HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 03-16-2004-7aORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: March 16, 2004
Action Agenda
Item No. 7-a
SUBJECT: Orange County's 2004 Legislative Agenda
DEPARTMENT: County Commissioners PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN) Yes
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Public Hearing Notice - Chapel Hill Commissioner Steve Halkiotis
Herald Commissioner Barry.Jacobs
Public Hearing Notice - News of
Orange County
Three Draft Resolutions - Introduction
and Support
Draft Resolution - Positions on
Legislation w/Exhibits A, B, C, D,
&E
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough
Chapel Hill
Durham
Mebane
732-8181
968-4501
688-7331
336-227-2031
Draft Letter to Orange County
Legislative Delegation
Potential Items/Projects for 2004
Federal Funding Assistance
PURPOSE: To hold a public hearing on 1) potential items for inclusion in Orange County's
legislative agenda package for the 2004 North Carolina General Assembly Session and to
consider approval of draft resolutions for presentation to Orange County's legislative delegation,
and 2) for discussion on potential items/projects to request federal funding assistance.
BACKGROUND: In past years, the BOCC has developed a package of legislative items to
pursue for North Carolina General Assembly sessions. A list of potential legislative items for
the 2004 Session has been developed by the County's Legislative Issues Task Force (LITF)
and is attached to this abstract. At the Board's March 4, 2004 regular meeting, it approved the
scheduling of a public hearing on potential legislative items for the BOCC's March 16, 2004
regular meeting and on potential items/projects for federal funding assistance..
The Board needs to hold the public hearing on the potential legislative items in preparation for
presenting its proposals to Orange County's legislative delegation for consideration during the
2004 General Assembly Session. The BOCC meets with the legislative delegation on March
29, 2004, and the General Assembly convenes on May 10, 2004.
After the public hearing, the Board will need to review and consider approval as necessary of
the attached draft resolutions and associated materials as developed by staff and the County
Attorney. Those materials consist of four resolutions. The first resolution with its attachment
relates to authorization to levy an impact tax on land development to pay a portion of the costs
of school capital facilities.
2
The second resolution with its attachment relates to mental health system reform and asks that
counties be provided with transition flexibility in implementing the plan of the General Assembly
for mental health system reform.
The third resolution and attachments concern the formal documentation through a narrative
description of the Orange-Chatham boundary line as redefined in 1989 and subsequently
monumented by the State of North Carolina. The boundary description includes bold text that
has been added that, if approved by both the Orange and Chatham County Boards of
Commissioners, would result in three parcels of land on which Orange County taxes have been
paid for many years being clearly included inside the geographical boundaries of Orange
County.
The fourth resolution with attachments requests that Orange County's legislative delegation
take certain positions on various legislative matters.. One of the attachments is an amended
version of the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners 2003-2004 Legislative
Goals with additional comments to clarify Orange County's positions in several areas.
The second to last attachment to this abstract is a draft letter to Orange County's legislative
delegation expressing the Board's appreciation for past efforts on legislative items and
transmitting to them the Board's 2004 legislative package.
It should be noted that, based on information shared by Commissioner Moses Carey, the LITF
did discuss the activities of the State's Public Health Task Force. However, the LITF
determined that the County would likely not be best served by voicing a position at this time on
the State's Public Health Task Force work, The Task Force has just recently completed its
various public hearings and, according to information from Orange County Health Director
Rosemary Summers, is not scheduled to finalize its recommendations and present them to the
General Assembly until sometime in April. The LITF concluded that it may be better for the
County to review the Task Force's recommendations and then provide comments/consider
positions on the various topics addressed.
It should also be noted that the work of the LITF to this point is based on the current information
available and the outlook for the 2004 General Assembly Session, The issues addressed by
the LITF and incorporated into the draft resolutions may evolve and change over the session
and require additional attention by the Task Force and Board of Commissioners. New issues
may also arise necessitating additional review. Social Services Director Nancy Coston has
indicated that some child welfare issues may arise that may need discussion by the BOCC.
Lastly, the Board will need to discuss potential items/projects for 2004 federal funding
assistance, Commissioners Jacobs and Halkiotis are planning to meet with Congressman
David Price on March 23, 2004 to discuss potential items, and the Board needs to review and
discuss the list of items/projects that are to be presented to Congressman Price.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None at this time,
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board conduct the public
hearing on potential items for inclusion in Orange County's legislative agenda package for the
2004 North Carolina General Assembly Session and consider approval of the four draft
resolutions, and review, discuss, and consider approval as necessary of the list of
items/projects that are to be presented to Congressman Price for possible federal funding
assistance.
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
FOR
TUESDAY, MARCH 16, 2004 AT 7:30 P.M.
A public hearing will be held on the following list of potential legislative items for the 2004 North Carolina
General Assembly Session:
? Cigarette Tax and Alcohol Tax Increase
? Closing of Tax Loopholes
? Local School System Utility Costs
? Local Revenue Options
? Public School Capital Building Fund Disbursements
? State Reimbursements to Local Governments
? Billboard Advertisements on Interstate 40
? Funding for Rural Planning Organizations
? Unpaved Roads in Post-1975 Subdivisions
? Social Services, Criminal Justice Partnership, and Dispute Settlement Centers Funding
? County Financial Responsibility for Children Needing Residential Mental Health Treatment
? Mental Health Reform Funding and De-institutionalization Costs
? In-Home Services for Seniors Funding
? Reform of Medical Prescription System
? Smart Start Funding
? Funding for UNC Pharmacy School, UNC Dental Clinic, and NC Poison Control Center
? Bottle Deposit Legislation
? Advance Fee for Cathode Ray Tube Recycling
? White Goods Recycling
? Reduced Class Size and Associated Need for Capital and Other Funding
? "More at Four" and Associated Need for Capital and Other Funding
? Funding for UNC School of Government
? Private Sector Soil Evaluations for Septic System Permitting
? ABC System Changes
? Soil and Water Shared Employee Funding
? Utility Eminent Domain
? Local Government Property Transfers
? Annexation & Local Planning and Revenue Option Incentives to Control Growth
? Broaden Local Government Authority to Enact Laws to Protect Public Health, Safety & Welfare
? Open Burning Limits on High Ozone Days
? Restaurant Inspection Fees
? County Fee for Judicial Activities
? Eliminate Verification Process/Fee for Recording Deed of Trust Cancellations
? County Fee for Inspection of Body Piercing Establishments
? Criminal Record Check for Long-term Care Employees
? Statutory Definition of Health Facility Locked Units
? Guardianship Laws Study Commission
? Definition of Animal "Shelter"
? Impact Tax to Replace Impact Fee
? Orange/Chatham County Line
? Transition Flexibility in Implementing Mental Health System Reform
The Board will also consider expressing support for, with some possible revisions and additional
comments, the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners (NCACC) 2003-2004 Legislative
Goals. A copy of the NCACC 2003-2004 Legislative Goals is available at
hlln //u,w ncace.org/leeislaliveinfo.hrol.
The Board will also consider items/projects to pursue for federal funding assistance The proposed
legislative items and other materials associated with the public hearing will be available to the public on
Friday, March 12, 2004.
The Board of Commissioners welcomes all comments on all items as may be introduced or addressed at the
public hearing, The meeting is open to the public and will be held on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 at the
Southern Human Services Center on Homestead Road in Chapel Hill beginning at 7:30 p m If you need
additional information, please call Greg Wilder at 245-2314
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
FOR
TUESDAY, MARCH 16, 2004 AT 7:30 P.M.
A public hearing will be held by the Orange County Board of Commissioners to consider potential
legislative items for the 2004 North Carolina General Assembly Session. The Board will also consider
items/projects to pursue for federal funding assistance. The proposed legislative items and other materials
associated with the public hearing will be available to the public on Friday, March 12, 2004.
The Board of Commissioners welcomes all comments on all items as may be introduced or addressed at the
public hearing The meeting is open to the public and will be held on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 at the
Southern Human Services Center on Homestead Road in Chapel Hill beginning at 7:30 p m If you need
additional information, please call Greg Wilder at 245-2314.
DRAFT
1
NORTH CAROLINA
RESOLUTION REGARDING
ORANGE COUNTY LEGISLATIVE MATTERS
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Orange County that the Board hereby requests the Senator and
Representatives representing Orange County to introduce and
support the following legislative matter:
1. AN ACT TO AUTHORIZE ORANGE COUNTY TO LEVY A TAX ON THE
IMPACT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF GENERATING
REVENUES TO PAY PART OF THE COSTS OF SCHOOL CAPITAL FACILITIES
(Exhibit A);
Upon motion of Commissioner , seconded by
Commissioner the foregoing resolution was
adopted this the day of , 2004.
I, Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the
County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the
foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said
Board at a meeting held on
2004 as relates in any
way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings
are recorded in Minute Book No. of the minutes of said
Board.
WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day
of , 2004.
Clerk to the Board of Commissioners
2
Exhibit A
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT TO AUTHORIZE ORANGE COUNTY TO LEVY A TAX ON
THE IMPACT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT FOR THE PURPOSE
OF GENERATING REVENUES TO PAY PART OF THE COSTS
OF SCHOOL CAPITAL FACILITIES
The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:
Section 1. The following definitions apply to this act:
(1) Commercial building enclosed floor space.. All enclosed
floor space used for any purpose except:
a, dwelling units and accessory structures to dwelling
units;
b, recreational facilities constructed as part of a
residential development and used primarily by
residents of the development;
C. buildings owned by the United States, the State of
North Carolina, any county or any municipal
corporation;
d. buildings owned and operated by non-profit entities
for noncommercial and nonresidential purposes;
e. schools or day care centers..
(2) Dwelling Unit. An enclosure containing sleeping, kitchen,
and bathroom facilities designed for and used or held ready
for use as a permanent residence by one family.
