Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 10-03-2022 Business Meeting 1 APPROVED 11/15/22 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BUSINESS MEETING October 3, 2022 7:00 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Business Meeting on Monday, October 3, 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. All commissioners were present. 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda Commissioner Bedford noted she plans to pull item 8-e from the consent agenda during that portion of the agenda. Chair Price dispensed with reading the public charge. 2. Public Comments (Limited to One Hour) a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda Laura Bibb said she is a lifelong Orange County resident and attended public schools in Orange County. She said she graduated from UNC-Asheville in 2000 and UNC Law School in 2003. She said she and her husband settled here to raise their children. She said she is concerned by what appears to be a lack of a strategic approach to development in Efland. She said there are growing numbers of public hearings and more industrial warehouses being built. She said there is an increase in heavy traffic from warehouses and trucks. She also said the warehouses give trucks an additional excuse to bypass the weigh station on 1-40/85. She said it is a narrow and dangerous road with lots of curves and a 55 miles per hour speed limit. She said there is also a school and soccer complex there, so the road is traveled frequently by children and families. She said driving down West Ten Rd. is dangerous, and creates noise and environmental pollution around a school that is currently struggling. She said Gravelly Hill has a rating of an F. She said she is concerned by the lack of concern the Commissioners have about development there. b. Matters on the Printed Agenda (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda below.) 3. Announcements, Petitions and Comments by Board Members Commissioner Hamilton said she had no comments. Commissioner Greene said she went to a talk last week at the botanical garden by Johnny Randall who spoke about native wildflowers and how they grow in utility line easements 2 and road beds. She said it reminded her an initiative had been started as a collaboration between the county and power companies to better manage road beds so native flowers would be able to thrive. She said turns out that the Board of Commissioners passed a resolution right before COVID to ask for work to be done on this. She said it got started but was a casualty of COVID. She said the Board authorized the Commission for the Environment and county staff to work with the botanical garden to encourage the NC Department of Transportation, utility companies, and property owners to plan implement and study such road bed and rights of way management practices. She petitioned the Board to formally reinstate this process and work. Commissioner Bedford said she had no comments. Commissioner Fowler said she had no comments. Commissioner Richards said petitioned county staff to further research universal pre- K. She said the county is working on the long term strategic facilities plan and believes this would be good information to have. She said staff could report back on how long they would need for this research, but that she would like it to be a part of the Board's strategic plan and the facilities plan. Commissioner McKee said he would like to second Commissioner Richards's petition, and had no further comments. Chair Price said she would like to put a third on that petition because it is something the Board has talked about before. She said as the Board gets into the actual strategic planning, some of the items that Commissioner Greene and Commissioner Richards mentioned that drift away and are brought back up can become part of the plan so there is constant work on them. She said she had a meeting this morning with the town mayors over breakfast with the point of continuing to work together and collaborate. She said she took a tour of Perry Place last week which is the affordable housing complex that straddles both Carrboro and Chapel Hill. She said CASA manages this development, and it is moving along well. She said residents should be able to move in by the end of December or beginning of January. 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations a. Fire Prevention Week Proclamation The Board considered the approval of a proclamation designating the week of October 9 through 15, 2022 as Fire Prevention Week in Orange County. BACKGROUND: Fire Prevention Week is celebrating its 1001" year, the longest running health campaign, to honor the brave firefighters and first responders who risk their lives to protect us every day and reaffirm the importance of fire safety and preparedness. Fire Prevention Week was started by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) in 1922 to commemorate the Great Chicago Fire of 1871. Fire Prevention Week teaches children and adults how to stay safe in the event of a fire. In 1925, President Calvin Coolidge proclaimed the first National Fire Prevention Week to occur from October 4 through October 10, 1925. President Coolidge stated that, "This waste results from the conditions which justify a sense of shame and horror; for the greater part of it could and ought to be prevented... It is highly desirable that every effort be made to reform the conditions which have made possible so vast a destruction of the national wealth". The Great Chicago Fire burned from October 8 to October 10, 1871, with most of the damage occurring on October 9th. The fire caused roughly $200 million in damages, killing approximately 300 people, and destroying over 17,000 buildings and structures. The 3 consequences were more than just fire damage itself, as martial law had to be declared after an outbreak of looting and lawlessness. Fire impacts a community financially, including lost tax revenue, reduced tourism and business investment, downgraded bonds, and reduced real estate values. This week, all people in Orange County should educate themselves about fire prevention and safety and recommit to taking the necessary steps to prevent fires. The year's theme, "Fire will not wait. Plan your escape.T"'," effectively serves to remind Orange County residents of the importance of having a home fire escape plan. Commissioner McKee read the following proclamation: ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PROCLAMATION FIRE PREVENTION WEEK OCTOBER 9-15, 2022 WHEREAS, Orange County is committed to ensuring the safety and security of all those living in and visiting our county; and WHEREAS, fire is a serious public safety concern both locally and nationally, and homes are the locations where people are at greatest risk from fire, understanding that: • Home fires caused 2,580 civilian deaths in the United States in 2020, according to the National Fire Protection Association° (NFPA°), and fire departments in the United States responded to 356,500 home fires. • Home fires caused 4 civilian deaths in Orange County in 2021 and fire departments responded to 1,296 home fires. • Smoke alarms sense smoke well before you can, alerting you to danger in the event of fire in which you may have as little as two minutes to escape safely. • Working smoke alarms cut the risk of dying in reported home fires in half. • Orange County residents should be sure everyone in the home understands the sounds of the smoke alarms and knows how to respond. • Orange County residents who have planned and practiced a home fire escape plan are more prepared and will therefore be more likely to survive a fire. • Orange County residents need to make sure their smoke and carbon monoxide (CO) alarms meet the needs of all their family members, including those with sensory or physical disabilities. • Orange County first responders are dedicated to reducing the occurrence of home fires and home fire injuries through prevention and protection education. • Orange County residents that are responsive to public education measures are better able to take personal steps to increase their safety from fire, especially in their homes; and WHEREAS, the 2022 Fire Prevention Week theme, "Fire won't wait. Plan your escape," 4 effectively serves to remind us it is important to have a home fire escape plan; NOW THEREFORE, we, the Orange County Board of Commissioners, do hereby proclaim October 9-15, 2022, as Fire Prevention Week throughout this community, and urge all the people of Orange County to prepare and practice a home fire escape plan for Fire Prevention Week 2022 and to support the many public safety activities and efforts of Orange County's fire and emergency services. This the 3rd day of October, 2022. Renee Price, Chair Orange County Board of Commissioners A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to approve and authorize the Chair to sign the proclamation. