Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda - 12-10-2024; 8-a - Minutes
1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: December 10, 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: November 7, 2024 Business Meeting Attachment 2: November 12, 2024 Work Session FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with this item. ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PLAN: There are no Orange County Strategic Plan Goals applicable to this item. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that 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 November 7, 2024 6 7:00 p.m. 7 8 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Business Meeting on Thursday, November 9 7, 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 and 12 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 Travis Myren, Interim Deputy County Manager 17 Caitlin Fenhagen, 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 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda 23 A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler, seconded by Vice-Chair Greene to remove the 24 closed session from the agenda. 25 26 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 27 28 2. Public Comments (Limited to One Hour) 29 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda 30 Megan Kimball read from the following statement: 31 Good evening, Commissioners.Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the land use plan. I urge the countyto continue partneringwith our municipalities to coordinate land use that supports environmental sustainability and fosters affordable, vibrant communities. Scenarios one and two align with the hard worm our towns have put into their own plans, which concentrate development within municipal boundaries, close to services. This approach supports walkable, connected communities and increases transportation options, reducing car dependency. Maintaining the Rural Buffer and the Urban Services 32 Boundary in Hillsborough is essential to this strategy. 33 2 In contrast, scenarios three and four would encourage development outside town boundaries, increasing household and taxpayer costs while also driving up air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions,which harm public health and contribute to climate change. Moreover, it's unlikelythat OWASA or Hillsborough would extend water and sewer services beyond their boundaries, especially with the high costs of crossing 1-40. With the towns committed to managing growth within their boundaries, it's premature to include such expansions in the county's land use plan. If this ever changes, it should be a collaborative decision. Without these services, new developments would rely on private water or septic systems, leading to costly maintenance. Private providers often fail to meet standards, which risks unreliable, expensive water quality. Recent examples in western NC highlight the importance of dependable utilities for public health. Lastly, housing affordability remains a critical issue.White building outside municipal boundaries may seem less costly, it hides a major drawback—higher transportation costs as families travel farther for work, school, healthcare, and groceries. Instead of sprawl,we need affordable housing solutions within our town cores, where all community members can live,work, and thrive in walkable neighborhoods. Thank you for your time, and I urge you to prioritize scenarios that support smart growth, 1 sustainability, and affordability for all Orange County residents. 2 3 b. Matters on the Printed Agenda 4 (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda below.) 5 6 3. Announcements, Petitions and Comments by Board Members 7 Commissioner McKee said he attended the recent Chiefs Association meeting at the 8 Efland Fire Department. He said that the facility was recently renovated, and he was able to tour 9 that. He said that they have a lot of activity due to their location and proximity to the interstate. He 10 asked that staff provide information on the current plans for the Link Building in the 11 February/March timeframe to be considered before the budget is finalized. He said he has 12 concerns about the shape of the building. He said that there is a report in the agenda on 13 foreclosures and he asked for a report on the geographic area (not specific property identification), 14 household size, property value, and ethnic/racial breakdown of the 45 properties that have been 15 foreclosed upon. 16 Chair Bedford said that Commissioner Portie-Ascot had asked the manager for similar 17 information earlier that day and the manager reported that they may not have all of the 18 demographic information available but would provide all that they can. 19 Commissioner McKee encouraged commissioners to stop by the renovated Efland Fire 20 Department. 21 Commissioner Fowler said she attended a Board of Health and Behavioral Health 22 Subcommittee meeting, and that they are considering ways to address the behavioral impact of 23 social media and cell phone use on adolescent mental health. She said that she met with Justice 3 1 United and there is a backlog of funding for home repairs and the need for more re-entry housing. 2 She said those services are already provided but they are asking for more. She congratulated the 3 commissioners who were re-elected to the Board and noted that Marilyn Carter was also elected 4 to the Board. 5 Commissioner Hamilton thanked voters for supporting her and the other commissioners 6 who were re-elected and for supporting the bond. She said she attended a plaque unveiling for 7 Mayor Howard Lee at Chapel Hill Transit. She said that she attended the Habitat dedication in the 8 Weaver Grove community. She said she also attended an Alliance Health board meeting. 9 Chair Bedford said that she, Commissioner McKee, and Commissioner Greene have 10 volunteered for the Board retreat committee, to be held in January. She thanked everyone who 11 worked to make the election process smooth and successful in Orange County. She 12 congratulated all who were elected and reelected. She thanked the candidates that won and lost. 13 She said it is nice to have candidates run. She thanked the bond education committee, the staff, 14 and citizens for voting for the bond. She said there will be several Veterans' Day events on 15 Monday. She petitioned staff to prepare a report on the incentive package for economic 16 development and review on tax impact related to the cost. She said that she would like to see a 17 pros and cons list. 18 Vice-Chair Greene congratulated everyone who was elected to the Board. She thanked 19 the voters for supporting the bond. She said she recently spoke with Mike Ortosky at Cooperative 20 Extension who said they had made a presentation on farming and farmland protection and 21 preservation at a recent Planning Conference. She said that she would share the presentations 22 from that with the Board. She said she attended a conference on mass transit in Philadelphia and 23 it focused on how to build vibrant communities around transit and housing through a climate 24 protection lens. She said DOT, USDOT, and HUD are working closely together to talk about grants 25 and planning in the interest in co-location of housing and transit. 