Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda 02-20-24; 8-a - Minutes
1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: February 20, 2024 Action Agenda Item No. 8-a SUBJECT: Minutes DEPARTMENT: Board of County Commissioners ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Draft Minutes (Under Separate Cover) Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board, 919- 245-2130 PURPOSE: To correct and/or approve the draft minutes as submitted by the Clerk to the Board as listed below. BACKGROUND: In accordance with 153A-42 of the General Statutes, the Governing Board has the legal duty to approve all minutes that are entered into the official journal of the Board's proceedings. Attachment 1: January 16, 2024 Business Meeting Attachment 2: January 19, 2024 Retreat FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with this item. SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT: There is no Orange County Social Justice Goal impact associated with this item. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: There is no Orange County Environmental Responsibility Goal impact associated with this item. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board approve minutes as presented or as amended. Attachment 1 1 1 DRAFT MINUTES 2 ORANGE COUNTY 3 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 4 BUSINESS MEETING 5 January 16, 2024 6 7:00 p.m. 7 8 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Business Meeting on Tuesday, January 9 16, 2024, at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Human Services Center in Hillsborough, NC. 10 11 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jamezetta Bedford, Vice-Chair Sally Greene 12 and Commissioners Amy Fowler, Jean Hamilton, Earl McKee, Phyllis Portie-Ascott, and Anna 13 Richards 14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: 15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts 16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Deputy County Manager 17 Travis Myren, and Clerk to the Board Laura Jensen. (All other staff members will be identified 18 appropriately below) 19 20 Chair Bedford called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. All commissioners were present. 21 22 23 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda 24 Chair Bedford dispensed with reading the public charge. 25 26 27 2. Public Comments (Limited to One Hour) 28 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda 29 Terri Buckner said for the past 40 years, the towns and county have excelled at joint 30 planning. She said the rural buffer and WASAMPBA to reinforce protections of farms, rural 31 communities, wildlife, drinking water quality and supply, and community infrastructure. As part of 32 the joint planning, she said certain areas were identified for development like the 15-501 corridor 33 but not at the currently proposed densities. She said changing the plan now without a new 34 planning process ignores the impacts of climate change. She said affordable housing is needed 35 but she continues to observe some town elected officials prioritizing new affordable housing at 36 the expense of existing affordable housing. She said there are over 400 affordable housing 37 opportunities in the 15-501 area. She said using Chapel Hill's 15% affordable housing 38 requirement, if this area is built out to OWASA's estimate of 2,200 new homes, it would create 39 330 new affordable units, but asked what would happen to the existing 400 plus affordable units. 40 Between the pressure of new development and increased risk of flooding due to the loss of 41 permeable surfaces in the watershed, she asked if there would be a net gain or loss of affordable 42 housing. She said this type of strategic planning needs to occur before expanding the urban 43 boundary. She said Chapel Hill does not have the authority to require missing middle housing of 44 developers and the cost of extending water and sewer or the impact of those costs on housing 45 costs is unknown. She said it is also unknown what income levels will be served by new affordable 46 housing, the impact on schools, or the impact on transit. She said there are many open questions 47 and no answers and is depending on board to get the answers to those questions on residents' 48 behalf. 49 BJ Warshaw said he agrees with everything Terri Buckner just said. He said he continues 50 to be concerned about WASAMPBA. He said he lives in Chapel Hill ETJ and this Board is his 51 direct representation in this matter. He said he was disappointed to hear people continue to say 2 1 that this change would not impact the University Lake Watershed at a Chapel Hill Town Council. 2 He said state maps show otherwise and said he would like to see the findings of county staff on 3 this matter after the Board directed staff to investigate this issue at a previous meeting. He said 4 Carrboro had a motion to vote on this issue on February 6th and does not want them to vote 5 without the correct information. He said this decision feels rushed and that further studies are 6 needed to determine the impact of changing this agreement. He said there is no guarantee that 7 the stated affordable housing will ever occur and there is no full cost-benefit analysis or a plan for 8 how affordable housing will be developed in this area. He said he would like to see more 9 comprehensive planning at the county level and collaboration between county and towns on this 10 issue but also affordable housing and climate change issues across the county. 11 12 b. Matters on the Printed Agenda 13 (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda below.) 14 15 16 3. Announcements, Petitions and Comments by Board Members 17 Commissioner Richards said there were a lot of activities during the holidays and on Martin 18 Luther King, Jr. Day. She said she attended the first meeting of the Jordan Lake One Water 19 Coalition and board officers were elected. She said it was a good organizational meeting and is 20 looking forward to serving. 21 Commissioner McKee said after learning that Buccee's will be built in Alamance County, 22 he is extremely disappointed that, over time, Orange County will lose tens of millions of dollars to 23 Alamance County because the Orange County Board of County Commissioners did not approve 24 that project. 25 Vice-Chair Greene said she stepped in for Chair Bedford at the graduation ceremony for 26 the 6th class of Project EngAge Volunteers. She said this is a great volunteer program for older 27 residents helping each other out. On a related note, she said that the senior centers are always 28 looking for volunteer drivers for seniors. She said she attended the Martin Luther King, Jr. Day 29 events yesterday in Hillsborough and went to her second DSS Board meeting today. She said 30 that people are wanting to sign up for Medicaid expansion and staff is working to process nearly 31 1,900 applications at this time. She shared that this Board learned that Chapel Hill was interested 32 in applying for funding for an affordable housing project on Homestead Rd., and initially wanted 33 to use some county-owned land to build a covered bus shelter. Then, she said they learned that 34 the requirements were that the site had to have Saturday bus service, so Chapel Hill decided not 35 to apply after all. She said it was interesting to her because the state requirements did not used 36 to consider public transit, and it is not a deal breaker for funding now, but six extra points could 37 be applied to an application if Saturday transit were available. She said she is directing her 38 comments partly to the MPO representatives on the Board, because people at state level 39 recognize the connection between affordable housing, transit, mobility, and climate change but 40 funding transit is still a challenge. 41 Chair Bedford said she attended a Watauga Club dinner, and the subject was RTP 3.0 42 and the future development of RTP, including housing. She said it was interesting and will involve 43 Durham and Wake counties rezoning. She said she went to Carol Woods last week to thank them 44 for their$175,000 donation towards the Master Aging Plan. Finally, she said she attended a zoom 45 meeting earlier this month with Senator Graig Meyer as part of a subcommittee planning for future 46 land use if the UNC coal rail line ever becomes available. 47 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she also attended the project EngAge graduation and 48 was impressed by the courses graduates took. She said she also attended several MLK Day 49 events. She said she enjoyed an oratorical contest that involved courageous students in 50 elementary, middle, and high school who made speeches. She said she attended two meetings 51 of the Orange County Partnership to End Homelessness and attended a training on the point-in- 3 1 time count, which will provide the number of people experiencing homelessness in Orange 2 County, including those sheltered and unsheltered. 3 Commissioner Hamilton said she attended 3 Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Day celebrations 4 this weekend. She said the message she comes away with is the importance of not giving up 5 hope and working together despite differences to bring justice and improve the wellbeing of 6 everybody. She said she will bring that with her as the Board resumes its work for the year. 7 Commissioner Fowler said the Legislative Issues Work Group met since the last meeting 8 and updated the list, which will come to the Board before going to representatives. She said she 9 attended a Cooperative Extension in December, and the 2024 Ag Summit will be held on February 10 19th at Cedar Grove Community Center. 11 Commissioner Richards said she forgot to mention that she and Commissioner Portie- 12 Ascott went to Butner on Friday to see a 54-bed mental health facility for youth, which was very 13 impressive. She said the scarcity of beds for youth is well known. She said there were many 14 representatives from the Criminal Justice Resource Department and court system in Orange 15 County also in attendance for the tour of the facility and overview of the processes. She said more 16 renovations at the facility are forthcoming. 17 Commissioner Hamilton also wanted to mention that there are public engagement 18 sessions for the Orange County land use plan. She shared the dates and encouraged people to 19 provide input on the plan online. 20 21 22 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations 23 24 a. Recognition of Graduates of the 2023 Orange County Youth Preparedness Camp 25 The Board recognized Molly Selleck and Layla Woolfolk for fulfilling all requirements to graduate 26 from the 2023 Orange County Youth Preparedness Camp, including completion of the PREP+6 27 Service project, impacting the disaster readiness level of fourteen (14) area families. 28 29 BACKGROUND: The Orange County Youth Preparedness Camp is an annual day camp for 30 Orange County teens conducted by Orange County Cooperative Extension and Orange County 31 Emergency Services. The Camp was first offered in 2018 and is based on the National Youth 32 Preparedness Initiative founded by Mississippi State Extension. The Camp has been held 33 annually in Orange County in 2018, 2019, 2022, and 2023. 34 35 During the June 26-30, 2023 camp, students engaged with the Federal Emergency Management 36 Agency (FEMA) Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) curriculum, exploring topics 37 from search & rescue to emergency medical services to fire safety. Instructors during the week 38 were County emergency services professionals and members of the Orange County Sheriff's 39 Office, as well as employees with the Department of Social Services. Through experiential 40 learning activities, presenters provided insight with youth into their career paths and 41 responsibilities. Youth also earned CPR/AED certification and participated in a disaster 42 simulation to apply skills learned throughout the week. 43 44 In order to officially graduate from the camp, youth are encouraged to impact their community 45 preparedness level by completing the PREP+6 project. This project requires each participating 46 youth to help their own household as well as six other area households develop an emergency 47 preparedness kit and communication plan. The camp participants provide educational resources 48 from FEMA to each household and provide additional guidance on ways to improve the 49 household's readiness for future disasters. The teen then verifies that the kit has been created 50 and that the communication plan has been completed. 51 4 1 In 2023, Molly Selleck of Chapel Hill and Layla Woolfolk of Carrboro completed the camp 2 graduation requirements and assisted a combined fourteen (14) area households to become 3 better prepared for emergencies. These young leaders now posess the skills to effectively help 4 their communities in the event of an emergency. They also achieved certification in CPR and AED 5 and are better prepared for the future. 6 7 Jonathon Smith, Cooperative Extension Director, introduced Molly Selleck and Layla 8 Woolfolk. 9 Sarah Pickhardt, Division Chief of Emergency Management, reviewed some of the skills 10 that participants learned throughout the week and highlighted their accomplishments. 11 Jonathon Smith said Molly Selleck and Layla Woolfolk went above and beyond helping 12 their own family and other families create an emergency preparedness plan and emergency 13 communications plan. In total, he said they have helped 14 families in Orange County. 14 15 16 5. Public Hearings 17 None. 18 19 20 6. Regular Agenda 21 a. Affordable Housing Advisory Board (AHAB) Funding Recommendations for FY 2023-24 22 Affordable Housing Capital Investment Plan (CIP) Funds and Remaining 2016 Bond Funds 23 The Board considered a resolution awarding funds for the FY 2023-24 Capital Investment Plan 24 (CIP) Affordable Housing request for proposals (RFP) process based on the funding 25 recommendations from the Affordable Housing Advisory Board (AHAB). 26 27 BACKGROUND: The FY 2023-2033 Adopted Capital Investment Plan (CIP) includes $5 million 28 for Affordable Housing development in each of the fiscal years FY 2023-24, FY 2026-27 and FY 29 2029-30. A total of$15 million for affordable housing development will be allocated over the ten- 30 year plan. The FY 2023-24 Affordable Housing funds of$5 million includes an additional $700,000 31 of remaining bond funds from 2016. 32 33 Additionally, at its June 20, 2023 Business meeting, the BOCC declared eleven (11) parcels of 34 County-owned land as surplus for affordable housing. The County may: 35 o Sell the properties by negotiated sale to either a public or private entity for the purpose of 36 developing affordable housing for persons of low to moderate income (the property could 37 be offered for below market rates to serve as a subsidy for the affordable housing project). 38 o Lease the property to a public or private entity for the purpose of developing affordable 39 housing for persons of low to moderate income (the lease rate could also be negotiated 40 below market rate to serve as a subsidy for the affordable housing project); and 41 o If there are no developers interested in the above options, sell the property on the private 42 market with the proceeds of the sale dedicated to other affordable housing projects. 43 44 On July 26, 2023, a request for proposals (RFP) was released which included the eleven (11) 45 parcels of County-owned land. The eligible proposals are for new construction and/or 46 rehabilitation for homeownership and/or rental development affordable to low-income 47 households. The proposed projects may be mixed-use and/or mixed income. As outlined in the 48 State of North Carolina's Olmstead settlement agreement, no more than 20% of residential units 49 may be set aside for people with disabilities and land banking is not an eligible use of the funds. 50 5 1 The eligible applicants for funding are non-profit organizations involved in affordable housing and 2 community development (including faith-based organizations), for-profit developers, and joint 3 ventures between eligible non-profit and for-profit entities. 4 5 The proposal evaluation scoring matrix (see Attachment 1) considers the following factors for 6 each proposed project: 7 (1) income and vulnerable population targeting, 8 (2) targeting of households currently living and/or working in Orange County, 9 (3) leveraging of other funding sources, 10 (4) building and site design, including environmental sustainability and accessibility 11 features, 12 (5) community design, including neighborhood compatibility and location, 13 (6) community sponsorship, engagement, and support, 14 (7) project feasibility, and 15 (8) developer experience. 16 17 The application cycle opened on July 26, 2023, and closed on Sept 28, 2023. The County 18 received ten (10) proposals. The Affordable Housing Advisory Board (AHAB) reviewed the 19 applications for the 2023-24 CIP Affordable Housing Bond Program on November 14, 2023, and 20 December 19, 2023. Based on the scoring matrix and discussion of the projects, AHAB proposes 21 the following funding recommendations: 22 Funding AHAB Funding Recommendation Requested Score Cedar Village (CASA) $825,000.00 191.1 $825,000.00 Homestead Horizons CASA $3,533,173.00 187.3 $733,500.00 Davie Circle $500,000.00 158.5 $500,000.00 EmPOWERMENT, Inc. Wentworth Conveyance of Land 178.1 Conveyance of Land EmPOWERMENT, Inc. Homestead $1,000,000.00 150.5 $825,000.00 EmPOWERMENT, Inc. East Village Habitat $3,700,000.00 189.7 $800,000.00 Hill Street Pee Wee Homes $166,500.00 178.4 $166,500.00 Trinity Court (Community $950,000.00 191.3 $950,000.00 Housing Partners Homestead Gardens $900,000.00 176.0 $900,000.00 (Community Home Trust Shady Acres $6,998,820.00 Incomplete $0 Total: $185573,493.00 $5,7005000.00 23 24 The proposals are summarized below with AHAB's funding recommendations, and also 25 addressed in Attachment 2. 26 27 Cedar Village (CASA): $825,000 28 Community Partners: DR Horton 29 30 The proposal requests funds for the construction of three (3), twenty-four (24) unit residential 31 buildings, and one community building that will serve households at or below 30% to 60% Area 32 Median Income (AMI). The project will also include eight units set aside for referrals from Veterans 6 1 Bridge Home to address a Town of Hillsborough request for housing to serve veterans with 2 disabilities. Cedar Village will be developed as a Low-Income Housing Tax Credit community to 3 finance the project, allowing CASA to leverage significant private capital and debt with a relatively 4 small funding commitment from local partners. The site is a part of Collins Ridge, a new market- 5 rate subdivision developed by DR Horton, which will comprise over nine hundred (900) total 6 single-family homes, townhomes, and apartments upon completion. 7 Homestead Horizons (CASA): $733,500 8 Community Partners: UNC, Town of Chapel Hill, Self-Help, Community Home Trust and Habitat 9 for Humanity 10 11 The proposal requests funds to develop a thirty-two (32) unit apartment building that will provide 12 affordable housing for households earning less than 30% of the Area Median Income (AMI). The 13 project will be funded with the purpose of assisting in the development of the apartment building, 14 which will be subject to affordability restrictions for at least ninety-nine (99) years. The building 15 will be managed by UNC Horizons and will be operated as supportive housing for low-income 16 families with children headed by women in recovery from substance abuse. Homestead Horizons 17 is part of a larger effort to address the affordable housing crisis in Chapel Hill and will provide 18 much-needed housing options for low-income families in the area. 19 20 Davie Circle (EMPOWERment, Inc.): $500,000 21 Community Partner(s): N/A 22 23 The proposal requests funds for the acquisition of an existing rental property, which consists of 24 eight(8)affordable housing units in Chapel Hill, NC. This project is for individuals earning between 25 30%-60% of the Area Median Income (AMI). Specifically, the project aims to acquire eight rental 26 units in a centrally located complex, which offers proximity to the UNC Campus, UNC hospitals, 27 Franklin Street, and numerous other businesses. EMPOWERment aims to allow low-income 28 households to reside in Chapel Hill while ensuring long-term affordability. This property is 29 considered Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH) and is currently occupied by seven 30 (7) families in the targeted AMI range 30%-60%. 31 32 Wentworth (EMPOWERment, Inc.): Conveyance of Land for PEACH II 33 Community Partner(s): N/A 34 35 The conveyance of the parcel of land will be used to produce affordable housing in Chapel Hill 36 catering to populations earning below 60% AMI. This project will be called PEACH II and, similar 37 to the PEACH Apartments, it will have access to public transportation. The units will be centrally 38 located, within walking distance to the UNC campus, Hospital, Franklin Street, schools, shopping 39 and other businesses. 40 41 Homestead (EMPOWERment, Inc.): $825,000 42 Community Partner(s): N/A 43 44 The proposal requests funds for the acquisition of ten (10) single-family homes located off 45 Homestead Road in Chapel Hill. This project will target people who are earning below 80% AMI. 46 This is a Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing property (NOAH). All ten (10) households are 47 currently occupied and, if funded, the occupants will not be displaced. This project will ensure that 48 communities like this one will remain safe and affordable. In the future, homes that become 49 available will be occupied by individuals who earn between 30% to 60% of the area median 50 income (AMI). These homes will remain affordable. EMPOWERment will identify funds to make 7 1 needed rehab and repairs and ensure the quality, health, and safety of the homes over the 2 affordability period. 3 4 East Village (Habitat): $800,000 5 Community Partner(s): N/A 6 7 The proposal requests funds to develop site infrastructure in contribution to the delivery of 8 seventy-six (76) needed new units of housing in Orange County. Of these units, sixty-four (64) 9 will be affordable Habitat homes sold to first-time homebuyers earning between 30% and 80% of 10 AMI. The remaining twelve (12) units (15%) in East Village will be market-rate homes. The project 11 has a mixed-income design and inclusion of two-story duplexes prioritizes smart density and 12 meaningful community interaction to create social and economic benefits for East Village 13 residents and the broader community. 14 15 Hill Street (Pee Wee Homes): $166,500 16 Community Partner(s): N/A 17 18 The proposal requests funds for the development of three (3)residences targeting Orange County 19 community members who have experienced chronic homelessness or are currently homeless 20 and have incomes below 30% AMI. The land these homes will be built on is located within the 21 Northside neighborhood and is right across the street from Baldwin Park and two blocks from 22 downtown Carrboro. By building in this neighborhood, the project leverages an existing 23 community asset to allow for tenants to live independently within the context of community. 24 25 Trinity Court (Community Housing Partners): $950,000 26 Community Partner(s): Town of Chapel Hill 27 28 The proposal requests funds for the redevelopment of fifty-four(54)affordable rental units serving 29 households earning from below 30% up to 80% AMI. Trinity Court will be comprised of twenty 30 (20) two-bedroom, twenty (20) three-bedroom, and fourteen (14) one-bedroom units. The range 31 of unit sizes and types will provide opportunities to serve target populations, including individuals, 32 families with children, persons with disabilities, individuals or families transitioning out of 33 homelessness, holders of housing vouchers, and others. Trinity will be developed under the 34 Housing and Urban Development(HUD) Rental Assistance Demonstration Program (RAD),which 35 will provide the property with a forty (40) unit project based rental assistance contract allowing for 36 forty (40) of the fifty-four (54) households to pay no more than 30% of their income towards 37 housing costs. The remaining fourteen (14) units will be subject to Low-Income Housing Tax 38 Credit requirements and income and rent restrictions. 