out a lot of the
community aspect to the council. She said it becomes more of a representation by staff and
governmental officials.
Commissioner Richards said there were thirty-one positions, but students could not
come because it was at 3 pm. She said half the people would not come. She said even
though it looks like the community was represented on paper that it was difficult to have the full
representative body there. She said they tried changing the meeting times but then that
created overtime for staff. She said that she was previously the NAACP representative on the
council but there were challenges bringing those people together. She said there was an
honest effort, but the structure made it hard to get the representation.
Chair Price says it seems like the Commission for the Environment would be the
community input because they are appointed by the board. She said they are at the point to
decide to move forward with the proposal or not.
Commissioner Bedford said she thought they could proceed on parallel tracks for with
their sustainability coordinator and the Commission for the Environment focusing on the
climate plan. She said that all council members will have the opportunity to participate in the
MOU. She said the attorneys have seen a draft. She said if they do not move forward will they
lose opportunities to share information.
Commissioner Greene said what about having a staff working group.
Commissioner Bedford said the staff have gotten to know each other and that has been
a real positive. She said that could be left to the County Manager to decide since that is not
policy.
Commissioner Greene said they could recommend that there be a staff working group.
Bonnie Hammersley said they already are working together. She said part of the
advantage of the intergovernmental sustainability group is that there needs to be collaboration
with the towns as they put their plan together. She said that while there is not one plan, that
they do have many pieces to a climate action plan in other documents. She said that it is just
not combined. She said that there was an understanding that out of the Climate Council would
come our climate action plan. She said that never happened and she does not know why. She
said there were gaps between sustainability coordinators. She said that during the pandemic,
they saw the true value of the Intergovernmental Parks Work Group in working together. She
said that when the Climate Council was established, there was a question from the
Commission for the Environment as to their purpose. She said some people went over to the
Climate Council so that created redundancy. She said the Commission for the Environment
has a desire to be a leader on the climate action plan and they have been for so long.
Chair Price said members of the Commission for the Environment have the expertise
for the project work that is needed.
Commissioner McKee said it might be the best route to have staff move forward and to
disband this group and start over.
Chair Price said she thinks that is what the recommendation is.
Commissioner McKee said he wants to make sure that is what he is hearing.
Chair Price said that the council has not been functioning the way they were expected
or intended. She said that out of this, the different jurisdictions can continue to work together.
She said that Orange County will work on the climate action plan then Commission for the
Environment will assist.
50
Commissioner Bedford asked if they are suspending the Climate Council.
Chair Price said yes.
Commissioner Bedford said that is what is recommended.
Commissioner Richards said that for an intergovernmental agreement, the other
governments must be involved to adopt an MOU. She said this would not be solely Orange
County's staff creating this. She said the proposal is that we use the Intergovernmental Parks
as a model and specify the charge. She said there would be a new MOU created.
Chair Price said yes. She said the reference about the county doing a plan is because
they do not have one like the other jurisdictions have.
Commissioner Greene asked if Commissioner McKee was recommending a staff-only
working group.
Commissioner McKee said no.
Commissioner Greene clarified that it would be like the Intergovernmental Parks Work
Group with staff and then elected officials appointed.
Commissioner Hamilton said she would like to suspend the Climate Council for now,
because she is not sure she agrees with all of the recommendations in the presentation about
the charge. She said she would be happy to see an MOU.
Commissioner Hamilton made a motion to suspend the Climate Council and ask staff to
draft a memorandum of understanding with a restructured Climate Council based on the
Intergovernmental Parks Work Group and recognize the need for the county to create its own
climate action plan led by the county's sustainability coordinator and advised by and facilitated
through the Commission for the Environment.
Commissioner Bedford seconded the motion.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
d. Discussion of Extensions to State of Emergency Declarations
This item was added at the beginning of the meeting.