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Chair Price said this is the 100t" year of fire prevention week. She said even though this proclamation is dedicated to fire prevention, fires do happen, and we should recognize and acknowledge the challenging and heroic acts of firefighters and first responders and thank them as well. Elizabeth Farnan, Orange County Fire Marshall, said we are fortunate to be in a county that recognizes and supports the importance of fire prevention and fire and life safety education. She said as a fairly new Division Chief of Fire and Life Safety with all fairly new staff, it is their passion and goal to provide fire prevention and education on a level and in a manner that has never been provided before in Orange County. She said they know this is the key to reducing the number of fire fatalities, fire responder injuries, and increasing fire and life safety for all residents, employees, and visitors in Orange County. She said one of the Division's first goals with the help of a very generous donation from the Hillsborough Exchange Club was to adopt a dog that would help accomplish providing fire prevention and education. She introduced the very first robotronic "Sparky the Dog". She said during the month of October, Sparky will assist the Orange County Fire and Life Safety Division working collaboratively with the schools, Orange Rural Fire Department, and Safe Kids in providing every public, charter, and private school in the Orange County school system with fun, interactive, and STEM-driven fire prevention and education activities. 5. Public Hearings a. Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendments — Erosion & Sedimentation Control (E&SC) and Stormwater Management The Board received the proposed LIDO amendments, considered conducting a public hearing and accepting public comment, and considered approving the Statement of Approval and Consistency and LIDO Amendments. BACKGROUND: As Planning staff shared during the May 18, 2021 public hearing to adopt UDO amendments related to North Carolina General Statute (NCGS) 160D, additional amendments related to stormwater Performance Guarantees were necessary and were moving 5 forward on a separate path for consideration. The proposed LIDO amendments proposed now seek to specifically: • Ensure that County regulations are consistent with NCGS Chapter 160D-804.1, related to the acceptance of Performance Guarantees; • Update existing E&SC and Stormwater Management regulations to coincide with 15A North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) Chapter 4: Sedimentation Control Rules, 15A NCAC 02H .1000 through .1062: Stormwater Management Rules, the most current North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual, and the most current version of the NCDEQ Stormwater Design Manual; • Ensure that County implementation of its delegated Local Programs for E&SC and Stormwater Management conforms with the NCDEQ's most current Rules and Model Ordinances related to E&SC and Stormwater Management; • Clarify/refine County requirements for Stormwater Control Measure (SCM) Performance Guarantees; • Clarify/refine County requirements for annual SCM monitoring and 5-year inspections, and eliminate unenforceable County requirements for SCM maintenance guarantees; • Provide more equitable Land Disturbing Permit (aka "grading permit") timeframes; and • Update E&SC and Stormwater Management terms, definitions, and standards to be consistent with the most current North Carolina NCDEQ rules/guidance. Joint Planning Area (JPA) Review: In accordance with the Joint Planning Agreement with the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro, the UDO amendment package was sent to Town staffs on July 30, 2021, April 12, 2022, and April 25, 2022. The Town of Chapel Hill staff sent the comments contained in Attachment 6 on April 18, 2022. The Town of Carrboro planning staff sent the memorandum contained in Attachment 6 on May 16, 2022. Both Town staffs found no inconsistency with the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan. Planning Board Recommendation: The Planning Board reviewed this item at its May 4, 2022 regular meeting and its September 7, 2022 regular meeting. At the September 7, 2022 regular meeting, the Planning Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the amendments. An excerpt of the approved minutes from the May 4, 2022 meeting are included in Attachment 4. An excerpt of draft minutes from the September 7, 2022 meeting and the signed Statement of Approval and Consistency are included in Attachment 5. Materials for these Planning Board meetings are available at: http://orangecountync.gov/AgendaCenter/Planning-Board-26. Prior to making its recommendation, the Planning Board reviewed the materials in an "Ordinance Review Committee" (ORC) meeting on August 4, 2021. An excerpt of the approved meeting notes from the August 4, 2021 meeting are included in Attachment 3, and materials for that meeting are also available at: http://orangecountync.gov/AgendaCenter/Planning-Board-26 Planning Director's Recommendation: The Planning Director recommends approval of the Statement of Approval and Consistency as contained in Attachment 1 and approval of the LIDO Amendments as contained in Attachment 2. Cy Stober, Planning and Inspections Director, reviewed the background information for the item and made the following PowerPoint presentation: 6 Slide #1 Orange County Board of :r HEARINGPUBLIC Agenda UDO Text Amendments: Erosion : Sedimentation Control, Performance October 3,2022 Presenters, Cy Stober,AICP(Planning Director) Christopher Sandt,PE(Staff Engineer) ORANGE COUNTY Planning and inspections Department NORTH C'AROLTNA P P Slide #2 WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY. To consider action on County-initiated amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance(LIDO)that are necessary to conform to the State's most current Model Ordinances for Erosion&Sedimentation Control,Stormwater Management, and Performance Guarantees as mandated by applicable State General Statutes, Rules,and Design Manuals. • Clarification of procedural requirements and performance guarantees for Erosion&Sedimentation Control and Stormwater Management (i.e.improve UDO"readability") • Incorporation of consistent terminology into the LIDO to match NCDEQ's most current Rules,Model Ordinances,and Definitions for all things Stormwater Management and Erosion& Sedimentation Control Slide #3 BACKGROUND Delegated Authority for Erosion&Sedimentation Control(E&SC1 • Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973(SPCA) • State Sedimentation Control Commission(SCC),governing entity • G.S. 113A-Articie4: Local Programs and Local Approval of E&SC • County was first delegated authority as a Local Program in 1975 for E&SC by the SCC; renewed in 2a2a • State Model Ordinance for E≻ last revised November 2021 • E&SC is enforced by the Planning Department's E&SC Division StateE&SC Planning and AestgnManuel, 15ANCACChapter4 Issuance of land Disturbing Permits(LDPs) Authoritylimitedfonon-agriculfurallanduse!