39 40 Homestead Gardens (Community Home Trust): $900,000 41 Community Partner(s): Self-Help, CASA, Habitat for Humanity of Orange County, and Town of 42 Chapel Hill 43 44 The proposal requests funds for the development of twenty-one (21) townhomes, earmarked for 45 individuals and families earning 65% to 80% AMI The target population for the project is families 46 and individuals whose income falls within 80% or below the Area Median Income (AMI) threshold 47 and who either reside in or are employed in Orange County. The Homestead Gardens initiative, 48 situated at 2200 Homestead Road in Chapel Hill, represents a pioneering strategy for advancing 49 affordable housing through a distinctive collaborative framework. Notably, among these units, up 50 to three (3) will feature an integrated Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU), facilitating housing options 51 for those earning below 65% of AMI. 8 1 Shady Acres (Shady Acres, LLC): $0 2 Community Partner(s): NA 3 4 The proposal requests funds to develop forty-two (42) units. Of the forty-two (42) dwellings, six 5 (6) of the units would be reserved for 30% to 60% AMI, ten (10) of the units would be reserved 6 for 60% to 80% AMI, and all units would serve a Special Needs Population of elderly residents 7 over sixty-two (62)years of age and /or Veterans with a priority on those with disabilities. Located 8 on Sawmill Road in Cedar Grove and within walking distance of Cedar Grove Community Center, 9 this subdivision would provide forty(40)dwellings, two (2)Community Gardens and a Community 10 Amphitheater with a Gathering Room attached. 11 12 AHAB's scoring of the applications using the evaluation scoring matrix approved by the Board of 13 Orange County Commissioners earlier this year is detailed in Attachment 3. The Affordable 14 Housing Advisory Board members made the decision to exclude the Shady Acres application 15 based on the application being incomplete. 16 17 FINANCIAL IMPACT: The FY 2023-2033 Adopted Capital Investment Plan (CIP) includes $5 18 million in FY 2023-24 for the purpose of requesting for proposals (RFP) for Affordable Housing 19 development from nonprofit organizations involved in affordable housing and community 20 development (including faith-based organizations), for-profit developers, and joint ventures 21 between eligible non-profit and for-profit entities. Additionally, $700,000 in remaining funds are 22 included from the November 2016 bond referendum. 23 24 Bonnie Hammersley, County Manager, made the following presentation: 25 26 Slide #1 ORANGE COUNTY HOUSING DEPARTMENT Orange County FY2023-24 Affordable Housing RFP Board of Orange County Commissioners January 16, 2024 27 28 Bonnie Hammersley introduced the Interim Housing and Community Development 29 Director, Blake Rosser. She also thanked members of the Affordable Housing Advisory Board for 30 their work on this matter. 31 9 1 Slide #2 CapitalPURPOSE. To consider-Adoption of a resolution awarding funds fix the FV 2023-24 1 Plan (CM ■ Housingrequest propos-As (RM process basedon thelfunding1 1 1 the AffortUble Housing Advisory i. r ORANGE COUNTY + ► HOUSING DEPARTMENT 2 3 4 Slide #3 Affordable Housing bequest for Proposal • The FY2023-2033 .adopted Capital Investment Plan (CIP) includes $5 million for Affordable Housing development in each of the fiscal years FY2023-24, FY2026-27 and MM-30. • A total of $15 million for affordable housing development will be allocated over the ten-year plan. • The Bequest for Proposal (IFP) released on July 26,2023, included. FY2023-24 CIP Affordable Housing funds of $5 million with an additional $700,0D0 of remaining bond funds from 2016. • At the June 20,2023, BQCC Business meeting the BOCC declared eleven (11)parcels of County-owned land as surplus for affordable housing which were included in the RFP nORANGECOUNTY HOUSING DEPARTMENT 5 6 7 10 Slide #4 Affordable Housing Proposal Evaluation • AHAB members reviewed and evaluated the proposals individually,,66th discussion regarding the proposals in two subsequent meetings. • November 14,2023 meeting, applicants were invited to pre-sent their proposal. • Proposal applicants were allowed to pru-6ide supplemental information to provide clarity in relation to the scoring matrix by December 4,2023. • December 19,2023 meeting, review of the evaluation scores based on supplemental information with final recommendation. • AHAB used the scoring matrix as a base for the proposal,through the process a deficiency in the scoring matrix was recognized. • The scoring matrix is framed for dc-6vlopment of new units and dues not consider Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing(NOAH). • AHAB members believed that the NOAH proposals were vital to maintaining existing affordable housing inventurv. • AHAB recommended awarding$5.7 million to the eligible proposals for 199 units funded as requested and approximately 29 units partially funded based on the per unit cost. n ORANGE COUNTY ► HOUSING DEPARTMENT 2 3 Commissioner Fowler asked if there is another funding source for Naturally Occurring 4 Affordable Housing (NOAH). 5 Bonnie Hammersley said the two NOAH projects had other funding in addition to county 6 funding. 7 8 Slide #5 Orange County Affordable Housing Bond Program ApplIcation Scoring Form FY 2023.24 Cankal Investment Plan KIP)riindfng Cycle 5—df—t—tz— Marr rtr—gt,",*cob of rK,seerr=,d—df.lb.zftedk—ri—ar rhe mp.f—hrb.n-ugh—C rhe only mrerkar—a riwr M yearn time —ge boars w90 a mt-fo"OZ 5—,iojr—a rion wm.""r Scorecard Sum nary CaWgorlo FINnts TaFfWpoftU POSMWff 1-1—Targeting and 5pecral tJ—& 2.L-1 P—W—y 2-Leveraging 4.Bo&ng a no 5ite Desian 5.Cannmurtty 0e]Rn .5.commurav sponsorsolpfsopporx 7.Projt Feas4bll Ity a-Developer E.p—142 — Total palntr ORANGE COUNTY HOUSING DEPARTMENT 9 11 1 Bonnie Hammersley said that there is a formula targeting income and special needs and 2 that allocates the total number of points. 3 4 Slide #6 1.IncomeTargeting and Speclal Needs(45 Rolnts} What income ran8e(5)amL populabon(s) wi ll the proposed project serve Pn Imre the numberof unitf srrv0lreach income range in the green taxer under"�ncvma TarpWag-"P'lacxan X hn one grccn iroxundrr"Sper0al ftvds,-Orangc bvxts wOauto- fid, Nrb, 6ir =Itsaf Prorrkrdpew�s� Core kba project oerve paeplewlkh%),Mal Ihaur rLn�adb4 inks _ II lid P06,01I F-1 7-171 71 X2+0 pomtsl 37-6074AMI I u �No top4�rks] 15poirikt] 3095 Ahii a clow[#S ❑ Flslubtaftl �1 �iatal E5*tow , DefimduWpkvAth&mfgfi,aeswormspwpkeoLwk-nrAVhowieksoot&kabmoifrrawrla € oceorothervaudiarsaadsrr*wsOdonwstktgoktxv u POINTS ORANGE COUNTY HOUSING DEPARTMENT 5 6 Commissioner Fowler asked if total points could be broken out in the future so they can 7 see where points were allocated. 8 Bonnie Hammersley said they can do that going forward. 9 Commissioner Richards asked if"other funding" means they have it required or in-hand. 10 Bonnie Hammersley said those projects have other funding in hand. She also said that 11 she had assumed commitment letters were required but they may not have been. She said she 12 did see them when she was reviewing the applications. 13 Commissioner Richards said she has a concern about that because the county is an initial 14 funder for some projects. 15 16 12 1 Slide #7 7.Local Rei dency(5 Pointsl What percentage of the proposed project will proke housingfor Orange County reAents? Place an"1f"in one"boli by the appropriate percent of targeted units.Orange homes wig auto fiJ4. Percent of current Orange Counter residents`at sale or lease-up ®0-50%10 points) =50-80%12 P010 ®E0-100%15 poi%t EA TOTAtL POINTS Defined as households currently residing or working in Orange County orhoWng resided in Orange County ORANGE COUNTY HOUSING DEPARTMENT 2 3 4 Slide #8 I Leveragin g(52 paints) ru w hat dLSree does khe p ro Dyad project include other Sources of Funds? use the spore b6owto coka kte iewerage,then phare as 7C"M&wgrm box by die appaeprrarte ievemging ratio-Oronge boxes wifi autftm Pemeirt Funded by County Funding 41th er Criteriia 7131-1004 {o poitrts} aproject pays property tauoes(2 palats� LlL0-80%(1pairtts) Them twaarern"ffyexrhrsr.e1__1Project repaySFunds-priDdpalonly(3paiiw5)' =40-59%0 pgk5) Fheienwowrn"ryrrrhrsrre=Project repaysPorvds-P 41J10paintsF' =20-39%(9 paoWq Fl Project is mixed-income{1q paints{' =10-19%(15 pt qm) F--1 Prot is rrrixM-use{10 prdntsi' ={10'x(20 paints) 'TLnr nCxre tip aadapplvm roWv*-it* nvdpayi,ds �SuY 6412( Subtotal 'hkunrV ita dkm am iauanr mage iin&dV5ng a arhe4raWl andnnimies gragraphk crnmhhtian c¢o;�mdohlrrmis Cvcuk k,k verrrge Counryfunds{rncWjngrequest) mnmirMwgaraf.resJenW1agesmgr agero epsroeur"nent.a+OnemwdnevMupd Itcxrain�wcs Otherfunds(rxtag Coarrr[yJ pereent{uvntyfundinq WMAL POINTS 5 6 7 13 1 Slide #9 4-huliding and Site OEASn C20 points) Asslg�m a narttber ofpcfnfs 1n the green ljcxes below aeeorwna to y+76r best Jadanren f. Y04A pray prolome a narratlwe ezplan fllvn foreactr- Narrativa Profact.Incorpo rata.s.rstalrnubla da.1Qn aianaencr, su h as srnal ler balldlnp sis_es,we of loco C/recyc led t,Wldng matarlalr„arlang/artwQm features,' LED llghtlrW,water consereatlon fixtures,of iclent FNA£systems,ate.{up toy pemntr) Profoct providers I—C—p accosslbllty—d/o r I�Incorporates L)W w rsal D"Igo'Cup to S pornts) I�Protect.Incorpo raters sustainable coma ,,dry and a imnmaratal clsjgn alamants,such as noxIbla lot de tm,low Impact develo pment,sWrm mater controls,reduced l mpervous su rface areae, natural ord ht-msl=rit landscaping,or any other a ilio ml clamant that would sarve to nJnlrn&e net€atlw a Trow—rrtal impacts,as Orarllie County rezulatiore allow Cup to 5 points} Prof act Is comactad to watar and swear sarrica, will connect to a lstlnrs Mce,ormlllwea commuNty wall and sawar system corslstant With watar and swear bo.ndary agreements and local standards(up to 8 palnits) —Tf3TAL PC HNTS 'Pr�acf maat�Iamtxask R,Ch!FA o-naray pnYarAs_ hetes_.'i^>��+w.nc�rfacordlsltesldefnna'f/1)fes/nodre otraciuruea•resl�,4.� frxil,4eaaendtx�d.tsdl 35EE: httpsl.Azmwhdg. 4 prgjdssign-obtectrv�s/acrefslJ}ik}beyarnd�nrcr€sILdllty-rmi�rrsar-d'raigrr n ORANGE COUNTY ►► HOUSING DEPARTMENT 2 3 Bonnie Hammersley said Commissioner Fowler asked about Universal Design. She said 4 that the second box down asks for universal design. 5 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if there was a minimum score. 6 Bonnie Hammersley said there were ten applications and one was incomplete, so only 7 nine were awarded funding. She said that she was in both meetings and once the NOAH projects 8 were identified and had occupants, that made an impact. She said the top three received total 9 funding and the others received partial funding 10 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said there were some that score low on community design. 11 Bonnie Hammersley said the ones that scored low in that category were the NOAH 12 projects because they aren't new and did not have the design aspect. 13 14 14 1 Slide #10 s.cotnrr>tuhity design(20 paints( AsflB.ravarmbrr ofPvints iA rear 4rer»trorrors brow n[twdiry to r'aur brftJsdy+nmr,Yore rnal'Provifea ma-rprirc rrrP�norrdrformdr. Narrative F-11prolect Contributes to a mix of housirig:withln kiting—I&L oJh—c!Iup to 3 poirt4 Qeonus points for building appearance,quatlty of carkstractien,oempatlbl Ihy with surrounding heusir&a billty to foster a sense of a secure community,and tontnho bution to neighborod revitalization and/or affordable housing preservation(details must be provided by applicant fup to Spoiru`i F__Jproiect Isaccessible to services suc'has healthcare, schools.Smi—ries,etc.(up to d points) public trarrsportatlon,to Ind sere a bus route or ori-demand service(or eau.Nalerit),a related facilities are avallable te.g.,bus shelters, msslble stops,etc,l(up to S pohm.) r__Jprolect Is lasted In an area of thecounty traditionally underserved Iry hnusi rg dimelopment (up m A Pei -TOTAL p OKM nORANGECOUNTY ► HOUSING DEPARTMENT 2 3 4 Slide #11 S.Community Spon sarshipf Support(20 pointsM A55ipn s rlwnbey c/paittts Art rile green bases brili amrnlRW toYWff besffudomew.You mow pm wde a norroWs errlaAtnatlox11oreseh, Natratfve Applies nt can shhew-idence that they .rdinated with other o rganlzi tlo,os to complemeotlsrrppa rt the proposed protect(veto 6)sprits) �Applioawt can show evidence that they involved the Intended be-nefidades of the project in the planning process a nd t hat the outreac h a rid rnarteting plan is irttlusive(up to 6 points) AppllcaM tan demonstrate It has been xt ve ly invelved,or d—ribe the steps it will toke to become act wely Irwolved,In the County's Consolidated Planning processto Wentifv and address lrovslpe need relatedto the proposed prolect(up to 4pc4nW F—IlAppllca int has developed,orcan demonstrate plans.to develop,.11.1.with the,ca rri—iity act isit its to provide hol ct¢contnrunity services (up to 4 paints) MTOTAL POINZ nORANGECOUNTY + ► HOUSING DEPARTMENT 5 6 15 1 Slide #12 7.Project Feasibilky{30 paints) Assfpm a nomber ofoWnts M the grwm bees bekw oitm9mp to yoorbeaJvdpment. F7Appl6 nt ran demonstrate site mntrol,inning romplianee,and.timely and feasi bleconst ruct inn schedule{up to 14 points) L]Funding{other khan County funding)is in place at time of applr.ation{up to 10 pants) F7Appl ica nt presents a proposed budget and financial model ap propriate based oa reasonable assumptions(uta to id points) ETatal prints nORANGECOUNTY HOUSING DEPARTMENT 2 3 4 Slide #13 S.Ehmmioper Experlence(40 points) A usgn a number of pYAfm in the green beim bebw aeafsrdMg to yaw beat fudgment. aApplicant has expeflence carrying out comparable projects to chat proposed and has met regulatory cornpllance For previous projects{up to 10 points) aApplicant has a proposed team with deononstfated developmenr,managerlal,and financial management capabilities in prior projects iup to 1a prints} �A ppl icant and team members havea successful record or meeting prffp4sed budge€s and timelines iup to la points) Project sponsor is a ran profit housing provider(up to 10 pognts) ®Totat points ORANGE COUNTY HOUSING DEPARTMENT 5 6 16 1 Slide #14 PROJECT COST, TIMELINE & COMMUNITY PARTNERS e (7-1:.. 513,,867,572 4NO Mateh 2025 Wockfau ee Houjing Loan Pmgmm Bed-in KmnalRtodasciionFxagram, R3 vaTe Donors {...$'ti_#-I'IG•19�o^•.I,^.,r'I 11 r:n F,l^,•. :�,4..?:II+,I�'Yl�i 5.1,:51,3,173 F=mffy 2W4 v +YZP7]a Break,gFound Ualr Fuvrrdatmn Hamley Farnxh'Foundation Tc,a-n of Ompel Hill Self-Help Credit k1man {bra County ,.a 1"1.,'=41 10 1,N1 3-wom.11)._ C.IC IALLIJa11-1..isu!ti Tuti i1��.n1{.1Ii.a]J&J I S4 LLL 3C'i'W C' TAic LLL1 91AF k'e&Ciedk U[LlLCL u•ylu'i�lisae6 OrAftle CukbiCM Fiiv tr Due[ F.*mPI7)%7.1tN1FN7-Wrnmo"h N/A I . II I:'=1 i ''.I- 1`,I Ili 31,0m.800 Committed(ande Ta¢nad'IG13ape1 II- 1 will escvtry ;hair Employer Credit Union rrp,ql inion Orange Caranty Pri-vate Donors HIUMI-Ea.;L%UhLic $3.,%U,UU0 SP6,.i 2ula trNuc` St2sq ueLvcsl UNC He hh aatr[xtiun 4rurge Coui)W Primate Idona.n Tie-e ee Iianxa-f3i[l$treed 5542 WIQ 3156,588 I umvar?2021 TrJ -n c t Carni ro ELegin Cook potfndumon cjon.etrmfion Orange C-onntyy Pd,ate Honors T' . Bs/nn TUN II; � m eoa3rtrnesocn Noxrltridt N69hhamhaad Cnanmunity home Trom- X6,345,1939 # 000 4"Qua.rter2824 'Self-lielpCredit Un1r HumeateadGvxden!. A1frin CASA rr,nvrUronn Habitat Tuwnof C13apel Hili 2 [Orange Courm- 3 Bonnie Hammersley noted that the project cost shown for Trinity Court is incorrect and is 4 actually $18,983,793. 5 6 17 1 Slide #15 AHABSCORES - FY2023-24 PROPOSALS CA6A- EMN)WER DIPOW E E.WOTERm, Mobdr,11 kA P"Ttr CCUMWIJA comm QUA-c"M F1=01rad MMt-IDWiL. RMEV H d H*w6ry- Hcoes-IM liowmgHZIET19M. GMIE TEmmxdi uscvdile 5hem Pa,meo, 'rqr,MrV(YIMT fift(IM� ",No n,133,1-n Sawa VV-9 S1,OW'[W 11'", S166300 %egarp-ord Armuni EMU r 1T;701OW-1 OL137:iii/Com PcT 1 j6r ar.W, 1)L3LOLI*�;VIdUt:3r;Ibk' 31�5 4fis Y,7 MA I?tVPId;Ui,ULI% - 2)Lwal Rr,;i;L-nl-; i 3) 36.11 163 .1.9 2875 14-9 35i Qj IZ14 249 4)BuMagAiie 12il u.4 �j-u I I 4 5}Commirmiry Dmign 17.5 19.4 19-3 19-2 15B I-S 0.6 19.0 1.A COUIMm6ry if Fejajl�lirV 8b ENpr6enre k6 -Ap 2 Tolal Score Ira 158.5 178.1 1-510-5 1".7 178-43 191-3 17fejl 2 3 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if Shady Court did not submit even after an opportunity 4 for supplemental information. 5 Bonnie Hammersley said they did not. 6 Commissioner Richards said she would still like to see the percentage of total project 7 funding that organizations have secured. She also asked if there is a timeline for when projects 8 have to be completed. 9 Bonnie Hammersley said the project must be started 18-24 months. 10 11 18 1 Slide #16 AHAB Recommendation to BOCC Funding AHAB Funding Requested .COPE- Recommendation Cedar Village(CASA) $825,040.40 191.1 $825,040.40 Homestead Horizons $3,533,173.00 187.3 $733,500.00 (CASA) Davie Circle $540,040.00 158.5 $500,000.00 EMPOWERment.Inc, Wentworth Gmvevanceof 178.1 Gnm•eyanceof Land EMPCWERment,Inc.) rand Homestead 61,044,000.00 154.5 $825,000.00 EMPOWERment,Inc, East V!Ilace Habitat $3 700 W,00 189,7 $800 0[10,00 Hill Street(Pee Wee $156,500.40 178.4 $166,500.00 Hames) Trinity Court(Community $950,040.40 191.3 $ 50,000.40 Housing Partners Homestead Gardens $900,000.00 17CO $940,000.00 (Communit Home Trust Shad Acres $6,f)%,824.40 Incomplete $0 Total: 1$18,573,49100 $5,740,000.40 GRANGE COUNTY HOUSING DEPARTMENT 2 3 4 Slide #17 # I 1 1 1!N(S): The Manager reconunendsBoard adopt audiorize the Chair to sign dw attached Pd—nolution awAf ding finxils,for the FY 2023-- I' Affirdable Housinga process bas«i an the fundmg41kMu., i, !4 frorn the Affordable Housing Adn9ory Board(AHAB). nORANGECOUNTY HOUSING DEPARTMENT 5 6 7 19 1 PUBLIC COMMENTS: 2 Sandra Clinton said she has lived in Hillsborough for the past 25 years and has been a 3 homeowner at Crescent Magnolia Townhomes by Habitat for Humanity. She said she is grateful 4 for her home and is thankful for Habitat for Humanity. She said she currently serves on the Habitat 5 Advisory Committee and Homeowner Committee. She asked for funding for Habitat for Humanity. 6 Joseph Schwenker with Community Housing Partners and representing the Trinity Court 7 redevelopment. He said he could answer questions from the Board if they would like. 8 Commissioner Richards said the project seems like it is underway, and the county portion 9 is only 5% of the total. She asked how the county portion is helping move the project forward. 10 Joseph Schwenker said they have everything except what they are requesting from the 11 county. He said costs were much lower when the project was started, and this gap funding is 12 needed to make the project work now. 13 Commissioner Richards asked where they would get the money if not funded by the 14 county. 15 Joseph Schwenker said there are not a lot of other options left. He said they cannot cover 16 a million-dollar shortfall. 17 Chair Bedford said she was concerned about the disrepair of the property. She asked if 18 there are policies in place to ensure the project does not fall into disrepair again in the future. 19 Joseph Schwenker said yes. He said they are part of the rental demonstration program. 20 He said they are subject to NCHFA inspections and approvals, and they have equity investors 21 who buy tax credits, and they are invested for 15 years. He said there ae a lot of checks and 22 balances now. He said the project was poorly constructed in the mid-70's but this is a way to 23 remedy that and actually increase the number of affordable housing units. 24 Vice-Chair Greene said the backstory is the federal government has decided to disinvest 25 in public housing. She said that RAD is one of the latest devices that are really public-private 26 partnerships. 27 Anna Wu said she is the current board chair for the Orange County Habitat for Humanity. 28 She thanked the Board for their investment in affordable housing. She also thanked Bonnie 29 Hammersley and county housing staff for their hard work and leadership throughout this process. 30 She said they see how home ownership is slipping further out of reach for so many. She said that 31 many people who work here cannot afford to live here. She said the barriers are even higher for 32 people of color and those that make lower wages. She said that the East Village community in 33 Hillsborough is a key piece to assist homeownership in Hillsborough. She said that the project will 34 essentially double affordable housing units in Hillsborough, including fully ADA accessible units. 35 She said that the homes will be near public transit and even be walkable to the sportsplex. She 36 said that this type of large-scale development opportunities outside of Chapel Hill have been rare 37 due to the cost of infrastructure. She said that these projects and Habitat's $3.7 million request is 38 a request to supply affordable housing in previously underserved areas. 39 Delores Bailey, executive director of EmPOWERment, said that the Peach Apartments 40 are beginning to be built. She said that they will have 10 fully funded multi-family units by the end 41 of 2024. She thanked the Board for their previous support. She said the greatest need is for 42 families earning at or below 30% AMI. She said EmPOWERment recognizes that NOAH is one 43 of the best ways to meet this need. She said they have two projects and 18 families. She said 44 that NOAH projects scored lower because they are not new projects, but that does not minimize 45 the impact for the families who live there. She said when there is no affordable land, there can be 46 no new projects. She said they asked for 3 projects, combination of these rental properties would 47 help 18 families. 48 49 Bonnie Hammersley said she will be doing a debriefing with AHAB members and 50 applicants. She said she will provide the information to the Board at a work session and hear their 51 feedback to ensure the county is ready for the next RFP. She said they will draft the 20 1 recommendations but said ultimately, the decision is made by the BOCC. She said the Housing 2 Advisory Council is aware that the Board is making the final decision. 3 Chair Bedford clarified that the Board does not need to make a decision about the 4 remaining 10 parcels tonight. 5 Bonnie Hammersley said that will be at a future meeting. 6 Vice-Chair Greene said she is open to shifting numbers around, but her inclination is to 7 honor the recommendations of AHAB. She said she wants to see a conversation happen with 8 providers and the whole affordable housing coalition and a meeting of the minds about what the 9 matrix needs to look like. She said that her interest is that this process is reasonable, fair, and as 10 objective as possible. 11 Commissioner Hamilton said she supports AHAB's recommendation but also looks 12 forward to changes to the process. She said the low points for local residency stands out to her 13 on the matrix. She said that being able to see the big picture of housing units in the county and 14 the total number of affordable housing units would be helpful so that they can track the impact of 15 the money. She said she also focused want to use taxpayer money efficiently and the per unit 16 cost is important. 17 Commissioner Richards said she would like for the affordable housing community to be 18 able to provide feedback. She said that she was wondering if there should be a different scoring 19 matrix for NOAH projects. She said that those may need to be evaluated differently than new 20 projects. 21 Bonnie Hammersley said her thought was to have a section just for NOAH projects. She 22 said she agrees with Commissioner Hamilton and that this should come back at a work session 23 in the near future. 24 Commissioner Richards said she is confused by what the funding is already for some 25 projects. She said she would like for that to be incorporated into the process. 26 Bonnie Hammersley said that could be captured in the leveraging section of the scoring 27 matrix going forward. 28 Commissioner Fowler said it would be nice to know how the ruberics are used because 29 some got the highest and lowest funding. She said there is confusion on how rubrics are used 30 because scores do not equate to the recommended scoring. She said she read the minutes but 31 does not understand how AHAB members got to their decision. 32 Bonnie Hammersley said the matrix was used as a base. She said one of the AHAB 33 members said they used the scoring matrix, but also took into account the impact of displacement 34 if NOAH projects were not funded. She said the last time the scoring matrix was presented as a 35 scoring matrix and then the Board decided to change it and it was not based on the score. She 36 said the Board needs to discuss how to move forward with this. 37 Commissioner Fowler said local residency was not scored very highly. 38 Chair Bedford said this can come back at the work session and be explained better. She 39 said that there are restrictions based on federal funds. 40 Commissioner Fowler said given this discussion, she said she can support AHAB's 41 recommendation. 42 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she supports AHAB's recommendation and appreciates 43 their consideration of the impact of displacing residents. 44 45 A motion was made by Vice-Chair Greene, seconded by Chair Bedford to adopt and 46 authorize the Chair to sign the attached Resolution awarding funds for the FY 2023-24 CIP 47 Affordable Housing RFP process based on the funding recommendations from the Affordable 48 Housing Advisory Board. 49 50 Chair Bedford said they discussed the RFP in June, and they did not change it then. She 51 said that the questions that were raised in the meeting minutes were the same questions she had. 21 1 Vice-Chair Greene said she continues to be impressed by the affordable housing 2 providers and their collaboration. 