(3) Land development,
a. Land development shall mean:
1. construction of any dwelling unit, other than
one excluded under subsection (b) of this
Section, for which a building permit was issued
or should have been issued after the effective
date of an ordinance adopted under this act;
2.. construction of any commercial building
enclosed floor space for which a building
permit was issued or should have been issued
after the effective date of an ordinance
adopted under this act;
3. conversion of a building that adds one or more
new dwelling units or that creates new
commercial building enclosed floor space; or
4. the initial location of a manufactured home or
other dwelling or commercial structure within
Orange County.
b. For purposes of determining the impact of land
development for this act, land development shall not
include:
I construction of an addition to a dwelling unit;
2, the relocation within Orange County of any
structure located within the County on the
effective date of an ordinance adopted pursuant
to this act or any structure with respect to
which an impact tax pursuant to this act has
been paid;
3 within the County, the reconstruction or
3
replacement of one dwelling unit by another or
the replacement or reconstruction of commercial
building enclosed floor space that was in
existence on the effective date of an ordinance
adopted pursuant to this act or of any such
floor space with respect to which an impact tax
adopted pursuant to this act has been paid.
(4) Net proceeds, The gross proceeds of the tax less the cost
to the County of collecting and administering the tax.
(5) Person. An individual, partnership, corporation, or other
legal entity.
(6) Person responsible for the impact of land development. The
owner of any dwelling unit or commercial building enclosed
floor space on the date an occupancy permit is issued for
such dwelling unit or commercial floor space or, if no such
permit is issued, the date the dwelling unit or commercial
floor space is occupied.
Section 2. Authorization, The Orange County School Capital
Impact Tax.
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this Section,
Orange County may adopt an ordinance levying a tax on the impact of
land development within the County and provide for the administration,
enforcement and collection of the tax.
(b) Orange County may not adopt an ordinance pursuant to this
act if any ordinance pertaining to a system of impact fees to provide
for capital improvements to public schools within orange County,
adopted pursuant to Sections 17-18,.1 of Chapter 460 of the 1987 Session
Laws and Chapter 324 of the 1991 Session Laws, is in effect..
Section 3. Use of Tax Proceeds.. The purpose of the tax
authorized by this act is to generate funds to partially offset the
cost of constructing new school capital facilities or replacing,
expanding or improving existing school capital facilities necessitated
in part by new growth within orange County. Accordingly, the net
proceeds generated by the tax authorized by this act shall be deposited
by Orange County in its capital reserve improvements fund or funds
established under Part 2 of Article 3 of Chapter 159 of the General
Statutes and may be expended, to the extent otherwise authorized by
law, only for capital improvements projects related to public schools,.
Section 4. Liability; Administration. An ordinance adopted
pursuant to this act shall provide that:
(1) A person responsible for the impact of land development
shall pay an impact tax for each square foot of dwelling
space and commercial building enclosed floor space for
which an occupancy permit is issued or, if no such permit
is issued, for each square foot of dwelling space in an
occupied dwelling and for each square foot of occupied
enclosed floor space in a commercial building.
(2) The tax shall be due on or before the date an occupancy
permit is initially issued for the dwelling unit or
commercial building enclosed floor space in question or, if
no such permit is issued, the date such dwelling unit or
commercial floor space is initially occupied, However, no
tax due shall be considered delinquent until sixty (60)
days after the tax becomes due. There shall be added to
delinquent taxes interest at the legal rate,
(3) Taxes authorized by this act may be collected pursuant to
G.S. 153A-147 or G.. S. 160A-207. In addition, taxes
4
authorized by this act may be recovered in a civil action
in the nature of debt including an award of reasonable
attorney fees as part of costs.
Section 5.. Rates. Orange County shall establish annually at the
time of the adoption of its annual budget the tax rate to be levied per
square foot of dwelling space and per square foot of commercial
building enclosed floor space for the ensuing fiscal year. Different
tax rates may be established for different types of dwelling units and
different types of commercial building enclosed floor space
Section 6. Provisions for repeal of other local acts,
disclosure requirements and effective date.
(a) Orange County may repeal all or part of an ordinance
pertaining to a system of impact fees to provide for capital
improvements to public schools within Orange County, adopted pursuant
to Sections 17-18.1 of Chapter 460 of the 1987 Session Laws and Chapter
324 of the 1991 Session Laws.. With respect to an ordinance pertaining
to a system of impact fees to provide for capital improvements to
public schools within Orange County, Orange County may not adopt an
ordinance pursuant to Sections 17-18.1 of Chapter 460 of the 1987
Session Laws and Chapter 324 of the 1991 Session Laws while an
ordinance adopted pursuant to this act is in effect..
Section 7. Disclosure Requirements. Whenever the sale of real
property located in Orange County involves new construction, the seller
shall prepare and sign, and the buyer shall receive and sign, a
disclosure statement. The disclosure statement shall either be included
in a contract of sale or contained in a separate document executed
prior to the execution of a sales contract. This disclosure statement
shall fully and completely disclose that the owner of the property at
the time an occupancy permit issued for the new construction or, if no
occupancy permit is issued, the date the new construction is occupied,
may be subject to a tax levied by the County on the impact of land
development.. If a seller fails to make such a disclosure and the buyer
suffers injury as a result of the seller's failure to disclose, the
seller shall be liable to the buyer to the extent of the buyer's
injury.
Section 8. Refunds. If this act or any ordinance adopted under
this act is declared to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, by a
final decision of a court of competent jurisdiction, then any impact
taxes collected under this act shall be refunded to the person paying
them together with interest at the same rate paid by the Secretary of
Revenue on refunds for tax overpayments..
Section 9. Limitations on Actions.
(a) Any action contesting the validity of an ordinance
adopted under this act must be commenced not later than nine months
after the effective date of such ordinance.
(b) Any action seeking to recover an impact tax must be
commenced not later than nine months after the impact tax is paid.
Section 10.. This act applies to Orange County only.
Section 11.. This act is effective when it becomes law.
DRAFT
NORTH CAROLINA
ORANGE COUNTY
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Orange County that the Board hereby requests the Senator and
Representatives representing Orange County to introduce and
support the following legislative matter:
1
1. AN ACT TO PROVIDE COUNTIES WITH TRANSITION FLEXIBILITY
IN IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY FOR MENTAL
HEALTH SYSTEM REFORM, SESSION LAWS 2001-437 (Exhibit A);
Upon motion of Commissioner
Commissioner
seconded by
the foregoing resolution was
adopted this the day of , 2004.
I, Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the
County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the
foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said
Board at a meeting held on
RESOLUTION REGARDING
LEGISLATIVE MATTERS
, 2004 as relates in any
way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings
are recorded in Minute Book No. of the minutes of said
Board.
WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day
Clerk to the Board of Commissioners
of , 2004.
DRAFT
EXHIBIT A
[Date]
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT TO PROVIDE COUNTIES WITH TRANSITION FLEXIBILITY
IN IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY FOR
MENTAL HEALTH SYSTEM REFORM, SESSION LAWS 2001-437.
The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:
SECTION 1. G.S. § 1220-115(a) is amended to read as
rewritten:
(a) A county shall provide mental health, developmental
disabilities, and substance abuse services through an area
authority or through a county program established pursuant to
G.S. 122C-115.1. To the extent this section conflicts with G.S.
153A-77(a), the provisions of G.S. 153A-77(a) control. If a
county that is a member of an area authority determines to
provide its services through a county program or through a
multi-county program it may, for a reasonable period of time,
simultaneously participate in a county program or a multi-count
program while remaining a participating member of the area
authority.
SECTION 2. This act is effective upon ratification.
2
1sg:orangecounty\122C-115 amendment. doc
DRAFT
NORTH CAROLINA
RESOLUTION REGARDING
ORANGE COUNTY LEGISLATIVE MATTERS
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Orange County that the Board hereby requests the Senator and
Representatives representing Orange County to introduce and
support the following legislative matter:
1. An Act to Establish the Boundary Line Between Chatham
and Orange Counties (Exhibit A, with Background Information in
Exhibit B) ;
Upon motion of Commissioner
Commissioner
seconded by
, the foregoing resolution was
adopted this the day of , 2004.
1
I, Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the
County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the
foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said
Board at a meeting held on 2004 as relates in any
way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings
are recorded in Minute Book No. of the minutes of said
Board.
WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day
of
, 2004.
Cleric to the Board of Commissioners
DRAFT
EXHIBIT A
Title: An Act to Establish the Boundary Line Between Chatham and Orange Counties.
The common dividing line between Chatham County, North Carolina and
Orange County, North Carolina, shall be as follows:
2
Beginning at an existing point the Southeast corner of Orange County and the Southwest corner
of Durham County said point being in the Northern line of Chathan county said point being a
concrete post with a copper disk, stamped "CO. LINE, DURHAM CO., NO. 1 1968, ORANGE
CO. MONUMENT", having a coordinate value ofN 234,423.870 meters (m) E 608,128.788
meters, (m) as designated to be the corner of Durham and Orange Counties, and the northern line
of Chatham County, by the courts of North Carolina. Thence S 86° 56' 43.24" W 925.452
meters (m) to a concrete monument set with aluminum disk (93) East of Mt Carmel Church Road
(SR 1008) having a coordinate value of N 234,374.554m E 607,204.651m, said point being
designated as NCGS station, County Line 3, PID AB2055. Thence S 87° 40' 19,44" W
1,690.615m to a concrete monument set with aluminum disk (#4) East of Clearwater Lake Drive
(SR 1913) having a coordinate value of N 234,305.883m E 605,515,4.31m, said point being
designated as NCGS station, County Line 4, PID AB2056, [less and except a distance of 306.30
feet, more or less, returning line to a point in the East line of Mitchell Renkow et ux, being
Lot 2 of Clearwater Hills as described in Plat Book 25 Page 151, Orange County Registry.