26 Commissioner Richards congratulated everyone who was elected to the Board and 27 thanked the community for supporting the bond. She thanked the Board of Elections for running 28 a smooth election. She said a lot of young people worked hard on this election. She said that her 29 children were feeling concerned and a little down after the election and shared a message with 30 them that they would continue to survive, serve, and thrive in their communities. She said that is 31 what has to be done regardless of the elections and that the sun will come up tomorrow and they 32 can all do their best. 33 Commissioner Portie-Ascott thanked the Board for initially appointing her to the vacancy 34 in early 2023 and thanked the voters for supporting her and electing her to the Board. She thanked 35 everyone who worked on the bond education committee and thanked the voters for supporting 36 the bond. She said she stopped by the Kids Voting site at Bonnie B. Davis Environmental and 37 Agriculture Center on Election Day. She said that the children were putting together a list of how 38 to make Orange County better and she is interested in the final list. 39 40 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations 41 a. "The Nature of Orange" Photography Contest 2024 42 The Board recognized the winners and thanked all participants and judges of "The Nature of 43 Orange" 2024 Photography Contest. 44 45 BACKGROUND: The Orange County Commission for the Environment and Orange County 46 Parks and Recreation Council are once again proud to sponsor this year's "The Nature of Orange" 47 Photography Contest. The theme this year was Orange County Flora and Pollinators. The goal of 48 the contest was to inspire exploration, celebration and appreciation of Orange County's diverse 49 landscapes and outdoor experiences. Photographers help document the beauty and diversity of 50 important, and diverse pollinators, and the habitats they maintain. 51 4 1 A total of 93 photographs were submitted. A panel of independent judges selected first, second 2 and third place winners from the Youth and Adult divisions. In addition, judges identified an 3 additional Honorable Mention award per age group since there were so many high-quality 4 submissions. This year's judges were Lindsay Metivier, Andrew Neal, and Ethan Duvall. 5 6 Winners received a congratulatory letter, certificate, and for first through third place, a small 7 monetary award. The photographs will be displayed throughout the County. Last year's photos 8 were displayed at the Chapel Hill & Orange County Welcome Center, the Chapel Hill Library, 9 Central Recreation Center, Whitted Center, Hillsborough Visitor Center, Orange County Library, 10 Lanza's Cafe, and Southern Human Services Center. In addition, winning photographs are 11 displayed on the Orange County DEAPR website under the "breaking news" section 12 http://www.orangecountync.gov/deapr/, on the department's Facebook Page, and will be 13 "streaming" around the County on the visual monitors. 14 15 Abby Mattingly, Administrative Support at DEAPR, made the following presentation: 16 17 Slide #1 Thedt- rte' ,•. , of Photography Contest ORANGE COUNTY NOR11-I CAROLINA 18 19 20 Slide #2 Annual Photography Contest The goal is to inspire exploration, Score Criteria celebration and appreciation of Relevancy Orange County's diverse Composition/Arrangement landscapes and outdoor • Focu5/sharpness • experiences. We want to document Lighting and Creativity the beauty of our wildlife, waterways, natural resources, and Entries Adult youth people connecting with the 2024 sa 35 environment. - The theme was Orange County's 2023 s' 22 Flora and Pollinators 2022 41 Ili 21 22 5 1 Slide #3 111 Place Adult Winner Transparent Matt Robinson Cates Creek Park A bee on a coneflower with light shining through its wings. 2 3 4 Slide #4 2nd Place Adult Winner Dragonfly with depth �► Darren Strickland NC Botanical Gardens Dragonflies thrive at the Botanical Gardens,and they are excellent at posing for photographs.This was one shot in a series of 4 or 5 angles I managed to get the best depth of field and make this one stand out. 5 6 7 Slide #5 Yd Place Adult Winner Pollinating moth Darren Strickland 1 � NC Botanical Gardens The hummingbird moth is fairly large —_ when comparing to bees and other _ pollinators which can make them =� somewhat challenging to photograph.On this day there were a few at the Botanical Gardens,so I managed to grab a few examples. 8 9 6 1 Slide #6 Honorable Mentions Adult Golden Gathering 41" Kylee Harvey Blackwood Farm Park Two Monarch Butterflies gather both nectar and pollen from a White Lilac bush. 2 3 4 Slide #7 11t Place Youth Winner Austin Poole ti Bonnie B.Davis EAC 0 This is a picture of a butterfly on a clover t flower at the Bonnie B.Davis Facility. .+s r 5 6 7 Slide #8 2nd Place Youth Winner Sidney Pearce WildSide Farm A honeybee collecting nectar on a Miss Violet Butterfly Bush. it g 1 Slide #9 311 Place Youth Winner V Valencia Y Gold Park ' r I took this photo in the pollinator garden g of Gold Park.I was crouched down to see all the bees at work and this one landed r right in front of me! s 2 3 4 Slide #10 Honorable Mentions Youth Winner Cabbage White Sidney Pearce WildSide Farm A Cabbage White Butterfly having some nectar from a white flower. • 5 6 7 Slide #11 Photo Displays -Chapel Hill&Orange County Welcome Center -Chapel Hill Library ,ow Central Recreation Center -Whiffed Center -Hillsborough Visitor Center -Hillsborough Library •Lanza's Cafe 8 1 Slide #12 Thank You -Orange County DEAPIR AL -Parks and Recreation Council Lindsayti "" --.Tian Duvall -Commission for the Lindsay Metivier is a Andrew Neal works at Ethan DuVall is a Environment photographer,an the Orange County news photographer educator,a curator, Public Library and is a with CBS17 in' -Judges and a gallerist based cartoonist and self- Raleigh.Ethan enjoys in Carrboro,North publisher.He lives in dOCUrnenting ind Carolina.Lindsay Hillsborough. shanng the stories of opened Peel Gallery+ No,th Carolinians and Photo.Her work has their co MfIlLinitie& been exhibited 2 3 Vice-Chair Greene asked if the pictures could be permanently displayed. 4 Abby Mattingly said that she would like that and is open to suggestions. 5 6 5. Public Hearings 7 None. 8 9 6. Regular Agenda 10 a. Requests from Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Board for General Manager Salary 11 Cap Increase and ABC Board Member Monthly Stipends Increase 12 The Board approved requests from the Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Board to: 13 1) increase the salary cap for the ABC General Manager; and 14 2) increase the monthly stipends provided to ABC Board Members. 15 16 BACKGROUND: Orange County Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) General Manager Tony 17 DuBois, at the request of the ABC Board, submitted information to County staff on October 8, 18 2024 with two (2) requests for consideration by the Board of Commissioners (Attachment 1). 19 20 ABC General Manager Salary Cap Increase 21 The first request is to increase the salary cap for the Orange County ABC General Manager. 22 North Carolina General Statutes stipulate that the salary of the General Manager of a local ABC 23 board "shall not exceed the salary authorized by the General Assembly for the clerk of superior 24 court of the county in which the appointing authority was originally incorporated unless such 25 compensation is otherwise approved by the appointing authority." 26 27 At its April 5, 2022 Business meeting, the Board of Commissioners unanimously approved an 28 increase to the ABC General Manager's salary cap to $132,000 in response to a request from 29 the ABC Board. Attachment 2 is an excerpt of the minutes from the Board of Commissioners' 30 April 5, 2022 Business meeting. More recently, the North Carolina General Assembly raised the 31 Orange County Clerk of Superior Court's salary effective July 1, 2024 to $135,248, above the 32 $132,000 ceiling approved by the Board of County Commissioners in 2022. 33 34 As detailed in Attachment 1, the ABC Board approved salary increases for ABC employees in 35 February 2024, and approved a salary increase for the ABC General Manager to $127,923 in 36 July 2024. Attachment 1 notes that the staff salary increases, in conjunction with the current cap 9 1 on the General Manager's salary, have resulted in compression issues. 2 3 The Orange County ABC Board requests an increase in the salary cap for the General Manager 4 position to $150,000. Attachment 1 provides ABC General Manager compensation comparison 5 data points from other jurisdictions to support the ABC Board's request for a salary cap increase 6 for the General Manager. 