3 4 VOTE: Ayes, 6 (Commissioner Fowler, Commissioner Hamilton, Commissioner Portie- 5 Ascott, Chair Bedford, Vice-Chair Greene, Commissioner McKee), Nays, 1 (Commissioner 6 Richards) 7 8 MOTION PASSES 9 10 11 7. Reports 12 a. Presentation of School Membership Proiections and School Capacity Calculations 13 The Board received presentations from the NC State Operations Research and Education 14 Laboratory (OREd) on its ten-year school membership projections and from County staff on 15 utilizing the Woolpert capacity calculation. 16 17 BACKGROUND: Over the past year, the School Capital Needs Workgroup and the SAPFOTEC, 18 a technical advisory committee, have discussed making improvements to the School Adequate 19 Public Facilities Ordinance (SAPFO) enrollment projection and capacity determination process, 20 based on commonly identified limitations of the process. The County has worked with OREd and 21 Woolpert to develop alternative enrollment projection and capacity calculations frameworks. 22 OREd and County staff will present these updated frameworks. 23 24 OREd Enrollment Projections 25 The County currently projects future enrollment through a series of mathematical formulas based 26 on historic enrollment. Through the Certificate of Adequate Public Schools (CAPS) test, the 27 County receives information from Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Hillsborough, and the County's planning 28 departments regarding future residential development, but does not directly utilize that information 29 in the future year projections. 30 31 Through a review of peer counties, County planning staff identified that most nearby counties use 32 OREd to provide student enrollment projections. Both districts also have worked with OREd in 33 prior years, and Orange County Schools is currently working with OREd through its ongoing 34 redistricting process. 35 36 OREd utilizes land-use and future residential development projections directly in its ten-year 37 enrollment projections. It determines the student generation rates of specific neighborhoods and 38 makes estimates of generation rates of future developments based on similar existing 39 neighborhoods. OREd has worked with the districts and the planning departments of the County 40 and all municipalities, including Mebane, to make its own enrollment projections for both districts. 41 42 Woolpert Capacity Calculations 43 The current SAPFO utilizes the building capacity estimates based on state and school district 44 guidelines as established in 2002. The capacity estimates have been updated based on 45 renovations, additions, and changes to state guidelines in the intervening decades, but the 46 underlying base assumptions have not been reviewed in that time. The base assumptions also 47 have not been updated to accommodate Pre-K and Exceptional Children (EC) classrooms. 48 49 As a part of the Woolpert assessment and long-term capital planning contract, the consultants 50 went through each school building and conducted a thorough review of the size, condition, and 51 type of each room. After accounting for each type of room present in each building, Woolpert was 22 1 able to make its own capacity estimates for the districts. These estimates can exclude the 2 classrooms that the districts have identified as being reserved for Pre-K. EC classrooms are 3 calculated as having a much smaller capacity than general classrooms. The estimates also have 4 a formula to account for course diversity, like arts, band and languages classes that require 5 different rooms. It prorates the capacity of each school to 95% at the Elementary level, 85% at 6 the Middle School level and 75%at the High School level. Based on utilizing the Woolpert capacity 7 framework, capacity in the districts increases by 78 students. If the Board of Commissioners 8 changes capacity policy to exclude Pre-K classrooms, the capacity drops by 574 seats, resulting 9 in a net decrease of 496. The table below illustrates the changes in calculation at both districts 10 and at each level. Chapel Hill -11 Carrboro . . Middle SAPFO Capacity 5664 2944 3975 12583 Woolpert Capacity(/excluding Pre-K) 5704/5334 2993 3701 12398/12028 Difference (/excluding Pre-K) +40/-330 +49 -274 -185/-555 Orange County SchoolsMiddle SAPFO Capacity 3361 2166 2939 8466 Woolpert Capacity(/excluding Pre-K) 3655/3451 2396 2678 8729/8525 Difference (/excluding Pre-K) +294/+90 +230 -261 +263/+59 12 13 In reviewing the ORECI projections against both capacity models, no district exceeds the CAPS 14 threshold of 105%, 107% or 110% for Elementary, Middle and High School. That threshold 15 represents the point at which CAPS could no longer be issued for new developments, and the 16 County must plan for a school expansion. In both districts, the high school enrollment will exceed 17 100% capacity at different points in the 10-year horizon with the Woolpert Capacity calculation. 18 19 Kirk Vaughn, Budget Director, introduced Thomas Dudley and Brian Godfrey. 20 Thomas Dudley of ITRE made the following presentation: 21 22 Slide #1 School Enrollment Projections OREd Land Use Study (OPERATIONS RESEARCH AND EDUCATION LABORATORY (TRE INSTITUTE FOR TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND EDUCATION o.•«�.(n+���"l�,°nM`« CENTENNIAL CAMPUS iP NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY JANUARY 16, 2024 23 23 1 Slide #2 Operations Research and Education Laboratory (OREd) County Commissioner Meeting: January 16th, 2024 Outline ■About ITRE and OREd ■ Land Use Study: Process and Results ■ Out-of-Capacity Tables ■ Discussion / questions &Answers 2 3 4 Slide #3 About ITRE and OREd ITRE The Institute for Transportation Research and Education(ITRE) In01y41 Te rl Iron e,.. tia.dl<au�r.m. conductstransportation research and provides professional training,education,and technical services. 5 6 7 8 24 1 Slide #4 About ITRE and OREd OREd is an unbiased, third-party, evaluation research group that helps to depoliticize the school planning process. OREd guides di stricts through data-driven solutions and policies using stakeholder interviews, GIS analysis, mathematical modeling, and applied decision science. www.itre.ncsu.edu/OREd 2 3 4 Slide #5 About ITRE and OREd : The Role of 0REd Integrated Planning far Schools and Communities (IP SAC) Reflect on Historic Enrollment Data (Enrollment Forecasting) Account for Current and Future Growth (Land Use Studies) Compare Projected Needswith School Capacities (out-of-Capacity Table) 5 6 7 8 9 25 1 Slide #6 About ITRE and OREd: : Client Map (1990-2023) 2 3 Thomas Dudley said they have worked with many districts over the history of the program. 4 5 Slide #7 Land Use Studer: Interv1ew Roster County Leadership and Planning Cy S tober Plmr ng 8a Iry pecliory Dnectm Orange County NishTuvedi TraxupertahmDuectcr Steve Bnxdley Ecomxnic Develapment Director Municipal Laurier" City ot'Mebare Chris Rollins City Manager Ashley Owrbey Development Director Corey Isles Plarunng Manager Taxn of Chapel Hill Dwight Bassett Ecornxnic Develapment Director Town of Canborb Marty Roup- Developmeyd Review Adnuds tratar TcwnofHi1bbonugh ShannanCampbell PlmrdwardEcoannicDeveloprmidManager CmmBmmidy S AIMholders OWASA VishmGangadhararr DirectorofFagueerugardPbunrg 6 7 8 9 26 1 Slide #8 Land Use Study: Enrollment Factors • Transportation AccessibiIity • 1-40Widening Project—Improved access to Durham,RTP,and Triad • S.Chu rtonStreet Widening—Improved access to Chapel Hill and Hilhbomugh • Hilbbarough Train 5tation—Establish passe rger rai I service • Chapel Hill Bus Rapid Trans it(BRT)—Establish dedicated bus lanes • Industrial Development • Buckhorn Econ rim icDevelop ment District • Demand for Life Sciences&Advanced Manufacturing:Thermo F'sher Scientific • Proximity to the Megasites:Vin Fast,Walt peed,Greensboro Rand alp h Toyota ■ Residential Growth • Widespread growth in multiple regions aft he district • "Vertical"high-density infill growth in southern orange • "Hor¢ontargrowth into vacant sitesincentral and western orange • Water&Sewer • overall robust infrastructure,th a ugh wastewater capacity limitations ins ame areas 2 1 J 4 Slide #9 Land Use Study: Development Inventory �- I]reJ zrrnn�rY,rn u,:o rrt,,:gd�rcJ � cb,c..nx.. I® wrr:lwll Se '[h•ri YNI ml!•a ws a5• wll Y•c,a. 11MRLP4.taaLl, , 1z Shwdwl u•,., r.:L— a5r —.1 wll &IIaV Tnrb PROM ' !„•,c.,•cwll ala ca.cl wll Fa Mau-CAS✓<11RwGMa lialnl I is ra oro c.l�na ,c Y,s I 51 Halal 4C .(Ml .tmws sm ,t Y,: 19N 9traai dE mb— I ke.^�...e.sseslS,*•e•7'r�l sa wlF Ynq,a• hmlY lop. a, I r1l,rlen .hla„•^ 9 L•Inn lNe,! Y WrryrrCmrrlP • ^� .4.•,ALc wl IDI —.1 wl SflRWR�1'LwMr ' �Y.,SrlVra >� = f ulk••v^GLclwl SN GLrcl wll �rN1ylA I A 1�anbeP !I nrlc u�Y,t,...tt rcl wll 76 14ab_ .s ac arcl wll �ru•��{lall ]E _Ca31tl1H1 r •.vc u ,�riljLlR ]a C tlNll y. .^c ufn,.hT rcl wll w.ytiY,d O,q.•IHII L Prla,Cmnl!_ I,c6 ro0 mr I,c 6�,•nc• Irr ,c Y,s r.,rwanr,nn.nulr, I.T.i xH . r.lAr,.•s•u rm�^„f � I51 GLrcl wl :.. l� R�r.lr CnylltY .4mwow•c I�r ,4 Y,s .io i mw•vrla _ I� ,4 Y,s Iv•P, -_ 9 d'1 Cmntr •k^a,ctl 4tl I•-no-•• Il9 GLrcl wl �� rm. _...,. •k^a,ctl G,dc•s 115 GLrcl wl Fd— rla 4lvss Inw•.n^a i lar GLrcl wl YM'IlY ] urgr Cmnlr CLc•v••]nu. _ !b L•Inn laialYl! I 5 txrl�ry Cu�lll. erk t.•c ��nen Iain Ir'rryrCmn�r_ n , _ nevnlm Ir.,m.[mmT wre�d arcl6�w.trmwa•os — wll Yne,a' ilr.ci,lr.r�,s .rr�r¢rrwrrtr IW.m�I F,.z^rra�W,IKMa•,r,i! m1+^M,S.A•sK 0a GLrcl wl 5 6 Thomas Dudley said this shows the list of planned developments that will occur in the 7 school districts. 27 1 Slide #10 Membership Forecast: Out-of-Capacity Tables Orange County Schools- SAPFO Capacities icQwli,r t'�rW Yn«ti I•er.� b Mnr.,.pLY n„ I =-U 1 =-a x21426 202.x? 2NI-2i +.. =23-19 W29a1 902a-31 ioal2ON->a MIJ 31 �,.na.e wcc4x W.W"mi mry UM*19 I1f41 1 nLarl�ia+eltl 1 Cero'S1 Ekenenri 429 2G1 296 28,5 29 293 965 316 934 842 347 364 U11Wn4 Ct175ki E4irp'4gty A$ a'"81 W.a5 Ekefl v%" A50 496 462 414 418 4t& 419 417 419 41 aln2 414 414 Hl4dlu�Elsmwaery 425 Nrm Hopp Elon'gniarq Sts 514 S1U 52t Paniwao Elehti wry° 510 812 316 377 3041 306 391 2S2 284 299 291 264 Capacity Legend 9r"P4dtt E17m9n4ily SC2 7e14" 5361 3055 1043 949D 3*74 3164 9117 $157 1184 $173 990 5711 wl+�tgat:lter4Y+(t6-a] _ gS'w,-1pv , A L SMoatk MIddk 740 693 839 633 655 544 662 643 670 575 E86 558 188%_18616 0 N1111 y HU ddo 7W 411 405 463 47S 300 575 4152 575 507 616 627 'Oa4M1f44 Nlm* 724 535 590 a.t7 � 549 _ 5A4_ 549 542 5W $112 539 Toa h. 2166 1$579 WA 1543 1641 1494 •€31 1768_--1190 4dtii.d 7445 1863 High Sahoo44a 10 42'4 Cotler 8,7,24 1 111T 11 �1 114] I.: I'.'- I '60 1313,- CrergaHN 1392 1222 1239 Iii' '- F'mlRarshpAudnlry �dty 42- 42 42 42 4-1 426 42 42r 42 42 c ,n�nra.ararae TCiW I ■ I $393 I 3414 ?324 7376 3452 2441 7310 754E 7657 7&84 7779 CBarinlahxarnv Imlrw M1or Tnropararlm _s ®__.® ^-_—nM1?NCO uarlm SyeWn Tmal 9454 5016 9G� 1'47d 7133 'f4Si T3ffi _.7432 7529 4536 7T3] 7854 M1a.har„nra s.ar.N.ra, mn:lly]� 2 3 Commissioner McKee asked what impact redistricting would have regarding the less than 4 95% capacity. 5 Chair Bedford asked Kirk Vaughn why the Board is doing this. 6 Kirk Vaughn said the current SAPFO is a mathematical model. He said that this will take 7 historical enrollment and capture the impact of new development. 8 Commissioner Hamilton thanked them all for this effort. She said she would like to see 9 and understand what the student generation formulas are. She asked how they can know that it 10 is the case for Orange County. She said that she is happy to go into closed session if that is 11 something that cannot be shared publicly but that it is very important to her to understand the 12 model. She asked how they check to make sure the assumptions are accurate. 13 Thomas Dudley said that the SGR shows the students come from the new developments. 14 He said they model that based on other neighborhoods of similar size and location. 15 Commissioner Hamilton asked if they could see the model. 16 Thomas Dudley said that he will talk that over with staff. 17 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if there is any accounting for students who may leave 18 public schools for charter schools. 19 Thomas Dudley said their model assumes that students will continue leaving public 20 schools for charters at the current rate they are already leaving. 21 Commissioner Hamilton said it would be good to have some way to see what may drive 22 an increase of students at Partnership Academy and Phoenix Academy. She said it seems 23 unrealistic that it would stay the same. 24 Chair Bedford said that the Partnership Academy is moving. 25 Commissioner McKee said they are moving to the old facility on Hwy 70 and this is an 26 improvement for lunches and athletic fields. 27 Kirk Vaughn said he got those answers from school staff. He said that enrollment is based 28 on growth and district and charter is based on application rates. He said that was how they 29 modeled the future numbers. 30 31 28 1 Slide #11 Membership Forecast: Out-of-Capacitor Tables Orange Counter Schools- Woolpert Capacities tSvrdLr.r4 a-------'Yu,4B-1 4514 24 1184 11�b1 M240 1 Una I imm I MT-26 Han 2u x 20"Od1 ! 2(Qidl W17M i b7d&5i 1.xo>z+.nmrv.na:, wa.14.+�w i44m41112ry Scho0R(K-5) Ctr*al ElsmtBviary 401 Nti 2N WE, 3t6 394 342 347 ;351 ]rrNLnQIrc..,_. E11,1n4 Ctwokc Elam4.51ry Sw - - .Gt"9(ewhEL-MvM1y 412 506 402 '-412 414 414 Hlkba1n43h lkmelierf GSE 437 437 437 477 437 477 437 777 417 43,` 437 New Htse Eleni ftbv� 552 527 514 514 523 $88 5241 544 549 551 558 359 Palhua}s E3MnihMry 478 1 312 1 319 347 3M 3416 301 232 2114 296 251 -q" Capdtl5y Legtntl 1TI,v NO EkmeMit3' 559 554 56.2 'r.mb 3453 3656 ]1142 3438 3474 3141 3117 3157 3164 3171 ]249m-7k211 � C 9696 Piddle Sthedla(Balt -1 ' A L 5teemdck'Al", 677 633 63¢ 633 SM 644M7- 663 676 476 546 535 Gtdvtfy.htddt 6x36 411 w 475 598 52G SU 579 BW 616 S2? 1G0l4�-1�" O-G.M ddl. 624 4138 647 Q541 1574 J46 542 5se- 935 63a 7b1d49 2.1@5 ISTD 1535 1643 5@64 1964 17.11 1705 iTN 1948 1943 1663 Mph$61100+9!8.12) C9dw RP44 H.,M 1326 1117 1136 1171 [143 1167 1174 1173 1128 :2:U 'tom 73-12— C-l-93 2 C-l-93111gh 1316 1.2.2. 1]39 1160 11411 1253 1-186 1253 -1 lam PeYYr3nhb hca4emY 4a a ;L7'. At 42 43 42 4Z _— `< Ogn4av IY,,,rA,N Tblads MY3 2312 2414 2314 737E 24M 2414 2940 29960-lest- 2WA 27.75 ImlvaMrTnmpm,4m 8Ts6em Tet91 6927 7416 71139 7476 Tisa it" Tau 7432 7664 7536 r733 12.14 � 9.,lonM1,mrauo4an M1mM14nF,innY�irrly 2 3 4 Slide #12 Membership Forecast: Out-of-Capacitor Tables CHCC - SAFFO Capacities 9iP+:r�+r cawlmx Fw44i04414uAh-1874 049 i.ia I ids]-SI 32245✓® 94!69 swFST t46rAJ 311.5.5.1 i '4511.15 415, 31 I 57]1.1! iPi-7:.] °4]].w IMnsm11r7 6i1i9194111�-0I 1.ims,..nrar...a:. It,4a,ea EbmenlQ7r - 3 4 1: 1 1,5 1v"� a'"di°"wOC4 rlw-KO EbnK41a13• 4 44r.swro-c,wa4., - YPrrNnalrc•.... Sm.y EkmemorY A 4u 44, 1- .4 11 - - - Ep11rsmElam4rocly 496 3541 356 3412 3511 4417 404 -012 ;416 4,M� 4341 434 ES>LS FM Ek111OU1y 546 339 334 322F 334 312 315 347 335 ]01FFGEW—,d ry 532 510 493 492 404 491 499 4111 50£ 152 517G1 W-1 El6Anory 1 11Ykf pEl�numnf FAB 46H 459 461 4416 449 454 494 470 49] km5CPWEkmavdrr Capacity Legend Id141y Gt4N4 hii 565 BOW 399 351 ,"FA M 36F 372 S7f1 3411 X12m71 4 4 441 + rt 9696 741413 60414 d576 4503 4442 "A ►106 ilii 1 1916 416E I dM 461E U12 Ib44N 4sha416 IwJ1 14,Iety, 1110Xw10646 :tllh'4b1P 4 4 115 9 V 5 ? 0' _ U4,fid3:. I TOff I 'R3 1 703 004 W4 570 1 7T0 I am i W3 I 017 I0:70 63b mr111'r..dtle 772 727 'FOS 705 57'1 777 %W. 2264 I M& I XMI 1 2711 1 2144 I Wt I =11 1 250 1 3662 1 Zei£ 1 1509 1 HIS 6eto4k 14-151 Canban H-A, Eft PI W HILI1ff7Q 55871 *A9 I�]P E—Chw.IHd:H'P. I+1'12 1370 1190 1]:23 1334 1302 1.2A1 1109 1279 I1T1 IF41 opr,navwmrA am Ph—.&.31—eH4h CC� 37 39 ]9 311 3E 3B 3e 78 39 341 33 r4r,4a,1,4m rm 79t41s ''.aift - —M-- awe 325E W25 x1341 311E 3956 7611 3011 WTI BuunM1,N[4ue4m aw—T941 1 125M 11216 TIM I i"M MNA t111d. 11906 11M 191173 11112 11225 1151 M1mM14nFainn4�iwiv n:IW4em 5 6 7 8 9 29 1 Slide #13 Membership Forecast: Cut-of-Capacity Tables CHCCS- Woolpert Capacities Fbr at�:.��...s1s1.0 sm,aib arrb.lr1a1 allaae ao-atsa marm a111a3. aih4al 1aw4a Elea M-i E+:hnoY pC•q I.xr�a+.nrcirc.�.a:� N.Y}:SY.iG EIIII W21y 5123 3F] 3'3!1 351 ;454464 3M 379 a�,a�e nraoc4 E bo E3 Im" '}LII 4aL 495 451 4n4 t53 >.WmpYr4wsXu 3-1 Ek..h.rmry l!ij.T xo..xn:ln<•.... EP1N(.rS EkrM1W101y - 3 1. 441 Esbn HIR Eh-.,"o.V 339 334 37T 334 3'i7 350 mill 3C7RG EIam4r11 , 'CA i R 1517GEA OWEbA'"-1 q Ew IWy 4.+11 453 441 955 {'1'd' 44,3 479 4k33m�E6 m 4.-1 e Chnarily Legrnd ww Gmw E93A1-w9 74i 3h4 351 351 3a4 sT+ 734 3R2 R,eerfAir Ekemi4sT a v 1 A c90% Tolai p9} 1 "7 IBLt 4liZ 4w 4816 4611 4111 4616 4711 Iiia 4861 130k.-1 pd�w, odd*SIN011 R 41 _ WID"00 Uddo 1.7? 7I,1g TAg s17, I 1^ 67$ 91# +31a IifO P.Z2 _..Fii9 F`.; - 9p11•A,._1p6y6. DdbrWhWNW Phim.6 dol u,.i 9a ErI ywrIY!• $1h111 r411]fB r. .. I T sxs siaa I–sera—I-airs I I n 5e --34 I z�9aaP�__I [—b—High 951 l7Fx �;t 9TZ 9li C—W19 High iS3.5 154!11 1437 E4'W[CtWel s"M Ph.— h' 112a a in 3A .ia—i__...__._...._ _....___..&"- Imlva4rTnmPm+tlm T4Ni 37ni �t�iia 8i9 9911 919 5177 991f I 9o.rch ntl[a ua4m &yMiPI TaAIf i1'Bii 1436. 1141Ri.,a,_1.1.7Ai lUSA siwa 1190® 1139 s-9T3 ii'ii 11236 'IM hmhamn�snnonrryv o�n:INP40LPx 2 3 4 5 Slide #14 Discussion Questions & Answers 6 7 8 9 30 1 Kirk Vaughn made the following presentation: 2 3 Slide #1 O'MNGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA oolpert Inc. Capacitor Calculations January 16, 20124 4 5 6 Slide #2 W CaLPERT CAPACITY CALCULATIONS • As part of the Long-Range Optimization Plan, oolpert created a full inventory of every room in the two district's portfolios. • Collected information about the size, condition, use of each room. • Using that information, Woolpert creates a standardized capacity assessment of each school based on the number of educational spaces by type. ORANGE COUNTY NO Tii Ci%RDLINA 7 8 9 10 31 1 Slide #3 WOOLPERT CAPACITY CALCULATIONS • Each type of Educational Space has its own capacity assumption, including EC classrooms. Level ClassType Students/ Total RM Roams. HS krt Classroom 22 12 HS 3andClassrooms 38 6 HS Xch4ttrings Classrooms 42 2 Tama Class room/lack Box/Theater HS rts 42 7 HS Jass room-Core Academics 22 245 HS TE-GeneralHI h-l3a Space 21 8 HS E General Lab 19 17 HS Itness weight Roam 19 11 HS 3ymnaslum Main 38 7 HS clenceClassroom fLab Combo 22 50 HS C Life Skills Classroom 8 3 HS C Self-Contained Classroom 8 b ORANGE COUNTY NOM-H CAROLINA 2 3 4 Slide #4 W OOLPERT CAPACITY CALCULATIONS • Because we have information at the classroom level, we can exclude Pre-K Classrooms as reserved by each district. CHCCS ... Rooms Reserved for Pre-N 24 11 K-5 gMciq Reduced 374.5 2033 Pre-K DtpackV 320 175 2024 Pre-K Enrollment 250 91 Percent Utilized 78% 52% • Requires change in BoCC capacity policy to remove Pre-K. 4 ORANGE COUNTY ti[W11-1 CAROUNA 5 6 Commissioner Hamilton asked to go back to slide #2. She asked if Woolpert made 7 assumptions about classroom totals based on assumptions. 8 Kirk Vaughn said they made estimates based on the type of classroom. 9 Commissioner Fowler said the numbers between SAPFO capacity and Woolpert capacity 10 are the same, but the colors are changing because Woolpert has a different definition of what is 11 working and what is not. 12 Kirk Vaughn said if a building is under capacity, rooms might be used for another purpose. 13 32 1 Slide #5 WOOLPERT CAPACITY CALCULATIONS • Also accounts for course diversity (i.e. languages, arts, band, etc.) by prorating the total capacity of the building at different rates. • Elementary at 95% • Middle at 85% • Highschool at 75% ORANGE COUNTY NOKI-1-1 C-ARIDLINA 2 3 Commissioner Fowler asked what is meant by prorating. 4 Kirk Vaughn said the total number of classrooms with the number of students that can fit 5 into the classroom to determine building capacity. He said that they assume that not every 6 classroom is always full because of required electives and such. 7 Chair Bedford said that is why the high school numbers were reduced and some 8 elementary schools gained. 9 10 Slide #6 WOOLPERT CAPACITY CALCULATIONS Comparison to SAPFO • Overall change from current SAPFO capacity is negligible, but clear variation at the school, district and educational levels. • Increase of 78 students from SAPFO, but a decrease of 4965 when excluding Pre-K Chapel Hill-CArrhare City Er@in@ntseV Middle High Total sthbols SAPFO Capael[ 5664 1 2944 1 397512583 Woolpert iCapachy{/exuding 5704/ 12398/ Pre 5334 2993 3701 1202.8 Difference excludln pre-X +40 30-3 +49 -274 -195 1-555 Orahile County Schools El�rneAtary Middle High total SAPFO C' tlt 3361 2166 2939 18466 Woolpent Capadty{/excluding 3655/ 8729/ 2396 2678 Pre 3491 8523 Difference @ cludin pre-K +294/+90 +230 -261 +263 +59 ORANGE COUNTY NOItTI-1 CAROLINA 1 1 12 Commissioner Hamilton asked if pre-K is excluded, does that mean that those classrooms 13 with those students are just not counted. 14 Kirk Vaughn said yes. 33 1 Chair Bedford said that is what the school boards have been advocating for pre-K 2 classrooms to be removed from capacity. 3 4 Slide #7 WOOLPERT CAPACITY CALCULATIONS Combined Table of new OREd Projections and Woolpert Capacity (excluding Pre-K). Etementwv Schoolis 5334 4575 86% 1 4852 91% MtddleSchools 2993 1 2716 91% 1 2624 88% High Schools 3781 1 3974 107% 1 3806 101% System Total 12028 11265 94% 11282 94% DREd SY 2034 Orange Couunty Schools Capacity birollment Percent or Eorallonvil PeFcent oF Elementary Sdwois 3451 3055 88% 3211 93% hRM4 Schools 2396 1579 66% 1863 78% High SchcAs 2678 2382 89% 2779 104% System Total 8525 7016 82% 7854 92% Nate.CAPS Threshold Is set(or 105%at Elementary.107%al Middle ORANGE COUNTY and 110%al High School NOlUrl7 CAROLINA 5 6 7 Slide #8 WO0LPERT CA PAC ITY CA LC U LATI 0 N S Implications for Bond Planning • Sufficient Capacity for Consolidation and Swing Space at Elementary and Middle School levels. Growth in western part of the county recommends location near Mebane rather than renovating existing site. Possible need to reserve bond capacity for wing expansions at High School levels. ORANGE COUNTY NOWT-1-I CAROLINA s 9 Commissioner Fowler asked if the bond capacity is beyond what they already 10 recommended. 11 Kirk Vaughn said this would mean that some of the bond might have to go to high school 12 rather than other priorities. He said that it would not be required but it should be considered. 34 1 Commissioner Hamilton asked if mobile classrooms were included in either of the 2 capacities. 3 Kirk Vaughn said no. 4 Chair Bedford asked the Board if they would like to move forward with amending the 5 capacity framework. 6 Travis Myren said current SAPFO will require the Board to only require notice to other 7 partners. He said that if other parts of SAPFO are changed, would require approval. 8 Commissioner Hamilton said she is not comfortable making changes until she sees the 9 model. 10 Travis Myren said there is no time constraint for the projection models for this year. He 11 said they would need to provide notice by February of next year of the change. 12 Commissioner McKee said he wants to make sure that any discussion about projections 13 has the full involvement of both school systems. 14 Kirk Vaughn said that they contracted with the school districts directly. 15 Chair Bedford asked about thoughts on capacity. 16 Commissioner Richards said it is interesting to her that some are dismissive of SAPFO. 17 She said when they discussed the school and Greene Tract, SAPFO was not considered. She 18 said that if they are doing both, that is good, but she said she supports the methodology taking 19 development into account. 20 Chair Bedford asked how often the capacity numbers will be able to be updated and 21 whether staff will be able to do it. She asked how much that costs. 22 Kirk Vaughn said they have the framework from Woolport and that it would be possible. 23 He said the land use is only every so often, so it is not the same scale. 24 Commissioner Fowler said it would be nice to follow this for a year to see how it operates. 25 She said that it is hopeful to use this, and it will be good to know what they functionally need. She 26 said she is leaning towards that, but they need to see the information. She said that she does not 27 want to exclude pre-K rooms. 28 Chair Bedford said she has advocated for the pre-K count but it is not mandated they build 29 for the Pre-K but she thinks this board needs to do it. She said they have a joint meeting coming 30 up with the school boards. 31 32 PUBLIC COMMENT: 33 Kari Hamel said she would like to see the modeling and methodology shared with the 34 public. She said that one of the boards asked to see where students were living that were leaving 35 for charter schools. She said that she is unsure how many language teachers are being used in 36 the two districts. She questioned if a classroom is needed if there is a 40% shift in some of these 37 subjects. She said she would also like to see the projections include the educational adequacy. 38 She said she would forward this information. 39 40 Chair Bedford asked if virtual instruction is calculated at all. 41 Thomas Dudley said they are counting students in seats and that is the standard across 42 districts. 43 Chair Bedford said there are some dual enrollment students and asked if they were 44 factored into the usage. 