Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes-10-10-2023-Joint Meeting with Fire Departments and Work Session 1 APPROVED 1214/23 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS JOINT MEETING WITH CHIEFS' ASSOCIATION AND WORK SESSION October 10, 2023 7:00 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Joint Meeting with the Chiefs' Association and Work Session on Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Human Services Center in Hillsborough, NC. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jamezetta Bedford, Vice-Chair Earl McKee (arrived at 8:30 p.m.), and Commissioners Sally Greene (arrived at 8:23 p.m.), Amy Fowler, Jean Hamilton, Phyllis Portie-Ascott, and Anna Richards COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None. COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Deputy County Manager Travis Myren, and Clerk to the Board Laura Jensen. (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) ORANGE COUNTY CHIEFS' ASSOCIATION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chief Keith Hayes, Chief Kevin Brooks, Chief Phillip Nasseri, Chief Matthew Mauzy, Chief Brad Allison, Chief Ricky Baker, Chief Charles Bowden, Chief Jeff Borland, Chief Jeff Cabe, Chief Will Potter, and Fred Stipe, Board Chair of South Orange Rescue Squad Chair Bedford called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. All commissioners were present, except for Vice-Chair McKee and Commissioner Greene who were meeting with residents regarding broadband access in Northern Orange County. Charles Bowden, President of the Fire Chiefs Association, introduced Mike Causey, Commissioner for the NC Department of Insurance. 1. Recognition of Firefighters for Length of Service Mike Causey recognized the following individuals for their length of service as firefighters in Orange County: 40+ YEARS LENGTH OF SERVICE RECOGNITION Andy Gates— Caldwell — 46 years of service James Emory— Caldwell —46 years of service CT Pope — Cedar Grove —46 years of service Tim Crabtree— Eno —47 years of service Keith Hayes — Eno —41 years of service Ricky Baker— Orange Grove —44 years of service Tom Griggs— Orange Grove —47 years of service Richard Sykes— Orange Grove —47 years of service Wallace Wilson — Orange Rural — 50 years of service David Ballard — Orange Rural —47 years of service Mac Cabe — Orange Rural —41 years of service Mike Tapp — New Hope— 53 years of service Cliff Carrol — New Hope—40 years of service William R. Blankenship — New Hope —45 years of service 2 Charles Quinlan — New Hope —42 years of service Kirby Saunders, Emergency Services Director, recognized the following individuals for their length of service as firefighters in Orange County: POSTHUMOUS RECOGNITION Tommy Holmes — Orange Grove —46 years of service RETIREMENT RECOGNITION Ben Nichols — Orange Grove —43 years of service David Riggs — Carrboro— 29 years of service LENGTH OF SERVICE RECOGNITION Stacey Graves — Chapel Hill — 20 years of service Jeff Borland — Cedar Grove - 35 years of service Sammy Borland — Cedar Grove - 35 years of service LD Summers— Cedar Grove - 35 years of service CJ Pearson — Cedar Grove - 20 years of service Larry Mann — Carrboro — 25 years of service Edwin Renegar— Carrboro —20 years of service Michael Law— Carrboro— 20 years of service Chip Aiken — Eno — 25 years of service Betty Williamson — Eno — 30 years of service Keith Hayes — Eno —40 years of service Bill Waddell — Orange Grove — 30 years of service Dusty Wall — New Hope— 25 years of service Shawn Ellis — New Hope — 20 years of service Kenny Stewart—White Cross — 32 years of service Jeff Mooney—White Cross — 30 years of service 2. Service Highlights and Updates President Charles Bowden made the following presentation: Slide #1 Service Highlights and Departmental Updates 3 Slide #2 Fire Department calls for Service CY2022 Calls For Service by Type 14,122 Calls for Service FIR 41% EMS 59% Slide #3 Rural Department calls for Service 2022 Calls for Service 604 574 446 399 387 4U us EMS 21E 213 287 263 ■FIRE 225 174 96 E 60 Eno EFland Orange Gravy Now Mope Caldwell Ceder Grove VMIa Cross North cnau.am Source:CA❑ 10 4 Slide #4 Municipal Dept. Calls for Service 2022 Municipal Department Calls for Service 6262 ■EMS ■FIRE 2346 1819 0. N Chapel MITI 4rarw Rural cardora Source:CAD 11 � Slide #5 South Orange Fescue • Chief Mathew Mauzy • Responds County Wide for Rope Rescue as well as Statewide for Missing Person Land Search and Swiftwater/Flood Rescue Volunteer Staffing • One Station • Equipment — Three Motorized Boats &Four Paddle Craft — One Patient Transport UTV — Three BLS Ambulances — Two Technical Rescue Trucks — One Incident Rehab Unit • Averaging 1,250 calls per year �z 5 Slide #6 Fire District: Efland IS03 • Chief Kevin Brooks • Combination Staffing Model • Three Stations • Equipment — Four engines — Three tankers — One brush truck — Two First Response Vehicles • Averaging 550 calls per year Chief Bowden said that Efland is in the process of remodeling Station #1 and that they've purchased a few trucks in the past couple of years. Slide #7 Fire District: Orange Rural i 05 • Chief Jeff Cabe • Combination Staffing Model • Three Stations • Equipment Four Engines Two First Responder Vehicles Three Tankers One UTV One Aerial Platform One Boat One Heavy Rescue • Averaging 1,950 calls per year 14 Chief Cabe noted that they had four stations now and their call volume is over 2,200. 6 Slide#8 510, Fire District: New Hope 0 4 • Chief Charles Bowden • Combination Staffing Model • Two Stations • Equipment Three Engines one UTV Two Tankers one Squad Truck One Brush Truck • Averaging 600 calls per year 7B Chief Bowden said New Hope has seen a large increase in the number of calls in the last year. Slide #9 Fire District: Orange Grove IS05 • Chief Ricky Baker • Combination Staffing Model • Three Stations • Equipment Three Engines one Rescue/Engine Truck Three Tankers Two First Responder Vehicles One Brush Truck one Boat • Averaging 400 calls per year 17 Chief Baker said their call volume continues to climb a little every year. He said they are also planning for renovations to make accommodations for personnel. 7 Slide #10 Fire District: Cedar Grove WO 6 • Chief Jeff Borland • Combination Staffing Model • Two Stations • Equipment Two Engines One Squad Truck Two Tankers Two Brush Trucks • Averaging 250 calls per year ,a Chief Borland said their call volume has also increased. He said that they've dropped their ISO rating to a 5. Slide #11 Fire District: Caldwell 1§0 4 • Chief Brad Allison • All Volunteer • Two Stations • Equipment Two Engines Two First Responder Vehicles Two Tankers Chief's Vehicle One Rescue Pumper One Brush Truck • Averaging 450 calls per year ,3 Chief Allison said their call volume has increased and that they've lowered their ISO rating. He said they also opened station #2 and added a new engine to the fleet. Chair Bedford asked for an explanation of what ISO ratings are. 8 Mike Causey said ISO stands for Insurance Services Organization, and it is a national rating organization. He said his office inspects 1,215 fire departments in North Carolina. He said North Carolina leads the nation in lowering ISO ratings. He said that the higher the ISO rating, the more expensive a homeowner's insurance will be. Elizabeth Farnan, Fire Marshal, said that every fire department in Orange County has recently lowered their ISO rating. Mike Causey said it is a rating that affects people's pocketbooks. He said to lower your ISO rating requires teamwork from the fire department to meet all of the qualifications. He said it depends on water supply, 911 services, the type of equipment the department has, the training for the firefighters. Chief Bowden said every department in Orange County has an ISO rating of 5 or below. Chief Jeff Cabe said in 2015, the Chiefs Association made a goal of lowering the ratings. He said prior to that, every department except Chapel Hill and Carrboro were a 9. Slide #12 Fire District: !White Cross IS0 4 • Chief Phillip Nasseri • Combination Staffing Model • Two Stations • Equipment Three Engines Two First Responder Vehicles Two Tankers One Heavy Rescue One Brush Truck Three Boats • Averaging 350 calls per year as Chief Nasseri said call volumes continue to grow. He expressed appreciation to all of those involved in getting ISO ratings down. 9 Slide #13 Fire District: Carrboro WO 2 • Interim Chief Will Potter (Carrboro Fire & Rescue) • Fully Paid Staffing • Two Stations • Equipment Three Engines One Aerial Platform One Tanker(202t 40Daiberyj One Battalion Chief One Brush Truck • Averaging 1,800 calls per year 21 Chief Potter said call volumes continue to increase. He also said that he was recently made the permanent chief of the Carrboro fire department. Slide #14 Fire District: Chapel Hill 1§02 • Chief Vence Harris (Chapel Hill Fire & Rescue) • Fully Paid Staffing * Five Stations * Equipment Four Engines Two Battalion Chiefs One Aerial Platform One Heavy Rescue One Aerial Ladder Two Boats. One UTV • Averaging 6,000 calls per year 22 Chief Bowden said that Jay Mebane is the new chief in Chapel Hill. 10 Slide#15 Fire District: Mebane IW2 • Chief Bob Louis (Mebane Fire & Rescue) • Combination Staffing • Three Stations Equipment Four Engines One Tanker One Aerial Platform One Heavy Rescue Two Brush Trucks one UTV • Averaging 3,000 calls per year (600 in Orange County) as Slide #16 Fire district: North Chatham �sos • Chief John Strowd (North Chatham Fire & Rescue) • Combination Staffing • Seven Stations • Equipment Eight Engines Seven Tankers Two Aerial Platforms Two Heavy Rescues One Brush Truck Eight Boats, One UTV • Averaging 2,000 calls per year (100 in Orange County) 74 Chuck Quinlan, President of the Board of Directors for North Chatham, said they are looking to hire more staff due to increased call volumes. He said they are also doing renovations for two stations. 