(i.e.non-farm) Slide #4 Erosion Sedimentation Control Fmclalh Slarnmer Sednwt Baeln Min Sklnrner(newly canalum-dr �Y Crdr Mining 1e im7enl Tiap in raeEd aroE.thich y Mul d dd ds ICO) Check Danis JVQTE:EASCC WTR61SARE TCMP"ARy 5 TA%X T4AE$ Slide #5 BACKGROUND County's Delegated Authority for Stormwater Manaaemertit Clean Water Act of 1972 (C1 A) Environmental Management Commission (EMC), governing entity G.S. 143-214,7; Stormweler Runoff Ruies and (Local) Programs Orange County was delegated authority as a Local Program in 2001 for stormwater management (Neu se), renewed in 2022 State Model Ordinance (Neuse-TarPam), last revised Feb. 2021 Stormwater is enforced by the Engineering Div. of Planning Dpt. State Stormwater Design Manual(MDC), 154 NCAC 02B and 02H { Issuance of storm water Management Plan Sup)approvals A uthorlty limiter}to non-agricultural land use (l_e_iron-farm) Cy Stober said Christopher Sandt is the county's reviewer for enforcement of all of these rules. He said he is in the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Division of the Planning Department. He said Patrick Mallet has Erosion Control Officers who review all land disturbance permits and plans that deal with erosion and sedimentation control. He said Christopher Sandt deals with all storm water devices that are installed in the county. 8 Slide #6 tormwater Control Measures {dry Dwp ion Pwd ruar�scMsa,� SIo�Rmaka t4etland PERMANEA0707RUCTlMS Esishng Legacy Sedrwt 6aeln Lml SpreRder Slide #7 RECOMMENDATIONS: • A thorough Peer Review process was conducted over an 18- month period that included County staff, Towns (Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Mebane), and NCQEQ • Staff recornmends approval to bring UDO into compliance with NC General Statutes • The Planning Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of these proposed UDO Amendments at the September 7, 2022 meeting 9 Slide #8 AMENDMENT EXAMPLES: Terminology, Terminology, Terminology!! Inconsistent Terminolm: Correct)Current Terminolony: anll er„rlr,., Erosion and.SedWenta#Ion GORtFOI Control Plan • Infiltration Systems • Land Disturbing Perrnit (LDP) �Ugmuallag Rogm => + Certificate of Stormwater Compliance C lr.ann lal lY 114spopa lblo 124ggop * Financially Responsible Party • Stormwateir Runoff Christopher Sandt, Staff Engineer, continued the presentation. He said there are 147 pages of the nearly 700 page Unified Development Ordinance that were affected by these changes. He said the reason for the changes is that the county is obligated to keep local programs in conformance with state rules and regulations, and there have been some changes to those since the last time the UDO was amended. He also said some of the terminology is incorrect due to changes in the industry. Some examples of this are included in slide #8. Slide #9 I fl AMENDMENT EXAMPLES (continued): Now I PNew Sections 2.2;7 and 6.22, .,r .� yell I•JY air specific to Performance Guarantees y •i 4..•..uR�i i9rp I,n +i lr ° � •�° I,� °_ La nd Distu rbi ng Permit(LID P) timelines updated for better 5 a n y pro- 'bm u,. a Im contlnulty,Section 2.18.5 Y moo, AM .mr nn a I'b • EXIST; 18 month% to%tart conslructlon, '� °�'•"' •°' �• " a I!1" � ��ears to construct,2- r extension we wwkl.,.r.• Caro- ,mr n.n �-�—�• payment of Y.current LDP fee PROP; 3 years tv slart eorrslruction, or the LDP expires Once cor►SIruction slarted,mull renew LDP every 2 years �=�r:t�• '"'� we payment of LS current LDP fee 10 Christopher Sandt said slide #9 showed the threshold chart, which developers and applicants have to adhere to this if they want to disturb earth in Orange County. He said the chart was not previously part of the LIDO, but it makes sense for it to be added for thoroughness of the document. Slide #10 RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Receive the proposed UCO Amendments; 2. Conduct the Public Hearing and accept the Planning Board recommendation and staff/public comments; 3. Close the Public Hearing; and 4. ApproveMolpt the proposed UDO Amendments Christopher Sandt said they submit annual reports to the state for erosion control and storm water, which are due on October 21 st. He said over the past couple of years they have made it clear to the state that the county has been working on these amendments, and hopes to be able to report that the needed changes have been made with the adoption of the changes tonight. Slide #11 QUESTIONS/COMMENTS: Cy Stober.AICP (Planning Director),cstober0orangyecoun1ync.*o 919-245-2575 Chrlstopher Sandt,PE(Staff Englneer),csendt Oran ocounl nc. y,919-245-2683 Eno Fbw Commissioner Bedford asked what a borrow area is. 11 Christopher Sandt said a borrow pit is an area from which builders can borrow fill/dirt, with the proper erosion control measures. He said it is a pretty common construction practice. Commissioner Bedford asked what department regulates erosion control for agricultural development. Christopher Sandt said the county is able to regulate anything that is not farm related. He said if someone wanted to build a residential home on a farm, the county would be able to enforce its rules and regulations specific to the residential area of the property. He said the farm itself is regulated by the Forest Service and they are held to erosion control standards, even though they have a little more leeway. Commissioner Hamilton thanked Cy Stober and Christopher Sandt for the thorough presentation. She commended them for how easy it was to follow the presentation and materials despite the highly technical terms. Cy Stober said this is the work product of Christopher Sandt and James Bryan in the county attorney's office. Commissioner McKee congratulated staff on this effort to bring the county in compliance with state requirements. In reference to the erosion control devices shown on the screen earlier and the things Christopher Sandt mentioned, he said he works on the 1-40 Toll Road project and the erosion control plan for that project is approximately three inches thick. He said it is very comprehensive, is adhered to closely, and there are extreme measures if it's not adhered to. He said the erosion control devices also actually work because in all of the rain received last week due to Hurricane Ian, all of them held. A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler, seconded by Commissioner Hamilton, to open the public hearing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS No one signed up to speak for the public hearing. A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to close the public hearing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Greene, to approve the Statement of Approval and Consistency and LIDO Amendments. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 6. Regular Agenda a. Regulation of Gatherings on and near School Property and Public Playgrounds The Board held a first reading of an ordinance regulating picketing on or within a specified distance of School Property and Public Playgrounds. BACKGROUND: The Board of Commissioners requested information on how the County may regulate protests or large gatherings in Orange County. The Board initially received information on this subject at its February 1, 2022 Business meeting. At that meeting the Board discussed many aspects of this type of regulation including prohibiting large gatherings on certain public school properties. The Board further discussed this topic at its May 10, 2022 work session. At that work session the Board determined parades would not be regulated and provided further 12 direction to the County Attorney for revisions to be brought back to the Board for future consideration. At the June 2, 2022 work session, the Board determined to move forward with an ordinance prohibiting picketing on School Property. At the June 21, 2022, Business meeting the Board determined the ordinance would be brought back at its meeting in October. The agenda materials for each prior discussion may be viewed at the links above. Pursuant to the Board's prior discussions and input, the County Attorney revised the draft ordinance which generally provides as follows: • Only covers Picketing conducted on, or within a yet-to-be-determined number of linear feet of, School Property and Public Playgrounds including on any public right of way within that distance; Recent changes to North Carolina law provide that when a local ordinance involves a potential criminal penalty, the ordinance may not be adopted at the meeting at which it is first introduced. Such an ordinance may only be adopted at the next regular meeting following its introduction. Because