7 8 Stipends Increase for ABC Board Members 9 The second request from the Orange County ABC Board seeks an increase in the stipends for 10 ABC Board Members. The stipends were last raised in July 2004 for ABC Board members as 11 follows: 12 • $75 per month ($900 annually, up from $50 per month); and 13 • $125 per month ($1,500 annually, up from $100 per month) for the ABC Board Chair. 14 15 Attachment 1 notes the ABC Board's request to increase the stipends to: 16 • $150 per month ($1,800 annually) for ABC Board Members; 17 • $200 per month ($2,400 annually) for the ABC Board Vice-Chair; and 18 • $250 per month ($3,000 annually) for the ABC Board Chair. 19 20 Attachment 1 also provides ABC Board Member stipend comparison data points from other 21 jurisdictions with similar annual sales of$30-$35 million, and also from neighboring jurisdictions, 22 to support the ABC Board's stipends increase request. 23 24 Judson Williamson, ABC Board Chair, reviewed information from the abstract. 25 Commissioner Richards asked if the ABC Board reviewed salaries and stipends from other 26 ABC Boards around the state. 27 Judson Williamson said they reviewed the salaries for ABC Boards that generate $25-$30 28 million per year. He said that the general manager salaries and board stipends are all higher in 29 those areas. 30 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said there is no financial impact to the county. She asked for 31 clarification on the reason the ABC Board has to ask the Board. 32 Judson Williamson said they are asking for a variation from the statutory structure where 33 the position is tied to the Clerk of Court unless there is approval from the local governing body. 34 He said there is no financial impact to the county. 35 Commissioner McKee said he supports the request given the size of the organization and 36 that it has no financial impact on county government. He said that the Orange County ABC gives 37 funding to the Sheriff's Department to assist. He said the proposal is not unreasonable and it has 38 been a long time since any changes were made. 39 Commissioner Hamilton said it is reasonable to compare the salary to the Clerk of Court 40 position with the general manager's position, given the importance of that work to the citizens of 41 the county. She said in regard to ABC Board member stipends, there are many people who serve 42 on boards in Orange County who do not receive stipends. She said the more funds that go to 43 salaries, the less will go back to the county. She said that there is an indirect financial impact on 44 the county with the decision. She said that she supports changing the salary cap to $135,000, 45 and not above, and stipends. 46 Judson Williamson said he does not believe the position of Clerk of Court and ABC 47 General Manager are not analogous positions in every county given the number of locations and 48 staff that the General Manager oversees. He said that Orange County has over 9 retail locations 49 with a warehouse. 50 Commissioner Hamilton said it is a value judgment and arbitrary. 10 1 Chair Bedford said she would support increasing the salary cap to $140,000 and the 2 stipend. 3 Commissioner Fowler said that she has served on the ABC Board, and it is very 4 transparent and a working board. She said she agrees with the points Commissioner Hamilton 5 raised and noted that they have maximized income, which has resulted in funding for some county 6 programs within the justice division. She said that she supports the $150,000 salary cap. 7 8 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to 9 increase the salary cap for the ABC General Manager to $150,000. 10 11 VOTE: Ayes, 5 (Commissioner McKee, Commissioner Fowler, Vice-Chair Greene, 12 Commissioner Richards, and Commissioner Portie-Ascott); Nays, 2 (Chair Bedford and 13 Commissioner Hamilton) 14 15 MOTION PASSES 16 17 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to 18 increase the stipends provided to ABC Board Members as follows: 19 • $150 per month ($1,800 annually) for ABC Board members; 20 • $200 per month ($2,400 annually) for the ABC Board Vice-Chair; and 21 • $250 per month ($3,000 annually) for the ABC Board Chair. 22 23 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 24 25 b. Safe Route to School Plan 26 The Board approved the Orange County Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Plan. 27 28 BACKGROUND: The 2014 Orange County Safe Routes to School Action Plan was updated with 29 public involvement, field investigation and extensive analysis. Detail information on the federal 30 Safe Routes to School program can be found on the Federal Highway Administration website 31 here (link). This update includes and is not limited to: 32 33 • Planning level analysis of existing transportation around schools 34 • All Orange County public schools 35 • Youth involvement in the planning process 36 • Implementation—Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG), Transportation Alternatives 37 Program (TAP) and others 38 39 WSP as the consultant conducted the Existing Conditions Analysis, Draft Recommendation and 40 finalized the Plan (Attachment 1). The Existing Conditions Analysis involved a comprehensive 41 field study of each Orange County public school, focusing on a 2-mile radius around the school 42 property. Orange County Transportation Services hosted a virtual public meeting with all the 43 school principals and administration in accordance with the approved Scope of Work, Chapter 3 44 in the attached Plan. 45 46 Public Involvement: 47 • March 7, 2024 — OCTS, WSP, and Orange County Schools - Stakeholder Meeting 48 • July 8, 2024— Public Engagement event with Orange County Schools 49 • July 9 to August 9 — Existing Conditions Report with Recommendations out for public 50 review 11 1 Some of the key highlights of the Plan include: 2 • Students walking and cycling to school include — Orange Middle and High School, 3 Hillsborough Elementary, Efland Cheeks Global Elementary, Gravely Hill Middle, River 4 Park Elementary, Pathways Elementary, and Cedar Ridge High School 5 • Recommendations include: 6 - Crosswalks at intersections and mid-block crosswalks near schools 7 - Reduced speed zones and other traffic calming measures 8 - Extending sidewalks to rural areas and filling in gaps in urban areas 9 - Multi-use Paths and Greenways along major corridors and some secondary roads 10 11 The County's Transportation Advisory Service (TAS) and Orange Unified Transportation Board 12 (OUTBoard) recommended the SRTS be approved by the Board of County Commissioners. 13 14 TAS Action: 15 September 26, 2024 — Unanimous approval 16 17 OUTBoard Action: 18 September 30, 2024 — Unanimous approval with: 19 • Narrative emphasizing each school to pursue Municipal and School Transportation 20 Assistance (MSTA) with the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) to 21 address car line and its impact on State roads. 22 . Add lineal feet or miles - to each sidewalk, bike lane, and/or side path 23 • Increase priority for - No parking on state/town roads near schools, speed limit reduction 24 and bike/ped recommendations. 25 26 The final 2024 Orange County Safe Routes to School Plan was updated with OUTBoard action. 27 28 Nishith Trivedi, Transportation Director, made the following presentation: 29 30 Slide #1 GRANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA Orange County Safe Routes to School Plan 31 12 1 Slide #2 Outline 1. Background 1. Scope of Work 2. Planning Process 1. Analysis 2. Public Engagement 3. Plan 1. Recommendations 4. Action 2 2 3 4 Slide #3 Background — 2014 Plan SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL Stmteglc Action Plan o..Nce rou.