11 Slide #17 11SOCurrent Updates • Ffland F❑ — 3 • Orange Grove FD -5 • White Cross FD —4 • Caldwell FD-4 (as of Sept 27,2022) Chief Bowden said that Cedar Grove went from a 6 to a 5 ISO rating. 3. ARPA Funded Radio Replacements and Radio System Improvement Project Chief Nasseri said that with ARPA funding, they replaced $2.4 million worth of radio equipment. He said that the contract was awarded in December, and that they are expecting the equipment soon. 4. Special Operations Team —Technical Large Animal Rescue Chief Nasseri said that their Special Operations Team strives to respond to any crisis. He said they initially started with trench rescue, and now have moved into large animal rescue. He said they recently hosted a class in the White Cross area teaching first responders about this specialization. Technical Large Animal Rescue za 12 Chief Bowden said that the departments work together on larger emergencies. Chief Nasseri said that due to the increase in square footage of buildings in Orange County and weather-related emergencies, the departments are having to collaborate more on responding to situations. The Board took a brief break while the fire chiefs departed the meeting before beginning the work session. 5. Discussion on the County's Participation in Mayors, Managers, Chair(MMC) Meetings The Board discussed the County's participation in multijurisdictional Mayors, Managers, Chair (MMC) meetings. BACKGROUND: In most years, the County and the Towns of Carrboro, Chapel Hill, and Hillsborough hold a joint meeting called the Assembly of Governments meeting. In 2016, one of the agenda topics was an update on the Greene Tract. As part of an effort to advance progress on the development of the Greene Tract, the group discussed the creation of a Task Force to provide recommendations on the development of the property for affordable housing, a school site, and other potential uses. A history of the Greene Tract and related agreements and past planning activity is available here. Discussion during the 2016 Assembly of Governments meeting included the possible creation of a public task force to recommend potential uses for the Greene Tract. Another suggestion involved the creation of a task force made up of the Mayors from Carrboro and Chapel Hill, the Chair of the Board of Commissioners, and the Managers from each participating jurisdiction. A final suggestion was that the managers for each jurisdiction create a proposal for governing board review. Ultimately, discussion on the topic ended with the suggestion that a starting point would be a meeting of the Mayors, Managers, and Chair (Attachment A). There was no action taken at the Assembly of Governments meeting to create a task force, and none of the participating jurisdictions took formal action at a later date to create a task force. In fact, the Mayors and Chair may have met informally prior to 2016 to discuss policy matters of mutual interest or to set agendas for joint meetings. The only agenda item that the Board of Commissioners adopted that referenced the Mayors, Managers, and Chair assemblage was the 2021 Greene Tract Interlocal Agreement. This Agreement assigned the Mayors, Managers, and Chair to "...be the representatives of the Parties for the purpose of negotiating the ultimate uses of the Property and working directly with staff to bring such negotiated results to the governing board for final approval and determination." The scope of topics discussed during MMC meetings has broadened over time to include topics like human services related agreements among the jurisdictions and responsibilities for housing related services. The meeting notes from the preceding twelve months of MMC meetings are provided as Attachment B. General concerns have been raised about the general role of the MMC and transparency to the elected governing boards and the public. This discussion is intended to address concerns Board members have about the MMC group and to provide direction on whether the County continues to participate, and if so, on what basis or under what types of limitations. 13 Travis Myren introduced the item and made the following the presentation: Slide #1 Agenda Item 5 ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA Participation in Mayors, Managers, Chair (MMC) Meetings Board of Commissioners Work Session October 10, 2023 Slide #2 Purpose • Discuss the County's participation in multijurisdictional Mayors, Managers, Chair meetings. ORANGE COUNTY 2 N NCF"[ILRfJLINA 14 Slide #3 Background • The Mayors of Chapel Hill,Carrboro, and Hillsborough likely met informally with the Chair of the Board prior to 2016 to set joint meeting agendas and other items of mutual interest - No facilitator, meeting notes,etc- • 2016 Assembly of Governments meeting—Update on the Greene Tract — Discussion of Task Force to make recommendations on affordable housing,school site,other potential uses — Several suggestions on composition — Meeting of Mayors, Managers, and Chair suggested as starting point - No formal action taken to authorize or appoint representatives • 2017 MMC Greene Tract Meetings begin - Meeting notes produced bystaff • 2019 MMC Greene Tract Meetings continue with facilitator — Agenda,Meeting Facilitation,Meeting Notes ORANGE COUNTY :r NaRrH c:nxs3LJNA Slide #4 Background • 2021 Greene Tract Interlocal Agreement - Assigned the Mayors. Managers. and Chair to "---be the representatives of the Parties for the purpose of negotiating the ultimate uses of the Property and working directly with staff to bring such negotiated results to the goveming board for final approval and determination." • 2022 and 2023 MMC Meetings — Continue to discuss Greene Tract development Roles and responsibilities for affordable housing creation and supportive services Partnership to End Homelessness Memorandum of Understanding interfaith CounciJ request for Interlocal Agreement for predictable funding ORANGE COUNTY 4 110C3RTH C:ARf31111JA 15 Slide #5 Continued County Participation Status Quo — Chair participates and shares meeting notes — Informal gatherings Board Authorized by Topic — Chair seeks Board authorization to participate by topic — Informal gatherings Board Authorized by Topic and Scope — Chair seeks Board authorization on specific topics and scope of the discussion — Informal gatherings Discontinue Participation Informal gatherings only GRANGE COUNTY 5 NC7R1"H C.A1tC3LJNA Travis Myren discussed options for the Board to consider if participation is continued. Slide #6 Recommendation Discuss the Caunty's continued participation in MMC meetings. ORANGE COUNTY 6 NORrH C-ARL3LJNA Commissioner Fowler asked Chair Bedford for her thoughts on how official the group is and how it is helpful. She said that it seems that it could be subverting the purpose of governance if only a handful of people are making decisions. 16 Chair Bedford said she initially began going as part of the Orange County Partnership to End Homelessness. She said that it took a bit, but she figured out what it was she did not care for. She said they did not get information ahead of meetings and she did not want to make decisions without preparation. She said that she also decided that she would not be bringing back a recommendation to her Board from these meetings. She said it put her in the position of speaking for the Board without actually checking with her colleagues first. She said the minutes are a must have but it also presents an opportunity for a chair or mayor to work outside of their boards. She said Commissioner Greene asked if the meetings should be recorded. She said that at that point, she did not think it should be recorded. She said the other question is if it should be a public meeting. Commissioner Portie-Ascott if there was an informal meeting group before the MMC. Bonnie Hammersley said there was not a group meeting regularly before the MMC. She said at most it was managers and mayors meeting to set agendas for joint meetings. She said in 2016 at the Assembly of Government, they were talking about the Greene Tract, and it was always once a year. She said that it was created to facilitate additional conversations about the Greene Tract. She said before 2016, there had been a task force, but nothing had happened for a long time, and it led to a lot of frustration. She said that the benefit of the MMC is that there has