Thence S 05 degrees 49 minutes W 342.22 feet, more or less, to the southeast corner of
Brooke R Johnson Jr et ux, being Lot 1 of Coffey & Walker as described in Plat Book 27
Page 156, Orange County Registry. Thence N 86 degrees 56 minutes W 300 feet. Thence N
33 degrees 46 minutes 18 seconds W 246.59 feet. Thence N 33 degrees 46 minutes 18
seconds W 60 feet, more or less, to a point in the line of Bruno A Niemitz et us, being Lot 4
of Clearwater Hills Revised as described in Plat Book 26 Page 172, Orange County
Registry. Thence S 59 degrees 56 minutes W 303 feet, more or less. Thence S 83 degrees W
65 feet. Thence N 07 degrees 50 minutes E 374 feet.]* Thence S 87° 19' 01,23" W
1,763.003m to a concrete monument set with aluminum disk (#5) East of Old Lystra Road (SR
1915) having a coordinate value of N 234,223.357m E 603,754.361m, said point being
designated as NCGS station, County Line 5, PID AB2057, [less and except a distance of 481
feet, more or less, representing the distance from NCGS station 4 on the East side of
Clearwater Lake Road and the North West corner of Niemitz et ux being Lot 4 of
Clearwater Hills Revised, Plat Book 26 Page 172, Orange County Registry.]* Thence S 87°
33' 27.40" W 1,563.940m to an aluminum Disk set (#6) in the East end of a asphalt traffic
island at the intersection of Smith Level Road (SR1919) with US 15-501 having a coordinate
value of N 234,156.710m E 602,191.842m, said point being designated as NCGS station
County Line 6, PIT) AB2058. Thence S 87° 47' 41,52" W .37347m to a concrete monument set
with aluminum disk (0) West of Smith Level Road (SR 1919) having a coordinate value of N
234,155.273m E 602,154.523m, said point being designated as NCGS station County Line 7,
PID AB2059.
Thence N 83° 36' 42.54" W 2299.666m to a Berntsen Aluminum monument set with brass disk
(#8) in the Margaret Daniel Property (Orange County PIN 977-99-1332 having a coordinate
value of N 234,411.14.3m E^ 599,869.136 said point being designated as County Line 8.
Thence N ° 83' 13' 04.69" W 1214.099m to a concrete monument set with aluminum disk (#9)
East of Poythress Road (SR 1939) having a coordinate value of N 234,554 519m E
598,66.3.53.3m, said point being designated as NCGS station County Line 9, PID AB2061.
DRAFT
Thence S .39° 39' 39.13" W 50.139m to a concrete monument set with aluminum disk (#10) East
of Poythress Road (SR 1939) having a coordinate value of N 2.34,515,920m E 598,631.532m,
said point being designated as NCGS station County Line 10, PID AB2062.
Thence N 84° 54' 4126" W 246 205m to Existing Rebar in a concrete post (#11) the Southeast
corner of lot 5, Section 2, Wolf's Pond Subdivision, (Plat Boole 19 Page 149 OCR) having a
coordinate value of N 234,537.756m E 598,386.297m, said point being designated as County
Line 11. Thence N 84° 31' .30 43" W 690.729m to Feno Monument set with brass disk replacing
an existing iron pipe (#12) the Southwest corner of Lot 5, Section 4, Wolfs Pond Subdivision,
(Plat Book 22 Page 59 OCR) having a coordinate value of 'N 234,603.658m E 597,698.719m
said point being designated as County Line 12. Thence N 0.3° 32' 14.02" W 60.959m to a Feno
Monument set with brass disk (#13) in the line of said Lot 5 having a coordinate value of N
234,664,501m E 597,694.958m said point being designated as County Line 13.
Thence N 8.3° 16' 04.99" W 2422,591m to a concrete monument set with aluminum disk (#14)
South of Jones Ferry Road (SR 1942) having a coordinate value of N 234,948.488m E
595,289.070m, said point being designated as NCGS station County Line 14, PID AB2063.
Thence N 8.3° 15' 33.17" W 2231.659m to a concrete monument set with aluminum disk (#15)
to a point in the Walter Braxton Durham Et Al property (Orange County PIN 9747-62-6596)
having a coordinate value of N 235,210.435m E 593,072.838m, said point being designated as
County Line 15. Thence N 82° 55'46.72" W 1587.051m to a concrete monument set with
aluminum disk (#16) East of White Cross Road (SR 1951) having a coordinate value of N
235,405.782m E 591,497.855m, said point being designated as NCGS station County Line 16,
PID AB2064. Thence N 82° 53' 40.81" W 1668.976m to a Feno monument set with brass disk
(#17) in the Walter Atwater property (Orange PIN 9737-43-8522) having a coordinate value of
N 235,612.224m E 589,841.696m, said point being designated as County Line 17. Thence N 00°
03'37.30"W 169913m to a Feno monument set with brass disk (#18) in the said Walter
Atwater property having a coordinate value of N 235,782,137m E 589,841,875m, said point
being designated as County Line 18. Thence N 84° 25' 40.82" W 246.394m crossing Collins Mt.
Road (SR 1954) to a Feno monument set with brass disk (#19) in the said Walter Atwater
property having a coordinate value of N 235,806.061m E 589,596.645m, said point being
designated as County Line 19. Thence S 12° 42' 08.03" W 161.90.3m to a Feno monument set
with brass disk (#20) in the said Walter Atwater property having a coordinate value of N
235,648.120m E 589,561.045m, said point being designated as County Line 20. Thence N 8.3°
04' 0512" W 1544.721m to a concrete monument set with aluminum disk (#21) East of
Crawford Dairy Road (SR 1956) having a coordinate value of N 235,834.552m E
588,027.615m, said point being designated as NCGS station County Line 21, PID A132066,
Thence N 82° 29' 19.27" W 967.680m to a computed point in the Haw River (#22) having a
coordinate value of N 2.35,961.049m E 587,068.239m, said point being designated as NCGS
station County Line 22, PID AB2077. Also being the ending point, the Southwest corner of
Orange County, the Northern boundary line of Chatham County and in the East line of Alamance
County.
*Enclosed modification [ ] to be field surveyed such that there will be monuments installed,
distances converted to meter units, less/excepts and "more or less" removed.
All coordinates and beatings are based on the North American Datum of 1983/86. All
coordinates and distances are in meter units.
4
LAW OFFICES
COLEMAN, GLEDHILL, HARGRAVE &. PEEK
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
129 E. TRYON STREET
P O DRAWER 1529
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278
919-732-2196
FAX 919.732-7997
N w cgandh com
March 4, 2004
Robert L. Gunn, Esquire
Gunn & Messick, LLP
Post Office Box 880
Pittsboro, North Carolina 27312-0880
RE: Chatham/Orange County Boundary
Dear Bob:
EXHIBIT B
FROM THE DESK OF
GEOFFREY E. GLEDHILL
E-MAIL g .fu,1dh,11(q N ndh<om
This letter follows our recent telephone conversation
concerning the Chatham County/Orange County boundary. As I told
you during our telephone conversation, Orange County is
interested in revisiting the location of the Chatham/orange
County boundary, one small segment of the boundary that is
illustrated on the maps that are enclosed. One of the maps (I)
illustrates the boundary line approved by both the Chatham
County and Orange County boards of commissioners in 1989 and
identifies the location of the affected parcels. All have been
receiving orange County services and paying orange County taxes,
thought they were "grandfathered" into the original resolution
adopted by the boards of commissioners of both Chatham County
and Orange County regarding government services and tax situs
and would like their property to be permanently located in
Orange County. Another map (II) illustrates the relocation of
the Chatham/Orange County boundary to accommodate these
properties. The other maps illustrate the "bubbles" already in
the boundary approved in 1989.
As I indicated to you, it is my understanding that there
have been informal meetings of people who live along the
boundary and that the properties illustrated are the only ones
that are now located south of it whose tax situs is in question.
The parcel that is north of the Johnson/Brooke property is
5
Robert L. Gunn, Esquire
Page 2
March 4, 2004
partly located in Orange County and partly located in Chatham
County according to the 1989 boundary but is taxed completely in
Orange County.
Please advise as soon as possible as to the willingness of
Chatham County to relocate the Chatham/Orange County boundary as
illustrated on the map identified as II. In that regard, there
may be an interest on the part of one or, both of the boards of
commissioners in holding a public hearing or at least providing
specific notice of its public meetings on this point to be sure
that any decision to change the boundary to resolve unresolved
issues from the 1989 resolution is the last word on this.
When we talked by telephone we also discussed the State's
interest in the legislature approving a local act which would
describe the boundary to correspond with the remonumenting of
that boundary by the State. That local act should probably be
requested by both Chatham and orange counties. I think it would
be prudent, however, to wait to make that request until this
latest issue on the boundary is resolved one way or the other.
That is, if the boundary will be changed to accommodate the
Niemitz, Johnson/Brooke and Renkow properties, the local act
should reflect that change.
GEG/lsg
Enclosures
:cc: Barry Jacobs
Margaret Brown
Moses Carey, Jr.
Alice Gordon
Stephen Halkiotis
John M. Link, Jr.
Rod Visser /
Very truly yours,
COLEMAN, GLEDHILL, HARGRAVE & PEEK, P.C.
eoffr E. Gledhill
1sg:1etters\gun,1tr
ill A P z
= Parcels This map contains parcels prepared for the inventory of real propety, within N
TBXf Parcel TBXI Orange County, and is compiled from recorded deed, plats, and other public
Maor Roads
J
notified that aforementioned
re
cesshould hereby should be be
cafor or veti 1:2400
pprimary ary information sources map are
ed
Cetlfity ty
contained on this map. The county and
adtl its mapping companies companies assume
information
Text City Text lega
no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map.
/? A P I[
? Parcels This map contains parcels prepared for the inventory of real pmpety Within N
Orange County, and is compiled from recorded tleod, plats, and other public
Text Parcel Text public sanddam. Users of this map are heb notified that the aforementioned
ed ed for for
n n sources sources should
public primary Information b be consulted ngoof the 1:2400
Major Roads on this map. The county and
and its mapping comp anies assume
information contained o
Text City Text no legal responsibility for the information contained on this ma p.
RD
p
0
2
1989 Boundary at
Wolfs Pond
8
Add, fiorrA Map
" This map conmins parcels prepared for the Inventory of real propety, within N
h
bli
er pu
c
Orange County, and Is compiled from recorded deed, platss, and ot
-•••- records and data. Usersiles map are hereby notified the aforementioned
^•^ public primary information sources should be consulted for verification of the 1:12026
information contained on this map. The county and its mapping companies assume
...
:S.o...
no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map.
.
...>..? ^ ?-____i_ /1111
AdPtom) 41P
This map contains parcels prepared for the Inventory at real propety within N
Orange County, and is compiled from recorded deed, plats, and other public
that the aforementioned
h
enlt
recordsanddafa
'-••"•' b
ed
on sourcesource should
public primary intonmabs s
be consulted farpegc an
a
he 1:2400
., The
acontained
companies
n contained on this map. The county and its mapping assume
com
no legal responsibility for the information contained an this map
map.