�.r xoa.H c.aaiiu. I Jill - •'moo �— _ — tr a 4R - j �m�eyxvwndwmag.wM.iIDu � - xe•yweyd�getsunv iliAvt _ • Existing Conditions & '°•r Recommendations v r 4•�wm hM1 Cvea.. Grady Brown Etementary CW Stanford Middte ••'°- Cameron Park Elementary 5 6 7 13 Slide #4 Background — 2024 Update IL 0 00 Safe Routes to School Update 8 OmngeCaunLfthwl� . 0 • Existing Conditions& 0 Recommendations All 13 Ccunty Public Schools 2 3 4 Slide #5 Background 2014 Plan -f wwk Tj51 A�naIvN oI EflSIMRColditlols . WSP Shivang Shelat Tack C-DIa11 Plan Alexa Kennedy Tall I-Wal 11a, T.k OCSI.—T— 1., .11. 1. • Mr. James Merrill • Dr.Danielle Jones • Kevin Smith 5 Larry Albert 6 7 14 1 Slide #6 Existing Conditions Analysis Crades5evlmd 9x-12•" Total Emotlment 7103 Number of Bums r! Number of Students RWing the Bus 503 In the AM;6115 In trle PM Number ofShai.Walking 20-30 - NumberofStudentsCycarg 0 Number orStudenls Driven Soo Special Needs Population Unmown tarts Uses Surrounding School P",Lo.OMSKY reWMW4 MrlW"Ural V es or&kenacks Yes t '{ No walk Zones Norse : .$ CroWng Cuards Sherrlffdkectk7g traffic in the AM and PM •�, _ - - Puldl that 4esma walking or BicKling Unknown y , 111cyckyPedestrlan Sa"Taught to Students unknown !W�40 y! Exkbng parting Capacity 600 spaces -,_�'.-.an.. • Presence of Car welting Zones Yes Number of Staff Managing Drop ot(Mick up 4-5 Residences wbhina 10-min bike ride from the 2719 is• w,i •+l school I Example t Cedar Ridge High Field visit with pictures Detailed tables each school •""°° Travel behavior '"'° Infrastructure 2 3 4 Slide #7 Planning Process - Analysis Cedar Ridge High:Traffic from the Efland Cheeks Global Elementary: New Hope Elementary:.Afternoon afternoon pick up is heavily backed Afternoon pick-up line on School pick-up line along New Hope up at the New Grady Brown School House Road.Several parents Church Road Road and Orange Grove Road walking to pick up students. intersection I , I Gravelly Hill Middle:Traffic in the left. -- turn lane during the afternoon pick up Orange High:Students walking on Hillsborough Elementary:Looking the opposite side of the road to get to a car south along N Nash St at the pick-up line for grades 2-5.A bus is passing on • Field visit—am and pm peak the left,while a car coming from the opposite direction is also passing. • School input and staff input Characteristics table for each school 5 6 7 8 15 1 Slide #8 Planning Process — Engagement • March 7, 2024—Stakeholder Meeting • July 9 to August 9 — Existing Conditions Report with Recommendations out for public review On July 8, 2024,from 9:00 am to 12:00 pm, OCTS conducted a Public Engagement event with all Orange County Public Schools in accordance with the approved SOME. All the principles, vice-principles, school board staff were invited to participate in an open discussion. Key highlights from the event include; • Students continue to walk and bike along dangerous roads like ESC 86 (AL Stanback Middle and New Hope Elementary), Orange Grove Road (Cedar Ridge High and Grady Brown Elementary), Richmond Road (Efland Cheeks Elementary) • Increasing population is resulting in increasing impact on schools, and subsequent increase in walking and biking tolfrom schools. • All schools are working on transitioning to Infinite Campus (from Power School) to help improve messaging to students and parents. • The Existing Conditions report was very helpful and informative to the schools, 2 s 3 4 Slide #9 Plan Recommendations _ Strategies Task January•May tune-Jury August• October September December A-Existing Conditions Re rt 8-Public Engmempnt Repan C-Draft Pian O-Fina!Pian Infrastructure Strategies Encouragement Strategies • Bicycle Lane, Sidewalk,Greenways • Promote School Bus Use • Buffered Bicycle Lane and Paved Shoulder • Walking School Bus • Bike-Ped Bridges Safety Education Programs • School Zones and Speed Limit Reductions Walking&Biking Incentive • Crosswalks and Midblock Crossings • Signals High-Intensity Activated Crosswalk (HAWK)Signal • Speed Hump/Cushion 5 s 6 7 16 1 Slide #10 Plan Recommendations • Example AL Stanback Middle project I D R—m—nd.U.. Is..Addressed Need la Add traffic calming 7affi—significant long High measures,such as NC 06 and poses a safety e#ending the school sone barrier for cyclists and further south and reducing pedestrians. the speed limit from 45 mph to 35 mph throughout the schoel zone. Ile Add a high visibility Benton Drive and NC 96 Medium crosswalk a id pedestrian presents a key crossing ossing sig nage to NC 86 issue for cyclists and and Benton Drive. pedestrians. Ic Add 35 mlles cf sid—tk The lack of bicycle and Medium and 4"paved shoulders,a pedestrian infrastructure bicycle lane,or a shared- along NC 66 presents key use path along NC 36 from infrastructure gaps for _ Hillsborough's northern cyclists and pedestrians, town limit to south of Neo Hope Church Road. Id Add O.1 miles of sidewalk The lack of bicycle and Medium ora shared-use path along pedestrian infrastructure Benton Drive. along Benton Drive presents key infrastructure gaps for cyclists and pedestrians. le Add 0.1 miles of sidewalk The lack of bicycle and Medium or a shared-use path along pedestrian infrastructure Storey Lanealong and Storey Lane presents key infrastructure gaps for cyclists and pedestrians -e•mm sa�.r. am,.,®aaan�urc 2 3 4 Slide #11 Plan Recommendations - Funding Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program(HSIP) Surface Transportation Block Grant(STSG) Safe Streets and Roads for All(SS4A) Carbon Reduction Program State and Local • NCDOT Safe Routes to School • Scholl District Budget Staff will also work with NCDOT for SPOT Safety/Mobility, resurfacing, bridges, etc. And other locally administrative processes as they become available 5 6 Nishith Trivedi said by having a plan, the county can use this information to seek grants 7 for implementing projects. 8 9 17 1 Slide #12 Plan Recommendations Plan Adoption/ Update _J Transportation Evaluation •d L Plan Funding Champion Public -- r Engagement Committee 2 12 3 Nishith Trivedi said the plan will be updated every few years. 4 5 Slide #13 Action September 30,2024 Unanimous approval with: Narrative emphasizing each school to pursue Municipal and School Transportation Assistance (MSTA) with the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) to address car line and its impact on State roads. Add lineal feet or miles-to each sidewalk, hike lane, andlor side path Increase priority for-No parking on state/town roads near schools,speed limit reduction and hikelped recommendations. Incorporated into Final Plan October 10,2024 CPRPO—Endorsed Plan October 15, 2024 - BG MPO—Approved Plan for use in CTP,MTP,and STIP November 5,2024 - DCHC MPC—TC recommended Board incorporate in CTP,MTP,and STIP 6 13 7 8 18 1 Slide #14 Action The Manager recommends Board approve Orange County SRTS Plan. 2 is 3 Commissioner Fowler said this is the third time she is seen the presentation, and she 4 really appreciated all of the details provided. She said that this plan will also impact CMAC as a 5 source of funding and this plan aligns with the climate plan. 6 Cedar Ridge High School senior Chloe Pankratz served as the youth representative on 7 the advisory committee. The Board thanked her for her participation. 8 Commissioner Hamilton asked how hard it is for the schools to apply and if they had the 9 capacity to do so. 10 Nishith Trivedi said it is a phone call from the administration to the NCDOT. He said that 11 the municipal school transportation assistance program is its own division within the DOT and that 12 is who the school would call to request assistance. He said that the request must come from the 13 school itself. 14 Chair Bedford asked who the contact person is. 15 Nishith Trivedi said he would find that information for the Board. 16 Chair Bedford asked for information on the application process for the Surface 17 Transportation Block Grant. 18 Nishith Trivedi said it is separate from Spot 7 and Spot 8 and applied for separately. 19 Chair Bedford asked if the projects with a match are more likely to receive funding. 