been more progress in the last 7 years than there was before. She said one of the concerns she had was when it started to grow bigger than the Greene Tract. She said that they brought the Partnership to End Homelessness and she did not feel there was a reason to bring those items before the MMC because they already get brought to the full boards. She said that the mayors have more authority than a chair does, since mayors are elected by the people. Commissioner Portie-Ascott said it seems like it would be a great idea to have a group like the MMC to discuss those common issues. She said maybe some tweaking could be done to provide more direction. Commissioner Hamilton said she had a concern about the MMC making decisions. She said with the Greene Tract, there was a clear directive. She said with the other topics, there was no clear direction. She said a smaller group making decisions holds up information sharing. She said she thought the meetings should be open to anyone. She said the role of setting joint agendas makes sense. She said that she did not see the group serving the Board well. Chair Bedford said the full set of Greene Tract minutes are not on the website, but they put summaries up. She said they did not do that for other discussion items. Commissioner Hamilton said the problem is that topics should not be discussed without a mandate from the boards. Chair Bedford said that is exactly what this portion of the meeting is to talk about and figure out. Commissioner Hamilton said she thinks no. Commissioner Fowler said that she agrees with the need for a limited scope because there are already intergovernmental bodies to discuss those topics. Commissioner Richards said she thinks there are things that happen in Orange County where getting the leadership together to talk about them is a good thing. She said that access to the meetings is a concern. She said that said in one of the minutes it seemed like the MMC was going to appoint itself as a task force to do something and that the scope should be limited. She said it did not actually happen, but it seemed like it was limiting input and participation. She said the Assembly of Governments does not seem like the time to make decisions since the time is brief. She asked if staff should be meeting instead and then bringing information to the Board. Bonnie Hammersley said she meets with the managers and OWASA director monthly. She said when she hears things that might be coming, she shares it with the Chair. She said this is natural protocol. She said Commissioner Greene had asked her if the MMC meetings might be recorded because she has an interest in discussions about homelessness and was hearing things from Mayor Seils from Carrboro, so she wanted to know what was happening. She said that it 17 was brought up to the MMC group and it was a very quick no on the recording. She said that she thought it was interesting because the facilitator was recording the meetings just to keep track of notes and they told her she could no longer do that. She said that led to her needing to hire an assistant to come with her so she could keep track of the notes and discussion. She said that they were concerned they would be limited in what they could say if it was being recorded. Chair Bedford said she was one that had concerns about recording the meetings because of liabilities. She said she says what she is going to say but other people might not. John Roberts said that the MMC does not meet all of the statutory criteria for the open meetings laws to apply. He said the more formal the body becomes and the more responsibility they take on, then there becomes a stronger argument that it is a public body, and all three jurisdictions could get a slap on the wrist if it is not open to the public. Commissioner Hamilton said the fact that it is not being recorded and there are reservations about recording it, makes her wonder what the group is doing. She said if they are doing the work of the public, it should be open. Chair Bedford said that if the MMC meetings are limited to discussion about the Greene Tract then it should be open to the public. She said that just because it is open to the public does not mean that public comment must be accepted. John Roberts said that the first criteria for a meeting being subject to the open meetings law is that it has to be elected or appointed. He said that since this group was not created by anyone, it does not meet the criteria. Commissioner Hamilton asked if the interlocal agreement was the creation of this body. John Roberts said he does not think so because it only assigns certain items to be discussed and all agreements do that. Commissioner Portie-Ascott said that transparency is important. She said she is not in favor of the meetings continuing unless they are open to the public and recorded. Chair Bedford said that the MMC was specifically cited in the interlocal agreement for the Greene Tract, and it was voted on by all boards. John Roberts said that he does not think that creates a public body. He said that assigns the negotiation of certain aspects of that agreement but did not mandate meetings or set meeting schedules. He said that it is not a task force in his reading. Chair Bedford said she read a blog post from the School of Government about functions that governmental groups might partake in that would make them susceptible to the public meeting statutes. She said that if the group is deliberating, or hearing presentations, it gets to a point where they should be careful. She asked what administrative means in this case. John Roberts said it would be assigning people to do certain tasks and that the county does not have an administrative board. Chair Bedford said a member of the public was concerned about the advisory piece. John Roberts said the MMC certainly provides advice to their Boards. He said while there is no case law, he said there was a blog post from the School of Government about this exact type of scenario. He said the author's opinion is that it is not an advisory board. He said however, that when members are assigned responsibilities, the argument becomes stronger that they are a public body. He said the safest course is to make these meetings open to the public. Chair Bedford said she has learned not to make decisions with information the first time it has been presented. Commissioner Greene arrived at 8:23 p.m. Commissioner Richards asked if the MMC should even be making decisions. Chair Bedford said they were not technically making a final decision, but they were deciding what would be brought back to the respective boards for their final decision making. 18 Commissioner Fowler summarized the meeting discussion up to this point so that Commissioner Greene could be brought to speed. Commissioner Greene said she doesn't think the group should exist at all. She said that if it does exist at all, it should only be for the Greene Tract only. She said that the MMC had a conversation about the Partnership to End Homelessness when there are already four elected officials on that Board. She said that the conversation should have been brought to that group. She said she liked the fact that many years ago, the Assembly of Governments used to meet quarterly. She said she might be open to the MMC continuing if it is only for the Greene Tract and if it is open to the public and recorded. Commissioner Richards said she asked earlier about the need for the opportunity to talk about items in meetings of all of the elected boards. She said she wondered if meeting more than once per year would be more helpful. She said that she was unaware that the Assembly of Governments used to meet quarterly. Commissioner Greene said that the idea of a housing collaborative was brought up during an Assembly of Governments meeting. Chair Bedford said the Solid Waste Advisory Group is also a group of elected officials that meet. Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked why it changed from 4 times a year to 1 time a year. Bonnie Hammersley said when she came it was only twice a year. She said that she thinks it changed because there were some personalities that were affecting it and sometimes people were not showing up. She said that it depends on who is in leadership and if they want to do that or not. Vice-Chair McKee arrived at 8:30 p.m. Chair Bedford said she heard consensus that the MMC should only meet regarding the Greene Tract. She said that initially she was opposed to recording the meeting, but she has changed her mind. She said that it is a risk of going around the board and the public does not have full access. She asked if there was any downside to making the meetings open. Commissioner Hamilton said no. Chair Bedford said she did not think so either because the public is entitled to know and that members of the MMC have different opinions. Commissioner Greene said that if the rationale for the MMC was because the Assembly of Governments were too unwieldy then it makes sense that it would be a public meeting because it is a stand-in for the Assembly of Governments. Commissioner Hamilton said if it was related to a closed session topic then it would not be open to the public but if not, there is no reason not to have it open. Commissioner Fowler asked if it would be public so people could hear but that no decisions would be made. Chair Bedford said yes and that no decisions would be made. Commissioner Greene asked if it would be recorded. Chair Bedford said it could be, but it does not have to be. She said if it is a public meeting then they have to have minutes but not a recording. Commissioner Greene said if it is going to be public then it is easy enough to put a recording machine in there. She said if she cannot be there, she would like to hear everything that was said. Chair Bedford said that if there is a recording then they could get that to the Clerk separately from the facilitators for creating minutes. Laura Jensen said the transcriptionist could be asked if they would be open to doing that and if so, a contract amendment would be required. 