45 Thomas Dudley said he will check into dual enrollment with Durham Tech. 46 47 b. Discussion on School and County Capital Planning and Financing Scenarios 48 The Board reviewed and discussed financing scenarios related to implementing the long-range 49 County Facility Plan and the School Long Range Facilities Optimization Plan and provided 50 direction to staff on adjustments to the financing scenarios defined in this abstract with the goal 51 of adopting a preferred plan of finance by the end of January 2024. 35 1 BACKGROUND: The County engaged two facility consulting firms to evaluate the condition and 2 adequacy of both County and School facilities and to make prioritized recommendations on capital 3 improvements over a ten-year planning horizon. Both plans utilize the Facilities Conditions Index 4 which quantifies facility conditions and can be used to prioritize repairs and replacements. 5 6 County Facility Plan 7 The County selected O'Brien Atkins Associates in March 2022 to review the state of County 8 facilities from both a facility condition and space planning context over a ten-year period. O'Brien 9 Atkins Associates presented a final draft to the Board of Commissioners on November 9, 2023. 10 That draft identified eight decision points to improve public safety, justice, social services, and 11 recreational facilities over the next ten years. The lowest cost alternative identified a total of$130 12 million in renovation and construction needs. 13 14 School Facility Plan 15 The County and School Districts selected Woolpert in March 2023 to review the state of the school 16 facilities from a facility condition, space planning, and educational adequacy context. Woolpert 17 last presented to the County Board on December 4, 2023 outlining four options to address the 18 next five to fifteen years of school facility needs. The total cost of those options ranges from $219 19 million to $1.1 billion. Woolpert is recommending an option that would require $1 billion in capital 20 investment over the next 15 years. 21 22 County staff has worked with the County's financial advisors to determine alternative plans of 23 finance that would be needed to fund the various options. This presentation details the debt 24 metrics that are used to evaluate the amount of debt the County carries, the revenue and 25 expenditure assumptions contained in the debt model, and the tax rate and debt policy 26 implications of the options presented by Woolpert. 27 28 Debt Metrics 29 As credit rating agencies evaluate the County's financial condition, they examine three primary 30 metrics related to the amount of debt the County is obligated to pay. 31 32 • Ten Year Payout Ratio 33 This metric measures the amount of principal to be paid in the next ten-year period to 34 prevent backloading debt payments. One rating agency adds a positive adjustment if the 35 ten-year payout ratio is 65% or greater. This means that 65% of outstanding principal 36 payments are paid within ten years. The County's current payout ratio is 67.1% and is 37 managed by structuring level principal payments over the entire term of the debt issue. 38 39 • Debt to Assessed Value Ratio 40 This metric measures the amount of outstanding tax supported debt as a percentage of 41 the County's assessed value (tax base). This is one measure of the County's ability to 42 raise revenue to make debt service payments. As assessed values increase, the County's 43 ability to generate enough revenue to pay back existing debt also increases. The County's 44 current policy is that total outstanding debt will not exceed 3% of assessed value. The 45 County's current debt to assessed value ratio is 1.28%. Having a ratio under 3% also 46 results in a positive credit rating adjustment. All of the financing scenarios discussed 47 below maintain a debt to assessed value ratio of under 3%. 48 49 Debt Service to General Fund Revenue Ratio 50 This metric compares the amount of debt service payments the County is obligated to pay 51 on an annual basis to total projected general fund revenues. This is a quantitative 36 1 representation of the County's ability to pay debt obligations on an annual basis. If debt 2 service is growing at a higher rate than general fund revenues, the proportion of the 3 County's budget that is dedicated to debt will increase and lower the ability to fund other 4 operating expenses. The County's current policy is to maintain annual debt service costs 5 at or below 15% of general fund revenues. The County has modestly exceeded this policy 6 in the past. According to one rating agency, a "strong" position is 8% to 15%, and an 7 "adequate" position is 15% to 25%. In FY2023-24, debt service is 13.60% of total general 8 fund revenues. This ratio is tracked in each of the financing scenarios below. 9 10 Model Assumptions 11 The debt model makes several assumptions to predict the likely impact that a given amount of 12 borrowing will have on the debt service to general fund revenue metric and the property tax rate 13 required to make annual debt service payments. 14 15 Assessed Value 16 The assessed value growth assumption is important because it is directly linked to the 17 debt service to assessed value metric discussed above, and it dictates the amount of 18 revenue that each penny on the property tax rate can generate. 19 20 In most years, assessed value grows by approximately 2% annually. However, in years 21 in which a revaluation occurs, assessed value grows at a much higher rate as all of the 22 real property in the County is valued as closely as possible to market value. The 23 Department of Revenue has indicated that current market values are well above the 24 assessed values that were established in the 2020 revaluation. In the second quarter of 25 2023, the NC Department of Revenue estimated that current assessed values are 26 representing approximately 64.8% of market value. As a result, total assessed value may 27 increase by as much as 50% when adjusted to market conditions, increasing the value of 28 one penny from $2,304,674 to $3,476,344 which is reflected in the debt model. In future 29 revaluation years, the rate of growth is moderated to approximately 11% which is 30 consistent with prior revaluation years. 31 32 Total General Fund Revenue 33 Total General Fund Revenue is primarily comprised of property tax (68%) and sales tax 34 (15.6%). Total property tax collections are calculated by applying a tax rate to total 35 assessed value which is assumed to grow as described above. Sales tax collections are 36 assumed to grow at a rate of 4% annually. Additionally, the model assumes that the 37 operating budget will increase by 3% annually which requires associated revenue growth. 38 39 Current Existing and Planned Resources 40 The County has already authorized and planned funding in the Capital Investment Plan 41 (CIP) that would partially address the needs identified in the facility studies. The County 42 has approximately$202 million in existing and planned tax supported capital investments, 43 and the School Districts have approximately$148 million in approved and planned funding 44 to address the Woolpert Scenarios. Funding for school recurring capital and technology 45 investments are not included in the effort to fund the Woolpert recommendations. 46 Count Projects Approved Projects Not Financed $10 million Count Projects —Ten Year CIP $192 million Total Existin and Planned $202 million 37 School Districts Existing and Planned Tax Supported Borrowing1 Remaining 2016 Bond Funds $15 million Remaining Deferred Maintenance Funds $38 million School Projects—Ten Year CIP $95 million Total Existing and Planned $148 million 2 3 Financing Scenarios 4 Each of the financing scenarios is evaluated on the basis of tax rate impacts and the resulting 5 debt service to general fund revenue metric. In order to manage the number of scenarios 6 presented, each model assumes that existing and planned tax supported borrowing is funded at 7 the amounts contained in the accepted Capital Investment Plan. 8 9 The variable in each of the scenarios is the amount of new funding for County and School facility 10 needs. As a starting point, the amount of funding for County projects represents either the first 11 five years of the County Facility Plan or all ten years. The financing scenario illustrations 12 (attached) indicate the tax rate impact on each scenario if only the first five years of County 13 projects were funded over the ten-year period in an effort to reduce the number of options. The 14 amount of funding for school projects substantially align with the options contained in the Woolpert 15 study of long range school capital needs. To provide a consistent comparison between options, 16 all models assume an upfront tax increase in FY 2026, after a potential bond referendum in 17 November 2024. 18 SchoolScenario New County New One Time Tax Peak FundingTitle Funding . I Revenue Al $75 million $130 million_ 4.00 cents 17.4% A2 $130 million $130 million 4.57 cents 18.0% C1 $130 million $400 million 7.89 cents 22.0% C2 $130 million $300 million bond + 8.66 cents 19.4% $100 million pay-go D $130 million $630 million 11.22 cents 26.6% Middle $75 million $200 million bond + 5.49 cents 17.2% $50 million pay-go 19 20 21 Scenario Descriptions 22 23 Scenario Al 24 o Spreads the first five years of County Facility Plan ($70 million) over ten years and 25 adds 3% annual inflation ($5 million) to account for spreading the projects over a 26 longer timeframe 27 o Continues the $130 million school bond from FY2023-24 CIP 28 o When combined with existing and planned resources, provides $219 M in the first 29 five years to meet Woolpert's Option A and an additional $59 million over the ten- 30 year planning horizon to address other priority needs. 31 o The County would have sufficient collateral to finance this scenario with a Limited 32 Obligation Bond instead of a voter approved General Obligation Bond. 33 34 38 1 Scenario A2 2 o Funds the County Facility Plan short range and mid-range projects ($130 million) 3 over ten years 4 o Continues the $130 million school bond from FY2023-24 CIP 5 o When combined with existing and planned resources, provides $219 M in the first 6 5 years to meet Woolpert's Option A and an additional $59 million over the 10 year 7 planning horizon to address other priority needs. 8 o The County would have sufficient collateral to finance this scenario with a Limited 9 Obligation Bond instead of a voter-approved General Obligation Bond. 10 11 Scenario B 12 Option B from the Woolpert report was not analyzed since it costs more ($1.1 billion)than 13 Option D ($1.0 billion) and does not address any of the educational adequacy or interior 14 space improvements. 15 16 Scenario C1 17 o Funds the County Facility Plan short range and mid-range projects ($130 million) 18 over ten years 19 o Adds a $400 million school bond 20 o When combined with existing and planned resources, yields total school resources 21 of$548 million which meets the Woolpert Option C target of$541.2 million with an 22 additional $6.8 million to address other priority needs. 23 Scenario C2 24 o Funds the County Facility Plan short range and mid-range projects ($130 million) 25 over ten years 26 o Adds a $300 million school bond and $100 million in pay-as-you go (cash) 27 o When combined with existing and planned resources, yields total school resources 28 of$548 million which meets the Woolpert Option C target of$541.2 million with an 29 additional $6.8 million to address other priority needs. 30 31 Scenario D 32 o Funds the County Facility Plan short range and mid-range projects ($130 million) 33 over ten years 34 o Adds a $630 million school bond to fund Phases I & II over ten years 35 o Does not include the third phase since it falls outside of the ten (10) year planning 36 horizon 37 o When combined with existing and planned resources, yields total school resources 38 of $778 million which meets the Woolpert Option D target of $776.9 million for 39 Phases I & 11 with an additional $1.1 million to address other priority needs. 40 41 Middle Scenario 42 o Due to the large difference in funding levels between Scenario A ($130 million for 43 school projects) and Scenario C ($400 million for school projects), staff are also 44 presenting a scenario between A and C. 45 o Spreads the first five years of County Facility Plan ($70 million) over ten years and 46 adds 3% annual inflation ($5 million) to account for spreading the projects over a 47 longer timeframe 48 o Adds a $200 million school bond and $50 million in pay-as-you go (cash) 49 o Woolpert will engage with the School Districts and the County to prioritize projects 50 to fit this budget, if chosen. 39 1 Bond Funding Practice 2 Historically, the County has allocated bond funds to the two school districts based on the average 3 daily membership in place at the time the bond was authorized. In FY 2023-24, that would mean 4 Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools would receive 58.44% of the funding, and Orange County 5 Schools would receive 41.56% of the total. Unlike in the operating budget where average daily 6 membership must be used to allocate funding, the County is not obligated to fund capital projects 7 in the same way. 8 9 Since the County now has a prioritized plan for school funding, bond funds could be allocated on 10 a project basis instead of by average daily membership. Given that average daily membership 11 helps to drive facility needs, moving to a project-based approach would not have a dramatic 12 impact on these allocations. Based on the projects contained in Phase 1 of the Woolpert 13 recommended Option D, Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools would implement projects 14 representing 58.2% of the total Phase I projects while Orange County Schools would implement 15 projects representing 41.8% of the recommended amount. 16 17 Travis Myren, Deputy County Manager, made the following presentation: 18 19 Slide #1 Agenda Item T•b GRANGE COUNTY NORZrH CAROLINA School and County Capital Planning and Financing Scenarios Board of Commissioners Business Meeting January 16, 2024 20 21 40 1 Slide #2 Purpose • Discuss financing scenarios related to implementing the County Facility Plan and the Long Range School optimization Plan and provide direction to staff on alternative scenarios • Goal of developing preferred plan of finance by the end of January 2024 --mil— ORANGE COUNT Y 2 3 4 Slide #3 2025- SRI Heftcrvare.t-lnk WhInl 90.1.231 S1t2 Renwme ltx w g IXC Ial liiwe C.rrx.anMy 1.tswer 0eik4.ng lar m� w end--gm 320,00[1 County F�ic �'ities ysnxa{IeY r6hvH. mle aca 4Y23 Ileamc1-1 JM.Jail Builtliriq Mmm S'hQifi LwdrnmSTnla1�.'to Cede Gri—xu ld a - -S7 O7r_63/, 2026 ourarn porlmg bl. I^� W [�Cti[Y'Ia1iLIL7"v4lWt.�i11GC11��C} Mpy[(1d�1[f�lObafi011 Pi JuuCINM J116F1CC nb L�IA}llkl ;4-•11 Ur :Tt'1 IfM1.9d�IW n nVl'laue�ia+1Y17g lo[ &551 X50 2027 4flzcrnr�nn E1ra71rf AtlsMney RwlAi�p Akiw�.fliaiYl.n Attnme+'ima r Mlk xnildirq BiAda • � SR3 AarTAcn lmrlui9lnl S37d,531 • Fifteen 15 earQ lan Q ❑M IIA.:rotwtly llu dmg¢t fAN xr'naI eMxel niemp.r a=a taf Finargvwy � SR6 0 Orelding `SL'E'S$9'J'�lg 1U?$ SR7 IdrarMl lAlglar 111'ICr�aaer.�'Y,1GL�S xulldlr,rw lm/Ld1S Ya E;iAYWY'riltr'SaoIuSF Fgc011Y 95,518,217 • Costs estimated for the „u„stw, m�e a,u eolaWIiGdrilq;rtilu{•.ylr fluae g first ten years ---- 2024 RR9 I1.k Cerceal R—Ai-al Mat.Nei Sim or Faw—Palk $17,3,10,951 • Option A-$130 million SR7n Hio!Tfi9nCre¢IRlil.l fluiirinn AAh5l—Molrrp"Bulldin0 Sa.266,799 263 • Option B-$137 million MR1 Fanp.I., 1.Aff�4,rwl{rW,FGrg o MR2 Om—mnxl''!"l jllbtxA•ijf ui W}IrtE jA mvgi w• OrG -P Scarf Adll—ly Sqi— S941097 • First five years(Short 243' MR3 0a9M Atlditinn le SatiMea n lledlL Ouildimjin G4apNlfill 516,026,726 Range)-o70 million LU C7 MR9 l?crcxraYr 7irQ.usptrrLaiian0 7dr Mw¢hvsi M¢:orlr¢ur Oukl'sg Addlnut $122,417 = 3032 MR6 Llui3e SIevIN v76ee al Malts Paul Silo.Mave iL o¢I of A.rtea CAIIH w Molrnpud Ste $72,53d,272 'a IiHv:mmfle grruald PlsiY eel ertnting J¢smiz[wnea ffirri`GfzrYWL:+alnr.LnnkB 57eMIR 0xux MRd Sparc S2,7a0,762 2033 MR? I]eemMl i;xeteei vA ainfm:-_1.1k,"lw el o'd.lu -.LkAdlaperl¢ng prege $ta,g31,15d MR8 6mP(1;J%,1llul Juranel:eMLAJ y—u fkulwuultrdxulldiliy WYu�e:wcrrGl l;.11dl� ?^9 q1i Space iru r1ls .1 C-1 i;.TR xl sw— 703:4 MR9 Rannvaie 31&cries Cimlrasmm.¢ie.lri 1w:Ccrza^v y 1400,755 f I r_•ualrtaim an YIn:.M Ila¢i 7^_nul.imnt nn lAe'.i 5 6 Travis Myren said the further out, the weaker the strength of the projections. 7 8 41 1 Slide #4 SchoolLong Range Optimization Plan OPTIONS RETURN ON INVESTMENT 'COSTPERYEAR X TIMELINE TOTAL INVESTMENT COMFORTABLE ` � &SAFE Add iesses No hugs hlocneaee Nn dditini�I msmmlmprl ! -5214rnillab 20% inelassmom to student ar renavML-d Syears offaGibiyr,-rrl; spies snpaCity uh..h COMFORTABLE M 17,-L SAFE, 1W 0 PLUS 10 YEAR As Nochanpes Nochanges Noaddltlonal ALL �* FACILITY NEEDS toclassmom Iastudont or 1P1y!"M willtyneixd, spxon capacity srncrots COMFORTABLE &SAFE, OrLa *96 IFSIIP6RADED 2 upgraded i -"tS4mlllion '��055Al2 million PL Eearnir,g tools, 10 PintsLEARMNGTOOLS Renovations Replacement New schoolsna space Change£ ;5{r[apt COMFORTABLE a &SAFE PLUS NEW 1 Upgraded 7 2 RPnLians Ipaning -Sfi]milin •�• N tools Replan, n[ New 15yean CONSTRICTION and right-,iz� sclwnls zenx is sta wvQm spares iFhw W5 replorM4rgwcl3}' f�.m nxr�ovyfr�s.amsi 2 3 4 Slide #5 ,Debt Metrics • Why measure debt? — Credit rating—Orange County is one of 13 North Carolina counties with highest rating(Aaa) Impacts the cost of borrowing --I�Higher credits get lowest interest rates Impacts annual budgeter Debt service is the first legally binding budget obligation if not managed,debtser"ce could crowd out spending on non-mandated services Andlor require a tax rate increase to pay debtplus mandated services ORANGE COUNTY 5 nresx-rra[=nx€�tuty� 5 6 7 8 42 1 Slide #6 Debt Metrics Ten Year Payout Ratio Measures the proportion of total outstanding principal will be paid off in the next ten(10)years Prevents backloading principal payments Positive adjustment it 10 year payout ratio is 65%or more Current ratio is 67.1% ORANGE COUNTY NOR'I-H C/kRL7LiNA 2 3 4 Slide #7 !Debt Metrics • Debt to Assessed Value Ratio Measures total tax supported debt as a percentage of total assessed value One measure of ability to pay debt service — As assessed value increases,the same tax rate generates more revenue County policy to keep total outstanding debt service at or below 3%of total assessed value — Current ratio is 1.28° All of the financing scenarios maintain a debt to assessed value ratio of 3%or less Debt Service to General Fund Revenue Ratio - Measures the amount of debt service due annually to projected general fund revenues — Another measure of ability to pay debt service except on an annual basis — Debt service is the first obligation in budgeting — If debt service is growing faster than general Fund revenue, less funding is available for everything else — County policy establishesa target of 15%of general fund revenues dedicated to debt service annually — Current ratio is 13.6" GRANGE COUNTY 7 NC)WYH CAR€3"r1JA 5 6 7 8 43 1 Slide #8 Debt Metric Summary Measure Current Target,lftlicy Current Value 10 Year Payout 65% 67.1% Principal satisfied in next tern years Debt to Assessed value 3% 1.28% Tamal tax supported debt at or below 3% of total assessed value Debt Service to General Fund 15% 13.6% Revenue Annual debt service at or below 45%of general farad revenue ORANGE COUNTY B NOR'r-H C/kRL7LiNA 2 3 4 Slide #9 Debt Model Assumptions • Projected Assessed Value Growth — Leasure of ability to pay Natural Growth—2%annually($470 million from FY2024 to FY2025) 2024 Revaluation 50%projected growth with Sales Ratio of 64.8% Projected assessed value Growth Illustration of Potent laI Impact of Revaluation on Pn bilGarns Reven ue Ne ut ra I Tax Rate Sou-o W Given Me new assessed value, what would Che new rax 5�u.ow rate neem to be to Produce the safne amount of propeq tax fevenue as the yearprior to the revaluation ettel 54m:o W accounting for natural grovKh S3P,0W $am.mW . kA jlf.Off Prior 60 3.33 billion fl 5353 $194.01 mkfion Rewm1 U 5661 mak mos 102c JQ? 4026 mag Ion mai 142 IM ma. 205 After Reoad $0,5 04 billion Efiedem $19$.33 moon FY2025.26 ORANGE (--OUNTY 9 NC)WI-H C:A.RC3111vA 5 6 Commissioner McKee noted that revenue neutral does not mean revenue neutral for the 7 property owners. 8 Travis Myren said that is correct. 9 10 44 1 Slide #10 Debt Model Assumptions • Total General Fund Revenue - Measure of ability to pay - Integral in Debt Service to General Fund Revenue metric Operating budget growth—Salo annually requires general fund revenue growth Sales tax growth-4%annually ORANGE COUNTY .. rVORTH C/kRL7LiNA 2 3 4 Slide #11 Debt Model Assumptions • Existing and !Tanned Resources -- Not starting from zero investment • Facility analysis took a snapshot of facility conditions in summer of 2023 • Investment options include any deficiencies at that point in time • Any planned spending can be used to achieve investment targets - Projects have been approved but not financed - available spending - Capital Investment Plan Suhot4 ClOstricts Existing arid Platmed Tax Suppewted BoffoMnll County Existing and Planned TaxSupported Sortoyang RemIning 2@15 Band Funds $15m6an County ProjeubApproved Projects Not Financed $10 million Rmulning Marred Valnteunce Funds $36miian County Pr*cls—Ten Year ClP S192nAon' School Proi M—Ten Year CIP $85 moon Tot29 Existing and Planned $202 mYllon Total Existing and Planned $148 nMon 7 52 million dedicated to Tacitity related projects �s ORANGE COUNTY 11 NC)WYH C:ARC3"r1JA 5 6 7 8 45 1 Slide #12 Scenario Al - $131 million band + $75 million County Plan Financing Amounts nl tv,county Funddng Flrmfive gears,of County Facility Scenario Al-Tax Rate - - P&m($70 n,rlm)rpread over ten Existing CIP 2.0 cents years An acidlhonal Inhallon Existing County CIP $ 1910 mill on addW 1$5 million). County Facility PEan 0.21"cents Plus Other Existing Resources $ 10.0 million Additional School Needs 1.78 cents $130 n3oi bond assumed:m oral Tax Impact 4.00 c*nts [County Facility Plan $ 75.0 million FYND-24 CIP otal Car al Fundtn -Cuun $ T77N Mfio t Pmckcss 559 rtsls10 ovw Woolpert()prion A Stenar10 Al-Deist Service to Revenue Polity Would piawle 111.9 mfiark mac% ToloiSchoo;Punding mm ay rormelrmnance isFs. esaw '"vF ira9F F6]x v.sx .. yeer5&16 or additiorksl prarlty te.o�c �3. 14.Xii _ >&7% Existing School CIP 5 95.Omillion needs a.a+ Lk.ei Plus Other Erring Resources $ 53.Omillion Front memo School honvxiW �A. Additional Schaal Needs 130.0 rnlllion - 9130 rnilim over lteee canwaurrne yaeNs Told CapltalFunding $ 278.17rnllllon ec`• Could Be duampll"Mtl With a .,a /4p ti (pert Option A(over 5 yearn $ 219.0 million Lnwila valedr ap mio4 CAeVdd aw Nal c'hy•;+gyp c "Y c{ + caY sw . �'�4 t k «a' rFar eh $ 59.0 million 4+d"lon sow Deas not Include$33 mllnn in recurring capllal af$33 ml nn on prr)eclad Anlcla 46 ravasxee for laatrscloo ORANGE COUNTY 12 NOR'I-H€/kRC3"rI1A 2 3 Travis Myren said this slide should help make the rest of the presentation clearer. He said 4 that it shows the CIP as planned and the county facility plan. 5 Commissioner Fowler asked if any of these projects included things that were already 6 planned in the CIP. 7 Travis Myren said they removed items that would overlap. 8 Commissioner McKee asked what the time frame would be for the tax rate increase. 9 Travis Myren said that would be a one-time 4-cent tax increase in FY 2025-26. 10 11 46 1 Slide #13 Scenario A - $130 million bond + $130 million County Ilan Financing Amounts Total Cn>Jnty Funddng $136 nVism�1Y facades Plan Scenario A2-Tax Rate over ten yaaera ExIsting CIP 2.0 cents Existing County CIP $ 1920 million $130 meson pond assumed in County Facility Plan 8.68 cents Plus Other Existing Resources $ 10.4 million FY202&24 CIP Additional Schaal Needs 1.$9cents [County Facility Plan $ 130.0 million wodnzee 3,59n1allian aver woalpen Total Tax Irrl fact 4.57cerds oto! al Fundfn -Coun $ 332.(W Ml,.' opllon h - Could plw9e 111 9 Minn Scenarlo A2•Deist Service to Revenue Polity wriwaay rorwairmmme In yeamMGarroraddWrigl 20.0% 32,en 3g,pyy iTa% Tutaf Schaaf Fundfiriff lw4rity 11M& ca.oti 1E3X Y3.34f 1f.1:1 614%416Y 10.0.% xisting School CIP $ 95.4million Front loaded 9chnol honulga viCU II2.a% Plus other Existing Resources $ 53.4rrdlhon - 61341 milion o r three aa.os; wnwuAne y^eers rlltlonal School Needs $ 134.0 million - Resulf inniyier tw npecl 6 ', Total C17,197tal Funding $ 278.0fntl!1an Could be accomplia"WM aWoD Limited ot>"lon&7114 NltiaQ of a ,� iy ti °r6 c= 5 ati ' s° s� IPert t7ption A(suer 5 yearn $ 219.0 million votor apps wed General Qpllgedotl I u•gy p c ,+`r'4 ai 019sw . €'4"PI kms,, kap Over Ter el 5 59.6 MAW Mali —wr '[tans nmIncludla$33 nAMn in racurflnb capital of$3S ixima n rn prnoolydAtticle 46 fftmua Mr lactricloo ORANGE COUNTY 13 NORTH C/kRL7LiNA 2 3 4 Slide #14 Existing Annual Debt Service County tax rate impact[slower due to Annual Debt Service Payments on Existing Debt decline in existing debt service between 540.aaaAaa FY2426-27 arid FY2027-28 53 Affij e • Approximately $58 S million of$75 million IS timed to occur after Capacity is gained in SKMAoa FY2027-28 525paaAaa • School projects are front loaded resulting In a higher tax Impact s2aaooAAc $15.CVeAa7 • School project timing could be adjusted to benefit from capacity gained in FY2427-28 s3nmwAcc &SArin.9nV f 2�9 2@5 .1 1.7 1.11 .1 M0 10.33 20.3E 1.1 2n39 1.1 •E�erF Au�lDYi50riYA •'moot Annu4 DOEE9wwvo •A�IHmT:aS dsrf.ul0.ms Yrvlco ORANGE COUNTY 1a NORTH C:e4RC3"r1JA 5 6 Commissioner Fowler asked how borrowing affects the 10-20 year timeframe if they 7 wanted to do more borrowing for schools. She said that it only shows the first ten-year timeframe. 