one potential penalty of this ordinance is trespass, which is a statutory misdemeanor, this ordinance may only be adopted at its second reading. Due to the multiple substantive revisions requested by the Board at prior meetings, the County Attorney recommended this item be reconsidered at a new first reading. If, at this first reading, the Board determines to move forward with this ordinance, the second reading will occur at the Board's October 18, 2022 Business meeting. John Roberts reviewed the background information for the item. He said one of the items left open at the last meeting was the buffer area from the schools. He said he suggests a 50 ft. buffer from entrances to the school property. He said that would accomplish the goal of keeping it away from students. He said the Board also should discuss the limit on the number of people and he would suggest adding language along the lines of"this ordinance does not apply to those that have appointments with teachers or staff." He said he has clarified at previous meeting that all rights within the Bill of Rights are subject to reasonable restrictions; even speech. He said that protests and demonstrations are not currently allowed and that this ordinance would simply extend that to the entrances and into the public right of way. He said this would not do anything the school board cannot currently do except extend it into the public right of way. Monique Felder, Superintendent of Orange County Schools, addressed the Board. She said that Orange County Schools teachers, students, and staff had an up close encounter with those expressing their First Amendment rights. She said that they support the First Amendment and those expressing their rights but hold exception to those that are doing so in very close proximity to students and staff. She said specifically, those that are in the NCDOT right of way. She said that after the traumatic event last fall at their school, the school board and she received a lot of feedback from students and staff. She read comments they received after the protest at Orange County Schools last fall: "I felt afraid. Afraid for you, for me, our students and our staff. I want to comfort my students and reassure them that I will be able to care for them. After this experience, I am not able to offer my students that reassurance for their safety. I cannot believe they were allowed to be so close to our school, even with a non-violent protest. Knowing that they are easily able to access our campus without repercussions makes me fearful of school-related violence. I personally felt very unsafe. I would just like to say that the protesters made me feel very unsafe at school. I was worried that something might happen where 1, or other people, would be injured. I felt threatened by their gathering, 13 yelling, their sign holding so close to the school. I wanted you to know that the students do not feel safe knowing that a group can post up, in large numbers, outside of the school. I do not want protestors to show up to our campus. School should feel like a safe space for everyone and them being here can make it feel like they are in danger. It is weird that the protesters felt like they had the right to show up to a school to voice their concerns and harass students passing by. I am a freshman. This isn't what I expected my first few weeks of high school to look like. I know school should be a safe place and now others might not know that. My mind began to wonder as we passed the group of protestors by the student parking lot. How atrocious it is for students to be forced out of the rear entrance of their school for fear of being ridiculed. How discussing it is for students to physically breakdown with the news of protestors being out front. I do not feel safe and my parents do not feel it is safe." Monique Felder said that, as a district, they are in full support of people being able to practice their first amendment rights, and to do so in the right of way areas that are adjacent to the school. She said they are asking that they just protest a little further away. Patrick Abele said they have specific policies that address access when children are in school. He said that this is about the NCDOT right of way area. He said that students come through carpool with parents, drive themselves, ride the school bus, and students who walk or bike to school as well. He said that when they talk about the DOT right of way, this will help make it safe and free of hazards for students. He said they support a local ordinance because they feel it threatens students and staff. He said that the original request for 1,000 feet was consistent with other regulations and he understands limitations with having a different measure. He showed the following aerial images: Aerial View of Orarge High School r t .r i Ordinance would only appY to adjacent'right of way"o n school propertyas shown in Ye I low. of .4djacentproperty would not he restricted in right of .FA .. - y L f 14 Patrick Abele said they are not looking to restrict what people can do on their private property and would only like to see restrictions in the area in yellow: New Hope Elementary School slue line=approxirretefg500ft Green line=appmx inmtef 250ft Patrick Abele said he asked if any individuals had been cited for being in the area and the answer is no because there was no ordinance prohibiting that. He said putting the buffer in surrounding the property would accomplish the goal the school system wants. Commissioner Fowler asked if they had a distance around the right of way. Patrick Abele said they don't want to add a distance because the way the school right of ways are, the distance will create itself. Commissioner Fowler asked the attorney if that is something they could do. John Roberts said he is not sure how to describe that unless you say something to the effect of"along the front of the property." Commissioner Greene asked for more clarification on the request. Patrick Abele said they are looking for a specific ordinance for all campuses that would prohibit protests and demonstrations in the DOT right of way areas near the school property. Dr. Felder said this policy would specifically apply when students are on campus for learning or events. Chair Price asked what the width of the measurement in the image. Patrick Abele said they can run 6-10 feet of the property that is maintained by the schools. Chair Price asked if the thick yellow area affect the road. Patrick Abele said no that it would just be the grass. Chair Price asked about the image of New Hope Elementary. Patrick Abele said that is an example of the distance buffers. He said that one of the concerns is needing a distance standard because different schools have different entrances. Chair Price asked if there would be a semi-circle around the entrance in John Roberts's example of a 50 ft. buffer. John Roberts said yes. Chair Price exited the meeting at 7:59 PM. Commissioner Hamilton said as a mental health provider she understands the impacts of verbal threats and thanked Dr. Felder and Patrick Abele. She said that she wants to postpone the ordinance and wants a committee to work on this that could walk the grounds, talk 15 through, and consider the concerns of residents related to free speech. She said this issue is too important to everyone to not be more deliberative. Commissioner Richards thanked Dr. Felder and Patrick Abele for being here and being creative in their suggestions about the objective and intent being when students are present and near the entrances of schools. She said engaging the Sheriff's Office is also important to come up with something she could support. Commissioner McKee asked how many protests have occurred at any of the schools within the last ten years. Dr. Felder said she is aware of two that occurred last year. Commissioner McKee said he finds it interesting the original proposal included private property and far distances. He asked what the reasons were for the recent changes. Patrick Abele said they were a result of also hearing the community's concerns, focusing on protecting children, and not asking the Board to pass an ordinance that could not be enforced. He said as they