19 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked what happens if the other members of the MMC do not want to make the meetings public. Chair Bedford said that then the county would not participate. She said they will try to work together but what elected official is going to say they do not want the public to be involved. She said that public comment would not be invited but it would be open. Commissioner Fowler asked if the facilitator could do the minutes and use the recording to do that. Chair Bedford said those minutes were not like the minutes they prefer and that they were very general. Commissioner Greene said they were facilitator minutes and not minutes for the public record. Vice-Chair McKee said he did not think the county would want to do anything that wasn't completely transparent, and that the Greene Tract was enough for the MMC to handle without other topics. Bonnie Hammersley said that anything that involves the Greene Tract has to have agreement from all three parties. Chair Bedford said the benefit of the MMC is that work has happened. She said they have helped progress the Greene Tract along. She said there is a benefit to having elected officials together to talk about various topics. 6. Greene Tract Community Engagement Proposal The Board received a historical perspective on engagement activities related to the development of the Greene Tract and discussed a new community engagement proposal to inform the site design process. BACKGROUND: The Greene Tract is located east of the Rogers Road community within the Town of Chapel Hill's extra-territorial jurisdiction (ETJ). Of the 164-acre parcel, 104 acres is jointly owned by Orange County/Chapel Hill/Carrboro, and 60 acres is owned by Orange County (Headwaters Preserve). Over the last 20+ years, the three jurisdictions have invested significant resources to identify and support the goals for the Greene Tract as a resource for the Rogers Road community and the residents of the two towns and Orange County, all of which can be found on the County's dedicated Greene Tract project page and dynamic StoryMap, but featuring the following: - In 2006, the Town of Chapel Hill initiated and led a Rogers Road Small Area Plan Task Force with the Greene Tract partners, resulting in a final report in March 2009; - In 2012, the Historic Rogers Road Neighborhood Task Force led its own small area planning efforts, resulting in a final report in September 2013; - In July 2015, the Jackson Center co-led the Mapping Our Community's Future Report with the Historic Rogers Road Community, which was completed in May 2016; - In June 2016, Orange County purchased 60 acres for preservation from the Solid Waste Enterprise Fund ("Headwaters Preserve"); - At the 2016 Assembly of Governments (AOG) Meeting, a suggestion was raised to ask the elected officials of the three jurisdictions to participate in discussions on the Greene Tract; - In 2017, staff examined a potential reconfiguration of the jointly-owned tract and the County-owned tract for the purposes of environmental preservation, potential affordable housing development, and a possible school site; 20 - Between 2018 and 2019, the three jurisdictions considered multiple iterations of a joint resolution for the development of the Greene Tract and accompanying Conceptual Plan; Between 2019 and 2020, the three jurisdictions discussed and approved the Greene Tract Resolution for a Path Forward and Interlocal Agreement, identifying land use acreages for the Greene Tract, initiating staff to seek professional services to conduct an environmental assessment, and initiating the drafting of an Interlocal Agreement between the three jurisdictions to provide a decision-making process for the three jurisdictions moving forward; - In April 2020, Orange County contracted with SynTerra to complete the Greene Tract Environmental Assessment, to be delivered in July; - In 2021, the Interlocal Agreement (ILA) between Orange County and the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill Regarding the Current and Future Use of the Jointly Owned Greene Tract was executed by all three parties. Among other commitments, it directed staff from all three jurisdictions to work in good faith to "develop a work plan that includes, among other things, a decision point timeline regarding development"of the Greene Tract; and In November 2021, the three local governments adopted a resolution approving a conceptual plan, which identified land uses and acreages to be used as schematic for future planning purposes, including the development of a Master Plan. The 45 acres with frontage on Purefoy Drive and Lizzie Lane were identified for "Development" and the 16 acres with frontage on Merin Road were identified as "Public School and Recreational Site". In January 2023, a staff work group operating at the direction of this ILA identified the need to separate the master planning needs for the Greene Tract into professional design services and community engagement services, allowing trained professionals to focus on the respective deliverables and allowing the planning staffs to coordinate their efforts. This will allow the community engagement efforts to focus on a shared vision and mission for the design professionals to utilize in their delivery of a master plan that recommends development footprints, designs, and intensities for this acreage, also as directed by the 2021 Greene Tract ILA. The staff is currently reviewing Statements of Qualifications for the design services, and anticipate an award of contract forthcoming. Request For Proposals (RFP) Process of Evaluation In June 2023, Orange County issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) to identify a qualified consultant to provide Community Engagement Services for the Greene Tract Master Plan on behalf of Orange County and the two Towns. Four qualified proposals were received and evaluated by the proposal review committee composed of Orange County, Town of Chapel Hill, and Town of Carrboro Planning staff. The committee evaluation was based on the following criteria: Criteria Maximum Point Value 1. Consultant experience as it relates to the scope of 15 services of the RFP and project deliverables 21 2. Technical approach to the project, proposed tasks, and 20 timeline to complete work 3. Project Organization 15 4. Consultant's capability and capacity to perform project 10 5. Community Engagement Strategy 20 6. Total cost of proposed services 20 Total 100 Based on the proposal evaluation process, the review committee unanimously recommends Gensler for contract award. Gensler is a nationally-recognized land planning and community engagement consulting firm with a Raleigh office dedicated to the North Carolina Piedmont that supports 45 staff. Gensler features the Gensler Research Institute, which explores equitable design solutions to create diverse spaces for clients and communities. Gensler is being supported by VHB on this project, utilizing VHB's prior experiences in working with both towns and the county on varied planning projects, most recently a Traffic Impact Analysis for St. Paul's Village, located at the intersection of Rogers Road and Purefoy Drive. Summary of Project Scope and Approach The Gensler and VHB proposal is intended to assist Orange County, the Town of Carrboro, and the Town of Chapel Hill with community engagement services to coordinate and manage the community engagement strategy for the development of the Greene Tract Master Plan. Community engagement efforts will be a central component to the master planning process and will encompass innovative and inclusive community engagement initiatives, focusing on underserved communities and communities of color. All services on behalf of the Greene Tract must be consistent with the "mutual promises and obligations" for"Public Participation and Decision-Making" established by the 2021 Greene Tract ILA, including commitments to Public Engagement, Affordable and Mixed Income Housing and other uses, a School Site with Public Recreation, Connectivity, and a Development Agreement. The project features a 16-month timeline, with 12 months