A4, +bpi Moo
This map contains parcels prepared for the inventory of real prepety Within N
bli
d
h
ot
er pu
c
from recorded deed, plats, an
Orange County, and Is t
his
of
the aforementioned mapare
hereby n
records an
Users
„ tion
s
primary ary In
d sources urces should b be co w u
for or verification o of the 1:4800
consulted
s
Information
public
its
taine
irdw
n this map. The county and and its mapping companies assume
infartnmion contained on
no legal responsibility for the information contained an this map.
DRAFT
For reference purposes, the items in this resolution with one asterisk (*)
include updates to their content from the similar language that was part of
Orange County's 2003 Legislative Agenda, Items with two asterisks (**) are
new for the 2004 Legislative Agenda. All, other items are duplicates from
2003.
1
NORTH CAROLINA
ORANGE COUNTY
RESOLUTION REGARDING
LEGISLATIVE MATTERS
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Orange County that the Board hereby requests the Senator and
Representatives representing Orange County to take the following
position on legislation regarding the following matters:
REVENUES
1) Support an increase in the cigarette tax, primarily for
the purposes of health programs and for reducing and
preventing tobacco use (See March 5, 2003 Board of
Commissioners' Resolution - Exhibit A), and with a
portion of the new revenues being dedicated as a funding
source for the Farmland Preservation Trust Fund and for
the creation of regional processing centers to create
value-added products and help promote farm options;
2) Support an increase in the alcohol tax with a portion of
the new revenues being dedicated for mental health and
substance abuse rehabilitation treatment programs;
3) Support balancing the State of North Carolina budget by
closing tax loopholes, including ending the sales-tax cap
on boats, planes, and railway cars, doing away with a
2
sales-tax cap on business machinery, repealing a tax
credit for cigarettes manufactured in North Carolina but
sold overseas, and eliminating an interest expense
deduction for banks;
4) Support legislation to re-institute State funding of
local school system utility costs;
5) Support legislation to allow all counties to enact
various revenue options, with optional local referenda,
that have already been authorized for counties in other
parts of the State, including real estate transfer taxes,
impact taxes for school facilities and other
infrastructure, prepared meals taxes and occupancy taxes;
6) * Ensure that the Public School Capital Building Fund
disbursements (which for FY 2002-03 were estimated to
have been $794,000 for Orange County had they not been
withheld by the state, and for which allocations have
been restored for FY 2003-04) continue to be made on
behalf of Local Education Agencies (LEAs) to address
pressing capital needs in the next and future fiscal
years;
7) Support the North Carolina Association of County
Commissioners (NCACC) and North Carolina League of
2
3
Municipalities (NCLM) positions regarding state
government reimbursements to local governments;
TRANSPORTATION
8) Support establishing a permanent prohibition on billboard
advertisements along Interstate 40;
9) Support increased dedicated funding for the establishment
and implementation of Rural Transportation Planning
organizations throughout the State;
lo) Support legislation providing the North Carolina
Department of Transportation with flexibility statewide
in addressing acceptance and maintenance of post-1975
recorded subdivisions with unpaved roads to address
unintended exclusion from the state-maintained road
system (Examples: 1) Developed subdivisions based on
unrecorded subdivision plats on pre-1975 unrecorded
subdivision plats which plats include publicly dedicated
roads and 2) Unexpected Death of Original Subdivision
Property Owner and Lack of Owner's Right-of-Way
Dedication Signature on recorded plat);
3
4
SOCIAL SAFETY NET
11) * Support legislation that, at a minimum, returns to the
Fiscal Year 2001-2002 level of funding for State Aid to
Counties in the Social Services Budget. These funds
have been available from the state for decades to
support the administration of state and federal public
assistance programs provided through county governments.
These funds are used to pay some of the costs of the
staff who determine eligibility for Food Stamps,
Medicaid and other financial assistance programs. These
programs are experiencing growth in the number of
persons needing assistance, which has increased the
workload for the staff at Social Services. The state
should increase its funding to support the county
administration of these programs, especially since this
is one of the few sources of state funds in any of the
operational costs of the local Social Services programs.
Two years ago, the Orange County portion of this fund
was reduced from $69,603 to $58,851. Since these funds
can be used to match federal funds, loss of these funds
results in either additional county costs or loss in
revenue of $21,504 to support staff at Social Services;
4
5
12) Support legislation providing that the State is
responsible for providing services to children in need
of residential mental health treatment;
13) * Support the reinstatement of Criminal Justice
Partnership Program (CJPP) funding and other
alternatives to incarceration lost due to budget cuts in
the Department of Correction with the understanding that
diverting these funds would lead to greater costs and
challenges for the correctional system as well as the
general public;
14) Support adequate funding for Dispute Settlement Centers
and other similar entities as these resources provide
viable alternatives to the court system, and thereby
diminish court costs and the strain on the limited,
already over-burdened judicial system, and any diversion
of these funds is "penny-wise and pound-foolish";
15) Support legislation directing that the North Carolina
Department of Health and Human Services put on hold
further efforts regarding mental health reform until 1)
adequate funding is provided to local governments to
address implementation costs, and 2) adequate planning
and funding is provided to address the costs which will
5
6
be incurred with the de-institutionalization activities
that will certainly occur as an outcome of reform;
16) Support legislation involving programs and funding to
expand the in-home services available to seniors;
17) Support legislation for the funding of intensive home
visiting projects that target prevention of child abuse
and neglect;
18) Support legislation which promotes reform of the medical
prescription system that incorporates provisions
included in the State of Maine system;
19) Support legislation for reinstating and maintaining
adequate funding for Smart Start statewide that ensures
that children across the state can have the
opportunities for success in the same manner as those
with Orange County Partnership for Young Children;
20) Oppose cuts in funding to the University of North
Carolina Pharmacy School and related activities;
21) * Re-instate funding to the University of North Carolina
Dental Clinic to restore it to Fiscal Year 2001-02
funding levels;
22) Oppose cuts in funding to the North Carolina Poison
Control Center which provides immediate life-saving
assistance to families across the state and reduces
6
7
costs to the public, the state, and medical institutions
by reducing the public's need to utilize emergency rooms
and other medical facilities;
SOLID WASTE
The State of North Carolina has not demonstrated adequate
leadership on recycling efforts. It has failed to
implement strategies and incentives to encourage recycling
and also has not instituted penalties sufficient to ensure
that recycling opportunities are pursued. This deficiency
could begin to be reversed as follows:
23)Support bottle deposit legislation to be applied to any
liquids bottled for human beverage consumption including
soda, juice, beer, milk, wine, tea, water, and all
distilled alcoholic beverages;
24)Support legislation requiring an advance recycling fee
(ARF) and a subsequent ban on landfilling or
incineration of televisions, computer monitors and other
devices using a cathode ray tube (CRT) to display an
image on a screen;
25)* Support legislation that promotes and supports the
recycling and disposal of white goods including
7
8
retaining earmarked State revenue sources to support
these programs;
EDUCATION
Orange County believes that political initiatives regarding
education that create unfunded mandates for local
governments should be opposed. Examples of these include:
26)Legislation which seeks to reduce class size if the
State does not include the necessary funding (capital
and otherwise) and thereby creates additional pressures
on local school systems for construction of new and
expanded school facilities and for additional support
staff (Also See #6 above);
27)Legislation that expands programs such as "More at Four"
that obligate local school systems' space if the State
does not include the necessary funding (capital and
otherwise) and thereby creates additional pressures on
local school systems for construction of new and
expanded school facilities and for support staff;
28)Legislation cutting or reducing funding and other
support to the UNC School of Government (Institute of
Government) which has the effect of reducing its
effectiveness in assisting local governments in finance,
8
9
planning, and the many other areas where local
governments across the state depend on its breadth of
knowledge;
OTHER
29)** Support the Mental Health Treatment Court Pilot bill
that provides funding support for mental health
treatment courts in the Orange and Mecklenburg judicial
districts for adult offenders suffering from mental
illness, with treatment aimed at improving their ability
to function in the community and thereby reduce
recidivism and easing court caseload (See Exhibit B);
30)** Oppose unfunded mandates for local governments such
as 1) those associated with recent reform efforts at the
State level regarding mental health services, 2)
regulatory and performance standards concerning solid
waste and recycling programs, and 3) standards and
funding requirements related to the implementation of
the provisions of the federal No Child Left Behind Act;
31)Oppose legislation which would provide for private
sector soil evaluations to become the basis for county
health department permitting of septic systems as
proposed by the North Carolina Coalition for
9
10
Privatization of Wastewater Evaluations (See Exhibit C -
Orange County Health Department Memorandum);
32)Oppose legislation involving changes to the Alcohol
Beverage Control (ABC) system unless local ABC Boards
and local governments are included in discussion and
formulation of proposed changes and that any changes
"hold harmless" the services and funds provided to local
governments under the current system;
33)Support legislation that continues the current level of
State funding for all existing positions in County Soil
and Water Conservation offices;
34)Support legislation requiring county commissioner
approval for any proposed exercise of eminent domain
power by any utility operating in a deregulated
environment;
35)Support legislation enabling process free transfers of
equipment and supplies from one unit of local government
to another during emergencies/natural disasters;
36)Support amending the annexation laws to require
consultation with counties, including joint city-county
public hearings, on any proposed annexation, and to
provide planning and revenue option incentives to county
10
11
and municipal governments that enter into cooperative
planning agreements;
37)Support legislation to Broaden Local Government
Authority to Enact Laws to Protect Public Health, Safety
& Welfare (Senate Bill 160);
38)Support legislation to prohibit the issuance or
execution of open burning permits on high ozone alert
days to help avoid North Carolina, Region J, becoming a
non-attainment area (Code Orange, Red and Purple Days);
39)Support legislation to allow counties to collect fees to
offset the cost of restaurant inspections;
40)** Support legislation to allow counties to collect an
additional 5% on court costs to help fund capital,
operational, and other needs associated with ever-
increasing judicial activities;
41)** Support legislation to eliminate the verification
process, have cancellations stand on their own merit,
record them based on the same criteria used to record
other real estate-related documents, and reduce Register
of Deeds liability associated with cancellation process,
or, in the alternative, allow counties to begin charging
regular recording fees for Notices of Satisfaction and
Certificates of Satisfaction associated with Deeds of
11
12
Trust since there is currently no fee for recording
cancellations;
42)Support legislation that, in the event county
regulation/inspection of body piercing establishments is
state-mandated, adequate state funding is included to
address the additional county cost, or, as an
alternative, counties are allowed to collect fees to
offset the cost of the regulation/inspection activities;
43)** Support the instituting of a national criminal record
check for long-term care employees (all persons involved
in direct patient care) since the current requirement
for state criminal record checks is not adequate for a
mobile society where many in the work force come from
out of state. The current suspension of the state's
statutory requirement for a national criminal records
check must be lifted, not continued again;
44)** Support statutory clarification on the definition of
special care locked units (units intended to meet
certain requirements in order to provide special care
for persons with Alzheimer's disease or related
disorders; not simply units with a door that locks).