reflected and thought about best addressing the need, they wanted to come back with an additional recommendation that would address the goal. Commissioner McKee asked if there were any threats made. Patrick Abele said he has directly been threatened as an individual and as a school official. Commissioner McKee said his concern is that the original request and this request are not consistent. He said he finds it interesting that the demonstration was termed non-violent and the federal drug enforcement laws and sex offenders distance of 1,000 feet was referenced when neither of those scenarios apply. He said that he has pushed for years for there to be more school resource officers in the schools. He said that he will support that but that this is a solution looking for a problem. He said that he has an issue trying to reconcile whether any other group from any other political bent would have received the same response. He said that he will support Commissioner Hamilton's idea of carrying this to a public conversation. Commissioner Bedford asked John Roberts for direction. John Roberts said they can vote or discuss Commissioner Hamilton's idea. Commissioner Fowler asked for a summary of the school's existing policy. Patrick Abele said it is a regulation that guide visitors on a school campus. He said that this is insuring that the campuses are free from harassment, bullying, and acts of intimidation. He said there are rules and regulations for students to have protests on school campus. He said with this ordinance they have never mentioned the type of speech, only when and where. Commissioner Fowler asked if teachers can protest on campus. Patrick Abele said they are restricted as employees. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Benjamin Gaither said he is a 2020 Orange County High School graduate. He said when he attended, students were not allowed to discuss politics let alone protest the politics of schools. He said that teachers and parents of enrolled students are no exception. He said this is going to affect everyone at school regardless of politics. He said you have the right to protest the injustices of society. He said that by going through with item 6a then they are going to take away rights of students. He said that people deserve a voice. He said that when he was in school students stood up for a tech teacher that was going to be fired. He said students will not be able to tell the school what they think if something like that happens. He said they need a voice and it would be a shame to take away that voice. Chair Price asked for clarification that the ordinance does not apply to students. John Roberts said the draft does not apply to students, who are subject to school rules. Rev. John B. Gaither said the right of way includes the centerline out and is covered under the ordinance. He said this private property infringement goes too far. He said the 16 Orange County school Board meets on school campuses many times and thinks it could be narrowly defined. He said there is vague language about government meetings. He said if parents want to protest, he thinks having a protest in the public right of way is reasonable. Don O'Leary said it seems like the school system is afraid of parents. He said if they stayed with normal topics and away from sexual perversion, there would be less issues with schools. He said there would be fewer problems from the parents. He said there is no political fix to a spiritual problem. He said this is related to issues around the world. He said that the institutions have been infiltrated. He said putting any ordinance against the schools for protesting will solve anything. He said the next step is into people's homes. He said we all need to pray on this and come up with a proper solution. Olivia Fisher said her child attends fifth grade at Grady Brown Elementary School. She said she is pleased with the education. She said she is opposed because the ordinance is vague. She read part of the proposed ordinance. She asked what the boundaries are for the school playgrounds. She asked about the term official meeting. She said it puts a lot of discretion in the hands of school officials and law enforcement. She asked if can people gather along the roadway for a community cleanup and said that harassment is already a chargeable offense. She said that the ordinance does not promote a safer community or safer campuses. She said that it creates silent ones. Dale Hodson said he does not believe most of the Commissioners have a full understanding of the impact of the ordinance. He said that a deputy will have to decide many of these upon arriving on a scene. He provided the following questions: 1 - If fifty students are picketing outside their own school with huge Nazi banners covered with swastikas and other horrendous symbols and statements, can the Sheriff cite them, even though they are protesters at their own school? 2a - If fifty more counter-protesters form across the street, also students, but they attend a different school, and they're holding their "BLM" and "Pride" banners, can the Sheriff cite them because they aren't students at this particular school —while the Nazi protesters continue untouched? 2b -Will deputies have to check for student IDs of every person protesting, since that is one of the criteria in this ordinance, so in this example, one hundred ID checks? 3 - If I'm on a public sidewalk in front of my own house hundreds of feet away from a school, and no one at the school can see or hear me, can a student from that school come to that same spot, in front of my own house, and picket with a sign, but I can't? 4 - If I'm in my neighbor's back yard and we're talking together, hundreds of feet away from a school and no one at the school can see or hear us, and then another neighbor with a grudge hears us talking about politics, and then calls the Sheriff since we are "protesting," can the Sheriff come out and cite me? 5 - If I have a political sign next to a state-maintained roadway, near a school, and I am sitting nearby, quietly guarding my sign from being stolen, can the Sheriff cite me for protesting too close to a school? And does this contradict NC law (GS 136-32)? 6 - Is it true that political activists and their"election-related activity" (handing out flyers, etc.) will no longer be allowed at the normal fifty foot buffer outside the entrance to polling places if the location is "too close" to a school or playground? And does this contradict NC law (GS 163- 166.4)? 7a - If someone drives past a school and their truck has an "I Love Joe Biden" bumper sticker, can the Sheriff cite the driver for protesting too close to a school? 7b - What if, instead, there is a moving line of fifty trucks all flying huge "Trump 2024" banners past a school or a playground? (A similar event actually happened in Orange County in 2020.) Can the Sheriff cite the drivers for protesting too close to a school? 8a - If two friends are standing near a school, and one is wearing a plain T-shirt and the other is 17 wearing a T-shirt with the words "Biden Sucks" on the front, can the Sheriff cite the "Biden Sucks" wearer for protesting, because "Biden Sucks" meets your definition of a protest? 8b -And if the deputy cites only the "Biden Sucks" T-shirt person, is that decision made based on the content of the speech of the "Biden Sucks" wearer? (Wearing a shirt is speech.) 8c - So, does that means that any clothing worn near a school can be the basis for a citation? Does that mean that deputies will have to judge every piece of clothing, every conversation, every hand gesture to determine if a "protest" is occurring? 9 - Will the Sheriff's department have to spend time and resources responding to complaints about "picketing," when they could instead be helping prevent and solve actual crimes? 10 - Since the ordinance claims that enrolled students are not subject to this ordinance because: "such students are governed by school district rules and regulations," isn't it actually the case that that statement can't ever be true on property outside a school's physical boundaries, because the school district has no legal authority to control property outside a school's boundaries? 