dedicated to direct public engagement. Over this timeline, Gensler and VHB will use a four-phased approach to provide these services to the Greene Tract partners: o Phase A: Planning & Strategy, featuring an Engagement Strategy and Communications Roadmap, and a Planning Report that includes Site Visit findings, a Community Asset Map, and initial interview findings; o Phase B: Engagement Implementation, featuring more in-depth interviews, listening sessions, a public survey, design workshops, community event tabling, and community walk and talks; o Phase C: Synthesis & Initial Design Recommendations, featuring an Insights Summary and Guiding Principles and an Oral Histories Temporary Installation; and o Phase D: Design Alignment & Ongoing Outreach (in coordination with the design services consultant) featuring final design workshops, an open house, and a Final Recommendations Report and Master Plan Report 22 2021 Greene Tract ILA Community Engagement Commitments The 2021 Greene Tract ILA has a section on Community Engagement that makes the following commitments: • The public engagement contemplated in this Agreement shall occur jointly. The Parties shall not engage in individual staff or individual governing board public engagement. • The Parties' staffs shall consult with affordable housing stakeholders to seek input regarding preferred sites, special needs, connectivity, and any other information relevant to the ultimate selection of the site(s) for affordable and mixed income housing. • The Parties' staffs shall consult with school administration to seek input regarding preferred sites, special needs, and any other information regarding the ultimate selection and/or size of the site. Project Steering: The proposal includes a project steering committee but does not prescribe the composition of the Steering Committee. The parties would need to agree on the composition of the Steering Committee. The role of the Committee is to review draft work products and provide feedback; provide guidance to the consultant team on the community engagement strategy; and serve as a liaison between this consultant and the consultant selected for the Master Plan Design services. The Committee will meet with the consultant monthly through most of the planning process. Protect Presentation: The consultant will be required to make in-person presentations on the Community Engagement Summary Report to the Greene Tract and Rogers Road community, the Managers, Mayor, and Chair(MMC)committee, and the Orange County Board of Commissioners, Carrboro Town Council, and Chapel Hill Town Council. The elected bodies will receive and review the report, in conjunction with the final design of the master plan, and may take action to receive or adopt the report and plan. Based on the cost of the initial proposal, staff asked the consultant to develop an lower cost option that does not include some of the direct engagement services identified in the initial scope of work, including eight (8) Listening Sessions, six (6) Community Walk and Talk sessions, Tabling and Participation at four (4) Locally-Held Community Events, and an Oral History Installation. These services are collectively valued at $39,900. Additionally, an optional $50,000 is proposed in the scope of work as stiped funds to support direct volunteer involvement by community members in the project, including participation in outreach events and on any committees required by the process. If all of those elements are eliminated, the savings totals $89,900. 23 Travis Myren, Deputy County Manager, made the following presentation: Slide #1 Agenda Item 6 ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA Greene Tract Community Engagement Proposal Board of Commissioners Work Session October 10, 2023 Slide #2 Purpose • Provide a history of agreements and planning activities related to the development of the Greene Tract and discuss a new community engagement proposal intended to inform the site design process. ORANGE COUNTY 2 NC7ItrH C ARC313NA 24 Slide #3 Background Approved Agreements — 2020—Greene Tract Resolution for a Path Forward Obligated parties to Environmental Assessment(completed in 2020) Obligated parties to an Interlocal Agreement for decision making(completed In 2021) Identified land use acreages for affordable housing,school site,and joint preserve — 2021—Interlocal Agreement on the Current and Future Use of the Jointly Owned Greene Tract on Community Engagement • The public engagement contemplated in this Agreement shall occur jointly. • The Parties'staffs shall consult with affordable housing stakeholders to seek input regarding preferred sites,special needs,connectivity, and any other information relevant to-the ultimate selection of the site(s) for affordable and mixed income housing. • The Parties'staffs shall consuItwith school administration to seek input regarding preferred sites,special needs,and any other information regarding the ultimate selection and/or size of the site. ORANGE COUNTY s NCDIR71'H c:nxcaLANA Slide #4 Proposed Future Land Use Map^ Background November 2021 — Resolution Approving a Conceptual Plan • Map indicates location of fig acres of Joint development 22 acres of joint Greene Tract Preserve 16 acres forSchool use r WacresofCoun#rowned Headwaters Preserve j nu gl ww. - '�6r�w Tr•w P�ww*•97•n'8nn1 f+�q fR r L �. �N��wd�w.u..ad'�n linrgl`B•di SI . . HnYdM1Ha'NMw S'OM^eoxN a+^7r C�.1 fdY+4 �� �� FX•F-0 PYiW 11�•p W wMvhtl Travis Myren said the map was developed in 2021 and this shows the development spaces along with where the school and joint preserve would be located. 25 Slide #5 Background Prior P1,3nning ActlVitleS — 2006—Rogers Road Small Area Plan—Town of Chapei Hiil and Greene Tract partners — 2012—Rogers Road SmaH Area Plan—Rogers Road Task Force 2015—Mapping Our Community's Future—Rogers Road Community facilitated by Jackson Center Focused on development in the Rogers Road Neighborhood "...this effort would help guide future conversations about land use planning and develogmen r approvals,es peciall y In the Greene Traci—, Did not Include affordable housing or school stakeholders ORANGE COUNTY NCDIRtrH C;ARC3"NA Travis Myren said this could be used but it did not include school or affordable housing stakeholders as required in the 2021 direction. Slide #6 Background Recommendations Development Do's and Don'ts Retain families who have lived here for decades/ 9aT .. nr..m����..�ai.i�mswaa Than rk�.l�em«nriw W�eaemoyTMt • oirlrrshoq,¢nuly suypky rajas a buflneaa. Lvpi ,&hpmmar{Lal.Gg a[io[ws ISworna[tr[I Att hbM ,-Wahk—,—h-,tarryu r,am a nr Wr.E,M.L.*tRvtlw[an h-S rm * nlvs.xAffuIhWft&-E-d as rft x hu—c lama Far NsmW. WImxUTaWL arc ry Lw D.,—pk,and[--Ly n -pK ±pnew • Id�Mdt{rMoha Snaahn Dh#gKnem 7hlS IK4' 1 4k1tia15on �e�aa 6 raas brlX amo,nts d peop!Iran ouhltle hF Lk "NOI1 Oa K"g6v:ha[0"h0yhrr¢1W Lwiry w an,m tY6w daaa[rlhwm haH[J. asyn.C hha rh rrk[y hF nhusn¢rn•[rsC • •� • • • wlthn tlle•sWlrhrrW.rld. {atlhennesp.sewnhalrhrle pontsf axsx forthefuture 0 0 Y.skLmiq atyk for alrhlmhe haalrti Respectth, physical/natural � •a ORANGE COUNTY B NCDIRTH C,ARC3L1NA 26 Slide #7 9earlri7ly CanditlMYdRP The phmoiraph of a oo-lauslrx deneloprrrent to eno,nm[pnms..r-i-r ar ma �•fin..,dcTa�slsotPe�.d�+•Wyk we.W0. GerterodlyConsldsrldto'rife mosHy beaux d tM scale and better h-mp-ad or aa[ural[urrosrndlW. Thrr gmngle.,ay She mitt!DwkbrT.partF hgpww re59en[s orerwpelmmdly support 5rry1e CiXy deriar Md—d rafpP�tPa housir%. Rtliaents Iped the scale,iAdriduM u6U far wniau.Kayo panic and stoops.Some Thwghr i[lacked tm nwch Ilke puhoc howin�though.and thought a true Fr wouldte %ter CIE sgntd Mrxed responses Half of partiopants tr' k the enamor de--.pment above mold rrt—to the aaatn+a[oR+mu�IN e this 9hd[tsgraph had a naatl of re4on5 s Thm cured This wax dur�n re to The rlpht—le of derelmment rasher Nan the astaar tleslpn.as many wln liked if momIy on nmiedan fiedesgn and shafe. ..s�rs�.—d—9hu daa.a r.n.a.....u .-,wi[h.h:r��n rsr�—,. May xM did nor eemmeraed on the inseieuu M look x6soluee'IJ61' arty Inward{Ki yvur ng tyard that drd rat feeTn to et n Ruras c[ like[hP an es b.;—and[o the right ncalyud unarnmau['np,'aga in,'Q s[ly bwuw of[h¢ unth apggri fapad rtral fppl. stale inr nwmples Q.the tow yn.