Legislative requirements as outlined in Senate Bill 10
(House Bill 60) have been circumvented through
12
13
interpretation. Locked units must be considered special
care by definition or the rights of the residents in
those units are violated;
45)** Support the establishment of a study commission to
examine the guardianship laws in our state and to
recommend changes for strengthening this system.
(Senate Bill 179 and House Bill 246, introduced in the
2001 session, called for the establishment of a Study
Commission. No action was taken on these bills, with
the exception of a task force convened by the Division
of Aging.);
46)**Support the inclusion of a definition for "animal
shelter" similar to that contained in the orange County
Animal Control Ordinance in draft legislation being
developed and proposed by the House Interim Committee on
the Prevention and Disposition of Unwanted and Abandoned
Animals to improve conditions for the animals and the
humans who work with them (See Exhibit D);
47)Support some of the Legislative Goals of the North
Carolina Association of County Commissioners (NCACC),
many elements of which were and are initiatives of
Orange County, and with the additional Orange County
13
14
explanatory language included in Bold Italic where
appropriate (See Exhibit E);
Upon motion of Commissioner , seconded by
Commissioner , the foregoing resolution was adopted
this the day of , 2004.
I, Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the
County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the
foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said
Board at a meeting held on
2004 as relates in any
way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings
are recorded in Minute Book No. of the minutes of said
Board.
WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day
of , 2004.
Clerk to the Board of Commissioner
14
EXHIBIT A 15
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF AN INCREASE IN NORTH
CAROLINA'S TAX ON CIGARETTES
March 2003
WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners joins the Orange County Board of
Health in carrying out the responsibility of protecting and promoting the health of the people of
Orange County; and
WHEREAS, a goal of Healthy People 2010 is to "reduce illness, disability, and death related to
tobacco use and exposure to secondhand smoke"; and
WHEREAS, death rates from heart disease and cancer, the leading causes of death in North
Carolina and Orange County are partially attributable to smoking and tobacco use; and
WHEREAS, North Carolina's cigarette tax is currently $.05, the P lowest in the nation; and
WHEREAS, the use of tobacco products costs the State $4, 75 billion in medical costs and lost
productivity annually; and
WHEREAS, each year 24,090 children in North Carolina start smoking each year (66 a day); and
WHEREAS, the best way to prevent and reduce tobacco use by children is to substantially
increase the cost of cigarettes; and
WHEREAS, such a tax increase would result in a 16.1% decrease in youth smoking rates,
preventing 105,750 North Carolina children from starting to smoke and saving 33,750 premature
smoking-related death; and
WHEREAS, North Carolina expects to suffer approximately a $2 billion deficit in fiscal year
2003, the third year of significant deficits; and
WHEREAS, these deficits have caused cuts to important programs affecting the health and
wellness of the citizens and more reductions are threatened; and
WHEREAS, North Carolina targets almost no state funds towards preventing tobacco use; and
WHEREAS, such an increase would generate new revenue;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Orange County Board of County
Commissioners supports an increase in the cigarette tax in North Carolina to be used primarily
for health programs and for reducing and preventing tobacco use,
This the 5°i day of March 2003.
i
Margaret Brown, Chair
Orange County Board of Commissioners
c X N L I_.T ( B 16
ORANGE COUN'T'Y COMMUNITY RESOURCE COURT
FACT SHEET 1: 9/2003
a ORIGINATED ON APRIL, 2000.
O A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT BETWEEN THE OPC AREA PROGRAM AND JUDICIAL
DISTRICT 15B: ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS.
PARTICIPATING AGENCIES: DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS OFFICE, PRE-TRIAL SERVICES, CHAPEL HILL POLICE DEPARTMENT
CRISES UNIT, THE PUBLIC DEFENDERS OFFICE.
A VOLUNTARY COURT BASED JAIL DIVERSION PROGRAM.
s SERVES PEOPLE IN ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AVERAGE 75-100/YR.
S PROVIDES INTEGRATED SERVICES FOR PEOPLE WITH MENTAL HEALTH
DISORDERS DIVERTED FROM THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.
PRESIDING JUDGE: CHIEF DISTRICT COURT JUDGE JOSEPH MOODY BUCKNER.
AWARD RECH'IANTS FOR THE FOLLOWING GRANTS:
JANUARY 2001: FEDERAL MENTAL HEALTH BLOCK GRANT
(MENTAL HEALTH COURT CASE MANAGER)
JANUARY 2002: DRUG COURT: IMPLEMENTATION SITE AUTHORIZATION
JULY 2003: DRUG COURT: GOVERNORS CRIME COMMISSION FUND
(DRUG TREATMENT COORDINATOR)
MARCH 2003: BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE, OFFICE OF JUSTICE
(MENTAL HEALTH COURT CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKER)
SEPT. 2003: PENDING: COUNCIL OF STATE GOVERNMENTS:
REQUEST FOR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO IMPROVE
COLLABORATION BETWEEN CORRECTIONS AND MENTAL
HEALTH SYSTEMS
RESEARCH PARTICIPANT FOR 2 STUDIES;
COMMUNITY RESOURCE COURT STUDY :
NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY, SOCIOLOGY DEPARTMENT: PENDING.
THE SERIOUSL Y MENTALLY ILL IN NORTH CAROLINA'S CRIMINAL JUSTICS SYSTEM
TERRY SANFORD INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC POLICY, DUKE UNIVERSITY. MAY 2002.
17
EXHIBIT C
MEMO
Nmlh C...11na Publla Neahh
ORANGE COUNTY
HEALTH DEPARTMENT
Rosemary L Summers,
MPH, DrPH
Health Director
Richard E. Whitted Human
Services Center
300 West Tryon Street
Post Office Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Phone: (919) 245-2411
Fax: (919) 644-3007
www co orange.nc us/health
Animal Control Services
Central Administrative
Services
Dental Health Services
Environmental Health Services
Health Promotion and
Education Services
Personal Health Services
306-C Revere Road
P 0 Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Phone: (919) 245-2361
FAX: (919) 644-3006
u,
v
u
z
in
v
C
v
E
P
c
w
DATE: March 21, 2003
TO: Rosie Summers
FROM: Ron Holdway
Tom Konsler
RE: Legislative Proposal for Licensed Soil Scientists to Permit Septic Sites
Rosie,
At the request of the County Attorney, we prepared this memo to address concerns
regarding the recent legislative initiative for the privatization of evaluations of sites
for wastewater systems in North Carolina. This idea is being proposed by the North
Carolina Coalition for Privatization of Wastewater Evaluations (NCCPWE) and a
copy of the most recent information from that group is attached. Please note that
there is some concern from the coalition members and others that the proposal does
not reflect the position of the group as a whole. (See attached email from Bill Jeter,
the section chief for the NCDENR On-Site Wastewater Section). We understand
that you have already notified the county manager and our local county
commissioners of this push and also that the Local Health Director's Association is
preparing a formal response.
The current proposal as presented is a three pronged approach to septic evaluations
and we will respond to each aspect individually as well as give you our general
comments on the idea. As you know, the permitting and approval for on-site
wastewater systems has historically been a responsibility of local health
departments in North Carolina since the early days of water carried sewage with
very few exceptions. The existing program is an excellent public health program
with its primary goals of improving water quality and minimizing disease
transmission from direct contact with sewage or ingestion of sewage contaminated
water.
In general, we perceive the allowance of private sector permits is fraught with
potential for exploitation. Since the private soils consultants will be hired for the
most part by the property owner or developer to assess the soil suitability, the
incentive is present for the consultant to find useable soils, There is some
experience that demonstrates problems with this approach as large septic systems
(larger than.3,000 gallons per day) were permitted by the State until 1992 in a
manner similar to the current proposal. There were at least three large systems
permitted here in Orange County that became problematic in large part due to poor
siting conditions including soil, topography and inappropriate loading rates. Some
is
of these systems failed in a very short time after installation. The most notable of these situations was
the Piney Mountain Subdivision and that malfunction was eventually remedied by the extension of
sewer from the City of'Durham. The company that installed the Piney Mountain system also had
problem with systems in at least two other counties in North Carolina..
At a glance, the proposal contains no public health merit and likely represents a step backwards in
program quality. The major thrust seems to be resulting from licensed soil scientists who do not agree
with local health department's reviewing their work and from developers who have to wait several
weeks to months for their projects to be evaluated. Please be aware that there is no wording of the
general statute language for the proposal available to us at this time. As with all law making "the devil
is in the details" and we really do not know what the final statutory language will look like.
Below are the three major points from the NCCPWE proposal, Our comments on each point follows
them and are in italics.
1) Allow for a licensed soil scientist and certified site evaluator to submit soil and site suitability
information to the local health department as part of a completed wastewater permit application
package. The local health department would be able to issue a wastewater permit based upon
this packet of information with little or no field review. The proposed legislation would create a
system by which the health department could spot check these proposals prepared by the private
sector, but the local health department would not have to perform a duplicate evaluation and
may issue wastewater permits with no evaluation. A time trigger would be utilized to create a
deadline by which the health department would have to issue a permit or notify the licensed soil
scientist and certified site evaluator of any deficiencies in their proposal.