11 - Given the words in Section 24-5(c)(1) of your ordinance: "Picketing on state owned or federally owned property is not subject to the terms and prohibitions of this section," does that mean that, because there are state owned roads adjacent to EVERY school (except one) in Orange County, picketing is actually allowed by this ordinance everywhere you'd like to ban? 12 -And finally, does that therefore mean that the protest outside the Orange High football event last fall and the parent handing out information near New Hope Elementary this spring would be completely untouched by this proposed ordinance? (The two events cited by the OCS Board and staff as reasons to push for this ordinance.) He asked that the County Attorney answer all of these questions, in front of the public, during the next BOCC Business meeting. Tara Stewart asked the Commissioners to remove this from consideration forever. She said that the previous school board has pattern of silencing and that they asked this board to create this ordinance under false pretenses. She said there has been no evidence of laws broken, etc. She said that law enforcement has said actions were legal. She said that passing the ordinance will lead to increased instances with law enforcement caught in the middle. She said that restricting free speech for everyone is not how to protect children. She said it is a blatant violation of the first amendment. Kim Pettineo said she is not asking the BOCC to solve school system issues, but it is important for the context to be added. She said that the school board has consistently made it difficult and sometimes impossible for the public to attend events or make public comment. She said they are now trying to use law enforcement to intimidate and show favor to individuals who supported the school board's views. She said the Board cuts off those speaking with opposing views. She said they banned citizens from attending future meetings and in one case, because of the way they were dressed. She said that in zero cases did board members respond to the emails. She said that one member went out to physically intimidate parents on a public road. She said this was sanctioned by the school board. She said the BOCC has been strung along by the previous school board. She said that the purpose is not to protect children, but continue the pattern of parent suppression. Gretchen Schmid said she is speaking on behalf of Moms for Liberty. She said at a school board meeting that many residents came to participate, but all but ten had to wait outside the building. She said she attended the meeting and listened to those who were disagreeing with decisions made by the school board. She said that people were upset with the overreach of the school board. She said that Mr. Zachary spoke that night and that he is a grandfather whose family has been in the area for over 200 years and a part of the Quaker settlement who taught Black children to read and write and also helped many slaves escape on the Underground Railroad. She said that he wore an indigenous costume to represent his Great 18 Great Grandmother who had been left with a white man in 1829 so that she would not have to walk on the Trail of Tears. She said that part of the man's clothing included a hunting spear that deputies confiscated and held at the library door during the meeting. She said at the Board of Commissioners meeting on June 22 that Carrie Doyle and Patrick Abele presented reasons to limit protesting at schools. She said there were three situations of protest and discussed two school board meetings, with one being where the gentlemen was dressed in indigenous costume. She said that the irony of these comments is that each school board meeting starts with a moment of silence to honor those indigenous people and members of the Occoneechee Band of the Saponi Nation. She asked if the Board members did not hear the words of Mr. Zachary and if they did, were they unable to pickup on his intentions. She said there was nothing threatening about this elderly man showing up to speak. She said that the ability of citizens to disagree with government is a founding 1 st amendment issue. Kathy Arab said following that, they made the next meeting virtual. She said the next meeting was held at Stanback Middle School and this time even more people wanted to attend and speak. She said in a month's time, more concerning issues were coming to light. She said many people wanted to voice their concerns. She said that the school board spent public funds to have a law enforcement present. She said there was a deputy for every five citizens. She said that the people just wanted to be part of the meeting and they were limited to thirty-two. She said there were others who seemed to be there just to scream at those that wanted to enter the meeting. She said those who were able to enter found it strange that half of the available public seats were already filled by those who are known to support the school board. She said the school board has a policy to publish the agenda but that for this meeting, did not come out until Saturday. She said that the policy of work meetings is to limit public comment to an agenda item. She said that items seemed to change and that they were already asked to sign up online to speak on specific agenda items. She said that changing up the agenda drastically was what the school board at the time was doing. She said the Sheriff's department was also told who to throw out. She said that it undermines liberty for all citizens and this picketing ordinance is a perpetuation of this pattern. She said that those that spoke previously were followed by police officers to the podium. Kristal Clure said there is a school board policy that says members should relate in a courteous manner to the citizens they serve. She said that in spring of 2022 school board member participated in protest herself. She said that there is a video where the board member repeatedly speaks over citizens and tells parents to contact the school board for accurate information even chasing down parents. She said when a Sheriff's deputy arrived the video shows that the deputy determines that the private individual's actions were legal and that she was not sharing information to tarnish a school board member. She said that the school board member created disruption where there was none. She said if the previous board was concerned about protecting children it seems she wouldn't have engaged in this behavior. She said they have a history of wanting to silence parents and students who disagree with them and prevent sharing of documented factual data that would not reflect well on them but more accurately inform the voter base. Carol Kunkel said that September 24, 2021 a protest was organized. She said that previous school board member McKenzie described it as a tailgate protest, planned at Orange High School and billed as a protest of Covid measures. She said that the protestors were simply protesting spectator limits and mask requirements. She said that Sheriff Blackwood issued a public report afterward and said that a small group of protestors assembled outside the football game. He said another group that claimed to be part of the proud boys also gathered. He said that neither side engaged in action that constituted an illegal activity or speech that went outside the bounds of free speech that is protected. He said that despite the unpleasantness, no crimes were committed, the football game was not interrupted, and the 19 traffic was not a significant disruption. She said read comments made by Commissioner Greene at the June 21, 2022 BOCC meeting. She said she agreed with what Commissioner Greene noted about there not being an urgent need. She asked for the commissioners to not approve the ordinance. Sarah Snipes said this protest originated from students who wanted to have a tailgate party to protest the spectator restrictions that had been put on the students. She said that this was going to be on school property and in a safe location. She said that she reached out to the school board before the protest for space in the parking lot and was turned down. She said that on October 11 the school board