8 Travis Myren said the term would be for 20 years. 9 10 47 1 Slide #15 Scenario C1 - $400 million band + $130 million County Pl n Financing Amounts Totaf CnLnty Frmddng County Faclllty Plan over ten years 5cenarto C1-Tait Rata - rex impact canoe reo�ceo ov Existing t'IP 2.0 cents Existing70 C Coup CIP $ 1920 million os75rsucaurtryganrsareed ounty Facility Plan 0.6'8 cents t1` to 575 moon Plus Other Existing Resources $ 10.4 million Additional Schaal Needs 5.21 cents Woolpert Cptlon c Tmget-S541 Total Tax irn act 7,89 cents [County Facility Plan $ 130.0 million otal car sal Funding-Cuun $ 332m awfion S63 mtllllon over 4'la t Scenaft Scene rio Cl-Debt Service to Revenue Policy C target to a&was atmlonel u.ax Dd'*My r44d!7 Iivs.�n:o.0 xieY.,^ rad% 78tad Scdraoi Funding �m,na ��eters owin Existing School CIP• $ 95,0 mMillionTnaee tranches of acmA I oar oi$t33.33 M each over a seven 15.0% 15.0% id Plus Other Existing Resources $ 53,0 million Year period 19.9% Additional Schaal Needs 4000 million 3DN tel£appal Funding $ 548.9 rnllllcn WoqPDi 1pert Option C $ 541.2 million Over Target $ 6.8 mioeon 4�r 4i � c w+ l ell '[tcas not Include$33 mailicn n recurring capital of$3S �Pplan R�Ike ."W ffabon ca prgtorerl Article,46 r"@#m for wAmlogy �'� ORANGE COUNTY 1� NOR'I-H C,ARL7LiIVA 2 3 Chair Bedford said usually if a bond is approved, borrowing is spread out over several 4 years. She said it is front loaded and asked why the tax increase was planned where it was. 5 Travis Myren said when there is a one-year tax increase, building a reserve so that when 6 the peaks hit, that reserve can be applied, and a tax increase would not be necessary every time. 7 Vice-Chair Greene asked if the debt service revenue ratio is concerning here. 8 Travis Myren said it certainly would make budgeting a challenge to have around 20% of 9 revenue tied up in debt service before funding any services. 10 Commissioner McKee said that his fear is that it would drive tax increases and those are 11 much harder on their low wealth citizens. 12 13 48 1 Slide #16 $400 million bond + $130 (million County Plan with Incremental Tax Fete Increase Scenario C1-Debt Service to Revenue Poky Each scer[aria could a. 6e funded using ars Incremental W rate 70.2&-11 increase rrufoad Pf5.e4an upf nt increase. 2.019 � This fable iNustretes 52 aro incremental � approach for F72020-29 2.79 rc SceneW C f FY 2029 W 1.08 Fx.203Q-31 9.79 Inn% FY2033-32 Y3032-33 FY2031-34 s.40 su. Fx70343s To i 10.66 nuti CumulaGre[rua1is2.9TcarrPa rrn;i;avz,+.}::,.n.v-nSe�n:e� -:-znrrzoaaz� anusnrnr, -:nr�. .:vzaaa,a3Rr.maRa a;�d-3} over updrorr[Arnpact �.inixRJYn: �PPlty ORANGE COUNTY .. NC7R-I-H CJtAC7L1MA 2 3 4 Slide #17 Pay-Go Scenario • Option C2 converts $100 million of band financing into $10 mullion annual cash (pay-go) for annual maintenance • Trades a higher upfront tax impact and delayed distribution of funding for the following - Provides a stable funding source for school maintenance'between band issuances — Maintains more debt capacity for later major bond issuances Provides more flexibility to future Boards to adapt to financial instability,no flexibility in dent service No interest payments ORANGE COUNTY 17 nrr)x-YH C:,kRC3"r1J_. 5 6 7 8 49 1 Slide #18 ,Scenario C2 - $300 million bond + 100 million School Pay-Go + $130 million County Plan Financing Amounts Existing C2-Tax Rate xisting CIP 2.Ocents Trekaf Cour Fundin County Facility Plan ovu ten iY 9 yea a aunty Facility Plan 0.68cents Existing County CIP $ 1920 miMon - Tax impact canoe reduced ditionai School Needs-Borrowed 3.25cents by.aDca�nraducadta dit6anal School Needs-Pa bio 2.73cents 575 milion Plus Other Ex sting Resources $ 10.0 million otal Tax Ira ect 8.66cerrts [County Facility Plan $ 130.0 million Woolpert Op11on G Ta"4*i oto! irl Fundfn -Coun $ 332'.ti'R Mu., 363 million over wxaatD�r1 Scenario C2-Debt Service to Revenue scenana c target ru aa�lanai Policy fancy Torai School Funding 250% $10 icIn awuepay-e200% va Vj 1% s21a .6,1949 Existing School CIP' 95.O milon , r1a 5H you-go herds(not harrowed) 14U11,147% Plus Other Existing Resources $ 53,0 million prWder,flexibility during 150% t Additional School Needs- economic&mnt7psaea 100% I Borrowing $ 300.0 million 5 Q% Thr"ba+rches of SOW diticnap School Needs-Pay-Go$ 100.0 mitlian boNowing Sion each war PON swan year period , y Total Cailltcl Funding $ 548.ormlion Woolpert Option C $ 541.2 million �tipl�un Faber -�`lAKy uer Target 6.8 MOM _ '[Ives nol inolude$33 mdkn in recurring capital or 533 rn$cn in pr*,;Wd Article 46 reveom for tecbmiogy ORANGE COUNTY 18 rVORTH C/RC3"rVA 2 3 4 Slide #19 Scenario D - $630 million bond + $130 million County Plan Financing Arraxints County Facility Plan over tan Scenario D-Tax Rate Tallaf Coun FundYn years Eft1sting.CIP Lorents Tax lmpw canhe reduced by Existing County CIR $ 192.0 million 73cerda Irradlcedta$r5 County Facillty Plan 0.68 cents Plus Othtr Existing Resources $ 10.0 million "'R0n dditlenal School Needs 8.54 cents County Facility Plan $ 130.0 million Woolpert Won D Taro- otai Tax I irripad 11.22cents Phases 1&a fele WFyeer al Ca cel Funding-county $ 33I.RR rrillllon to-parlson{$,779.9 mllllon) Scenario it-Qebt Service to Revenue Policy Mme III In years 11-15.9223.1 sac% ml n ass*. Tai ni Sthnni Funding neaieh a%a %2." 25A Existing School CIP"` 5 95.0 miMonyi.1 osev 4Vo�v t�get d9o% lus Other En5ting Resources $ 53.0 million lsae ' TC+ Ing or$sci nallo1 tlf.oii Additional School Needs 630.0 million acvravring mr521omsori each TrW topltal Funding $ 778.drWillon over swan ysara sass naw pert C7ptiion C $ 776.9 mililian aye 3 s�db" tiroq �m yg�3 +A a Y lip 4�yIl Se 1 t G 5" � � . I Target $ 2.3 mdldan �9Cto�e.61 Ke ��dr3` 'Does real Include$33 nAan in recurring capital or$33 trillion in VWcled Article 46 rev"am for lw_heelogy ORANGE COUNTY 19 NC)WYH C:A.RClur r_A 5 6 7 8 50 1 Slide #20 Middle Scenario - 200 million bond + 50 million School Fray-Go + 75 million County Plan Middle 5cenarla•Tax Rate Financing Amountsxi5ting UP Middle ToMf County FPmdin County.Facility Plan ovu tan yaera-$75anrm oun[y Facility Plan 0.26cerrts Existing County CIP $ 1910 million alitional School Needs-Borrowed 1.78 cents $6 million in annum M-wycu• didonal School Needs–Pa-Po 1.43 rents Plus Other Existing Re5ource5 $ 10.D million 4o Cossh,W bormwod} otal Tarr[Twed 5,49ceaats [County Facility Plan $ 75.0 minion Ttv"tranches otsefto:9 otat!Capttyl Funding-County $ T77.0 a 0fion t±arrowing$W'S wh owr Middle 5cenarno-Debt Service to Revenue Policy sawn year penoo :now c,sa lNhaan cxxr,bared Wath ex168ng ae.P% vasa v,agr tc�'e^ 1,3% aaa% �� tc.�a TutmlSchout Fun dkg am plalwmd rescurca�syields 1.9% A.5% $398 nm n In t�se" a,P% Foisting School CtPr $ 95-0 million Izz% aegaunces to aoSmsa sctPodt Intl% Plus Other Existing Resnurces $ 53.0 mlllYnn P+'Uty FWed8 Pnt Additional Schaal Needs- ,o1 Borrowing $ 200.0 million 22% k4dPG`1 iConal School Needs–Pa foo$ 500 million ;+ ¢. 4% % #a p 2 3ti 55 a axt{tl teal Fundln $ rrrrr�gml r q�Pna —Aa7q' 'Canes apt include$33 rrailpn in recurring capital or E33 +aillion in proileoled hrtiole 46 revePxue for lixibi elogy ORANGE COUNTY 20 NOR'I-H C,ARC3"r1JA 2 3 Commissioner McKee said a one-time tax increase has a continuing impact because that 4 must be used to pay off the extra debt. 5 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if the rate includes what the county is currently paying. 6 Travis Myren said the total tax impact is the total increase to the existing tax rate. 7 8 Slide #21 Comparing the Scenarios Scenario New County New School One Time Tax Peak Debt Minimum 10 Title Funding Funding Rate I m pact Service to Year Payout Revenue Ratio Al $75 million $130 rrrillion 4.00 cents 17,4% 60.4% A2 $130 million $130 million 4.57 cents 18,0% 59.9% C1 $130 million $400 million 7.89 cents 22.0% 57.i?'O C2 $130 million $300 million bind B_66 cents 19.4% 5$_1% $100 million pay-go ❑ $130 million $630 million 11.22 cents 25,6% 55.0% Middle $75 million $200 million bond 5,49 cents 17.2% 60.3% $50 million pay-go y GRANGE COUNTY ai NIDR:r-H CA.RC:)"NIA 9 10 51 1 Slide #22 Other Options CountyScenario New YY One Time Tax Peak Debt i Title Funding Funding Rate Impact Revenue Ratio H $75 million $300 million bond 8.05 Cents 18.55% 59.0% S1[10 million pay-go $130 million Push $17.9 million $300 million bond in existing projects 5100 million pay-go 8.47 cents 19.16% 58.2% outside of the ten year plan ORANGE COUNTY NORTH C.1 RL7LiNA 2 3 4 Slide #23 Tax Impact on $500,000 Home Scenario Title One Time Tax Rate Impact ..ct on a$5rr rrr home in cents Al �_ 4.00 $ 200.00 A2 4.57 $ 228.50 C1 7.89 $ 394.50 C2 8.66 $ 433.00 D 11.22 $ 561.00 Middle 5.49 $ 274.50 H 8.06 $ 403.00 B 8.47 $ 423.50 ©RANGE COUNT l3 NORTH CAROLINA 5 6 Commissioner Fowler asked if the Board only does what is in the current CIP, if the tax 7 increase would be 2 cents. 8 Travis Myren said yes. 9 Chair Bedford said that the $12 million they set aside a year and a half ago prevented a 10 tax increase for two years. 11 52 1 Slide #24 Bond Funding Practice • Bond funds have been allocated between the two school districts on the basis of the average daily membership ADM} in place at the time the bond was approved Chapel Full Carrboro City Schools-58.44% - Grange County Schccls-41.56°, • Could move to a protect based allocation - Need based allocation - Projekt costs estimated inwoolpertStudy - Woolpert Option C-Phase • Chapel All Carrboro City Schools-5B 2%of total Pfiase I project costs • Orange County Schools-41.8%of total Phase I protect casts GRANGE COUNTY 24 NC3RTH CARC3LIWA 2 3 Chair Bedford said there should be an additional discussion because she does not 4 remember from the 2016 bond but when there are 999 charter students, she thinks that charter 5 students should not be factored into the ADM because they are not there to use the buildings. 6 Travis Myren said staff will model that and bring it to the Board's retreat on Friday. 7 Commissioner Fowler said project-based allocation would only work if the Board chooses 8 option D, and that otherwise, they should stick to ADM. 9 10 Slide #25 Recommendation • Discuss financing scenarios related to implementing the County Facility Plan and the Long Range School Optimization Plan and provide direction to staff on alternative scenarios Goal of developing preferred plan of finance by the end of January 2024 -- ORANGE COUNTY 25 NC3RTH CARCILINA. 1 1 53 1 Chair Bedford said she is still confused about the recommendation to fund the 2 maintenance dollars and she does not understand where that is factored into any of this. 3 Kirk Vaughn said in each Woolpert plan, there is regular maintenance built into the plans 4 for those buildings that are not undergoing other renovations. He said option A, there are no 5 renovations, and all funds go to maintenance. He said once they go past those periods, that is 6 when they hit the pay-go period. 7 Chair Bedford said she would like to see what it is that the county should be funding every 8 year for building maintenance if the buildings were in perfect condition. She said that number is 9 important. 10 Kirk Vaughn said Woolpert estimated between $27 million and 34.9 million per year. He 11 said that does not include technology and further capital funding. 12 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if there is an impact for families on personal property 13 and real property. 14 Travis Myren said it applies to both. 15 16 Slide #26 Proposed Timeline Proposed Bond Referendum Schedule 1. Review schedule of approvals for a band referendum and review November 91"Work Session the Counter Facilities Master Flan Review School Facilities Long Range optimization Plan-Woolpert December 4th Business Meeting 3: Review Financing Scenarios December 12tli Business Meeting 4. Approve a tentative plan for'Bond Referendum ilanuory 161h Business Meeting and/orJlanuary291h Retreat S. Staff meets with Local Government Commission on tentative January/February 224 Bond plan 6. School Boards adopt a resolution supporting the referendum February 2024. 7. Review potential adjustments to the band referendum plan,if March 7Business Meeting needed. March 12 Work Session March 19 Business Meeting ORANGE COUNTY 26 NC3R:rt-I CARCM-Iran 17 18 19 20 54 1 Slide #27 Proposed Timeline Proposed 2024 Capital Planning and Bond Referendum Schedule 8, B0CC adopts preliminary resolution esta bl ishing the bond purposes)and sets a not to exceed hondamount(s). Neither the purpose nor thenot toexce€ciamountmay change April 2^dSOCCBusiness Meeting allowing this action. 5. SCCC appoints bond education commltteeand approprlates funds for outreach Apr]116E"SOCCBusiness Meeting 10. Staff publishes a notice of intent to fie an application For a general obligation bond By May t referendum 11. Staffflles bond applicatlon with the Loral Government Commisslon By May 10 12. B0CC introduces bond order and schedules a public hearing May 71h SOCCBusiness Meeting 13. B0CC holds public hearing on bond referendum May21*tSOCC Business Meeting 14. 60CC adapts the band order,Formally set the ballot question and referendum date June 41h SACC Business Meeting 15. Community vote on bond referendum November 5,2024 ORANGE COUNTY 27 NORTH€;.ARC3"rI JA 2 3 4 PUBLIC COMMENTS: 5 George Griffin, CHCCS Board Chair read the following statement: 6 "Good evening Commissioners, I'm George Griffin and I'm Chair of the Chapel Hill- 7 Carrboro City Schools Board of Education. I speak tonight on behalf of our Board, our 8 superintendent and several district leaders who are with us this evening. CHCCS is genuinely 9 appreciative of your continued support of our public school system. As you 10 review financing scenarios for the School Long Range Facilities Optimization Plan, we are here 11 to focus and support several options under your consideration. The long-range plan produced by 12 Woolpert outlines a total of four scenarios to address the next five-to-fifteen years of school facility 13 needs. Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools favors serious consideration of'Scenario D',which adds 14 a $630 million bond to fund phases I & 11 over ten years. However, if the Commissioners feel as 15 though Scenario D is too ambitious, we feel Scenario "C-2" is a reasonable compromise. In short, 16 C-2: 17 18 • Provides $130 million to fund short-range and mid-range projects for Orange County 19 Government over ten years. 20 • Adds a $300 million school bond for major projects in both school districts, and $100 21 million in pay-as-you-go, to provide flexibility during economic downturns over the next 10 22 years. 23 • When combined with existing and planned resources, yields total school resources of 24 $548 million which meets the Woolpert Option C target of$541.2 million with an additional 25 $6.8 million to address other priority needs. 26 27 No matter which scenario is preferred by the Commissioners, the Chapel Hill-Carrboro 28 Board of Education requests that the allocated bond funds be distributed on an ADM basis 29 (58.44% to CHCCS) and not on a project basis. There remains a persistent myth going back 30 decades that there are funding inequities between the two school systems in Orange County 55 1 somehow under the control of the BOCC, or the state of NC, or both. This is simply not true. There 2 are in fact funding differences in annual operating budgets (i.e., per pupil expenditures) between 3 the districts, however, this is solely due to the CHCCS Special District Tax which has been in 4 place since 1909. This tax is only paid by residents of the CHCCS district and is not a financial 5 burden on other residents of Orange County. Thank you in advance for your consideration of 6 options D, or, C2. And for more on why, I yield the floor to Vice Chair Riza Jenkins." 7 Riza Jenkins, CHCCS Board Vice-Chair read the following Statement: 8 "Thank you George, and good evening everyone. I'm Riza Jenkins, and I'm Vice Chair of 9 the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Board of Education. 1, too, am here to urge the 10 Commissioners to strongly consider scenario "D", followed by C-2. I'm also here to publicly thank 11 the Commissioners who accepted invitations, from our administration and our PTA leaders, to 12 tour school facilities for a first-hand look at the needs in Chapel Hill-Carrboro, as we've been 13 having this conversation for a very long time: 14 • Thank you to Chair Bedford for her visits to Phillips Middle, Estes Hills Elementary and 15 Ephesus Elementary back in March of 2022. 16 • Thank you to Commissioner Hamilton for her visits to Carrboro, Glenwood and Seawell 17 elementary schools in March of 2022. 18• Thank you to Commissioner Portie-Ascott for her visits to Culbreth Middle and Carrboro 19 Elementary back on May 4 of 2023. And then again for visits to Phoenix Academy High School 20 and McDougle Middle on November 20. 21• Commissioner Green, we were delighted to host you back on October 5 for a visit to Ephesus 22 Elementary. 23• Same for Commissioner Richards, who visited Carrboro Elementary on October 29. 24 Together we saw first-hand the aging facilities that make up a substantial portion of our 25 district. Those facilities, which have existed for generations, are loved and cared for ... but no 26 amount of maintenance and upkeep will outpace the speed of innovation in public education. The 27 Board of County Commissioners made it clear to us two years ago that we were to use the allotted 28 funds now, and not bank them for any type of new construction or major renovation project down 29 the road. Indeed, CHCCS has been spending our capital deferred maintenance dollars as 30 expected and directed. We have used the funds for roof replacements, HVAC replacements, 31 playground replacements, safety upgrades and more. We have done that in good faith and have 32 been excellent stewards of public funds. We understand you want to develop a preferred plan of 33 finance by the end of this month. We would appreciate and be available to participate in greater 34 detail at any time, including possibly your scheduled retreat on January 19, or any subsequent 35 meetings. We've reached a pivotal moment. Let's be honest about the 21 st century needs of our 36 school district. Together, we'll make our students, families and stakeholders proud." 37 CHCCS Board member, Rani Dasi, said she is not only a board member but also a parent 38 of 4 students who have attended CHCCS schools. She spoke about the experiences of her 39 children in school facilities. She said there is now a clear picture of the needs and plans to address 40 them. She said they have had flooding issues, unreliable heating and cooling, and failing sewage 41 systems that backed up. She said that delayed investment in school facilities continues to create 42 significantly more needs. She said she knows the board cares deeply about education and she 43 thanked them. 44 45 Commissioner Fowler asked if multiple options can be given on a bond resolution. 46 Travis Myren said it is a yes or no question for a bond. 47 Chair Bedford said looking at C-2, it could be $75 million for the county and the difference 48 is .57 cents. 49 Travis Myren said that would line up with the scenario that Commissioner Hamilton 50 mentioned. 56 1 Chair Bedford said she found $17.9 million that she finds important but not as important 2 as schools. She said they are at a breaking point with school capital funding. She thinks some 3 county capital needs can be postponed to prioritize schools. She said a tax increase has to be 4 done, but that leaves her concerned about affordability. She said she does not think there is any 5 way to do option D. 6 Vice-Chair Greene said she would like to see the details on the $17.9 million on Friday at 7 the retreat. She said the county's facility plan was done with a lot of forethought and consideration 8 as well. She said she is not opposed to a tax increase, she just isn't sure what is sustainable. 9 Commissioner McKee said the tax rate will increase over time. He said they need to 10 discuss if they will continue to not allow projects like Walmart and others that are just on the other 11 side of the county. He said that is taking funds from their residents that could help with the tax 12 base. He said there is always more demand. He said that he cannot support option D. He said he 13 does not think the Board would want to cut county operating costs in order to offset a tax increase. 14 He said the needs are valid, but he is concerned about how to pull off funding in a way that is 15 sustainable. 16 Commissioner Fowler said she is leaning towards the middle but she knows they have to 17 be reasonable and think about the voters. She said that she thinks voters will be turned off by 18 option D. She said it will be painful and hurt people in terms of taxes, but the needs have been 19 ignored for far too long. She said she is inclined to support the middle option to see if it can get 20 passed. 21 Commissioner Hamilton said she hopes the strategic planning process will help guide the 22 board's decisions and not do some projects if they are not outlined as priorities in the plan. She 23 said students today are faced with demands that her kids did not have. She said the physical 24 space of school makes a difference and appropriate spaces for all students is important. She said 25 they can pay now or later with increased mental health needs or people in jail. She said at the 26 same time, the board has to also look out for people who struggle to pay their property taxes. She 27 said she is not afraid to go to the community with this and if they say no, then the community has 28 spoken. 29 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she is sensitive to families experiencing increased costs 30 for everything. She said she does not know which option she supports at this time. She said 31 Option C-2 or the middle option seem most realistic. 32 Commissioner Richards said she would like clarity on Friday on how the valuation impacts 33 the tax rate. She said she does not see Option D passing but has heard the community wants to 34 support schools. She said putting other things into the bond clouds the issue. She said she thinks 35 prioritizing projects is important and is part of the educating the community piece of the bond. She 36 said facilities money should possibly be managed as one pot. 37 Chair Bedford said if the Board picks the middle option, will Woolpert prioritize projects 38 within that option and clarify the order. 39 Vice-Chair Greene said she agrees with Commissioner Richards. She said prioritizing 40 needs across districts is important. 41 Chair Bedford said there is a misunderstanding in the community that the per pupil amount 42 in both districts is the same. She said in passing a bond, if some people think only one school 43 district will benefit, they are less inclined to vote for it. She said there has always been a conflict 44 with having two districts in one county. 45 Commissioner Greene asked if it was different for this because it was focused on facilities. 46 Commissioner McKee said there is a perception that the urban part of the county drives 47 the process, they are the cream of the crop, and the rural areas get what is left. He said that 48 perception has been around since he was a child. 49 Commissioner Richards asked if there was a gap 10 years ago. 50 Chair Bedford said there has never been a gap. 57 1 Commissioner McKee said there was a long-standing perception that no commissioners 2 took the rural parts of the county into consideration. 3 Commissioner Hamilton requested to see an option between H and B on Friday at the 4 retreat. 5 Travis Myren said there is some time before the final decision has to be made. He said 6 that they can get enough information on Friday that they will be prepared for the LGC meeting. 7 He said that it does not have to be made until April. 8 Commissioner Fowler asked to see an option for a $250 million bond and $100 million 9 pay-go. 10 11 12 8. Consent Agenda 13 14 • Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda 15 • Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda 16 • Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda 17 18 A motion was made by Commissioner Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to 19 approve the consent agenda. 20 21 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 22 23 a. Minutes 24 The Board approved the draft minutes from the November 9, 2023, November 10, 2023, and 25 November 14, 2023 BOCC Meetings as presented. 26 b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds 27 The Board adopted a resolution to release motor vehicle property tax values for three (3) 28 taxpayers with a total of three (3) bills that will result in a reduction of revenue. 29 c. Property Tax Releases/Refunds 30 The Board adopted a resolution to release property tax values for five (5) taxpayers with a total 31 of six (6) bills that will result in a reduction of revenue. 