Commissioner McKee said he heard there may be an extension of the local state of
emergency declaration until the end of June, which he disagreed with. He said he does not
think the numbers justify an extension. He said he wanted to put it out for consideration, and
he was fine if the Board wanted to discuss it at a future work session. He said he wanted to
propose updating the wording in the ordinance to state as follows:
"Emergency declarations once declared as per existing protocol by the Chair in
consultation with management that last more than 30 days will require Board of
Commissioner review and confirmation at the first formal business meeting of
the following month and each subsequent month in order to remain in effect."
Commissioner McKee said he did not think they had ever had an emergency last more
than two or three days. He said extending the review to 30 days is more reasonable than the
five days he originally suggested. He said he felt that to have an emergency declaration for
more than 30 days needs confirmation by the Board. He said he does not question any of the
commissioners, Chair, management or Emergency Services, but he felt that due to the impact
on the community, it needs to be a Board decision after 30 days. He said it could be as much
as 60 days depending on when it fell. He said that towns have ability to declare and impose
restrictions without the county being a part of it, so it should not be an impediment to the towns
deciding what is best for their own constituency. He said it was something that needed to be
looked at as a policy change, how does the county handle long-term emergency declarations.
Chair Price said it was timely because there is current state of emergency declaration
51
that could end on May 1st. She said there has been discussion about extending it, but that she
spoke with the County Attorney and Public Health Director and there may be a resolution to the
issue. She said the concern has been with transit workers and riders. She said right now
there is an emergency declaration, but the county lifted the mask mandate and satisfied FEMA
requirements.
John Roberts, County Attorney, said that his understanding is that this has come up for
a couple of reasons. He said one reason is because the towns want to continue meeting
remotely and the second is for protecting transit workers and the public who use public
transportation. He said as far as remote meetings go, the local declaration has no impact. He
said the state declaration is the only thing that grants local governments the authority (and
cities, the specific authority) to meet remotely. He said as far as transit is concerned, the
Public Health Director has broad authority to investigate and implement remedies to prevent
the spread of communicable disease, all the way up to and including quarantine and isolation
of individuals and groups. He said in that specific statutory language, the quarantine and
isolation authority shall only be used lesser alternatives have been tried and have been
unsuccessful. He said requiring masks on public transportation is within the Public Health
Director's authority. He said he spoke with the Public Health Director, and she was willing to
issue that direction. He said the managers can then implement that through their transit
directors.
Chair Price said she has an upcoming meeting with the mayors.
Commissioner McKee said he would like to make a motion to include the wording he
read earlier in the meeting.
Chair Price asked if that could be done at this time since it is an ordinance change.
John Roberts said he had reservations with the wording. He said it needed to be more
specific.
Commissioner McKee withdrew the motion. He said would like to sit down and discuss
it as a policy change.
Chair Price said to make this a petition so staff can begin working on the wording
change.
Commissioner McKee said he would like to pursue this. He thanked the Board for
being willing to discuss it.
Commissioner Richards asked for clarification for if the state of emergency will be
extended.
Chair Price said it will not.
Commissioner Richards asked what the process for will be sharing information if the
declaration is extended.
Chair Price said she would send an email to the Board before May 1 st
7. Reports
None.
8. Consent Agenda
• Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
• Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
• Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
Bonnie Hammersley said she would like to pull item 8-h to be discussed.
52
A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Greene, to
approve the remaining items on the consent agenda.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
a. Minutes
The Board approved the draft minutes for the March 15, 2022 and March 21, 2022 Board of
County Commissioners meetings.
b. Advisory Boards and Commissions—Appointments
The Board approved the Advisory Boards and Commissions appointments as reviewed and
discussed during the Board's April 14, 2022 Work Session.
c. Second Reading: Emergency Services Franchise by Ordinance — First Choice Medical
Transport, LLC
The Board approved on Second Reading, in follow-up to First Reading approval at the Board's
April 5, 2022 Business meeting, granting the renewal of a franchise agreement by ordinance to
First Choice Medical Transport, LLC (First Choice) to provide routine convalescent transport
services and surge capacity emergency services for basic life support (BLS) transportation.