+a mr s�derrd too-.rb-and th —e on the nottorrn wax oonsldend too union and—tlmal. Absolute"NOI' r'K[wet I"this one Aat Were mu*4wry rr&Ei A or a5sated rFt mostly because&the sale,Ilse nsstlt0imal 1.06 aid tho feelir>e that iE didn't fit w well s wh the rural feel afkd iMeperdenf living rn si seniors ih" wdm to see 1 - t pwomp din Mietmmunity. I 7 4 Slide #8 2023 Community Engagement Proposal Gensler Consultants proposal recommended by multijurisdictional staff team — supported by VHB with experience working with Orange County]urlsdictions on other planning efforts • Conducted Traffic Impact Analysis for St.Paul's Village, located in the same general area Negotiations underway with separate design consultant ORANGE COUNTY B 110L3RTH C:AR€31111JA Commissioner Hamilton asked for information on who VHB is and what they do. Cy Stober, Planning and Inspections Director, said that VHB is an acronym for Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc and they are very active in the Raleigh area particularly in transportation planning. He said it might sound familiar because they did the transportation study for Hwy 54 corridor and the traffic impact analysis for a development for St. Pauls just outside Chapel Hill. 27 He said they do varying consulting services and have experience within Orange County in all jurisdictions. He said most of the work they have done in our area have been localized efforts and not the very large interstate corridors that they are also known for. Slide #9 Project Proposal Elements • Project Management and Coordination - Coordinate with staff team(monthly updates) - Create detalled work plan and schedule - Review existing plans,studies,assessments,and agenda items Conduct site vislt Project Implementation - Data gathering and review • Materials relevant to the community Staff and planning partner alignment Meet with planning partners(S intervlewsl to understand challenges,opportunities,and needs Planning partners as defined by the RFP,include,but are not(limited to,environmental,recreation,engineering, planning,transportation,housing,Diversity,Equity,and Inclusion(DEI),and Solid Waste,and the Orange County Affordable Housing Coalition. ORANGE COUNTY 4 NORTH C.AROLJNA Slide #10 Project Proposal Elements • Project Implementation -continued - Community Advisory Group(Greene Tract Community Stakeholders/Compass Group) Group of 12.16 diverse community members Provide feedback on how to best connect and collect input from community Help consultant understand public concerns and aspirations Share information back to the group on other community engagement exercises - Compensation Strategy $50,000 suggested budget • Enable participation by underrepresented groups Identify number of hours of per month required to fully participate Community Champions — Community 5taWholdergompass group ORANGE COUNTY 10 NORTH C:ARC31111JA 28 Travis Myren said that the proposal does not include the composition of the group at this point so if they move forward with that element of the plan then they would need to have a discussion about the composition of the group and how it is chosen. He said that there is a compensation strategy that they have not used before, but it could be discussed. Slide #11 Project Proposal Elements Project Implementation —continued — Stakeholder Interviews and Meeting Attendance Elected officials Community members • Affordable housingproviders • Civic leaders — Community Listening Sessions Up tog community/resident organlzation meetings • Help consultant understand the challenges and aspirations of the local resident and business community — Public Survey Online and printed survey Instruments • Customized questions Feedback on various urban design and planning issues ORANGE COUNTY 11 NORTH C_A ZC31A NA Slide #12 Project Proposal Elements Project Implementation —continued — design workshop One—Vision Launch • Public 5takeholders-2.3 hours for up to 75 participants • Inform and educate the publican project and status • Hold Interactive exercises to explore key areas of opportunity and challenge • Identify shared interests Community walk and Talk • Six walk and talk sessions with staff,community champions,and communityadvisary/compassgroup Walking tours for informal Interaction Community Event Participation • Attend up to 4 community events Staff atable to share information and collect feedback ORANGE COUNTY 12 NORTH C:AR{?LJNA 29 Slide #13 Project Proposal Elements • Project Implementation—continued — Design Workshop Two—Vision Alignment Public stakeholders up to 75 participants Consultingteam will provide initial focus areas,guiding principles,potential design priorities Help consultant develop design criteria and evaluation measures to inform design approach — Insights Summary and Guiding Principles Summary of engagement activities Recommend guiding principles,design priorities — Design Workshop Three—CommunityCo-Creation Public stakeholders up to 75 participants Review previous workshop work Conduct an interactive review and collect feedback on two planning options ORANGE COUNTY 13 NORTH CAROLINA Slide #14 Project Proposal Elements • Project Implementation —continued — Oral Histories Temporary Installation Capture community perspectives during prior engagementactivities • Past near Greene Tract and Invlteaddltional feedback — Design Workshop Four—Design Alignment • Public stakeholders—up to 75 participants • Share speculative scenarios,valldatedthrough end user perspectives • Define direction for the preferred scenario — Final Open House • Final recommendations and report ORANGE COUNTY 14 NORTH C:AROLINA 30 Slide #15 Scope Differences Scope 1-$360,000 Scope 2 -$270,000 — Data gathering and review Data gathering and review — Staff and planning partner alignment Staff and planning partner alignment Com m u n ity Advisory Grou p Com m u n ity Advisory Grou p Compensation Strategy r___w_, 94a_ .g — Stakeholder Interviews and Meeting Attendance Stakeholder Interviews and Meeting Attendance Listening Sessions =r.A"ing Sessions Public Survey Public Survey Design Workshop One—Vision Launch Resign Workshop One—Vision Launch Community Walk and Talk — Com m u n ity Event Pa rticipation Design Works hop Two—Vision Alignment Design Works hop Two—As Ion Alignment Insights Summary and Guiding Princlpies Insights Summary and Guiding Prinel pies Design Workshop Three—CommunityCc-Creation Resign Workshop Three—CommunityCo-Creation Oral Histories Temporary Installation — Resign Workshop Four—Resign Alignment - Design Workshop Four—Design Alignment Final Open House Final Open House A r�� ORAR c:"H n U1kN } Slide #16 Timeline SAMPLE ENGAGEMENT ROADMAP rn URins rnGalna I sgnlns punM� I .r[rAni nwnrine I rwn7n7 I _7= rwR���n�n• inlwa neuu�R ue i r�SMei MfKm C—A was r e-a�cssrmwn eanm�r+y aw+wy earMner a.�Rr.�aYee��rmpn a E pMYO�usa[RAw�wilt, � Travis Myren said that the engagement process would be eight to ten months. 31 Slide #17 Cost Breakdown and Town Action Cost Allocation @ $360,000 - orange county(43%)-$154,800 - Town of Chapel Hill(4a%)-5154,800 - Town of Carrboro(14%)-$50,400 Cost AI location @ $270,000 - Orange County(43%)-$116,243 Town of Chapel Hill(43%6 -$116,143 Town of Carrhoro(14%5 -$37,814 • Town Action - Chapel Hill Town Council adopted a resolution"...prourdrng their support to the Orange County Commissloners entering into a contract with the cornmvnityengagernentconsultant."Staff presentation referenced the$364,000scope. - CarrboroTown Council adopted a resolution"...providing their support to the Orange County Commissioners entering into a contract far community engagemen t consult-an t services to be provided in relation to developmen t of a Master Plan far the Greene Tract." ORANGE r�r � 17 ORAR"H C,tl UNA } Travis Myren said that the cost would be shared with the towns based upon the Greene Tract allocations. Slide #18 Recommendation • Discuss community engagement proposal from Gensler Consultants ORANGE COUNTY 18 NC7ItrH C ARC]13NA 32 Slide #19 Greene Tract Community Stakeholders Community Advisory Groupl Greene Tract Community Stakeholders GTCS) Group We see the GTCS as a foundational pillar of our outreach work.TheTeam will work with the established GTCS as a sounding board throughout the project,providing feedback to the engagement team on how best to connect,collect input,and establish and maintain trust in the community.Our goal is to work with the public through this advisory group to ensure that public concerns and aspirations are consistently understood and considered in a proactive and authentic man ner.The GTCS will not only be used to share feedback and findings from the community engagement exercises,but to workshop the best communication and engagement approaches to gather feedback from a diverse array of community members and partners.The group should ideally be between 12-16 participants and expect to meet close to monthly(10) with the Team over the course of the project-The team will host both in person and virtual formats over the course of the efforts. p 19 NCDIORA "H cn NGE UNA } Commissioner Richards asked if all three parties agreed to the Mapping Our Community Future report. Travis Myren said it was shared but there was not a vote taken to approve or accept it. Commissioner Richards said she is concerned about it not being referenced. She said it seems that they are starting all over in terms of what the community wants. She said they are now expanding this to a group of people that creates a power imbalance. She said that she is concerned about who those people are. She said they have been studying this for a long time and they have done the Mapping Our Communities Future and the people that live there told them their wishes. She asked if the new group would make a recommendation. Travis Myren said it is not envisioned that the stakeholder group would create recommendations. Cy Stober said no and that the purpose of the community engagement consultant is to represent the community input to the design