32 d. Late Applications for Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion 33 The Board approved twelve (12) untimely applications for exemption/exclusion from ad valorem 34 taxation for twelve (12) bills for the 2023 tax year. 35 e. Advertisement of Tax Liens on Real Property 36 The Board accepted the report on the amount of unpaid taxes for the current year that are liens 37 on real property as required by North Carolina General Statute 105-369, and approved and 38 authorized the Chair to sign the Order setting the lien sale advertisement on or about March 28, 39 2024. 40 f. Manager Signed Intergovernmental Agreements 41 The Board acknowledged and ratified various intergovernmental agreements signed by the 42 Manager as previously authorized by the Board of Commissioners (BOCC). 43 g. Approval of Orange County Transit Service Area Update 44 The Board approved the Orange County public transit service area for federal compliance to 45 include Orange County and ten (10) miles outside Orange County 46 h. Approval of Orange County 2022 Transit Plan Public Hearing Records 47 The Board approved the 2022 Orange County Transit Plan Public Hearing Records based on 48 federal guidelines for transit service improvements. 49 i. Orange Unified Transportation Board —Approval of Youth Delegate Position 50 The Board approved an amendment to the Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard) 51 Policies and Procedures to establish a non-voting Youth Delegate position on the OUTBoard. 58 1 j. Resolution of Approval —Terry Road Farm, LLC Conservation Easement 2 The Board approved and authorized the Chair to sign the resolution approving the acceptance by 3 Orange County of the conservation easement, and authorized the Chair and the Clerk to sign the 4 conservation easement agreement, subject to final review by staff and County Attorney, with a 5 closing and recordation of the document expected to occur on or about March 30, 2024. 6 k. Contract Award to CRTS, Inc. for Design and Build of Two (2) Custom 48-Foot Tipper 7 Trailers 8 The Board approved a contract for the purchase of two (2)48-foot tipper trailers with a specialized 9 swing door for tipping to allow for the efficient transport and disposal of tires at the County's 10 contracted tire recycling facility. 11 I. Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget Amendment#5 12 The Board approved budget, grant, and capital project ordinance amendments for Fiscal Year 13 2023-24. 14 m. Amendment to the Clean, Inc. Contract for the Visitors Bureau 15 The Board approved a contract amendment to the July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 agreement 16 between Orange County and Clean, Inc. to increase the marketing contract for the Visitors 17 Bureau. 18 n. Approval of Motorola Solutions, Inc. Contract for Bi-directional Antenna Systems in K- 19 12 Schools 20 The Board approved and authorized the County Manager to sign a contract with Motorola 21 Solutions, Inc. for the first phase of installations of bi-directional antenna systems within K-12 22 public schools., with addendum, and any necessary amendments. 23 24 25 9. County Manager's Report 26 Bonnie Hammersley reminded the Board of the upcoming retreat on January 19, 2024 27 and reviewed the agenda. She also reviewed the agenda for the Assembly of Governments 28 meeting on January 23, 2024. She also mentioned the three retirees recognized in the information 29 items. 30 31 32 10. County Attorney's Report 33 John Roberts said the legislature is reconvening the short session on Apri124, 2024. He 34 said that any local bills must be submitted by April 15, 2024 in order to be considered. 35 36 37 11. *Appointments 38 None. 39 40 41 12. Information Items 42 43 • December 12, 2023 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List 44 • Tax Collector's Report— Numerical Analysis 45 • Tax Collector's Report— Measure of Enforced Collections 46 • Tax Assessor's Report— Releases/Refunds under$100 47 • Memorandum — Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 — Update from Clarion 48 Associates 49 • Memorandum Regarding Historic Central High School Alumni Meeting 59 1 • Memorandum Regarding Short Range Transit Plan and Transportation Multimodal 2 Plan Kick Offs 3 • Memorandum — Recognition of County Employee Retirements from October 1, 2023 4 through December 31, 2023 5 6 7 13. Closed Session 8 None. 9 10 11 Adjournment 12 13 A motion was made by Vice-Chair Greene, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to adjourn 14 the meeting at 10:24 p.m. 15 16 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 17 18 19 Jamezetta Bedford, Chair 20 21 22 Recorded by Tara May, Deputy Clerk to the Board 23 24 Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board Attachment 2 1 1 DRAFT MINUTES 2 ORANGE COUNTY 3 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 4 RETREAT 5 January 19, 2024 6 9:00 a.m. 7 8 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a retreat on Friday, January 19, 2024 at 9 9:00 a.m. at Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, NC. 10 11 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT. Chair Jamezetta Bedford, Vice-Chair Sally Greene, 12 and Commissioners Amy Fowler, Jean Hamilton, Earl McKee, Phyllis Portie-Ascott, and Anna 13 Richards 14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None. 15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT. John Roberts 16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Deputy County Manager 17 Travis Myren, and Clerk to the Board Laura Jensen. (All other staff members will be identified 18 appropriately below) 19 20 Chair Bedford called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m.All commissioners were present. 21 Laura Jensen led the Board and others in attendance in a brief ice breaker exercise. 22 23 Strategic Plan Discussion — Final Draft Presentation 24 Charline Kirongozi, of Berry Dunn consultants, made the following presentation: 25 26 Slide #1 4: F' Y1 u M Orange County Strategic Plan Board of Commissioners Work Session January 19,2024 b BerryDunn ORANGE COUN 27 2 1 Slide #2 Mission W hat ynu Un now For whom How you edit Guiding Principles Vision How dues the cornmuAy Where you're going carry out its mission? 1/1� What your want your How does it Interact with r mission to achieve the community? for your community Strategic Priorities What is the focus to move btoward the vision? 2 3 4 Slide #3 Mow Does It All Fit Together? Mission Statement Strategic • Strategic Priority Priority • Priority 4 Goal Goal Goal Goal Statement Statement Statement Statement • ��� 112ONb N- NNONNNNNINN ®�I Guiding Principles 5 3 1 Slide #4 Mission Statement, Vision Statement, and Guiding Principles The mission statement describes an organization's purpose or reason for existing. It is the public statement of the contribution it promises to make to Guiding principles are the precepts that help accomplish the community vision. It answers guide an organization throughout its life in the questions: Why do we exist?What do we do? all circumstances,irrespective of changes in its goals,strategies,type of work or the top management.They are expectations Avision statement defines your desired future state for how the County will conduct its and provides direction for where Lauderhill is going business,make decisions,and deliver as a community.It answers the question: What will programs and services to the community. Orange County look and feel like 5 years from now? 20 years from now? 5) AA 2 3 4 Slide #5 Mission Statement and Vision Statement Mission Statement Vision Statement Orange County is a visionary leader in We are a diverse,inclusive,and healthy county providing governmental services valued by working together to strengthen our community our community,including those required by and enhance the quality of life for all residents. law,in an equitable,sustainable,innovative, and efficient way. A.J 5 4 1 Slide #6 Mission Statement: Feedback The Mission Statement answers the question,'What do we do?" •62%o€respondents somewhat agree •31%o€respondents extremely agree '67 responses' i no mission Matemont is aullionable and couldr .' - Orange County isa F County•54%of respondents somewhat agree '64 responses' visionary leader in •31%of respondents extremely agree providing StatementThe Mission needs updating governmental services esponses` F •62%of respondents somewhat agree '64 rvalued by our 19%o€respondents extremely agree community, including + , those required by . • ' • • � • , - , la •Remove"visionary"(12 eomments)and change"to Orange County provides government services' laW,in an equitable,sustainable •Add"committed to being"after-Orange County is" '64 responses' , •The statement is not specific and is vague innovative,and •Remove"providing governmental services valued by our community" efficient Way. •"Add"seeks to be"before"a visionary leader" •Remove"those required by law"(15 comments)or update to"beyond those required by law" 111IMP 111.1.F b 2 3 Vice-Chair Greene said she liked the suggestion to change the statement to"beyond those 4 required by law." 5 Commissioner Richards asked for information about the feedback from the community on 6 the mission statement. 7 Charline Kirongozi said that some in the community thought"visionary" was a buzz word, 8 and some asked what was meant by the word. 9 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she liked leaving the word in, because it showed a 10 commitment to striving for better. 11 Commissioner Fowler said some parts of county government are visionary, and some 12 parts show the county striving to be visionary. She said she didn't feel strongly either way, but 13 she said including the word "strive" does change the impact of the statement. 14 Vice-Chair Greene said she didn't like the word "strive." She suggested "aims to be." 15 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if the number of respondents (67) was enough to 16 warrant changes to the mission statement. 17 Charline Kirongozi said the mission statement was available on the social pinpoint site for 18 community feedback. She said that at this stage there is usually less input. She said most people 19 feel that they've had input at an earlier stage. 20 Vice-Chair Greene asked how representative 67 responses are of the county. 21 Charline Kirongozi said the number is not representative relative to the size of the county. 22 Commissioner Fowler said that the word "visionary" is not in the vision statement, so it is 23 useful to keep it in the mission statement. 24 Commissioner Hamilton said that she didn't think the mission statement needed to be 25 changed. She felt that it was important to focus on the performance measures and objectives. 26 Vice-Chair Greene said she thought it was important to change the statement to "beyond 27 those required by law." 28 Commissioner Richards said that"visionary"felt vague and thought the word "leader"was 29 more specific. 30 Commissioner Hamilton said she was ok with taking "visionary" out. 31 Commissioner Fowler said she felt "visionary" felt different than "leader." 5 1 Vice-Chair Greene said she felt the word "visionary" implied creativity and proactive 2 efforts. 3 Commissioner McKee said he wasn't concerned about the precise wording. He felt it was 4 more important to focus on actions. 5 The Board decided to change the mission statement to "Orange County is a visionary 6 leader in providing governmental services valued by our community, beyond those required by 7 law, in an equitable, sustainable, innovative, and efficient way." 8 9 Slide #7 Vision Statement: Feedback The Vision Statement answers the question,"What do we want to be in the future?' '65 responses' •41%of respondents somewhat agree •48%of respondents extremely agree The Vision Statement is inpirri ambitious, ill ll We are a •44%of respondents somewhat agree '65 responses` diverse •45%of respondents extremely agree , inclusive,and needsThe Viion Statement healthy county •86%of respondents somewhat agree `63 responses" working •20%of respondents extremely agree together to tr ambitious,and answer the question, Where do we want to be in the future?" strengthen our -Remove healthy(14 comments)—"It doesn't make sense to suggest the county(population?)Is diverse and inclusive..yet at community the same time all in good health." -Improve to show what the County is working towards and enhance .Needs to be more aspirational •'Is this about ane community or multiple?'and"what is"county"?The people of or the people working for?Needs clarity" the quality of life for all residents. b 10 11 Vice-Chair Greene asked if"healthy" should be changed to "health conscious." 12 Commissioner Fowler said "healthy" refers to more than individuals, but that the 13 community is also functioning in a healthy way. 14 Commissioner McKee said "healthy" speaks to how Orange County compares to other 15 communities. 16 Commissioner Richards said that the vision statement is also aspirational and speaks to 17 what the county strives to be. 18 Charline Kirongozi said the feedback from the community questioned what kind of 19 "healthy" was meant by the statement. She said that it is important to not over define a vision 20 statement, because it could leave out something else that is important. 21 Commissioner Hamilton said if people are confused about what the word healthy means, 22 then she wondered if there is a better word that would cover the intent. 23 Commissioner Fowler said regarding the economy, some might use the word "vibrant," but 24 that doesn't encapsulate what they are hoping for with environmental health. She said that 25 "healthy" can also mean improving a situation by providing necessary supports. 26 Commissioner Hamilton said she is fine with the word "healthy," but it may come up that 27 residents are confused. 28 Chair Bedford said that the only synonym she found that comes close is "flourishing," but 29 she took Commissioner Hamilton's point that the Board needed to communicate what is meant 30 by the word "healthy." 6 1 Commissioner Fowler pointed out that 89% of respondents agreed with the vision 2 statement. 3 Commissioner Hamilton said it's a small sample size, so the percentage doesn't mean as 4 much. 5 Commissioner McKee said any word that is put there is open to interpretation. 6 The Board decided not to change the vision statement. 7 8 Slide #8 Guiding Principles Communication and Awareness —We provide information and opportunities for engagement in a tL° transparent manner so that all in our community have knowledge, understanding,and a voice. Inclusivity and Engagement —We foster an environment in which all are welcomed, represented, and 4 empowered to participate in and feel connected to their community. Dedication and Respect —We commit to our roles in public service and organizational excellence by fostering the skills,talents,and innovation of our residents, employees, volunteers, and boards needed to carry out this work. Stewardship and Advocacy —We are driven to excellence and foster opportunities to innovate and make proactive, data-supported decisions that respond to our community's diverse needs. �^& Partnership and Collaboration —We build meaningful relationships and connections that allow us to 11 create holistic and integrated systems of support for all- 117 Social Justice —We respect all people and strive to be equitable in all that we do. Climate Action and Sustainability—We recognize that our environment is fundamental to our being INand are deliberate in protecting, preserving, and sustaining our natural resources for the continued good of all. 6) 9 10 11 Slide #9 Guiding Principles: Feedback • Most Frequently Cited Top 3 Guiding Principles Orange County should include in its Strategic Plan: • Climate Action and Sustainability • Partnership and Collaboration • Inclusivity and Engagement • The top Guiding Principles the County should reconsider are: • Dedication and Respect • Social Justice • Stewardship and Advocacy b '62 responses to Top 3 and 32 Reponses to Reconsider' 12 7 1 Charline Kirongozi said the community thought that stewardship should be included and 2 should cover fiscal stewardship. She said that the community also thought some of the guiding 3 principles should be combined where there is overlap. 4 Commissioner Richards said she felt some of the guiding principles lacked specificity, 5 such as "Social Justice," but she didn't want to exclude anything. 6 Chair Bedford said she would add a little more detail to "Social Justice," and suggested 7 that a couple of commissioners work on the description together. 8 Vice-Chair Greene said that for "Stewardship and Advocacy," the sentence that followed 9 did not seem related. 10 Commissioner Hamilton said making data-supported decisions is part of stewardship, but 11 she was not sure how advocacy fit with the description. 12 Commissioner Richards said she thought of fiscal stewardship when she read the 13 principle, but it is not stated in the description. 14 Commissioner Hamilton said that "advocacy" should be part of Social Justice. 15 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if the respondents thought that "Dedication and 16 Respect" should be combined with "Social Justice." 17 Charline Kirongozi said the comment was that "Social Justice" could fall under"Inclusivity 18 and Engagement," and that the idea of social justice and respect was a given. 19 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said that it is not a given to her or to others in the community. 20 Chair Bedford said that in the interest of time it might be best to move on and come back 21 to the guiding principles. 22 Commissioner Hamilton said there may be time after the break to have more in-depth 23 discussions. 24 Commissioner Fowler asked why the respondents thought some of the principles should 25 be combined. 26 Charline Kirongozi said that the respondents felt there was some overlap. 27 Vice-Chair Greene said she would like to change the Climate Action and Sustainability 28 principle to, "We recognize that our environment is in crisis, and we are deliberate and proactive 29 in protecting, preserving, and sustaining our natural resources." 30 Commissioner Fowler suggested the word "critical." 31 Vice-Chair Greene said the environment is in crisis. 32 Chair Bedford also liked the description "in crisis." 33 Commissioner Fowler said she would change the word in the guiding principle from 34 "fundamental" to "critical." 35 Vice-Chair Greene said that we are in an environmental crisis, and it is important to say it. 36 Commissioner McKee asked how "in crisis" is defined. 37 Vice-Chair Greene said that scientists say that if we do not reduce CO2 emissions at a 38 rate that is sustainable, it will be detrimental to the planet. 39 Commissioner Hamilton said she felt the phrase "to our being"was vague. She suggested 40 the word "existence." She said she liked the word "critical," because "crisis" felt like an event like 41 a hurricane. She said that the word "crisis" can actually increase resistance to efforts. 42 Commissioner McKee said that was his thought as well. 43 Vice-Chair Greene said she felt that as leaders in the county, they should set the tone for 44 what is happening. 45 Commissioner Fowler said the words that are chosen are important. She said some words 46 can create pushback in the community. She said that climate action is a specific strategic priority. 47 Charline Kirongozi said having climate change as a strategic priority shows that resources 48 will be invested in action items to address it. 49 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she liked the word "critical." 8 1 The Board agreed to change the guiding principle statement to "We recognize that our 2 environment is critical to our existence and are deliberate in protecting, preserving, and sustaining 3 our natural resources for the continued good of all." 4 5 Slide #10 Strategic Priorities Environmental Protection and ClimateAction:Promote sustainability and resiliency across the County and collaborate with our partners to activate our community, protect and preserve our natural resources, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Healthy Community:Increase equitable access to care and social safety net programming to promote the physical, social, and mental well-being of our community. Housing forAll:Promote equitable and accessible housing and address housing disparities through policies, partnerships, and collaboration to create a thriving community. Multi-modal Transportation:Collaborate with our regional partners to expand, integratelconnect, and provide accessible public transportation options. Public Education/Learning Community:Enhance and maintain quality school operations and infrastructure and cultivate lifelong learning. b Diverse and Vibrant Economy: Foster an environment that attracts and retains sustainable and diverse businesses and visitors, employment opportunities, and diversifies our tax base. 6 7 8 Slide #11 Environmental Protection and Climate Action: Objectives Identify the priorities and resources necessary to implement the Climate Action Plan. Invest in our infrastructure to reduce the environmental impact of the County fleet and improve safety. Improve educational opportunities for County staff and community members on climate action and available resources to advance climate action projects. Incentivize and promote sustainable agriculture and local food systems development through supportive policy, funding,farmland protection and educational outreach. Review land use policies to promote and connect Town, County, and private trails and open spaces. Protect water supply/watersheds. Conserve and protect high priority open space, including Natural Heritage sites, nature preserves, watershed riparian buffers,and prime/threatened farmland. Include environmental stewardship objectives in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. b 9 10 11 9 1 Slide #12 Environmental Protection and Climate Action: Feedback Pay more attention to the land,waterways and animals that are essential for human life. Add wildlife corridors as an example of open space that needs to be conserved and protected. Denser housing and increased public transportation. Emphasize water quality and wildlife corridors. Focus on environmental stewardship. Assist smaller agricultural enterprises. b 2 3 Commissioner Hamilton said she would like to add investment in county and school 4 buildings to reduce environmental impact. 5 Chair Bedford suggested changing one objective listed in slide #11 to "Invest in our 6 infrastructure to reduce the environmental impact of the County fleet/facilities and improve 7 safety." 8 9 Slide #13 Healthy Community: Objectives Improve harm reduction, prevention, and support services for adults and children experiencing behavioral health issues and intellectual or developmental disability. Expand access to quality, affordable healthcare services. (e.g., Medicaid expansion, crisis response, healthy living campaign). Provide social safety net programming and the resources needed for our most vulnerable community members (e-g-,veterans, unhoused people,foster children,older adults etc.). Reduce impacts and barriers for justice-involved children and adults through deflection,diversion, therapeutic interventions, and re-entry support, including housing. Invest in,support,train, and retain our community safety, health,and emergency services employees and direct care workforce. Provide sustainable, equitable, and high-quality community safety and emergency services to meet the community's evolving needs. Invest in services and programs that improve the health and quality of life of the community (e.g., recreation and public open spaces, arts, etc.) b 10 11 12 10 1 Slide #14 Healthy Community: Feedback More focus on accessible spaces. Act in the areas of education, housing,and healthcare. Extend bike lanes. More affordable housing. Training space for EMS. Explore freedom to roam legislation. Improve the life expectancy by 8 years in the next 5 years is not achievable. Objectives should focus on public health and preventive health services. Decreasing poverty rate does not belong here. Suggest measures that include delivery of health services: coverage indicators like %of elders receiving indicated vaccinations, or% of diabetics achieving glucose control. 3 Include overdoes prevention efforts that already exists. b 2 3 Chair Bedford noted that improved training areas for EMS is already something the county 4 is working on. 5 Charline Kirongozi said the "Freedom to roam" suggestion is accessing publicly owned 6 lands. 7 Commissioner McKee said there are problems with accessing publicly owned lands 8 without crossing private land. 9 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked how"freedom to roam" legislation impacts schools and 10 people accessing school grounds during the school day. She said it can be a safety issue. 11 Chair Bedford said it was not something the county was going to pursue. 12 Vice-Chair Greene said the legislation is something that comes from Europe and agreed 13 that it's not something that the county is going to pursue. 