For the reasons listed oil the first page, ive think this approach is suspect. Furthermore, tike
concept of conducting a "spot check" of those sites recommended for approval is without
sound professional merit as it would be cosmetic at best. For discussion, if a probleuh was
discovered in a "spot check" world prior work by the individual Soil Scientist be subject to
review and possibly action on outstanding permits or world we just ignore those existing
approvals? It is our impression that Soil Scientists in this setting would have an abundance of
authority with little or no responsibility, for errors and omissions in their work because the
local health department is still the permitting agency. Finally, it is not clear what happens in
the event the local health department staff disagrees with tlhe soil scientist and therefore
refuses to issue a permit. We have had many submittals from private soil scientists in tike past
that, upon field review by our staff, have not accurately represented the true conditions on tlhe
site. Tile expertise of some private sector soil scientists, for evaluating oil-site systems has
been limited at best and the quality of work varies greatly front one individual or firm to
another. "Spot checks "would be a haphazard and meaningless method of quality checks
given the variability and complexity of soils and sites. If we were to issue a permit on even
one soil report, from the private sector ivithout field review, we would be putting ourselves and
the future homeowner at great risk and also assuming at least some responsibilityfor the
outcome of that system.
2) Create a certification program for those persons using soils information to propose a wastewater
system. The "certified site evaluator" would be allowed to collect site information necessary to
complete a wastewater system proposal. A certified site evaluator would not be allowed to
perform acts of soil science unless the site evaluator is also a licensed soil scientist in
accordance with G.S. 89F. An engineer or other professional that wanted to be involved in
small wastewater system proposals would be welcome to become certified through this
program. The advantage of certification is that a certified site evaluator could submit a proposal
for a wastewater system to a local health department and the local health department could issue
19
a permit with minimal or no review based upon the certified site evaluator's work and introduce
a method by which site evaluators can be held accountable for their decisions.
We do not have the same confidence that a certification committee world be successful in
taking appropriate action for errors, omissions, and bad actors, let alone making
accountability stick. The same type of oversight exists for engineers, licensed soil scientists,
and certified operators, but the respective governing boards have been reluctant to take action
on their members. In particular, the North Carolina Board for the Licensing of Soil
Scientists already has the legal authority via NCGS §89F-23 to seek injunctive relief against
those involved in soils work who are not legally licensed and, to our knowledge, they have
refused to take such action even when those persons are apparently ill blatant and multiple
violations of the licensing act and operating in direct competition with their own membership.
Given this refusal to bold non-rnenubers accountable, rve do not expect then: to bold their own
members to any greater or even reasonable standards.
It is not clear, but could be assumed that Environmental Health Specialists employed by the
local health department would also have to become certified as site evaluators. Regardless,
we strive to keep our on-site wastewater staff here in Orange County on tlue leading edge of
technologies and evaluation practices in the field. While we are not opposed to elevating the
overall state of practice for local health department practitioners, it would pose another
requirement.for continuing education and, in effect, be an unfunded mandate for counties to
absorb.
3) Require that all lands that are subject to local subdivision approval that do not have access to a
public sewer system must be evaluated by a licensed soil scientist prior to recordation with the
county register of deeds. Involving the soil scientist at the beginning of a proposed
development will assist the developer in making the most out of the proposed development
within the parameters of the soils available and will assist the local health department by
filtering out unsuitable properties from being proposed for development prior to the permit
application stage.
We have no objection to this element of the proposal. This is currently an option available to
developers proposing a subdivision: and is commonly used on a voluntary basis. In Orange
County, a variation of this requirement already exists in the current subdivision ordinance.
There also needs to be a provision to address subdivisions that intend to use systems other
than on-site wastewater systems such as package treatment plants.
20
North Carolina Coalition for
Privatization of Wastewater Evaluations
P.O, Box 2522
Wilmington, NC 28402
910452-0001
The North Carolina Coalition for Privatization of Wastewater Evaluations (NCCPWE•) represents the diverse companies,
organizations, and persons in NC that believe that the role of the licensed soil scientist in evaluating land for development in
NC can be expanded so as to protect public health.
Specifically, the North Carolina Coalition for Privatization of Wastewater Evaluations is seeking the following legislative
initiatives out of the 2003 and 2004 General Assembly:
1) Allow for a licensed soil scientist and certified site evaluator to submit soil and site suitability information to the
local health department as part of a completed wastewater permit application package. The local health department
would be able to issue a wastewater permit based upon this packet of information with little or no field review.
The proposed legislation would create a system by which the health department could spot check these proposals
prepared by the private sector, but the local health department would not have to perform a duplicate evaluation
and may issue wastewater permits with no evaluation A time trigger would be utilized to create a deadline by
which the health department would have to issue a permit or notify the licensed soil scientist and certified site
evaluator of any deficiencies in their proposal,
2) Create a certification program for those persons using soils information to propose a wastewater system. The
"certified site evaluator" would be allowed to collect site information necessary to complete a wastewater system
proposal. A certified site evaluator would not be allowed to perform acts of soil science unless the site evaluator is
also a licensed soil scientist in accordance with G.S. 89F. An engineer or otter professional that wanted to be
involved in small wastewater system proposals would be welcome to become certified through this program. The
advantage of certification is that a certified site evaluator could submit a proposal for a wastewater system to a
local health department and the local health department could issue a permit with minimal or no review based upon
the certified site evaluator's work and introduce a method by which site evaluators can be held accountable for
their decisions.
3) Require that all lands that are subject to local subdivision approval that do not have access to a public sewer system
must be evaluated by a licensed soil scientist prior to recordation with the county register of deeds Involving the
soil scientist at the beginning of a proposed development will assist the developer in making the most out of the
proposed development within the parameters of the soils available and will assist the local health department by
filtering out unsuitable properties from being proposed for development prior to the permit application stage,
In order to assist in these goals, the NCCPWE needs your help. NCCPWE. needs you to perform the following actions:
1) Contact your Senator or Representative and support these initiatives.
2) Be available to testify before the House or Senate in order to discuss how these initiatives will improve the
wastewater permitting process in NC without compromising public health.
3) Write a check to NCCPWE in order to help pay for attorney's fees and legislative consultants*,
* The purpose of the financial account for NCCPWE is to collect funds to pay fees associated with promoting this
legislation Records of contributions will be kept In the event that the funds collected exceed the legal fees incurred, the
excess monies will be refunded pro-rata. No administrative costs will be incurred, except for the cost of checks and deposit
slips and other office supplies necessary to deposit funds and pay bills,
21
From: <Bill,Jeter@ncmail.net> (Greg Wilder)
Subject: [Ehij North Carolina Coalition for
Dear Colleagues:
I am certain that you have see the attached NCCPWE proposed initiatives.
While these and other topics associated with privatization were
discussed by a stakeholders group, these initiatives were not adopted by
the group nor are they the consensus of that group. These initiatives
are not endorsed nor supported by the Division of Environmental Health
or the On-Site Wastewater Section.
Bill Jeter, Chief
On-Site Wastewater Section
tom. X H z G1-T D 22
AatntaLs
§ 4-33
ARTICLE L IN GENERAL
Secs. 4.1-4-30. Reserved.
ARTICLE II. ANIMAL CONTROL
DIVISION 1 GENERALLY
Sec. 4.31. Authority.
This article is adopted pursuant to the power
granted the county in G.S 153A-121, 153A-127,
153A-153 and 153A-442.
(Ord, of 6-16-1987, § I, eff. 1-1-1988)
Sec. 4.32. Applicability to veterinarians
Hospitals, clinics and other premises operated
by licensed veterinarians for the care and treat-
ment of animals are exempt from the provisions of
this article except for the provisions relating to
cruelty to animals and rabies control.
(Ord, of 6-16-1987, § XV1II, eff, 1-1-1988)
Sec. 4.33. Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when
used in this article, shall have the meanings
ascribed to them in this section, except where the
context clearly indicates a different meaning:
Adequate food means the provision at suitable
intervals, not to exceed 24 hours, of a quantity of
wholesome foodstuff suitable for the species and
age, sufficient to maintain a reasonable level of
nutrition in each animal. Such foodstuff shall be
served in a receptacle, dish or container that is
Physically clean and in which agents injurious to
health have been removed or destroyed to a
practical minimum,
Adequate shelter means that shelter which will
keep a nonaquatic animal dry, out of the direct
path of winds and out of the direct sun, at a
temperature level that is healthful for the animal
For dogs, cats and other small animals, the shel-
ter shall be a windproof and moistureproof struc-
ture of suitable size to accommodate the animal
and allow retention of body heat. It shall include
four walls, a roof and a solid floor raised off the
ground, with an opening entrance large enough to
allow access to the animal, but placed in such a
way as to keep the animal out of the direct path of
winds. Metal barrels do not provide adequate
shelter for a dog, cat or other small animal and
are prohibited for that purpose. The structure
shall be provided with a sufficient quantity of
suitable bedding material consisting of hay, straw,
cedar shaving, or the equivalent. For all animals,
the containment area shall be free of accumulated
waste and debris so that the animal shall be free
to walk or lie down without coming in contact
with any such waste or debris, and a suitable
method of draining shall be provided to eliminate
rapidly excess water or moisture. Aquatic or
semiaquatic animals shall have an adequate
amount of clean water in which to move.
Adequate water means a constant access to a
supply of clean, fresh water provided in a sanitary
manner.
Animal means any live, vertebrate creature
specifically including but not limited to dogs, cats,
farm animals, birds, fish and reptiles..
Animal control director means that person des-
ignated by appropriate authority in the county,
and where appropriate, his designee, charged
with the responsibility and authority to imple-
ment and enforce the animal control program in
the county.
Animal shelter means a place provided and
operated by the county directly or by contractual
agreement, whether jointly with another govern-
mental unit or independently, for the restraint,
care, adoption and disposition of animals.
At large means any animal off the property of
its owner or its keeper and not under the restraint
of a competent person.
Class I kennel means any person maintaining
an establishment where animals of any species,
excluding domesticated livestock, are kept for the
purpose of showing, competition, hunting or sport,
and which establishment is so constructed that
the animals cannot stray from the establishment,
and which maintains more than six but less than
19 animals.
Class II leennel means any person maintaining
an establishment where animals of any species,
tZ
n. m
I, S• iv
^. n
w
W
B°
w
d
n
9
w
N
CD4:3
23
EXHIBIT E
The Orange County Board of Commissioners expresses its general support for the North
Carolina Association of County Commissioners (NCACC) 2003-2004 Legislative Goals as
detailed below. In some instances, Orange County has not included some NCACC goals
below due to various concerns. In other instances, Orange County may have for various
reasons deleted some language that was originally part of an NCACC goal. And in some
cases, additional explanatory language has been included to further detail Orange
County's position on a particular matter. Any additional language included by Orange
County is shown in Bold Italic.