20 Nishith Trivedi said that was a separate and outside of the STIP. He said that it is part of 21 the overall budget of the state but not part of the law that prevents NCDOT from funding bike/ped 22 projects that do not have a road involved. 23 Chair Bedford said that it is important for the public to know that often the county's hands 24 are tied for a lot of these projects. 25 Nishith Trivedi said they have worked with DOT to include sidewalks if there is a highway 26 project on Orange Grove Road. 27 Chair Bedford said that the laws recently changed on allowing counties to maintain 28 sidewalks. She said they have one that they maintain and asked how that works as far as grant 29 application. 30 Nishith Trivedi said that they have worked with Hillsborough to coordinate projects that are 31 within the town limits. 19 1 Chair Bedford said that the county cannot fund all of these projects and there will be a 2 process for selection. 3 4 PUBLIC COMMENTS: 5 Ben Tengelsen said he has children at Grady Brown Elementary and at AL Stanback 6 Middle Schools. He said that a lack of sidewalks is notable around the community and that he 7 has seen a lot of children walking around schools on the roads. He is an enthusiastic supporter 8 of sidewalks. 9 Terren Green said she is a Cedar Ridge High School parent. She noted that there are 10 children walking to the high school as well as young drivers and she supports safer routes to 11 schools. She asked the Board to pass the Safe Routes to School Plan. 12 Carrie Winkler said that providing routes will be great for students as well as the 13 community. She said she is excited to see this moving forward. She said there should be 14 consideration for future tweaks to walking routes on the east side of Hillsborough. 15 Barry Weston said he lives near Grady Brown Elementary School. He said the number of 16 students walking along the road can be scary. He said that the area could also use better lighting. 17 Rudy Free said he is a parent of two children at Cedar Ridge. He said that Oakdale Drive 18 is also a treacherous road with drivers going too fast. He said his kids want to walk but it is an 19 unsafe situation. 20 Karen Clissold said she is a parent of a school aged child and that he would like to walk 21 to school but she is terrified due to safety concerns. She said she looks forward to safety 22 improvements. 23 Richard von Furstenberg said he has two school aged children. He said that the burden 24 of needing safe routes to school is not shared equally. He said that often the children walking are 25 students of color and students who come from low-income families. 26 Alissa Martucci said she bikes with her child to River Park Elementary daily and there is 27 no particularly safe way to do that. She said that a crosswalk would be helpful. She said that the 28 schools are part of the community and the pathways that get the students there safely will 29 positively impact the community. 30 Amy Gross said she is a teacher at Cedar Ridge High School. She said that sidewalks 31 would allow more students to participate in activities before school and after school. She said the 32 buses are a one-time shot and the students that rely on walking are a majority low-income 33 students and this would be beneficial to allow them to participate in more activities. 34 Chloe Pankratz said that there are students who walk to and from Cedar Ridge who were 35 not included in the count. She said they seem low especially because some students have early 36 release or late arrival. She said those would not have been included in the count. She said they 37 walk at all times of the day. 38 Christi Lewis said she is an employee of Orange Middle School. She described situations 39 where she saw students walking back to school for events in the dark. She said that it is very 40 dangerous, and more sidewalks would be a huge benefit for the community. 41 42 Chair Bedford asked about lighting and if it is included in the projects. 43 Nishith Trivedi said it is an administrative cost and considered a utility so he will look at 44 this information and get back to the Board. 45 Commissioner Fowler thanked everyone who made comments and participated in the 46 report. 47 Vice-Chair Greene also thanked everyone for their participation. She also expressed 48 frustration with the rules in place that prevent funding for Bike/Ped projects that do not have a 49 road included. 50 20 1 A motion was made by Commissioner Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to 2 approve Orange County SRTS Plan. 3 4 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 5 6 7. Reports 7 a. Update on the Impact of New FY 2024-25 Emergency Housing Assistance Guidelines 8 The Board received an update on the impact of new Emergency Housing Assistance (EHA) 9 guidelines during the first quarter of fiscal year. 10 11 BACKGROUND: The Emergency Housing Assistance (EHA) program made several eligibility 12 and policy changes for Fiscal Year 2024-2025. EHA can assist 12 households per month with a 13 payment of up to $4,500 if the following requirements are met: 14 • Earn 5 30%Area Median Income (AMI) 15 • Experience a "Life-Changing Event" (LCE) within the last three (3) months which affects 16 the ability to pay rent, OR receive a court summons for an eviction. 17 18 Additionally, applicants are required to complete a written plan for income stability and making 19 rental payments in the future. 20 21 Program Data 22 23 The average number of applications per month increased from 47 before the changes to 63 after 24 the changes. However, the higher average was caused by a large, one-time spike in applications 25 in July. Otherwise, the average number of applications has stayed relatively consistent throughout 26 the past year, as seen in the accompanying chart: 27 New Applications 2023-2024 NOVEMBEFUECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER 28 29 30 Given that the number of applications dropped significantly in August and September,the increase 31 in July is likely related to other factors such as summer holiday and school closures, rather than 32 the change in policy. The number of pending applications has fluctuated throughout the three (3) 33 months, but is typically in the range of 20-40. 34 35 The average total amount spent per month since the policy change is$48,396.69,with an average 36 of$4,033.06 per household assisted. The average amount households receive is lower than the 21 1 $4,500 cap on assistance because additional months are only paid if they can be paid in full since 2 a landlord could begin eviction proceedings based on a partial payment. 3 4 The percentage of applications denied has increased from 53% to 66%. As seen in the chart 5 below, denials are predominantly due to the household being over 30% AMI or living outside of 6 Orange County. Insufficient documentation of an LCE contributed to 22 denials. 7 8 Denied Applications (127) 40 34 33 35 Z5 22 18 20 10 15 5 10 3 Z 5 0 .�0 P Ota ���� Qto� case Fta e �e C Oo�t� e O 9 10 11 Life-Changing-Event Qualification 12 13 The main change to the policy from a non-financial standpoint is the ability to qualify for EHA 14 through an LCE. LCEs allowed some households to qualify for assistance before the eviction 15 process, but limited the ability to provide financial assistance once a case reached court. 16 17 The option to qualify through LCEs allowed 21 households to apply for assistance earlier than if 18 they had to wait for a court case to be filed. While twelve (12) of those households avoided an 19 eviction filing completely, nine (9) still had a court case filed against them as the eviction was 20 initiated after the application was submitted, but before it was evaluated and approved by staff. A 21 total of fifteen (15) households were approved for EHA assistance based solely on a court 22 summons. 