14 Vice-Chair Greene suggested changing the first objective on slide #13 to, "Improve harm 15 reduction, prevention, and support services for adults and children experiencing substance use 16 disorders and/or behavioral health issues and intellectual or developmental disability," doesn't 17 include adults and children experiencing substance use. 18 Commissioner Fowler said it was important to be specific. 19 20 11 1 Slide #15 Housing for All: Objectives Locate permanent funding sources to address new and existing housing needs. Address need and any policy barriers to increase access to emergency shelter beds and other low-barrier housing including eviction diversion. Invest in permanent supporting housing. Prioritize and select County-owned land and/or facilities as part of an overall plan of facilities to create crisis, bridge, low barrier, affordable, and permanent housing. Review County ordinances, policies, agreements, and the regulatory processes to increase opportunities and reduce barriers to construct housing. Partner with public agencies to increase opportunities for public employees to buy and rent homes where they work. Expand resources and invest in housing designed for our aging and disabled residents. Preserve existing housing stock from disrepair and avoid displacement. Increase representation of people with lived experience on housing related matters. b 2 3 4 Slide #16 Housing for All: Feedback Take advantage of inter-urban locations for lower cost housing. Clarify who is providing the subsidies for subsidized housing. More starter home options in the cities. Lack of affordable housing for those with moderate incomes. The review of the building process measure needs to be narrowed and clarified to ensure that it does not simply mean to streamline the process. b 5 6 The Board decided not to change any of the objectives for Housing, except to make a 7 grammatical change to "Invest in permanent supportive housing." They felt that the feedback 8 was addressed in the objectives or in other areas of the plan or was too specific for a strategic 9 plan. 10 11 12 1 Slide #17 Multi-modal Transportation: Objectives Identify priorities and resources necessary to implement the Orange County Transit Plan. Increase community awareness of all modes of transportation including transit, bike and pedestrian, vehicle, and all other modes. Support road projects that address congestion and reduce commute time using the County's Complete Streets policy. Coordinate transit investments with municipal and county land use planning to reduce vehicle miles travelled and to provide more equitable access to shopping,employment, medical centers, college campuses, etc. Invest in implementing the County's Safe Routes to Schools plan. Update transportation related plans to provide more multi-modal options in rural Orange County. b 2 3 4 Slide #18 Multi-modal Transportation: Feedback Make sure to include the expansion of safe and well-designed roadways. Consider adding a light rails system. Increased bus system in Hillsborough. More sidewalks and bike lanes. Less car dependability. b 5 6 On slide #17, Commissioner Fowler asked why the update of transportation plans was 7 focused on rural Orange County, rather than all of Orange County. 8 The Board discussed that in the rural areas there are specific challenges with the lack of 9 infrastructure to support mass transit options. They decided to change the last objective on slide 10 #17 to "Update transportation related plans to provide more multi-modal options including rural 11 Orange County." 13 1 Slide #19 Public Education/ Learning Community: Objectives �� .= Foster collaborative relationships with formal and informal educational organizations and agencies to provide opportunities for community members to meet, connect, and learn together. Improve school readiness and educational outcomes by providing access, training,tools, technology, and other resources needed to thrive. Provide support for workforce development through training,tools, technology, and other resources. Improve learning environments by investing in facilities over a 10-year period that addresses repair, renovation, and educational adequacy needs. Invest in and implement a plan that supports schools operational and facility funding needs. Implement the recommendations of the Schools Safety Task Force. Invest in and expand equitable behavioral health services for children and adolescents. Invest in and expand equitable behavioral health services for teachers and staff. b 2 3 4 Slide #20 Public Education/ Learning Community: Objectives Add more education on local history, geology,geography, and politics. Increasing access to free Library services. Increase community access to adult literacy classes and English as a Second Language classes. b 5 6 The Board decided not to change any of the objectives for Public Education/Learning 7 Community. 8 Commissioner Fowler asked if the county provides any English as A Second Language 9 classes. 10 Travis Myren said he thought Cooperative Extension did. 11 Chair Bedford said she thought the Department on Aging did. 12 Vice-Chair Greene said that the county funds a non-profit agency called Orange Literacy. 14 1 The Board took a break at 10:30 a.m. for 18 minutes. 2 3 Slide #21 Diverse and Vibrant Economy: Objectives Provide family-oriented and inclusive programming or other cultural events for residents and visitors. Review and revise County policies and regulations to support business investment in Orange County. Streamline and digitize business processes to facilitate efficient interactions between employers and County departments. Provide resources to small,creative, and agro-businesses that add character and quality of life to our community to attract employers, employees, and visitors. Increase access to and awareness of resources and assistance available to residents and businesses. Enhance the recruitment process to broaden applicant pools for County positions so the workforce becomes more diverse. Provide workforce and business development resources to enhance the skills of our workforce. b 4 — 5 6 Slide #22 Diverse and Vibrant Economy: Feedback Focus on adding to the tax base —include UNC-Chapel Hill and UNC health facilities in taxes. Include ways for people to maximize their earning power and upward mobility. More spaces to attend performances. b 8 The Board noted that they could not include UNC facilities in the tax base. 9 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if it is appropriate in this priority to discuss diversifying 10 the tax base and being open to more economic development opportunities. She said that Orange 11 County has not historically focused on economic development, meaning property owners bear 12 the brunt of tax rate increases. 13 Charline Kirongozi asked if it was captured in the second objective, "Review and revise 14 County policies and regulations to support business investment in Orange County." 15 1 Chair Bedford asked if it should include the phrase "diversifying the tax base." 2 Travis Myren suggested the phrase "expand and diversify the tax base." 3 Chair Bedford said some of this is tied to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. She said 4 making it explicit in the strategic plan is good. 5 Commissioner Hamilton said it should be explicitly stated. 6 Vice-Chair Greene suggested "Continue active recruitment of businesses to increase and 7 diversify the tax base." She said she was fine with either"increase" or"expand." 8 Commissioner McKee said he thought it deserved a separate bullet to show it's a priority. 9 Chair Bedford said that the suggestion of more spaces to attend performances was likely 10 related to performances spaces for children's theater. 11 Vice-Chair Greene said they could add something to the objectives to recognize that the 12 arts are part of the economy. 13 Chair Bedford thought it might be captured in the objective "Provide resources to small, 14 creative, and agro-businesses that add character and quality of life to our community to attract 15 employers, employees, and visitors." 16 Commissioner Hamilton said the first objective should read "Provide family-oriented and 17 inclusive programming and other cultural events for residents and visitors." 18 Chair Bedford noted that the plan is for 5 years, and not everything can be done in that 19 time frame. 20 Charline Kirongozi made two groups of commissioners to improve the language for the 21 Social Justice and Stewardship and Advocacy Guiding Principles. The groups worked 22 independently on different sides of the room for about 10 minutes and then came back together 23 to share their ideas. 24 For the Social Justice Guiding Principle, the working group suggested the statement, "We 25 reject oppression and inequity by ensuring fair and equitable treatment of all people." The Board 26 accepted the change. 27 For the Stewardship and Advocacy Guiding Principles, the working group suggested the 28 statement, "We foster opportunities to innovate and make proactive data supported decisions and 29 advocate to state and federal governments in response to our community's diverse needs and to 30 make best use of our resources." 31 After some discussion, the Board agreed on the following statement: 32 "We make proactive data supported decisions and advocate to local, state and federal 33 governments in response to our community's needs in a way that best utilizes our resources." 34 35 Slide #23 Next Steps Complete the final plan- [] Final adoption in February 2024. In alignment with the County's budgeting process, Berrydunn will develop tools to assist with performance monitoring, reporting,and implementation. b 36 16 1 The Board asked to review the draft of the performance measures and the pictures that 2 will be in the final plan before publication. 3 Charline Kirongozi said that the Board should get annual updates on the performance 4 measures in the strategic plan. She said that often, local government departments will include 5 how their requests or programs relate to the strategic plan in agenda items. 6 Travis Myren said new agenda forms will be developed to reflect the priorities of the 7 strategic plan. He said that new budget requests will be evaluated for how they integrate into the 8 strategic plan. 9 Commissioner Richards said she has been thinking about how the different county plans 10 will be integrated into the budget process. 11 Commissioner Hamilton said she would like to know the baseline measures for 12 performance measures. 13 Charline Kirongozi said that some performance measures will not have a baseline 14 measure to begin with, but some will. 15 16 Budget Preview/ Climate Action Plan Next Steps/ Housing 17 18 Slide #1 GRANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA FY2024-25 BUDGET PLANNING BRIEFING Board of Orange County Commissioners' Retreat January 19, 2024 19 20 21 17 1 Slide #2 GRANGE COUNTY FY 2024-25 BUDGET • Budget Terminology and Tools — CosttoContinDe • Costs Associated with Continuation of Current Staffing — Ten(10)Year Capitan Investment Plan(CIP) • Approves Appropriations for Year 1 • Creates a Ten(10)Year Plan for Capital Expenditures — Debt Service Model • Projects Debt Service Requirements and Affordability Measures based an CIP — Long Range Financial Plan • Ten(10)Year Operating Budget Projection Model based an Previous Expenditure Trends • Integrates Debt Service and Operations and Maintenance Costs from CIP OKANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 2 3 4 Slide #3 ORANGE COUNTY FY 2424-25 BUDGET R. 'I Strategic Fund Plan Balance Mignment Reliance or ud Principles�lt % Guiding DepartmentsL— iA I'rLollg Te.111 . FC7.III.boration Financial Across Planning t GRANGE COUNTY NORTH O.AROLTNA 5 6 7 8 18 1 Slide #4 GRANGE COUNTY EY 2024-25 BUDGET • Strategic Focus Areas for FY2024-25 — Existing County Staff and Programs — School Districts'Continuation Needs — Strategic Plan Alignment and Implementation ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 2 3 4 Slide #5 ORANGE COUNTY FY 20124-25 EXPENDITURE BUDGET Tw6far6 Tp Funds for Poa1- 3.9% ARPA and CIP 0.3% ■Personnel Services canmm.en oder AgaacWe Operations 9.9% Recurring Capital ■Education ■Contribs.to Other Agencies n Transfer to Debt Service r Transfers To Funds for Post-ARPA and FNouR119g C"ft) CIP 9.2% ORANGE COUNTY NORTH O.AROLTNA 5 6 Vice-Chair Greene asked what "Transfers to" meant. 7 Kirk Vaughn, Budget Director, said it referred to transfers to other funds that were not debt 8 service. 9 Commissioner Richards asked if it was possible to show the percentage of funding for 10 debt service for education. 19 1 Bonnie Hammersley said it was possible to change the pie chart on slide #5 to separate 2 debt service for education from debt service for other purposes. 3 Travis Myren said they would move that"slice"to be next to the education current expense 4 "slice" of the pie chart. 5 6 Slide #6 ORANGE COUNTY FY 2024-25 EXPENDITURE BUDGE. Recurring Capital 0.3% ■Personnel Services or erations ■Operations Personnel ■Recurring Capital 74.806 ORANGE COUNTY NORTH.CAROLINA 7 8 9 Slide #7 ORANGE COUNTY FY 2024-25 BUDGET • Expenditure Projections — County Cost to Continue Current Staffing and Programs — School Continuation Budget Estimates — Debt Service Requirements • No increase in debt service projected for FY2024-25 • If all projects proceed,2 cents projected for FY2025-26 s ORANGE COUNTY NORTH C.AROLTNA 10 20 1 Slide #8 COUNTY COST TO CONTINUE ESTIMATES • Known Personnel Cost Drivers Cost Driver Estimated Amount Annualized Salary Changes $4,115,000 Merit Performance Awards $440,000 Health Insurance (5.5%increase) $470,000 Retirement Contributions $1,600,000 TOTAL KNOWN COSTS $6,625,000 • Other Personnel Considerations — Across the Board Wage Adjustment-Every 1%_$800,000 — Living Wage-$17.65 — Public Safety Overtime-$1.8 million to right size ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CA UZ T INA 2 3 Travis Myren said the health insurance costs were increasing in part due to the cost of 4 prescriptions. 5 6 Slide #9 COUNTY COST TO CONTINUE ESTIMATES • Operating and Contractual Services Considerations — Opening Southern Branch library-$800k Planned open date in October,hire staff in July for hiring and training lead time. • Also includes costs for AMS{utilities,Maintenance and custodial) — Exhausti ng Ame dean Rescue Plan Act Funding • Emergency Housing Assistance Program-$2 million rental assistance+$100k staff costs • Long Time Homeowner's Assistance-$250.000 GARE Youth Program-$45.000 ARPA Grant Coordinator -$67,000(will evaluate need for closing out ARPA projects) — Annualizing New Programs Mobile Crisis Response-Included in Annualized Salary Changes • Bridge Housing--64,000 County Cost in PEM ORANGE COUNTY N�)k I'1 I('.;11,01 I` .1 7 8 Bonnie Hammersley said the emergency housing assistance program will not have any 9 funding in future fiscal years. 10 21 1 Slide #10 COUNTY COST TO CONTINUE ESTIMATES • Operating and Contractual Services Considerations — Strategic Plan Implementation • Strategic Plan Staffing-lA FTE • Department Director Retreat to Create Implementation Plan • Organizational Year-Form Interdisciplinary Teams • Develop a Deep Understanding of the Challenges — Climate Action Plait Implementation • Capital Investment Plan•$1.1 million • Operating Budget-$1.0 million ORANGE COUNTY NOuTH(:AWL)LINA 2 3 Vice-Chair Greene asked what the qualifications might be for a strategic plan employee. 4 Travis Myren said it would require experience with performance measurement and 5 strategic planning, and hopefully someone already familiar with the county's strategic plan. 6 Bonnie Hammersley said other peer counties already have strategic plan managers. 7 Commissioner Richards said it will require project management and collaboration skills, 8 especially in the first year of implementation. 9 Kirk Vaughn said that in other counties, the strategic plan coordinator is located in the 10 County Manager's Office or in the Budget Office. 11 12 Slide #11 SCHOOL CONTINUATION ESTIMATES Continuation Estimates Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools Continuation Estimate-Approximately$3 million Audited FY 2023 Fund Balance at 4.47%.below school fund balance policy of 5.5%. - Orange County Schools Continuation Estimate-Approximately$2 million $3 million In expiringfederal grants Supplanting with county funds would require 12%+Current Expense Increase Includes Similar Cost Drivers to the County Cost to Continue State Budget Provided 3%Increases for Instructional Staff No Growth{and perhaps a decline}in Number of Funded Students ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 13 22 1 Slide #12 SCHOOL CONTINUATION ESTIMATES Cost to the County Depends on Continuation Target and Resulting Per Pupil Amount CHCCS Continuation OCS Continuation CHCCS Continuation Estimate $2,950,000 OCS Continuation Estimate $1,940,00 Number of Funded Students Number of Funded Students FY2023-24 11,253 FY2023-24 8,003 Additional Per Pupil $262 Additional Per Pupil $242 OCS Funded Students 8,003 CHCCS Funded Students 11,253 New Per Pupil $262 New Per Pu iI $242 OGS Additional Funds $2,098,005 CHCCSAdditional Funds $2,727,830 Tatal w Fundiniz Needed $5,Q48.005New Funding 4 5%Increase in Current 4.5%Increase in Curren Expense Expense 2 3 4 Slide #13 SCHOOL CONTINUATION ESTIMATES Changes in Per Pupil Amount by Year Change in Per Pupil Allocation $600.00 $538 46 $500.00 $441.00 $400.00 $302.00 $300.00 $200.uo $187.25 $112.00$131'00 $102,00 $12650 $123.00 $100.00 $6.00 $14.75 $_ ro� yd ,yd`ro 1d'ry roux vd'°` rod'y 6`� d`^ d`�` rosg °row fib °rory tiq� .b $1100.00) $(304:00) © $(200.00) ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 5 6 7 23 1 Slide #14 ORANGE COUNTY EY 2024-25 BUDGET • Revenue Projections — Property Tax Estimates Sales Tax Estimates — Charges for Services — Interest Income ORANGE COUNTY NOR1-1-1 CAROLINA 2 3 4 Slide #15 ORANGE COUNTY FY 2024-25 REVENUE BUDGET Other Revenue-._ Transfam In 1.2% � t1.9M —Apprcp of Fund Balance t:hargea 4w Service-z 4_ 25% inlrrgovammentsl..,{-;- T.n9� r Property Tax Sales Tax Intergovernmental ■Charges for Service ■Other Revenue ■Transfers In ■Approp of Fund Balance r ORANGE COUNTY NOKI-H CAROLINA 5 6 7 24 1 Slide #16 REVENUE ESTIMATES • Property Tax — 2% Natural Growth due to New Construction $3,900,000 — No Change in Collection Rates(99.2% Property,99.6%Vehicles) No Tax Rate Increase for Debt Service ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 2 3 4 Slide #17 REVENUE ESTIMATES Sales Tax Estimate Currently seeing significantly slower growth,especiaflyin the per-capita article 40 Point-of-delivery articles are currently growingabove pre-covid rates, suggesting stronger local economythan state economy. FY 24 FY 25 Growth Proj Proj from FY 24 Article FY 23 Actuals Growth FY 2024 Projection Growth FY 25 Budget Est. Budget Art.39 $ 16,430,626 4.0%S 17,087,851 4.0%$ 17,771,365 7.1 Art.40 $ 11,785,331 3.0%$ 12,138,891 4.0%$ 12,624,447 -0.9 Art,42 $ 8,240,839 4.0%$ 8.570,473 4.0%S 8,913,292 6.7 Art.44 $ 284,938 4.0%$ 296,335 4.0%$ 308,189 2.7% HH-44 $ 6,655,046 4.0%$ 6,921,248 4.0%$ 7,198,098 25.2 um/Avg 5 43,396,780 3.8%$ 45,014,798 4.0%$ 46,815,391 7.4 ORANGE COUNTY NOWTH CAROLINA 5 6 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if there is a breakdown of property tax revenue 7 between commercial and residential. 8 Travis Myren said he would get that information to the Board. 9 10 25 1 Slide #18 REVENUE ESTIMATES • Sales Tax — 7%Growth from FY 24 Budget due to right size Hold Harmless • Potential Yield of Approximately$3 million • Actual FY2023-24 Growth-3.8%from FY2022-23 Actuals • Projected FY2024-25 Growth-4%from FY2023-24 Projected Actuals — Assumes returning to pre-pandemic growth rates with stronger local economy than overall state economy ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 2 3 4 Slide #19 REVENUE ESTIMATES • Other Revenue Considerations — Interest Income Growth - Interest income on county deposits, due to change in interest rate environment GRANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLTNA 5 6 7 26 1 Slide #20 TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES FOR RASE BUDGET • Total Estimated Expenditures $295,663,000 • $16.1 million increase from FY2023-24 • Total Estimated Revenues $287,927,000 • $8.4 million increase from FY2023-24 • Difference $7,735,000 , _ ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 2 3 4 Slide #21 TOOLS FOR BALANCING BUDGET • Refining Expenditure and • Special District Tax Rate Revenue Forecasts • Fee Increases • Cost Reductions • Phasing • Fund Balance Appropriation • Countywide Property Tax Rate ORANGE COUNTY NOWTH CAROLINA 5 6 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if there is a plan for personnel cost reductions. 7 Travis Myren said that at this time there is not a reduction in force being considered. 8 9 27 1 Slide #22 LONGTERM FINANCIAL MODEL Long Term Planning for Financial Stability Two I-argest expenditures categories, Personnel and Education, are programmed to grow faster than the largest revenue source-Property Tax. Capital projects with operating budget impacts Crisis Diversion Facility New Emergency Services Substations that require new staff Debt Service to Fund School and County Capital Needs ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 2 3 4 Slide #23 ORANGE COUNTY FY 2024-25 BUDGET FY 2024-25 BUDGET TIMELINE DATE Department Director Guidelines Presentation January 5 Operating Budget kickoff meetings January 12-13 FY2024-25 Budget Submission Deadline February 24 County Manager meeting w/Outside Agencies and Mid to Late-March Related Department Directors County Manager Meeting w/Department Directors Mid-March to Early April County Manager Meeting w/Fire Districts Early April COCC Joint Meeting w/Boards of Education April 27 County Manager presents FY2024-25 May 2 Recommended Budget 5 6 Travis Myren said that the information on slides 23 and 24 are incorrect and to disregard 7 the dates. 8 9 28 1 Slide #24 ORANGE COUNTY F' 2024-25 BUDGET Budget and Capital Investment Plan (Ci P) May 9 &June 1 BUDGET WORK SESSION SCHEDULE DATE Schools and Outside Agencies May 11 Fire District, Public Safety, and Human Services May 18 Support Services, General Government, May 23 Community Services, and Durham Tech Budget Amendments and Resolution of Intent to June 8 Adopt BOCC REGULAR MEETING EML�m FY2024-25 Operating and CIP Budget Adoption June 20 ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 2 3 4 Slide #25 LEADINGTHEWAY Draft Mission Statement Draft Vision Statement Orange County is a visionary We are a diverse, inclusive, and leader in providing governmental healthy county working together services valued by our community, to strengthen our community and including those required by law,in enhance the quality of life for all an equitable,sustainable, residents. innovative,and efficient way. Draft Guiding Principles • Communication and Awareness • Partnership and Collaboration • Inclusivity and Engagement • Social Justice Dedication and Respect • ClimateAAction and Sustainability • Stewardship and Advocacy ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 5 6 Commissioner Richards said the schools have to pass a resolution in support of the bond. 7 She said that there was not another meeting with them until April. She said it would be ideal if 8 everyone was on the same page for the resolution of support. 9 29 1 Chair Bedford said in the past there was not much discussion by the school systems on 2 the amounts of previous bonds. 3 4 The Board took a break for lunch at 12:15 pm. 5 6 The Board resumed the meeting at 1:18 pm. 7 S School and County Facilities Bond Financing Discussion 9 10 Slide #1 ORANGE COUNTY I%TC3R-rx CARC)LIWA. School and County Capital Planning and Financing Scenarios Board of Commissioners Retreat January 19, 2024 11 12 13 Slide #2 202 SRI H-mille d in*1"Iday S9,903,231 SRI ll—w—ll—w—It.—,gs.1 Cednr Gave Catxsa,niry Cmtn W .9 Slorage and t nKl}l County Facilities , °fl,,alg.r¢xla f,.I,._,t w<av $4,320,000 Ilcrexteilu-t illd Jail Hurding Move S7tcr T1"do"Storage to cedar Graver.Ow'd a 2026 SR3 yf�l lace plating W7 57,075,13./ Plan w SR4 ❑"`also n Caws Sumf Ivnex Howe•A lilt Rebati xi RJunxlile.k s1 ce iota 1 tr fLiild $551,260 (7 il,;Budd a aurfaccparking lot Z 2027 C—iwwt Cixlrk7 Atmrny Rruklxi0-V. Ciatncl An—V intoI ik Building.14iikla CC SRS :afrrnpark'npinl 5324,531 • IL SR6 Iluild LMSfac@ity(oildingoM l ad l4rci(irfccoic .Mo-F—gr':Icivicc«.�t of L-9- y 526,559,570 • Fifteen(15)year plan Toy srfnccMikiir.1 2028 SR7 Con—I aiuinaI Ooc qme Services HuMirg far AMS&Cu rely vfklc Stoiauc facility $5.518,287 • Costs estimated for the SR& Mrne pi""Slixfte f411 of Oki F A{,Bijkkfi0 info C.odtx G,.- 0 first ten years202Q SR9 flarld C.ilwl RMoealkxi at WIN Pixel Site of I aiiv,m Palk $17,340,$51 • Option A-$130 million SRIO nuidd Trwrslxvltalirn llfnlfdnll Adlilkxt to Moux axil Ruik6itf. 54,266,799 2030 • Option B-$137 million MRI Ili-4fip FAC Prn(ierty fm Affarinhln Rnoainq 0 MR2 1)-- rfi+�;Ci,mWR--14.x1 Who 1nlR,mfrs-I--p—)LM.II 4at>Prkty Spurr $996,197 • First five years(Short =0a, MR3 Build Addilkxi 111 rlaallh CW4111ie9 in Ouipel hill 516,0@6,726 Range)-$70 million w MR4 M-ainlo Mwo;pool Huiklkig Additiai. $122,987 2 ?U32 MRS Rudd V—ff aff-al Mata Pried Site Move SMxdfwf of.lvalix Cama 1.Motarpocl SStc 522,596,272 Relxvale gtrxrnd 0—ril edr,Idig J,.