NCACC LEGISLATIVE GOALS 2003-2004
(As Modified by Orange County)
Human Resources
1. Medicaid Relief
Seek legislation to implement a 6-year phase out of county participation in the costs of
Medicaid, beginning with a cap at current costs in the year 2003. (Legislative Goals
Committee Priority #1)
2. Long-term Care
Seek legislation to improve the long-term care system in North Carolina by:
? providing incentives for the employment of direct care givers,
? providing income tax incentives for in-home services provided for family
members.
? funding comprehensive long-term care planning at the county or regional level,
? expanding community alternatives for disabled adults, and
? increasing funds for Senior Centers. (Legislative Goals Committee Priority #6)
? reducing the federal, state and local incentives to institutional care
3. Latino Issues
Seek legislation to create a Study Commission that includes state and county officials to
undertake a comprehensive study of issues affecting North Carolina's Latino population;
including, but not limited to, health care and education..
4. Mental Health Services
Seek legislation authorizing county commissioners to determine the appropriate local mix of
public and private providers for those in need of mental health, developmental disabilities
and substance abuse services,.
5. State Health Program Mandates
Seek legislation to eliminate unfunded state health program mandates.
23
24
Taxation and Finance
1. Local Government Finance.
Seek legislation to allow all counties to enact any or all of'several revenue options from
among those that have already been authorized for any other county. (Legislative Goals
Committee Priority #2)
2. Inspection Fees.
Seek legislation to allow county commissioners to charge a fee to offset the cost of restaurant
inspections, and other fees to offset the costs of'health and environmental services.
(Legislative Goals Committee Priority #5)
3. Legislative Restrictions on withholding of funds.
Seek an amendment to the State Constitution of North Carolina stating: "Unless authorized
by an act of the General Assembly, the Governor may not withhold from distribution funds
that have been collected by the State on behalf of a unit of local government or funds the
General Assembly has appropriated or otherwise committed to a unit of local government."
(Legislative Goals Committee Priority #3)
4. Sales Tax Exemption.
Support legislation to exempt counties, cities, school boards and community colleges from
payment of state and local sales taxes on purchases within North Carolina.
5. Improvements to Automobile Property Tax Collection.
Support legislation to improve the system through which property taxes on motor vehicles
are collected.
Intergovernmental Relations
1. Public Duty Doctrine.
Seek legislation to restore application of the "Public Duty Doctrine" to local governments.
(Legislative Goals Committee Priority #4)
2. E911 Fees.
Seek legislation to increase flexibility in the use of fees generated for the Emergency
Telephone System Fund (E911) in order to expand the ability of counties to use these funds
for purchase or lease of any and all communication equipment associated with receiving,
processing or dispatching emergency calls for law enforcement, fire, medical, rescue or other
public safety services, to include more effective use of Emergency 911 Services through
funding of E911 services. (Legislative Goals Committee Priority #7) Seek legislation to
increase./lexibility in the rise offees generated for the Emergency Telephone System Fund
(E911) in order to expand the abilities of counties to track and process cellular phone
calls.
24
25
3. Economic Development Incentives/Tools.
Seek an amendment to the State Constitution that grants local governments additional
authority and tools that pertain to economic development, including Economic Development
Financing, in order to create jobs in North Carolina.
4. Funding Regional Commission.
? Seek legislation to maintain and expand the state's existing financial assistance to
regional Councils of Government.
? Support legislation that would allow the 17 Lead Regional Organizations to study
options that allow for greater regional cooperation through councils of
government.
5. Economic Development and Unemployment Rates.
Seek legislation establishing a mechanism that takes into account county unemployment rates
and change in unemployment rates in the application of state incentives for economic
development.
6. Local Governmental Retirement System Board of Trustees.
Seek legislation that increases local government representation and specifies that these
additional representatives must be members of the system. Current law established an
oversight boards - one for the Teacher and State Employees' Retirement System (14
members) and one for Local Government Employees' Retirement System (3 members) - in
which the State Board votes with the Local Board on issues affecting the Local Government
Employees' Retirement System. Seek legislation that restricts the opportunity for elected
officials and legislative bodies to withdraw or sequester funds specifically designated for
the Retirement Systenns.
7. Water Quality/Supply and Infrastructure.
? Seek legislation to provide financial resources and local regulatory control to satisfy
regional water quality/supply planning needs, along with the resources necessary to
meet environmentally sound water and sewer infrastructure needs.
? Seek legislation that provides additional funding for the Clean Water Management
Trust Fund and the N.C. Rural Center.
? Seek legislation to provide financial incentives to encourage the retrofitting of
facilities to diminish the use of water
? Seek legislation to establish an authority at the State level to coordinate the use of
water resources, the protection of water resources, and a regional and state-wide
emergency water resource coordination system
8. Economic Development and Growth Management Strategy.
? Seek legislation to clarify the ability of counties through their zoning powers to
implement "smart growth" strategies; including the ability to transfer density credits
or severable development rights and inclusionary zoning requirements for affordable
housing.
? Support legislation providing for State funding of affordable housing, environmental
programs, acquisition of open space, farmland preservation, rural economic
development, and economic development incentives.
25
26
9. Transportation Planning and Funding.
? Seek increased funding of the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP),
Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO's), Rural Planning Organizations
(RPO's), and localhegional transit authorities with particular attention to providing
finding to erodes of transportation that are alternatives to the automobile, e.g.
crass transit, bikeways, etc.
? Support a fundamental change in the state's planning/organizational structure
currently in use to allow for more formal input by local government and a funding
formula that provides adequate financial resources to address the state's ever-growing
transportation needs,
10. Workforce Development.
Support legislation to coordinate workforce development programs and funding of the North
Carolina Employment Training & Grant Program.
11. Library and Haman Services Maintenance of Effort.
Seek legislation to repeal m revise administrative and/or other rules that require local
funding of human services and libraries at continuous levels in order to receive state human
services funding and library funding (with library funding coming from the State Aid to
Public Libraries Fund).
12. Affordable Housing.
Seek appropriations by the General Assembly authorizing recurring funds for the North
Carolina Housing Trust Fund to provide new home ownership opportunities and affordable
rental homes for those qualified under the North Carolina Housing Trust Fund..
13. Homeland Security and Regional Emergency Preparedness.
Seek legislation to re-establish and fully fund the Regional Emergency Management Program
and support state efforts to provide planning services for homeland security on a regional
basis.
14. Ordinance Authority and Enforcement Mechanisms.
Seek legislation to obtain ordinance authority and enforcement mechanisms comparable to
municipalities as to nuisance abatement, regulation of unsafe buildings, and minimum
housing codes.
15. Retirement System Resources.
Support funding initiatives designed to bolster the Local and State Retirement Systems'
ability to provide quality customer service to their members,
16. Annexation
Support legislation to require the approval of the Board of County Commissioners of an
adjoining county when a city in which the city hall is located in another county seeks to
annex property in the adjoining county.
26
27
17. Elections Directors and Employees
Seek legislation to clarify the status of directors of elections and other elections employees as
employees of local boards of elections, entitled to the protection of the State Personnel Act
and the Tort Claims Act and represented by the Attorney General's Office in all matters.
18. Hurricane Relief Fund
Oppose legislation that would transfer funds appropriated for the Hurricane Floyd Disaster
Relief Project in an effort to balance the state budget.
19. Compensation for taxes on land used for mitigation
Support legislation to require compensation from state agencies and units of local
government for lost property taxes when they purchase mitigation land in other jurisdictions
if it results in substantial, adverse fiscal impact to the host county.
27
28
Public Education
1. Oppose Taxing Authority for Local School Boards
Strongly oppose legislation to authorize local boards of education to exercise independent
taxing authority. (Legislative Goals Committee Priority 98)
2. Charter Schools
Seek legislation to retain the ceiling on the number of charter schools allowed statewide and
to provide for better state oversight and accountability of charter schools (Legislative Goals
Committee Priority #9)
3. School Construction Funding
Seek legislation to grant to all counties the authority to implement funding options available
to some counties, other than property taxes and sales taxes, to fund school construction,
school construction debt retirement or other capital needs as determined by the Board of
County Commissioners. (Legislative Goals Committee Priority #10)
4. Resolution of School Budget Disputes
Seek legislation to amend G.S. 115C-4.31 to:
? Make optional the requirement for a joint meeting between the local school board
and the board of county commissioners.
? Require that the courts consider factors in addition to the sum of money necessary
to support a system of free public schools to include: other funding
responsibilities of the county, prevailing economic conditions, ability to pay, and
tax effort.
5. Standard Course of Study
Seek legislation to allocate sufficient state revenues to make the standard course of study
available in every public school throughout the state.
6. Public School Capital Building Fund
Seek legislation to assure that the Public School Capital Building Fund remains intact and to
direct the State Treasurer to report on long term commitments that are dependent on this
fund.
7. Community College Appointments
Seek legislation to allow each board of county commissioners which participates in funding
to appoint one county commissioner to the Board of Trustees of the several Community
Colleges in the case of multi-county campuses and, if two additional members are included
on the Board, that these be jointly appointed by the boards of county commissioners of
counties which participate in funding,
8. Reinstitute State Funding of School Utility Costs
Support legislation to reinstitute state funding of local school system utility costs.
9. Add School Nursing
Support legislation to appropriate state finds to add school health personnel in all counties so
that over a three-year period the state reaches a nurse/student ratio of 1:750.
28
29
Criminal Justice
1. Service of Process Fee
Seek legislation to increase the civil service of process fee to from $5 to $25 over a five-year
period.
2. Video Poker
Support legislation that would ban video poker machines,.
3. Gun Permits
Seek legislation establishing a non-refundable fee for gun permits applications.
4. Medical Care, Prisoners
Seek legislation authorizing counties to charge a $10 co-payment for prescription
medications provided to inmates who have a dearonstrated ability to pay.
5. Criminal Justice Partnership Act
Seek legislation to restore full funding for the Criminal Justice Partnership Act.
6. Appeal, Juvenile Treatment Orders
Seek legislation to amend G. S. 713-2604 to give the county the right to appeal when a judge
issues an order that a juvenile be evaluated and treated at county expense.