adopted the resolution to address harm. She said that the hate resolution says students from Orange High School shared information with the Board of Education. She said they were solicited and compelled by the school board. She said a previous school board member, Hillary McKenzie, said they went into a school classroom and showed them video of the protest and then asked them to comment. She said that this is how the student comments were obtained. She said that these board members and administration used their positions to manipulate students. She said they are using this to silence any voice of opposing views. She said that this policy should not be passed. David Kolbinsky said he has lived in Orange county for half a century. He said he was asked to highlight the cost of this ordinance. He said that he looked up lawsuits and there were many instances of people suing school boards for speech issues. He said that this ordinance will abridge the first amendment right of free speech. He said that the ordinance has morphed again and it seems they forgot about the proud boys. He said he was twice elected to the school board. He said that the signs simply had a website listed and they were walking in public highways when the people of the school board did not like it. He said when the school board made the presentation for this, the assistant superintendent said this is for some people that disagree with certain policies of the Board. Ingrid Conley said there is no Orange County social justice impact goal associated with this item. She said this is absurd. She said that the school board resolution states that it is centered around social justice. She then read from the school board's resolution. She said they intended to use the hate resolution to support the picketing ordinance. She said that the intended social justice impact is that it will prevent students from being recruited from white supremacists. She said that it will disrupt discrimination and challenge discriminatory behavior. She said why are they not acknowledging the social justice issues that the school board clearly stated. She said that they should provide an explanation of how it has no social justice goal impact. Sophia Stewart said she graduated from Cedar Ridge High School in 2016. She said the picketing ordinance says that gathering for a common purpose is prohibited in school property and even on private property. She asked what the right of the public to peaceably assemble means. She said it reminds her of 1968 when the City of Memphis tried to prohibit Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. from continuing to march because of the recent violence. She said that in his final speech, he said that they were going into court to fight the illegal injunction and that America should be true to what it says on paper. She said that if you read the transcript, you will see that "the wellbeing of children" is used over and over. She said that they said certain words of Dr. King's were "threatening to children." She asked for them to not approve the ordinance because history is watching. Jacquie Barker said commissioners claim the reason for this ordinance is to protect children but have not passed ordinances related to drugs, alcohol, pornography or social media while at school. She asked how this ordinance will stop students from hurting others feelings. She said there must be a long list of protests where students have been harmed since this ordinance has yet to be adopted. She said that if they are really protecting children from seeing protests, then they should just ban them from the whole town. She said it has been a year since 20 the need to have this discussion. She read a quote from President Truman. She said this must be where Orange County feels they are — in a period of increasing difficulty and danger. She asked that in 2022 is preventing students from witnessing a peaceful protest with messages they think are wrong, justification for abridging first amendment rights. David Ogden asked how one person gathers. He said it is true that the superintendents are creative. He said they made up reverse pre-crime where you can create an ordinance to that would have caused arrests had the ordinance previously been in place. He said they want to prevent hate speech. He said they know they cannot prevent type of speech, so they instead are suppressing all speech. He said that when you hold a group back, you are creating a situation where neither you nor them can be free. He said that this would make it illegal for parents to gather and protest racial injustices. He said many teachers have LGBT and BLM flags in their classrooms and these flags represent causes, issues, and actions that are being promoted by teachers. He said that under this ordinance, they have to be taken down because this will silence all speech. He said each commissioner has the right to peacefully assemble but maybe they don't value it because they are now on that side of the bench. He asked them not to table this ordinance but to instead put it to rest forever. Patricia Randall said that article 1 of the NC Constitution gives sovereignty to the people and all government originates from the people. She said that no laws were broken with the protests and there is no reason to pass this ordinance to control the people of the county. Lanna Spiegel said that the school board is trying to take away the voice of parents. She read from several comments against the ordinance. She asked why the ordinance is a priority when Grady Brown does not even have doors on all classrooms. She asked when commissioners gained the right to allow rights to some and not for others. She said that ordinances that control people's first amendment rights are communist. She said that there are many citizens that oppose the ordinance and asked if the commissioners hear their voices. Mark Stiles gave up his time. Heather Redding said she is a resident of Orange County. She said her comments are related to how the ordinance could impact protests at school board meetings. She said that she believes that laws do not have to be broken for harm to occur. She said that when the Proud Boys gathered the language that they shouted was troubling. She said when they came to a school board meeting and sat in their colors, it was equally troubling. She said the school board dragged its feet to ban the confederate flag from its schools and that was troubling. She said that this ordinance would stop groups from gathering peacefully. She said that if school board meetings were to take place in this building, it would ban all protests because there is a public playground less than a block away. She said that this ordinance would prohibit the right to protest and this erosion would further propaganda and disrupt progressive change. She said that this is not the time to stop the right to peacefully assemble. Larry Tippens said that he thinks they have lost something. He said that protesting goes back to Germany, when you could post a note to challenge the school. He said that what they are destroying and crippling is the ability to speak pro and con at the family level or at the school. He said that if you are not talking at home, then there are problems. Edward Zabolsky said he was not planning to speak until the school board decided to make him a criminal. He said that he lives next to the high school and they have a 25-foot easement that they maintain. He said there is then woods, parking lot, farm animals, and the school. He said that the Board has now proposed that he can be a protest of one person just by wearing a shirt that someone does not agree with. He said there are ordinances and laws protecting schools and entrances. He said to make an ordinance for a problem that does not exist seems like a waste of time. Chair Price asked Commissioner Hamilton to restate her petition. 