23 24 There was not a significant difference in average processing time between applications with an 25 LCE (24 days) as opposed to a court summons (22 days). The primary reasons for the gap were 26 time spent waiting on responses from households and property owners and the quantity of 27 applications.Applications that relied solely on an LCE required more follow-up questions and time 28 from EHA staff as the documentation provided in the original application was often insufficient or 29 unclear. 30 31 Repeat Evictions for Eviction Diversion Program Clients 32 33 Finally, the Board previously requested data on repeat evictions. The data presented in the table 34 below covers the six-month timeframe from April 1, 2024 through September 30, 2024: 35 36 37 38 22 ILAWrim"T-1-ty, 0 M,, os Percent of Total Total EDP Clients Served 280 Repeat Court Summons' + No EHA 30 10.7% Repeat Summons + Received EHA 19 6.8% Total Repeat Court Summons (With 49 17.5% and without EHA) 1 *First eviction resolved, then a new eviction filed later 2 3 Summary 4 5 Initial data suggests that the addition of a qualifying Life Changing Event has allowed Emergency 6 Housing Assistance funds to be used earlier and to prevent an eviction filing in over half of cases. 7 At the same time, households which were not able to apply before eviction court were still able to 8 receive assistance, representing a balance between the two types of applications. 9 10 Blake Rosser, Housing Director, made the following presentation: 11 12 Slide #1 nORANGECOUNTY � HOUSING DEPARTMENT Impact of New FY24-25 Emergency Housing Assistance (EHA) Guidelines November 7, 2024 13 14 15 23 1 Slide #2 But for July spire, application numbers about the same New Applications 2023-2024 NOVSWSER DECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APR4 MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEP4£MBER ORANGE COUNTY 2 �► HOUSING DEPARTMENT 3 4 Slide #3 Top reasons for denial: income level and non-residency Denied Applications(127) 1n Ja xs tx 1i 19 ORANGE COUNTY 5 Q HOUSING DEPARTMENT 6 Chair Bedford asked if applications rollover to the next month. 7 Blake Rosser said yes. 8 Chair Bedford said that she and Commissioner Portie-Ascott were curious if they have 9 always had applicants from outside of Orange County. 10 Blake Rosser said yes. 11 Commissioner Portie-Ascot asked if the application and information is available in a 12 prominent location on the website. 13 Blake Rosser said yes. 14 Commissioner McKee asked how it is hard to document illness or loss of job. 15 Blake Rosser said they would require documentation of hospital or doctor and those may 16 have an illness that reduces the hourly wage earned but did not require a hospital visit or stay. He 17 also said that letters of lost employment can be difficult because the applicant is unable to reach 18 the employer or to receive a letter of termination. 19 Commissioner McKee said it seems a bit counterintuitive. 24 1 Blake Rosser said they do attempt to contact employers, but employers are not always 2 returning the contact. He said that for illness, it often requires more than a doctor's note. 3 Commissioner Hamilton asked how mental illness can be accounted for. 4 Blake Rosser said that they evaluate those cases individually. He said if there was 5 confirmation that they missed work due to that, it would work. 6 Commissioner Hamilton said in that case a doctor's note might suffice. 7 Blake Rosser said yes and noted that it would vary case-to-case. 8 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said that some individuals that struggle with mental illness do 9 not seek medical assistance. She asked if they still needed a doctor's note. 10 Blake Rosser said yes because they have not figured out a way to allow someone's word 11 without exposing the program to vulnerability. 12 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if they could show bank statements that show income 13 from an employer and then none if that would work. 14 Blake Rosser said if they can show loss of income, that is what is needed. 15 16 Slide #4 Average amount, timing of assistance show interesting trends Avg.Assistance Amount $4,033 Avg. Monthly Expense $48,397' Avg.rime to Process 26 days Households assisted with Life- 21 Changing Event(LCE) Households assisted with Court 15 Summons Number of LCE Households 12 assisted prior to eviction 'Includes some larger holdoverapphealfons from June n O RA E V G C CO U I V TY 17 � HOUSING DEPARTMENT 18 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked for clarification on how it is determined that the landlord 19 will not accept partial rent. 20 Blake Rosser said that the county made a policy decision to cap it in that way because of 21 the past experience with landlords. He said that they did it in an effort to preserve funds. 22 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she hoped that that policy decision would be 23 reconsidered to prevent evictions, since not all landlords are the same. 24 Blake Rosser said that is certainly good to consider. 25 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked what assistance was provided to the 12 people 26 assisted prior to eviction. 27 Blake Rosser said that an EHA specialist is working with them to fill out a budget and help 28 track costs and expenses and look into areas that can be approved. 29 Chair Bedford asked if there is a change in trends in the winter when utility bills increase. 30 She asked if evictions increase at that time. 31 Blake Rosser said he has not been over the program long enough to notice a trend. He 32 said that there have been a lot of changes in funding in the last four years, so it is harder to spot 33 a trend. 25 1 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said that she wondered the same thing especially with the 2 spike shown in January. 3 Blake Rosser said that is when they scaled back the program and only assisting with 4 evictions and he wonders if there was a backlog of applicants. 5 6 Slide #5 Board previously requested data on repeat evictions • Data is for 6-month window (4/l/24-9/30/24) Clients from 4/1/24-9130124 dL rj- ."T- ,fl -,_*- Total EDP Clients Served 280 Repeat Court Summons'+ No EHA 30 10.7% Repeat Summons+Received EHA 19 6.8% Total Repeat Court Summons{with 49 17.5% and without EHA} "Errs[eviction resolved..then a new eviction filed later nORANGE COUNTY 7 �► HOUSING DEPARTMENT 8 Blake Rosser said that they will continue to track repeat evictions. 9 Chair Bedford asked if that seems to be working. 10 Blake Rosser said he was pleased by the number but will leave it to the Board to decide 11 if that is low or high. 12 13 14 Slide #6 For any questions: • Blake Rosser • brosser@orangecountync.gov • 919-245-2492 nORANGECOUNTY E► HOUSING DEPARTMENT 15 16 Commissioner McKee thanked Blake Rosser for providing the data on repeat evictions 17 and for continuing to track that information. He said it will help the Board make decisions. 26 1 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked what AMI range denied applicants fall into, those that 2 were denied due to their income. 3 Blake Rosser said he would have to go back and look at that data. He said that they were 4 also denying applicants when it was over 50% as well. 5 Commissioner Richards asked if this data will be on a scorecard, or will it be tracked 6 quarterly. 7 Blake Rosser said that he would be happy to update the Board at the frequency they 8 prefer. He credited his staff for putting together the information. 9 Commissioner Richards said this type of information is important for the community to 10 know and to be part of a living document like the strategic plan. 11 Chair Bedford suggested that the County Manager provide this information at a future 12 meeting. 13 Commissioner Fowler said it has proven its point that it is useful to maintain in the budget. 14 Commissioner McKee said he will share this information with Justice United at a future 15 meeting. 