Agriculture
1. N. C. Cooperative Extension.
Support legislation to maintain the funding for the Extension function and the Research
function housed within NC Cooperative Extension.
29
BARRYJACOBS. CHAIR ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MARGARET W. BROWN VICE CHAIR
MOSES CAREY.JR POST OFFICE BOX 81 81
ALICE M. GORDON 200 SOUTH CAMERON STREET
STEPHEN H. HALKIOPS
HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278
March 29, 2004
Senator Ellie Kinnaird
Representative Gordon Allen DRAFT
Representative Joe Hackney
Representative Verla Insko
Dear Senator Kinnaird and Representatives Allen, Hackney and Insko:
We write first to express Orange County's appreciation for your past support and assistance with legislative
initiatives of importance to the Orange County Board of Commissioners. In past years, Orange County has
definitely benefited from your assistance with several legislative pursuits. Several areas of recent note include:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
The Orange County Board of Commissioners appreciates the efforts and energy you've expended in support of
these and other initiatives, and trusts that the 2004 legislative session will afford opportunities to further that
support. We are forwarding to you the attached documents detailing the Board of Commissioners' legislative
priorities for the 2004 General Assembly session, The documents address our Board's positions on issues of
importance to our citizens regarding state and local revenues, solid waste/recycling, social programs
(particularly mental health), and other areas..
On behalf of the Board, I look forward to your support of these items and will be glad to provide any additional
information necessary. Any of the Commissioners can be reached through Donna Baker, the Clerk to the Board,
at her office in Hillsborough at (919) 245-2130.
Sincerely,
Barry Jacobs, Chair
Orange County Board of Commissioners
www.co.oranoe.nc.us
Protecting and preserving - People, Resources, Quality of Life
Orange County, North Carolina - You Count!
(919) 245-2130 • FAX (919) 644-0246
Attachments
Cc: Orange County Board of Commissioners
County Manager John Link
County Attorney Geof Gledhill
Ron Aycock, NCACC
Ed Regan, NCACC
www.co.orange.nc.us
Protecting and preserving -People, Resources, Quality of Life
Orange County, North Carolina - You Count!
(919) 245-2130 • FAX (919) 644-0246
DRAFT
ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
POTENTIAL ITEMS/PROJECTS FOR 2004 FEDERAL ASSISTANCE
FUNDING ASSISTANCE
Northern Human Services Center Water & Wastewater Treatment and
Disposal System
Orange County is in the process of developing an on-site wastewater treatment system
that is necessary to fully utilize its Northern Human Services Center (NHSC) located on
Highway 86 North in the Cedar Grove community. The NHSC is formerly a public
school and has historic and community significance. It is located in a predominately
rural area and operated by the County to provide citizens with various human services,
including recreational programs; daycare services; nutritional programs for the elderly;
and educational opportunities for the low income and non-English speaking populations.
The facility is well beyond the area to which urban water and wastewater treatment
utilities will be extended within the foreseeable future. Accordingly, the wastewater
treatment system will use not only a conventional septic tank treatment process but an
innovative, efficient and sustainable secondary treatment process based on
artificial/created wetland theory and technology. The effluent quality provided by the
proposed system will allow subsurface discharge at a rate that will be sustainable for
several decades. The total cost - design and construction - for the system is currently
projected to exceed $300,000, not including the price of the land the County has acquired
to contain the subsurface wastewater disposal area.
2. Acute Water and Sewer Needs in the Efland Area/Buckhorn Economic
Development District
TO BE PROVIDED TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON
MONDAY, MARCH 15, 2004
`5
DRAFT
3. Public Safety
The consoles in the 9-1-1 Center will need to be replaced as part of the communications
upgrade. Estimated costs for seven consoles and auxiliary equipment could exceed
$450,000.
A 90 foot self supporting tower is needed at the 9-1-1 Center to provide wireless
communications links from the 9-1-1 Center to the main communications building and
tower on Eno Mountain. The estimated costs for this tower is approximately $100,000.
These projected needs are a part of the total communications infrastructure upgrade for
the County.
DRAFT
POLICY ASSISTANCE
Section 8 Housing
We should always advocate for the provision of funding for new voucher units for
both the disabled and non-disabled low-income families. In recent years, the limited
number of new vouchers that have been available have primarily targeted the disabled,
low-income population with extensive requirements for support services. A review of
the 2003 funding awards for the vouchers for disabled reveals that approximately 1,300
vouchers were awarded nationwide in 15 states with none in North Carolina. Few new
vouchers are available for non-disabled families.
The President's FY 2005 Budget includes a proposal to convert the Section 8 Housing
Choice Voucher (HCV) Program from a unit-based funded program to a dollar-based
program, or block grant. This is being proposed under the guise of allowing greater
program flexibility that would result in program savings. This program is known as the
Flexible Voucher (FV) Program. The proposed flexibility would allow greater local
control and decision-making regarding inspections, targeting, rent setting and income
eligibility. However, most housing advocates agree that this type program would actually
result in fewer families being served since funding would be capped at a certain amount
each year.
Further, housing industry professionals estimate that funding to support the voucher
program would be drastically reduced - by an estimated $1.9 billion in appropriations in
FY 2005. And, not only would the amount of money available for housing subsidies be
reduced, but administrative fees would be reduced as well which could lead difficulty
meeting personnel costs. Therefore, we should advocate for the retention of unit-
based funding for housing vouchers for our current allocation as well as any new
vouchers available in next year's budget. We should not support the proposed
Flexible Housing Voucher Program.
2. EFNEP(Breast-feeding Program
Early in December 2003, it was announced that funding for the North Carolina In-Home
Breastfeeding Support Program (IHBSP) had been denied by Food and Nutrition Service
(FNS) in Atlanta, ending the program. The In-Home Breastfeeding Support Program
started as a pilot program in Wake County through other funding sources in 1991, and
was so successful in assisting limited resource women with breastfeeding that many
counties added it as quickly as they could arrange funding sources. The Breastfeeding
Support program was started in Orange County in September, 2000 when funding was
received from Food and Nutrition Services as part of a statewide proposal The Orange
County Commissioners have provided emergency funding from human services safety
net dollars through the end of the fiscal year in order to continue to meet the need of the
clients in Orange County.
DRAFT 4
Although the state was proactive in resubmitting the grant after the first denial, the
criteria was so extreme and limited that it was impossible to design a program that would
meet the criteria. The criteria included limitations for serving only food stamp recipients,
which would exclude many limited resource families that need this vital service. This is
hard to understand, since the FY 04 Guidance for Food Stamp Nutrition Education
document shows that allowable nutrition education programs include "Breastfeeding
education, promotion and support which is coordinated with WIC and which supplements
and complements WIC services, rather than supplanting them" The program in North
Carolina met these criteria, yet it was not funded. We would appreciate your influence in
determining if the review for funds was administered fairly in the Southeastern region.
Orange County has also delivered nutrition education to limited resource families for 30
years through the federally funded Expanded Foods and Nutrition Education Program.
This program has been very successful in addressing many of the problems that are now
in the forefront of issues, such as nutrition, overweight and health concerns. The
program teaches families to utilize resources that they have to the fullest extent, and
personal success stories of program participants indicate that many have been able to
leave public assistance programs. In the current fiscal year, the EFNEP program suffered
a 10% cut in funds. In the fiscal 2005 President's budget, the 10% was reinstated, and
your support is needed to insure that the money is included in the budget, and that
incremental increases be approved in subsequent years. These funds are part of USDA's
appropriations under the Smith Lever Programs, and are one of the 3D line items.
3. Federal Tobacco Quota Buyout
It is Orange County's understanding that if the Quota Buyout is approved, it is proposed
that a privately funded buyout in the amount of $100 million would be formed in each of
the fiscal years 2005 through 2009. These funds would be used to provide compensation
for many tobacco-dependent communities to reduce their dependency on tobacco and
thus lower the chances of having to appropriate scarce federal taxpayer dollars in the
future to support deteriorating rural tobacco economies.
Orange County has routinely been excluded from the possible benefits of funds similar to
the one proposed with the Quota Buyout (example: Golden Leaf Foundation) due the
County being categorized as an "urban county". Orange County does have some urban
areas, but a substantial portion of the County is rural. Orange County requests that,
should the Buyout be approved and the tobacco-dependent communities fund be
established, the eligibility criteria for funds should be formulated in such a way as to
assure that Orange County and other counties receive finding consideration based on the
merit of their circumstances rather than on a simple "urban" or "rural" characterization.
DRAFT
4. Bio-solids Disposal
Orange County is among the top five North Carolina counties in terms of acreage on
which wastewater treatment bio-solids (sludge) is applied. The County receives bio-
solids from wastewater treatment plants operated by Hillsborough and Orange Water and
Sewer Authority (OWASA) in the County, from Mebane and Burlington in Alamance
County and from the City of Durham in Durham County. The process of land applying
liquefied bio-solids is regulated by the NC Division of Water Quality under US
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) regulations, policies and guidelines under a
primacy agreement with the USEPA. Bio-solids are generally applied to agricultural land
(primarily land used for active livestock grazing or growing of forage crops) at
"agronomic" rates. Agronomic rates in this case indicate that the sludge is applied such
that its nitrogen/phosphorous content is consistent with the rate of application of standard
fertilizers. Unlike commercial fertilizers, however, bio-solids containing industrial
wastes typical of municipal wastewater treatment systems usually contain a number of
potentially harmful heavy metals (cadmium, chromium, arsenic, lead, mercury), synthetic
and volatile organic compounds (SOC's and VOC's) as well as some level of active
(Class B sludge) pathogenic organisms typical of human waste residues.
The land application of sludge to agricultural lands is exempt - as both a "discharge"
wastewater treatment activity and an agricultural activity - from approval, regulation,
enforcement or effective oversight by County land, environmental protection or health
regulation. Yet potential effects to the health of nearby residents that are associated with
aerosol or surface and ground water contamination are woefully on- or under-studied by
the EPA or the Center for Disease Control. Residents of Orange County that live nearby
to sludge application sites are fearful of'risks to their health and have at least anecdotally
reported a higher incidence of health and nuisance problems to the Board of County
Commissioners. Accordingly, Orange County seeks to open a dialogue on some level of
local control for sludge application activities within the County.