team. He said they would make sure that the intensity and density of development reflect the wishes of the community. He said the process is that the steering committee would direct the process. Commissioner Richards said that the community has already said what they want in the Mapping Our Community Future study. She said that in the community engagement for the strategic plan there was low participation in community meetings. She asked what the specific plan is to get real engagement. She said one of the meetings was at Rogers Road and she would like to know what they will do to increase participation. She said that Chapel Hill referenced the $360,000 cost of the plan and asked if the Council supported the amount. Commissioner Fowler said she wanted to understand what we are asking the consultant to produce. Cy Stober said Mapping Our Community Future is 8 or 9 years old. He said that the intention is for the intentions of the RENA community, especially now that the county owns the Headwaters Preserve, is reflected here. He said that the Mapping Our Community Future is not helpful as a planning tool. He said that the community engagement consultant would assist the design team to focus solely on design and land development. He said the community engagement 33 consultant would be making sure that they do not go back on the decisions that have been made up to this point. Commissioner Fowler asked if the design team would present the design to the group. Cy Stober said the engagement consultant would have the dual responsibility of representing the public entities they have contracted with but also representing the Rogers Road input and values are reflected in in the design. Commissioner Greene said everyone in the Town of Chapel Hill meeting said they wanted to lower the cost. She said that the presentation at Chapel Hill was 14 months. Travis Myren asked Cy Stober if the discrepancy in time included the design work. Cy Stober said it does and the four months of presentations to the three bodies. He said if there is a need to present to the Planning Board, this also ensures there is enough lead time to do that. Commissioner Greene said to summarize what she heard in Chapel Hill, they said they wanted to make sure they were not starting over, and they wanted to ensure that they were talking about what type of housing to put there. She said they discussed how the process would work in tandem with the design process. She said that Chapel Hill was fine with it, except they said lower the cost and shorten the time frame. She said she is hopeful that if the scope is reduced, that it might shorten the time frame. Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked how they would use the feedback they have received from the community and how that has been ranked. Cy Stober said the intention is to use the work and plans that have been done to create a plan of where attributes would be located. He said the community consultant would ensure that all the work already done is represented and when they finetune the detail, that the streets and land use reflect those wishes. He said it is really working to get a detailed master plan. Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if the housing would serve the four priority populations, or if it would serve any population that needs housing. Commissioner Greene said the details of the mix of the housing was still on the table. Bonnie Hammersley said the mix would be decided by the three partners. She said that managing expectations is important. She said she is concerned that the $360,000 option would override the work that has already been done and they do not know who those partners would be. She said that it might also slow the process down. She said that the three owners need to start making decisions about the road. She said they do not need to ask the community about Purefoy and a four-lane highway, but the owners can start making decisions. Vice-Chair McKee said he is not really sure what they are trying to do with the community engagement consultant. He said he is always concerned about unintended consequences. He asked if the decision is the county's and the county's only. He said that it is concerning that the towns support their entering into the contract. Bonnie Hammersley said that the county would be administering the contract, and the other jurisdictions would pay the county. Vice-Chair McKee said the wording is a little bit off. He said he agrees with everything the managerjust said. He said he felt like it was opening it back up for another 12 years of discussion. He said he didn't understand what they were buying for$270,000. Cy Stober said that the presence would be dedicated staff to the project and the community to provide dialogue with the community and receive input. He said the intention of staff is to ensure that the project is successful and to do that expeditiously. He said staff feels that having a third party would provide a resource of communication, for feedback and updates, and would have someone dedicated to that purpose. He said as planners, it is important that they have an ethical interest in representing the needs of the Rogers Road community. He said the Greene Tract is not new to him and it is exciting to be part of that. 34 Vice-Chair McKee said he doesn't question staff's commitment and dedication to the project. He asked what will happen if the input they get with this extensive amount of community dialogue does not align with what is already in place. Commissioner Richards said if the intention is to build upon the work that is already done and to provide a more detailed project then it should be stated clearly. She said she would like to see it specified that they are building on Mapping Our Community Future and prior work that was previously agreed to. Commissioner Fowler said that this is just for community engagement, and there is a separate contract for design services. Cy Stober said that is correct. Commissioner Fowler asked who decides who the community advisory group members are. Travis Myren said it would be up to the partners to determine the composition of the group. Commissioner Fowler said that it would come back to the Board. Chair Bedford said that would add six more months. Travis Myren said it would add time, but it would have to come back to the Board. Commissioner Fowler said she was leaning towards the lower cost option and is also interested in figuring out the configuration of the community members. Chair Bedford said the group could be removed and they could do it in a traditional way. Commissioner Hamilton said there was a need for community outreach and input now, since the needs of the community can change. She said she had concerns about the community advisory group, if that group would give the feedback that they are looking for. She said that in the agreement they discussed placing a school and recreational facilities, which is no longer best practice for school safety. Cy Stober said that the ingress and egress points are a major point of consideration and with the floodplain presence, and trying to be efficient on cost it is a big challenge with the school site design. He said that there are fire safety issues as well. Commissioner Hamilton said having a lot of public activity close to schools is not something they want to do in these times. She said since it is the Board that will be making the decision on this, they need to be kept in the loop. Commissioner Richards asked if they are saying that the design process might have a different location for the school than where it is now. Cy Stober said no. He said there are logistical challenges with access for the location, but they are in negotiations with a firm that has experience in school design. Commissioner Richards asked if they are looking for a specific design that addresses the challenges. Cy Stober said they need the school system's input, but they would design the access roads and further detail. Commissioner Greene said the schools have said they would not need the schools at this time. Chair Bedford said it might be 100 years before a school is needed in this area because they are addressing the schools now. Commissioner Greene said that Chapel Hill said they are not starting over with this community engagement proposal. She said the affordable housing community did not provide input to the Mapping our Community and it is important to know what their vision is. She said she thinks there are a number of things to keep them safe from Vice-Chair McKee's fears. She said she does not think the compass group is needed and she would support an occasional Assembly of Governments meeting to discuss the issue. Chair Bedford said a stakeholder group is a power imbalance. She would like to hear from the public but that she is looking for input, not a mission statement and charge. She said that they would expect that the elected bodies would be taking recommendations from the group when they 35 already have the information from the community. She said they need affordable housing input. She said she agrees to go with a smaller amount