21 Commissioner Hamilton said she would like to table a decision on this ordinance and would like for a task force of commissioners, school boards, and law enforcement to produce a solution that would protect students and also take into consideration the public's comments and concerns. A motion was made by Commissioner Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to defer consideration of this discussion. Commissioner McKee said he thinks this issue needs more public input and asked those in the room and those watching at home to step up and participate. Commissioner Bedford asked for clarification on the word tabling. John Roberts said it means they would bring the topic back but not necessarily the exact ordinance. Commissioner Bedford said she has no opposition for a committee to work on student safety. Commissioner Greene said she stands by her comments previously and appreciates comments tonight. John Roberts said in their rules of procedure they have substituted the word table with "defer consideration." He said that if not brought back within one hundred days, this would die. A motion was made by Commissioner Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to defer consideration of this item. VOTE: Ayes, 6 (Commissioner Fowler, Commissioner Greene, Commissioner Hamilton, Commissioner McKee, Chair Price, Commissioner Richards); Nays (Commissioner Bedford) MOTION PASSES 6-1 A motion was made by Commissioner Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to establish a task force with county staff and commissioner representatives, school staff and school board members, sheriff's staff, and members of the public to look at this issue. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Chair Price said she hopes the public can make a few in-roads to make comments and connect with the school board members. 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 Commissioner Bedford requested to remove item 8-e from the Consent Agenda. 22 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to approve the remaining consent agenda. VOTE: UNANIMOUS In reference to the proposed 2023 Board of County Commissioners meeting calendar, Commissioner Bedford said the issue with having the joint school board meeting in March is that the schools will not have their budgets ready by then. She said she spoke to two school board members and they would like to have a joint school board meeting later in April. She proposed making the second half of the work April 20, 2023 the joint meeting. Chair Price said the reason a March joint school board meeting was suggested was based on a request from the school boards wanting to have an opportunity to talk about issues they are facing at that time ahead of budget discussions. She said this would help inform the budget process later. Commissioner Bedford said she talked to Will Atherton, Orange County School Board Chair, and Rani Dasi, Chapel Hill-Carrboro City School Board Vice-Chair, and if the choice is only either March or April, they would prefer to have the meeting later in April when they know their budgets. Chair Price reminded the Board that the calendar can always be changed as needed, even after approval. Commissioner Richards said she also had a conversation with school board members, and her understanding is they want to talk in March, but also have a budget session in April. She asked if the Board is saying one of the April work sessions could not include a joint meeting with the schools. Commissioner Bedford said in the past, there was discussion about whether to allow public comment at work sessions, and the Board decided not to allow it. She said that they could change one of the April meetings to be whatever the Board wants it to be. Chair Price said it could be similar to the joint fire departments meeting. Commissioner Richards said the idea would be that they can have a better understanding of needs in March and discuss the budget in April. Commissioner Fowler asked if there is anything else planned for the April 20th work session. Chair Price said not that far in advance. Commissioner McKee said he would like to have time on March 9th to discuss some issues from the last joint meeting and issues related to school performance. Commissioner Bedford asked the Clerk to the Board if it is okay to tentatively add a joint meeting with school boards before the April 20th work session. Laura Jensen said that would work but she has to make sure the schools are also available that date. She said if the schools are not available April 20th, the calendar can be changed after approval. A motion was made by Commissioner Bedford, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to approve item 8-e, as amended. VOTE: UNANIMOUS a. Minutes The Board approved the draft minutes for the September 6, 2022 Business Meeting. 23 b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds The Board adopted a resolution to release motor vehicle property tax values for seven (7) taxpayers with a total of seven (7) bills that will result in a reduction of revenue. c. Property Tax Releases/Refunds The Board adopted a resolution to release property tax values for seventeen (17) taxpayers with a total of nineteen (19) bills that will result in a reduction of revenue. d. Late Applications for Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion The Board approved six (6) untimely applications for exemption/exclusion from ad valorem taxation for six (6) bills for the 2022 tax year. e. Approval of Board of Commissioners Meeting Calendar for Year 2023 The Board considered the approval of the meeting schedule for the Board of Commissioners for calendar year 2023. f. Grant of an Easement to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Related to the 1-40/1-85 Widening Project The Board authorized the sale of an easement to NCDOT to assist in the widening of 1-40/1- 85, authorized the Asset Management Services Department to prepare or review all necessary documentation to complete this transaction, and authorized the Chair to execute the easement and other required documents. g. Boundary Line Agreement with the Efland Volunteer Fire Department The Board authorized the execution of a Boundary Line Agreement to clarify the location of the boundary line between property owned by Orange County and property owned by the Efland Volunteer Fire Department. 9. County Manager's Report Bonnie Hammersley said the S. Greensboro parking lot in Carrboro will be closed beginning October 17th to begin construction of the 203 Project, which includes the southern branch library. She said alternative parking lots are located around town, and the Town of Carrboro encourages residents and visitors to go to townofcarrboro.org/parking for more information. She said there will also be signage posted to direct to other parking areas. She said the Community Relations Department will be sending out information to county residents about this the following day. 10. County Attorney's Report John Roberts said he had no report. 11. *Appointments None. 12. Information Items •September 20, 2022 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List •Tax Collector's Report— Numerical Analysis •Tax Collector's Report— Measure of Enforced Collections •Tax Assessor's Report— Releases/Refunds under $100 •Memorandum — Changes to Planning Board & Board of Adjustment Meetings •Memorandum — Proposed Unified Development Ordinance Amendment to Revise Neighborhood Information Meeting Responsibilities and Roles •Memorandum — Proposed Unified Development Ordinance Amendment to Address Efficiencies &Accessory Dwellings 24 •Memorandum — State Approval of Upper Neuse River Basin Association's Interim Alternative Implementation Approach (IAIA) 13. Closed Session A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler, seconded by Commissioner Bedford, to enter into closed session pursuant to G.S. § 143-318.11(a)(3) "to consult with an attorney retained by the Board in order to preserve the attorney-client privilege between the attorney and the Board." VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler and seconded by Commissioner Hamilton to reconvene into regular session at 9:52 p.m. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 14. Adjournment A motion was made by Commissioner McKee and seconded by Commissioner Fowler to adjourn the meeting at 9:52 p.m. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Renee Price, Chair Recorded by Tara May, Deputy Clerk to the Board Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board.