Approval on "Second Reading" is based on State law requirements that a franchise by
ordinance pass two readings in order to be granted by the Board of Commissioners.
d. Second Reading: Emergency Services Franchise by Ordinance— LifeStar Emergency
Services -2023, LLC
The Board approved on Second Reading, in follow-up to First Reading approval at the Board's
April 5, 2022 Business meeting, granting the renewal of a franchise agreement by ordinance to
LifeStar Emergency Services - 2023, LLC (LifeStar) to provide routine convalescent transport
services and surge capacity emergency services for basic life support (BLS) transportation.
Approval on "Second Reading" is based on State law requiring that a franchise by ordinance
pass two readings in order to be granted by the Board of Commissioners.
e. Second Reading: Emergency Services Franchise by Ordinance — South Orange
Rescue Squad
The Board approved on Second Reading, in follow-up to First Reading approval at the Board's
April 5, 2022 Business meeting, granting the renewal of a franchise agreement by ordinance to
South Orange Rescue Squad, Inc. (SORS) to continue providing emergency services basic life
support transport service, special event coverage, as well as technical rescue services.
Approval on "Second Reading" is based on State law requiring that a franchise by ordinance
pass two readings in order to be granted by the Board of Commissioners.
f. Second Reading: Emergency Services Franchise by Ordinance— North State Medical
Transport
The Board approved on Second Reading, in follow-up to First Reading approval at the Board's
April 5, 2022 Business meeting, granting the renewal and upgrade of a franchise agreement by
ordinance to North State Investment Group, LLC d/b/a North State Medical Transport (North
State) and the Franchise Agreement under which they will operate. Approval on "Second
Reading" is based on State law requiring that a franchise by ordinance pass two readings in
order to be granted by the Board of Commissioners.
g. Resolution Approving the Sale of Two Frontend Loading Vehicles to the City of
Rocky Mount, NC
The Board approved a resolution authorizing the selling of two frontend loading vehicles to the
City of Rocky Mount, NC.
h. Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Amendment#10
The Board approved a budget amendment for Fiscal Year 2021-22.
53
i. Approval of Contract Accepting Housing Staff Grant Funding from the Foundation for
Health Leadership and Innovation
The Board approved a contract accepting a grant from the Foundation for Health Leadership
and Innovation (FHLI) for two new positions in the Housing Department— a Team Lead for the
Housing Helpline and partial funding for a Housing Locator position (to be paired with ARPA
funding authorized in FY 2021-22 to create a 1.0 full time equivalent (FTE) position).
j. Second Amendment to the Development Agreement for the Construction of a Shared
Government Facility at 203 South Greensboro Street, Carrboro, NC
The Board approved the Second Amendment to a Development Agreement by and between
the Town of Carrboro, NC and Orange County, NC for the design and construction of a jointly
used government facility at 203 Greensboro Street in the Town of Carrboro.
Regarding item 8-h, Bonnie Hammersley said section 13 regarding the Efland
Emergency Services Substation needed more work, so she asked that the Board vote on
sections 1 through 12 instead.
Commissioner Bedford made a motion to approve item 8-h less section 13, and
Commissioner McKee seconded the motion.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
9. County Manager's Report
Bonnie Hammersley reminded the Board that they will be meeting with the schools on
April 28, 2022 and it will be a facilitator led discussion. She said the facilitator will help have
more discussion and there will be less staff presentations. She said the schools will not be
presenting their budgets at that meeting. She said the goals are to have a conversation
amongst the groups.
10. County Attorney's Report
John Roberts says the legislature will reconvene next week and he will update the
Board.
11. *Appointments
None.
12. Information Items
• April 5, 2022 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List
• Memorandum - Blackwood Farm Park Phase II Construction Project Progress
Information Update
13. Closed Session
None.
14. Adjournment
A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to
adjourn the meeting at 10:36 p.m.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
54
Renee Price, Chair
Laura Jensen
Clerk to the Board
Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board.