16 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked for detailed information on how the attorney assisted 17 280 people. 18 19 8. Consent Agenda 20 21 Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda 22 23 Chair Bedford removed item 8-t for further discussion. 24 Commissioner McKee removed item 8-j for further discussion. 25 26 Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda 27 Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda 28 29 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Richards, to 30 approve the remaining consent agenda, with the exception of items 8-j and 8-t. 31 32 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 33 34 In regard to item 8-t, Commissioner McKee made a motion to clarify that the second 35 budget public hearing and work session in May will be held on May 29, 2025, in addition to moving 36 the February 18 business meeting to February 20, 2025 and holding a meeting with the Town of 37 Carrboro on March 27, 2025. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hamilton. 38 39 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 40 41 In regard to item 8-j, Commissioner McKee asked if there was any information given on 42 the breakdown of what percentage for distribution would go back to the counties, or would the 43 increase go to GoTriangle's general budget. 44 Chair Bedford said none would come back to the counties. 45 Commissioner McKee said he would not oppose the increase. 46 Chair Bedford said the tax had not been indexed to inflation. She said the General 47 Assembly approved it first. 48 Vice-Chair Greene said it originally started at $5, so indexed to inflation it would be $11. 49 Commissioner McKee said he would have had a larger issue with the increase if it had 50 been indexed to inflation. 27 1 Chair Bedford said on the special tax there were representatives from Durham and Wake 2 in addition to Orange County. She said each county board had to now approve the increase. 3 4 Chair Bedford made a motion to approve item 8-j, seconded by Vice-Chair Greene. 5 6 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 7 8 a. Minutes 9 The Board approved the draft minutes for the September 26, 2024, October 1, 2024, and October 10 8, 2024 BOCC Meetings as submitted by the Clerk to the Board. 11 b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds 12 The Board adopted a resolution to release motor vehicle property tax values for two (2)taxpayers 13 with a total of two (2) bills that will result in a reduction of revenue. 14 c. Property Tax Releases/Refunds 15 The Board adopted a resolution to release property tax values for fourteen (14) taxpayers with a 16 total of seventeen (17) bills that will result in a reduction of revenue. 17 d. Late Applications for Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion 18 The Board approved fifteen (15) untimely applications for exemption/exclusion from ad valorem 19 taxation for fourteen (14) taxpayers for the 2024 tax year. 20 e. Approval of Additional Closing Costs — Kittrell-McAdoo Tract 21 The Board approved an increase in closing funds toward the County's previously approved 22 purchase of the Kittrell-McAdoo Tract. 23 f. Resolution of Approval — Donated Conservation Easement on Property of William Bruce 24 and Phyllis Richmond 25 The Board adopted a resolution approving the acceptance by Orange County of a conservation 26 easement for the William Bruce and Phyllis Richmond property. 27 g. Resolution of Approval — Donated Conservation Easement on Property of Circular 28 Design Construction, LLC (Array) 29 The Board adopted a resolution approving the acceptance by Orange County of a conservation 30 easement for Circular Design Construction, LLC (Array) property. 31 h. Acceptance of NC Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Grant —America 250 32 Program and Approval of Budget Amendment #2-E 33 The Board accepted a grant from the North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural 34 Resources for the America 250 Program for $10,000 and approve Budget Amendment#2-E. 35 L Orange County FY25 Quarter 2 Annual Work Program Amendments 36 The Board approved FY25 Quarter 2 Amendments to the Annual Work Program (AWP). 37 j. Resolution Authorizing Vehicle Registration Tax Increase 38 The Board approved a resolution authorizing the GoTriangle additional two dollars ($2.00)vehicle 39 registration tax increase. 40 k. Resolution Naming the 203 Greensboro Project as the Drakeford Library Complex 41 The Board approved a resolution naming the 203 Greensboro Project as the "Drakeford Library 42 Complex". 43 I. Approval of the Sale of 0.2 Acre Property, PIN #9863668236, in Hillsborough 44 The Board approved the sale of a 0.2-acre County-owned property, PIN #9863668236, located in 45 Hillsborough. 46 m. Request for Road Additions to the State-Maintained Secondary Road System for 47 Shagbark Court and Mocker Nut Lane 48 The Board made a recommendation to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) 49 and the North Carolina Board of Transportation (NC BOT) concerning a petition to add Shagbark 50 Court and Mocker Nut Lane in the South Grove Subdivision to the State-Maintained Secondary 51 Road System. 28 1 n. Service Agreement for Public Safety Communications Radio System and Approval of 2 Budget Amendment #2-F 3 The Board approved an agreement to provide service and maintenance for the Motorola Solutions 4 radio system equipment in the Primary and Backup Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs) and 5 approve Budget Amendment #2-F. 6 o. Purchase of Vehicles for Planning & Inspections and Emergency Services Departments 7 The Board approved and authorized Orange County Fleet Services to: 8 1) purchase three (3) Chevy Electric Equinox FWD (front wheel drive) vehicles for the 9 purpose of conducting inspections and performing other duties as needed for the Planning 10 & Inspections Department; and 11 2) purchase two (2) Chevy Silverado 1500 vehicles and one (1) Chevy Silverado 2500 12 vehicle for first responders with the Emergency Services Department. 13 p. Purchase of Solid Waste Vehicles for Recycling Collection and Tire Hauling and 14 Approval of Budget Amendment#2-G 15 The Board approved Budget Amendment #2-G, and approved and authorized Orange County 16 Solid Waste to purchase: 17 1) a LaBrie 33 cubic yard Automizer Tip to Dump Side Loader for the purpose of collecting 18 residential and commercial recyclable materials; 19 2) Two (2) Freightliner M2-106 with Heil PT1000 rear-loader vehicles for the purpose of 20 collecting residential recyclable materials; and 21 3) a Western Star 47X Road Tractor for the purpose of transporting tires to the tire recycling 22 processor. 23 q. Services Contract Award for Justice Facility Fire Alarm System Replacement 24 The Board: 25 1) Approved the County entering into a service contract with Siemens Industry, Inc. for the 26 replacement of the Justice Facility Fire Alarm system; and 27 2) Authorized the County Manager to execute the Agreement, subject to final review by the 28 County Attorney, and any subsequent amendments for contingent and unforeseen 29 requirements up to the approved budget amount on behalf of the Board. 30 r. Family Caregivers Month and Caregiver Day of Care Proclamation 31 The Board approved a proclamation recognizing November 2024 as Family Caregivers Month in 32 Orange County and designating November 16, 2024 as Orange County's Caregiver Day of Care. 33 s. Continuation of Takeaway Meals Program and In-Home Services Program and Approval 34 of Budget Amendment#2-H 35 The Board approved the continuation of the Department on Aging Takeaway Meals Program and 36 In-Home Services Program previously funded by the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) and 37 approve Budget Amendment #2-H. 38 t. Change in BOCC Meeting Schedule for 2025 39 The Board approved changes to the Board of Commissioners' meeting calendar for 2025. 