of money and to go faster. She said that she wants engagement but feels that everyone should be invited. She said the consultant should spend more time with the elected officials. Commissioner Portie-Ascott wanted to know if the Board would see a completed service agreement before it is finalized. Travis Myren said yes. Chair Bedford said this is the time to give input. Cy Stober asked for clarification because they are using their professional services contract. He said that it relies on timelines. He said that the intention would be that the scope of services are attached to the contract. Travis Myren said that is the information that she is looking for. Vice-Chair McKee said that the community he was most interested in hearing from were the people living within a one-mile radius of the project, particularly to the west and north. He asked for a meeting with the owners to discuss what they envision this to be because he is unsure and very leery of this. Chair Bedford asked if they could add joint meetings with the consultant and that the government owners would be there and the public would be invited. Commissioner Richards said she thought that the consultant would need to go back to the drawing board on the proposal. Travis Myren said staff would go back to the consultant and ask them to take the elements out to get to $270,000 and the focus groups. He said that would be another cost reduction. He said they can add a scope element that at the end of the community engagement process, the consultant will work with the boards to develop consensus based on the feedback. He said that would come at a cost but maybe it would be a wash. He said that it would likely not be back at the next meeting, but they would get it back as soon as they can. Commissioner Hamilton said there is a public survey involved. She asked if that would be helpful. Travis Myren said that they could ask for a quote from the consultants without the survey. Bonnie Hammersley said she thought there was survey fatigue in Orange County. Vice-Chair McKee asked for an explanation of the vision launch, vision alignment, and design alignment. Cy Stober said he thought workshops 1 and 2 could be combined into one workshop for launch and alignment. He said that they are not reigniting the Rogers Road community and they already have the feedback. He said that the vision launch could be removed because it has already been done. He said if they are consolidated and the prior studies used, then this could be done in one workshop by the consultant. Commissioner Greene said she thought there was interest in a small retail area there. She said that the Chapel Hill economic development officer had done a market study and said that there is not enough density to create a demand for a small corner store. She asked when that would come in. Cy Stober said that is a great question. He said that there is a need for a new analysis. He said if this is going to be largely staff managed, and the housing partners consulted, he is happy to ask the Town of Chapel Hill to revisit the study. Commissioner Richards said that things have been built there and that might change the outcome of a new study. 36 7. Affordable Housing Advisory Board —Appointment Discussion The Board discussed an appointment to the Affordable Housing Advisory Board. BACKGROUND: The Affordable Housing Advisory Board prioritizes affordable housing needs and assesses project proposals. The Board also publicizes the County's housing objectives, monitors the progress of local housing programs, explores new funding opportunities, and works to increase the community's awareness of, understanding of, commitment to, and involvement in producing attractive affordable housing.As a general practice,this Board has decided not to make recommendations for vacancies. The Board of County Commissioners appoints all fifteen (15) At-Large members. The following position is presented for Board consideration: NAME SPECIAL TYPE OF EXPIRATION REPRESENTATIVE APPOINTMENT DATE TERM BOCC At-Large First Full Term 09/30/2026 Appointee If the position listed above is filled, no vacancies remain. Tara May introduced the item. Commissioner Portie-Ascott suggested Andrew Myers. She said he brings geographical diversity and she liked that he was a general contractor. The Board agreed by consensus to appoint Andrew Myers. 8. Animal Services Advisory Board —Appointment Discussion The Board discussed an appointment to the Animal Services Advisory Board. BACKGROUND: The charge of the Animal Services Advisory Board is to advise the Board of County Commissioners on matters of concern regarding animal issues and animal services in Orange County, and to work with the Animal Services Director on various policy concerns and issues regarding County animal services. The Board of County Commissioners appoints all thirteen (13) members with representation from various related fields and municipalities. The following individual is recommended for Board consideration: NAME POSITION TYPE OF EXPIRATION DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT DATE TERM Cathy Munnier Animal First Full Term 06/30/2026 Welfare/Advocacy Re-appointment 37 If the individual listed above is appointed, the following vacancy remains: POSITION EXPIRATION VACANCY INFORMATION DESIGNATION DATE At-Large 06/30/2025 Vacant since 09/21/2022 Tara May introduced the item. The Board agreed by consensus on the recommended applicant. 9. Chapel Hill Library Advisory Board —Appointment Discussion The Board discussed an appointment to the Chapel Hill Library Advisory Board. BACKGROUND: The Chapel Hill Public Library Advisory Board is responsible for recommending long-term plans, policies, and programs of library service throughout the community. It advises the Chapel Hill Mayor and Council on library matters, develops plans for library facilities, and recommends operating policies of the library. The Board of County Commissioners appoints one member to this board. The following position is presented for Board consideration: NAME POSITION TYPE OF EXPIRATION DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT DATE TERM BOCC Orange County Partial Term 06/30/2025 Appointee Resident If the position listed above is filled, no vacancies remain. Tara May introduced the item. Commissioner Greene suggested Samantha Kaplan. The Board agreed by consensus to appoint Samantha Kaplan to the Chapel Hill Public Library Advisory Board. 10. Orange County Parks and Recreation Council —Appointment Discussion The Board discussed an appointment to the Orange County Parks and Recreation Council. BACKGROUND: The Orange County Parks and Recreation Council consults with and advises the Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks and Recreation, and the Board of County Commissioners on matters affecting parks planning, development and operation; recreation facilities, policies and programs; and public trails and open space. The Board of County Commissioners appoints all 12 members with representatives from each of the county's townships plus its municipalities, as well as two (2) non-voting youth delegates. 38 The following individual is recommended for Board consideration: NAME POSITION DESCRIPTION TYPE OF EXPIRATION APPOINTMENT DATE TERM Lilly Kohout Youth Member First Full Term 12/31/2025 (non-voting) If the individual listed above is appointed, the following vacancies remain: POSITION EXPIRATION VACANCY INFORMATION DESIGNATION DATE At-Large 03/31/2025 Vacant since 09/14/2023 Little River 03/31/2026 Vacant since 08/18/2023 Township Tara May introduced the item. She said that the Parks and Recreation Council is working on recommendations for the remaining vacancies. The Board agreed by consensus on the recommended applicant. 11. Orange Unified Transportation Board —Appointments Discussion The Board considered appointments to the Orange Unified Transportation Board. BACKGROUND: The Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard) advises the Orange County Board of County Commissioners on the overall planning and programming of transportation improvements in the County. The Board of County Commissioners appoints all twelve (12) members, with representation from each of the County's townships to the extent possible. The OUTBoard does not make recommendations. The following individuals are presented for Board consideration: NAME POSITION TYPE OF EXPIRATION DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT DATE TERM Natalie Ziemba Hillsborough First Full Term 09/30/2026 Township (re-appointment) Art Menius Little River Township First Full Term 09/30/2026 (re-appointment Joshua Mayo At-Large Second Full Term 09/30/2026 If the individuals listed above are appointed, no vacancies remain. Tara May introduced the item. The Board agreed by consensus on the recommended applicants. 39 Adjournment A motion was made by Commissioner Richards and seconded by Commissioner Fowler to adjourn the meeting at 9:45 p.m. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Jamezetta Bedford, Chair Laura Jensen Clerk to the Board Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board