[,-Cerner.Mow.Clerk of(:fours to f>afl SlcKld{IRx•e MR6 Spare 52,740,762 2033 MR7 0--—,—tkn a xurfaee Ixukng lot el a4d Jeil mite,Rukl n pmkifig giira4e $14,831,155 MR8 Move x110 asn1 Justice rrvita ljr—d floor int.t ink Mi"fi0.dlenovacokA L04), $22@,Ol@ Space fur DIMrict Gxxt Slrpf-11pice 1014- 2 U142 MR9 R=-w 3 fliavicl G—,,—vi J"—Ccn;a 51,400,155 i 1 ixuaan m Iro 7rM Oow,2 cafruonew nn tho Sot floor} 14 30 1 Travis Myren said if there are multiple uses for the bond, there will have to be separate 2 ballot questions for each purpose. 3 Chair Bedford said she thinks Commissioner Richards was persuasive in her argument 4 that there should only be one purpose related to school facility needs. 5 The Board agreed. 6 Commissioner Fowler asked about the cost estimates for the full 15-year plan. 7 Travis Myren said staff didn't assign costs to the last 5 years because the cost estimates 8 would be unreliable this far out. He added that if the short-range projects (in yellow in the slide 9 above) are stretched out to complete over a 10-year period, the county can still accomplish the 10 Development of the EAC Property for Affordable Housing in that time frame because it is a no 11 cost item. 12 13 Slide #3 School Long Range optimization Plan OPTIONS RETURN ON INVESTMENT COST PER YEAR X TfMELINE = TOTAL INVESTMENT COMFORTABLE ©&SAFE Addresses No changes No changes Noaddltional _$44mllllon -$219million 20% toclassroom to student or renovated 5years of facility needs spaces capacity schools COMFORTABLE in �--t� ppqq C}� 6Ltl &SAFE PLUS 10-YEAR Addresses No changes No changes No additional FACILITYNEEDS ALL toclassroom tostudent or renovated 10 years facility needs spaces Capacity schools COMFORTABLE &SAFE, MW © - PLUSUPGRADED Upgraded $54million $541.2 million �• - 2 learning tools, 10 years LEARNING TOOLS Renovations nospacechanges Replacement New schools school COMFORTABLE AM , &SAFE,: J PLUS NW 72 learning els 7 2 $67 million 000 1 Renovations Replacement New 15 years CONSTRUCTION and right-size schools schools. classroom spaces (.Mew M5 replacing cepaclty from Mcl-94 EI MS) 14 15 16 31 1 Slide #4 Comparing the Scenarios Scenario New County Now School OnePeak Debt Minimum 10 Title Funding Funding Rate Impact Service to Year Payout Revenue Ratio Al $75 million $130 million 4.00 cents 17.4% 60.4% A2 $130 million $130 million 4.57 cents 180% 59.9% C1 $130 million $400 million 7.89 cents 22.0% 57.0% C2 $130 million $300 million bond 8.66 cents 19.4% 58.1% $100 million pay-go D $130 million $630 million 11.22 cents 26.6% 55.0% Middle $75 million $200 million bond 5.49 cents 17.2% 60.3% $50 million pay-go ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 2 3 4 Slide #5 Comparing the Scenarios Scenario New County New School One Time Tax Peak Debt Minimum 10 Title Funding Funding Rate Impact Service toYear Payout Revenue Ratio H $75 million $300 million bond 8.06 cents 18.55% 59.0% $100 million pay-go $130 million Push$17.9 million $300 million bond B in existing projects 8.47 cents 19.18% 58.2% outside of the ten $100 million pay-go year plan* 'itemized list or projects on next slide ORANGE COUNTY 5 NORTH CAROLINA 5 6 7 32 1 Slide #6 Existing CIP Project 'Reductions Proposed Existing CIP Project Reductions Project Year Budget Cedar Grove Park,Phase II FY2029-FY30-31 $1,045,575 Covered Outdoor Fitness-Seymour FY2024-25 $200,000 Center Fairview Park Improvements FY2030-31-FY2031-32 $1,959,683 Millhouse Road Park FY2027-28-FY2028-29 $8,076,300 Mountains to Sea Trail FY2028-29 $693,000 Soccercom Phase II FY2025-26-FY2026-27 $5,879,060 TOTAL $17,883,618 ©RANGE COUNT'` 6 NQ1<FH C.AROUNA 2 3 Chair Bedford said under Scenario B, improvements to Fairview Park would be reduced, 4 but the new county central recreation building would still be built and would be adjacent to Fairview 5 Park, so they would still be getting quite an amenity. 6 7 Slide #7 New Scenarios Scenario New County New School One Time Tax Peak Debt Minimum t Title Funding Funding Rate Impact Service to Year Payout Revenue Ratio $75 million Push$17.9 million $300 million bond +8 in existing projects $100 million pay-go 7.87 cents 18.44°1° 59.2°/q outside of the ten year plan F $75 million $250 million bond 7.43 cents 17,77% 59.610 ° $100 million pay-go G $108 million' $250 million bond 7.79 cents 18.40% 69.4% $100 million pay-go 'Funds the Long Rage County Plan through project MR5-New Sheriff's Office O�C>�H COUNTY 7 cARCIA 8 9 10 33 1 Slide #8 Tax Impact On $500,000 Home Scenario Title One Time Tax Rate Impact ..ct on a$5rr rrI home in cents Al 4.001 $200.00 A2 4.57 $228.50 G1 7.89 $394.50 C2 8.66 $433.00 D 11.22 $561.00 Middle 5.49 $274.50 H 8.06 $403.00 B 8.47 $423.50 H+8 7.87 $393.50 F 7.43 $371.50 G 7.79 $389.50 GRANGE COUNTY B NOR-17H CAROLINA 2 3 4 Slide #9 Band Funding Practice Bond Allocation ADM vs. Project Based Budgeting CHCCS GCS Budgeted Average Daily Membership FY2023-24 58.44% 41.56% Project Based Option D--Phase 1 58.20% 41.80% Project Based Option C 60.08% 39.92% ORANGE COUNTY 9 NC7RTI-I CAR"LINA 5 6 7 34 1 Slide #10 Charter Students and Band Allocation Average Daily Membership FY2023-24 Budget FY2023-24 Budget CHCCS Ocs TOTAL CHCCS OCs TOTAL In-Facility Students 11„393 7,122 18,515 In-Facility Students 11,393 7,122 18,515 Less Out of District (350) (118) (468) Less Out of District (354) (118) (468) Plus Charter Students 210 999 1,209 Total Funded Students 11,043 7,004 18,047 Total Funded Students 11,253 8,003 19,256 %Allocation 64.19% 36.81% %Albcation 58.44% 49.5601. %Difference 2.75% (2.75%) $200 miltion bond $116,877,856 $83,122144 $260 million bond amount $122,380,451 $77,619,549 amount ,Difference $45©2,595 ($5,54O2,595) ,m JRA TGE COUNTY NORTH WTNA2 3 Commissioner McKee expressed concern with the perception of the funding percentage 4 split between the school districts if charter students are not included in the calculation. He also 5 asked what OCS would lose in this scenario. 6 Commissioner Richards said that charter students are not in the buildings and therefore it 7 doesn't make sense for them to be in the calculation. 8 Chair Bedford said, if the bond amount is $200 million, GCS's allocation would decrease 9 $5.5 million that would be given to CHCCS. She said she believes in continuing to flow through 10 operating costs with charter students in the calculation but does not think it's logical to do that 11 with capital costs because charter students are not in the school buildings. 12 Commissioner McKee said he believes there is still a long-standing perception issue, and 13 that people will not vote for the bond if they do not believe their school district will benefit from it. 14 Chair Bedford said she thinks the difference in operating costs and capital costs would 15 just have to be explained to voters. 16 Commissioner Hamilton said she thinks funding should be done on a project basis as 17 identified in the Woolpert report and believes that will be the best way to be good stewards of 18 public funds. 19 Commissioner McKee reiterated his concern about perception. 20 Chair Bedford said she agrees with Commissioner McKee about a perception issue and 21 thinks a 60-40 split is the best option, which is consistent with the way the Board splits operating 22 funds between the school districts. 23 Commissioner Richards pointed out that if funds were split by project in Scenario C, 24 CHCCS would get 60.08% and OCS would get 39.92%, which is virtually a 60-40 split. 25 Commissioner Hamilton said she does not want to do an arbitrary split and thinks the 26 board should either split funding by Average Daily Membership (ADM) or by project. 27 Commissioner Richards, Commissioner Fowler, Vice-Chair Greene, and Commissioner 28 Hamilton indicated they are in favor of project-based funding. 29 Commissioner McKee, Chair Bedford, and Commissioner Portie-Ascott were in favor of 30 funding based on ADM. 35 1 Chair Bedford clarified that she would not like to include charter students in the ADM 2 funding split scenario. 3 Commissioner McKee said he thinks as long as the percentage split between school 4 districts is reasonable, he is less concerned about perception. 5 Commissioner Richards said the point of the bond is to improve school facilities and so 6 the money should go where there is the biggest need, which was identified in the Woolpert study. 7 She said she thinks residents will understand that. She added that right now, there is money that 8 was given to OCS that has not yet been spent. 9 Commissioner McKee said that money has now been allocated. 10 Commissioner Richards said it took a long time and there were other projects that didn't 11 get done because that money was sitting there. She said she thinks the bond education efforts 12 needs to focus on the fact that the money needs to address capital needs that have been long 13 ignored in a prioritized way. 14 Commissioner McKee said if the bond is passed, the Board has no say in how, when, and 15 where the money is spent, and those decisions will be totally up to the elected school boards. 16 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she agrees with Commissioner McKee that the bond will 17 be a hard sell if the allocation is not at least close to 60% for CHCCS and 40% for OCS, to be 18 consistent with the way funds have been distributed in the past. 19 Commissioner Richards said that regardless of whether the funds are distributed on a 20 project basis or based on ADM, the numbers are coming out around the desired 60-40 split, 21 according to Slide #9. 22 Commissioner McKee said that there is no legal requirement for a future Board to agree 23 or follow this percentage for allocation. 24 Travis Myren clarified that if the Board chooses to distribute funds by project, a budget 25 amendment would be required for the school boards to use the funds for something else. 26 To Commissioner McKee's point, Vice-Chair Greene said this Board can set an example 27 and a strategy for a future Board and doesn't want perceptions to be the deciding factor in making 28 this choice. 29 Commissioner McKee said he agrees with Vice-Chair Greene and is not saying that the 30 perception of things is accurate. 31 Commissioner Hamilton said this Board can create policies and practices, so the money 32 is used efficiently and effectively and none of it is wasted. She said a project-based allocation 33 following the Woolpert study is the best way to go. 34 Chair Bedford said she is fine with going project-based this time but every other capital 35 decision in the past has been by ADM and that's why the percentages are so close across 36 scenarios. She said it's scary to think that it will always do it one way or another. She said in this 37 case it works to do it project-based for the bond to still pass, but if there was a bigger differential 38 it probably wouldn't. 39 Travis Myren said just to be clear, staff is looking for clarity on direction today. He said the 40 Board doesn't have to make a decision on the final not to exceed amount until April, but if the 41 Board wants alignment with the school boards' resolutions, a decision needs to be made sooner. 42 Chair Bedford asked if resolutions from the school board are required. 43 Gary Donaldson, Chief Financial Officer, said yes. 44 Commissioner Richards asked what the one-time tax impact of the last bond was. 45 Travis Myren said he thinks it was 5 cents split over several years. 46 Commissioner McKee said it may have been 6 cents, but that it was applied over several 47 years. He said the Board could choose to do that again this time, but if the increase is carried 48 over several years the cumulative tax impact is higher. 49 Commissioner Richards said the rationale for spreading out the tax increase would be that 50 there is less impact on taxpayers at one time, even if the cumulative increase is higher. 36 1 Commissioner Richards asked Travis Myren to explain how the impact of a revaluation 2 would play into this. 3 4 Slide #13 Revaluation and Redistribution of Tax Responsibility • The revaluation will bring the assessed value of all property in the County up to current market rates. — The new assessed values will redistribute tax liability among property owners based on the new values. — An increase in value does not necessarily mean an increase in the amount of tax paid any individual property owner- - Increases or decreases from pre-revaluation property tax bills are determined by how a subject property value grows relative to other properties. Countywide Assessed Tax Rate per Property Tax Assessed Tax Rate per Property Tax I Value ii r0Value Revenue Pre-Renal $23.23 billion 0.8353 $194.01 million Pre-Reval $350,000 0.8353 $2,923 Post-Reval $35.04 billion 0,5537 $194.01 million Post-Reval @ 50.84% $527,940 0.5537 $2.923 50.84% Post Reval @ 25% $437,500 0.5537 $2,422 increase Post Reval @ 65% $577,500 0.5537 $3,197 ORANGE COUNTY 13 NnRTi-I CAROLINA 5 6 Travis Myren skipped ahead to slide #13 after slide #10 in response to Commissioner 7 Richards's question. Travis Myren explained that after a revaluation, the assessed value goes up 8 and the revenue neutral tax rate comes way down to produce the same amount of property tax 9 revenue. He said that same analysis carries forward to the individual homeowner. He explained 10 that if the individual value of a home increases at a rate that matches the overall percentage 11 increase of the countywide assessed value, the homeowner will not see a property tax increase 12 post-revaluation at the revenue neutral tax rate. However, if the individual property value 13 increases more than the percentage increase of the countywide assessed value the homeowner's 14 property taxes will increase even at the revenue neutral tax rate. Travis Myren said that 15 Commissioner Richards revaluation itself will not increase tax revenue, and the question is what 16 amount on top of the revenue neutral tax rate would be required to pay the debt service on the 17 bond. 18 The Board discussed the impact on the Northside community during the last revaluation 19 and the potential impact of future tax increases to Orange County residents following future 20 revaluations. 21 Commissioner Richards asked what others think a palatable tax increase would be. 22 Commissioner Hamilton said the bond will go to the residents on a ballot to decide. She 23 said they will be given the information on the tax implications and the Bond Education Committee 24 will educate them and they will have the opportunity to give feedback. She said the Board has 25 already received emails in support of a bond. She said the focus for her is that the Board knows 26 the needs and needs to choose a plan that will address them--she said she personally supports 27 option H + B. She added that the rest is up to the democratic process. 28 Commissioner Fowler said she would like to go with Option H. She said it provides much 29 needed funds and is realistic to get done, but also provides flexibility if needed and ensures the 30 county keeps a good bond rating. 37 1 Vice-Chair Greene said she supports Option C-2. She said she doesn't want to reduce the 2 county contribution by as much as Option H. 3 Chair Bedford asked Kirk Vaughn, Budget Director, to calculate what Option H would look 4 like with a $108 million in new county funding instead of$75 million. 5 Kirk Vaughn said you could get a close estimate by adding .36 cents to the H+B tax 6 increase. 7 Chair Bedford said that would be 8.42 cents as a one-time tax increase but would address 8 some of Vice-Chair Greene's concerns with option H (amended Option G) 9 Commissioner Fowler said she could support that proposal, but it would impact the years 10 10-20 in the County CIP in terms of what is available for future debt service. She said she wants 11 to choose a plan that is equitable in terms of the county as well as the school capital needs. 12 Chair Bedford said even though it costs more to have the $100 million pay-go, it provides 13 flexibility to future boards and thinks it is worth it for that reason. 14 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said with the H+B option, she likes that the debt service ratio 15 will be within the recommended range from the rating agency. She asked if once the money gets 16 split the impact will actually be felt by the school districts. 17 Chair Bedford said it won't solve all of the issues but will address a lot of them. 18 Commissioner Fowler said the Board does not have to decide which county projects would 19 be delayed today. She said she supports amended Option G, as Chair Bedford suggested. 20 Chair Bedford said that's right because the Board revisits the CIP every year. 21 Commissioner Richards said she can support amended Option G but doesn't like the idea 22 of deciding which projects will be pushed off now. She said it feels like pitting county and school 23 needs against one another. She suggested Option G but with a$300 million bond and $100 million 24 as pay-go. 25 Commissioner Hamilton reiterated that she supports Option H+B because this can has 26 been kicked down the road and needs to be addressed now so other projects will have to wait. 27 Chair Bedford said she supports amended Option G. 28 Commissioner McKee said he supports H+B. He shared some of the conversations has 29 had with residents about moving out of Orange County due to taxes making it unaffordable. 30 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she has also gotten phone calls from people who are 31 concerned they will no longer be able to afford to live here but want something done for the 32 schools. She said she is leaning towards Option H+B. 33 Chair Bedford and Commissioner Fowler both said they will move to supporting option 34 H+B. 35 Vice-Chair Greene and Commissioner Richards said they are sticking with supporting 36 amended Option G. 37 Chair Bedford asked how Commissioner Richards would feel if H+B was framed as not 38 choosing specific county projects to cut out and instead decreased the new county funding by 39 $17.9 million. 40 Commissioner McKee said he likes that part of H+B because it signals a willingness for 41 the county to cut back on its own projects and he thinks that will go a long way for some residents. 42 Vice-Chair Greene said she does not like the identified $17.9 million in county projects 43 because it gives the community no option to provide input. She said the portion of county funding 44 would go down. She said she would like more discussion on whether to identify specific projects 45 or just reduce the amount of new county funding by $17.9 million because it makes a difference 46 to her. 47 Commissioner Fowler said she could support Option H which gets rid of the identification 48 of county projects. 49 Commissioner Hamilton said the Board just needs to decide the bond amount now and 50 thinks they can hash out some of the other details later. 38 1 The Board went back to Slide #2 and discussed which county projects would be possible 2 to complete depending on the amount of new county funding they decide to allocate to school 3 facilities. 4 202 SR1 Henwate I cru Ikutdulp rQ1,281 R2 Itxlrdr—,s al(kdw Gio—(''vTumit ( leWid-j foSI—xyem I 1 $4,320,000 cyCOUn L 'IIQS Ueconsuttct Jkl Jarl BuakLng Mare Slisrff Evldelce Storage to Uedar moves.13m o a 2026 SR3 57025,536 surface parking lot Plan w Uecrostium Court Slteel Amex Move A&A Probaliarl&Awenile.Jusliceinuo Limit&rild $557 �, SR4 nrf.Rudd a surface p.lang kN ,250 Z f}ermclnrr Digwt Annan Rnddr Mmr Ilislrinr An - 2027 Q SHS '1' a0 rrrxy inrnlink 8+iilrknq fkrilrfa � a t"lace parking lnt $324531 �+ Itvild EMS I'oc04y B.Wid g a1 Maror Pont Sit..Mc I7, rgc y:,rv—uut of Crruryr—t • Fifteen (15)year plan C SR6 ScrEBuilt" $26,559,578 2028 SR7 Gonveit original Emage cy Services Buikhnq fa AMS&(:aptly-hide 57oragc I activy $5,518,267 • Costs estimated for the SR8 Move pupa Startle out of Old LAC Build%Into CedwGiove 0 first ten years 2d29 SR9 build Cenval Recreation at Motor Pod Site of Iaimm Park 517,360,851 • Option A- $130 million SR10 Ruilrl Tmnxpxxlxlim Rriiding ArkStion In Motor p>•xal NniNn0 S4,266,299 203 • Option B -$137 million MRI DevekgtlAC�^Ix rtY lrc Aflrc LnhN Hms�irrJ l MR2 Dxetxsa4ftlCt Central Rertvatirva xt Whined A rrealC opr*n staxrx•a SFaff Anwrtify Span• 5996,197 • First five years (Short 2031 MR3 Ruik1 AMkifon to Srwlfaern I leallh E3raildirg in Chapel t{ilY S16,006,726 Range) - $70 million W MR4 Dxcroslnctfrmspalal-BuMing Mcwe into k4rrtruprnlH+rikfimJ Adrkrim 5122,987 Z 2032 MRS IN.W Sheriff o11`ore at Win,Pool She.Move Shm It nui of Jim"Cmhr 1.Motdpxxd Ste 522,SS6,272 Raxmete gauld fkxx of existing Justice oeftlef.Move Ckrk of Cotirls to okt'Awilf Offtce MRS Spatz: $2,760,762 2033 MR7 Occasatnct pnitim of axJme purkiN lot at old J4il tire.MAA is pa,it..q goruye. $16,831,155 MR8 Mare CJRD mt of katim Centa gotrM floe inti t irik fklildirrq.Rt>rrsvate❑kl G1ifD $228,018 Spare tot 0161 itd Gaut Support Slx�rx ?034 t h11:+ R—ow 3 Dfntiiul Gourtraurrw in Jutaim Centet $1,900,155 1 c trooan ma Tho 2nd fl—,2—Iroornc ren 11v 1.1 fl—I 5 6 Travis Myren stated that if the Board were to allocate $108 million in new county funding 7 rather than $75 million, all of the projects in yellow could still be completed, with the exception of 8 SR10. 9 Commissioner Hamilton suggested combining amended Option G and Option B, so $90.1 10 million in new county funding, $300 million bond with $100 million pay-go. 11 Chair Bedford said this would result in an 8.23 cent one-time tax rate impact. 12 After discussion, the Board reached consensus on this option and determined they would 13 allocate funds on a project-based basis according to the Woolpert study. 14 Commissioner McKee and Commissioner Portie-Ascott stated they do not support project- 15 based funding but understand the majority of commissioners are in support. 16 Travis Myren said the funding split for this scenario would be 60.08% CHCCS 39.92% for 17 OCS. 18 19 39 1 Slide #11 Proposed Timeline Proposed 2024 Capital Planning and Bond Referendum Schedule 1. Review schedule of approvals for a bond referendum and review the County Facilities Master Plan November 9`"Work Session — 2. Review School Facilities Long Range Optimization Plan-woolpert December 4th Business Meeting 3. Review Financing Scenarios December 12th Business Meeting 4. Approve a tentative plan for Bond Referendum January 16th Business Meeting January 19"1 Retreat 5. Staff meets with Local Government Commission on tentative January/February 2024 Bond plan 6. School Boards adopt a resolution supporti ng the referendum February 2024 March 3 Business Meeting 7, Review potential adjustments to the bond referendum plan,if March 12 Wank Session needed. March 19 Business Meeting OKAN(jE COUNTY 11 'tir W i t r C_AROI.INA 2 3 4 Slide #12 Proposed Timeline Proposed 2024 Capital Planning and Bond Referendum Schedule 8. BOCC adopts preliminary resolution establishing the bond purpose(s)and sets a not to exceed bond amount(s). Neither the purpose nor the not to exceed amount moy chonge April 21r BQCC Business Meeting following this action. 9. BOCC appoints a bond education committee and appropriates funds for outreach April 161h BOCC Business Meeting 10. Staff publishes a notice of intent to file an application for a general obligation bond By May 1 referendum 11. Staff files bond application with the Local Government Commission By May 10 12. BOCC introduces bond order and schedules a public hearing May 71 BOCC Business Meeting 13. 80CC holds public hearing on bond referendum May 211'BOCC Business Meeting 14. BCCC adopts the bond order;formally set the ballot question and referendum date June 41h BOCC Business Meeting 15. Community vote on bond referendum November 5,2024 ORANGE COUNTY 12 NORTH CAROLINA 5 6 Commissioner Richards asked what it would look like for pay-go to be $200 million. 7 Travis Myren said it would result in an additional substantial tax increase because every 8 1 cent increase only generates $3 million. 9 Commissioner Richards asked how to get people to support the bond when it still isn't 10 enough to address current needs. 40 1 Commissioner Hamilton said the Board can educate the community about the need for 2 more state and federal funding for education and the local impacts of choosing leaders at those 3 levels of government. 4 Chair Bedford and Commissioner McKee stressed the importance of commercial 5 economic development to lessen the tax burden on homeowners. 6 7 Wrap-Up 8 9 Chair Bedford reminded the Board the Assembly of Governments meeting will be held at 10 the Southern Human Services Center on Tuesday, January 23, 2024, and reviewed the agenda. 11 12 Adjournment 13 14 A motion was made by Vice-Chair Greene, seconded by Commissioner Hamilton, to 15 adjourn the meeting at 2:54 p.m. 16 17 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 18 19 Jamezetta Bedford, Chair 20 21 22 Recorded by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board and Tara May, Deputy Clerk to the Board 23 24 Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board. 25