40 41 9. County Manager's Report 42 Projected November 12, 2024 Work Session Items 43 Consultant Briefing on Orange County Comprehensive Land Use Plan 2050 44 Discussion on Housing Scoring Matrix, Eligible Projects, Naturally Occurring Affordable 45 Housing, Etc. 46 Additional Discussion on School Capital Funding Policy 47 Review of Upcoming Boards and Commissions Appointments 48 49 Travis Myren said the Board approved a budget amendment that will continue take-home 50 meals for seniors. 29 1 Commissioner McKee said he appreciated that the take-away meals have been brought 2 back. He said that he has received feedback from the community that people need this service. 3 Chair Bedford asked if the county needs to lobby the legislative delegation for someone 4 to come and deliver the meal. 5 Travis Myren said that the congregate meal program only provides funding for congregate 6 meals so it would have to be expanded to include take-way meals. 7 Chair Bedford said she would like to consider that for the legislative agenda because some 8 people could not physically come to meals. 9 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked what in-home services are provided. 10 Travis Myren said that is for in-home aides who help with daily tasks for 36 citizens. 11 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked how many hours a day they are provided services. 12 Travis Myren said he is not sure how many hours. 13 Vice-Chair Greene said they approved on second reading the naming of the southern 14 branch library as the Drakeford Library Complex. She said that the name is from Robert 15 Drakeford, and he was Carrboro's first Black mayor. 16 Chair Bedford asked if there was an update on this project. 17 Travis Myren said they are expecting a ribbon cutting ceremony in February 2025. 18 Commissioner McKee expressed appreciation to Vice-Chair Greene for working on the 19 naming committee. 20 21 10. County Attorney's Report 22 John Roberts said he would share an update in My Case with the Board and asked them 23 to check it. 24 25 11. Appointments 26 None. 27 28 12. Information Items 29 • October 15, 2024 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List 30 • Tax Collector's Report— Numerical Analysis 31 • Tax Collector's Report— Measure of Enforced Collections 32 . Tax Assessor's Report— Releases/Refunds under $100 33 • Memorandum — Overview of Foreclosure Procedure and Foreclosure Activity & History 34 Graph 35 36 13. Closed Session 37 None. 38 39 Adjournment 40 41 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to 42 adjourn the meeting at 8:54 p.m. 43 44 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 45 46 47 Jamezetta Bedford, Chair 48 49 50 Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board Attachment 2 1 1 DRAFT MINUTES 2 ORANGE COUNTY 3 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 4 WORK SESSION 5 November 12, 2024 6 7:00 p.m. 7 8 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Work Session on Tuesday, November 9 12, 2024, at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, NC. 10 11 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jamezetta Bedford, Vice-Chair Sally Greene 12 and Commissioners Jean Hamilton, Earl McKee, Phyllis Portie-Ascott, and Anna Richards 13 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None. 14 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts 15 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Travis Myren, Interim Deputy County Manager 16 Caitlin Fenhagen, and Clerk to the Board Laura Jensen. (All other staff members will be 17 identified appropriately below) 18 19 Chair Bedford called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. All commissioners were present. 20 21 A motion was made by Vice-Chair Greene, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to amend 22 the agenda to add consideration of an appointment to the Jury Commission. 23 24 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 25 26 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to 27 suspend the rules of procedure and take action at a work session. 28 29 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 30 31 The Board reviewed and discussed four applications for the Jury Commission. 32 A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler to appoint Kimberly Young Statkevicus to 33 the Jury Commission. 34 The motion failed for lack of a second. 35 A motion was made by Commissioner Portie-Ascott, seconded by Commissioner McKee 36 to appoint Sylvia Smith to the Jury Commission. 37 38 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 39 40 1. Consultant Briefing on Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 41 The Board received a briefing from Clarion Associates, LLC, on the Land Use Plan 2050 for 42 discussion and feedback. 43 44 BACKGROUND: At its September 10, 2024 work session, the BOCC received a presentation 45 with an update on the development and preliminary findings of four (4) modelled land use 46 alternatives. Much of the information that was presented can be found in a project deliverable, 47 the "Land Use Alternatives Report". This Report and all other completed deliverables are 48 available on the project website, "Resources" tab: https://www.orangecountylanduseplan.com. 49 50 2 1 Tonight's presentation from Clarion will include a briefing on: 2 • Project progress; 3 • Preliminary outcomes of the second community engagement window; and 4 • Initial recommendations for the draft Conservation and Growth Framework. 5 6 Additional information is provided in Attachment A. A PowerPoint presentation will be provided 7 at the meeting. 8 9 Community Engagement Window (CEW) #2 — CEW #2 tested public response to the four (4) 10 modelled land use alternatives and concluded on November 3, 2024. The Clarion team assisted 11 Planning staff with survey development and administration, preparation of engagement materials, 12 and meeting facilitation. A third engagement window will be held to collect feedback and input 13 during the final plan drafting process. 14 15 To promote the project and collect feedback, County Planning staff tabled at area community 16 events such as Efland-Cheeks Community Center Back to School and Festival Latino Americano. 17 Planning staff also featured the Land Use Plan 2050 project at the County Roadshow. 18 19 Community Workshops were also held on September 25 and October 3, 2024 at Gravelly Hill 20 Middle School and the American Legion Post 6, respectively. Planning staff worked directly with 21 community organizations and leaders to host three (3) community meetings in October for 22 populations that have traditionally been underrepresented in Orange County land use planning. 23 Meetings were hosted by EI Centro Hispano, United Voices of Efland Cheeks, and the Jones 24 Grove Missionary Baptist Church. 25 26 Upon request and availability, County Planning staff met with the Habitat for Humanity Policy and 27 Advocacy Committee (Affordable Housing Coalition and Affordable Housing Advisory Board as 28 guests); Chapel Hill — Carrboro Chamber of Commerce; and representatives of the Agricultural 29 Preservation Board. Planning staff also assisted several organizations with responses to 30 questions, which helped to facilitate receipt of comments around the land use alternatives. 31 32 Tom Altieri, Senior Planner, introduced the item and the presenters Leigh Anne King and 33 Emily Gvino of Clarion Associates. 34 Emily Gvino made the following the presentation: 35 36 Slide #1 En k, •RANGE COUNTY LAND USE PLAN ` • • commasionen '7 Navwnbw 1Z R+ 3 1 Slide #2 1. Project Update Z. Community Engagement window#2 a. Activities b. Objectives C. Outcomes 5 � 3. Discussion of Policy Direction 4. Next Steps 2 3 4 Slide #3 Project Timeline f. Phase 1: Phase 2: Phase 9: LaunchIdentify New Develop� Adopt the ProjectIssues and Plan ng Opportunities Influences -R9R3 4043 Y 20]4 }n} VVV 2(127 � 2024 ;924 2035 YGYS Gormnunl5y ingaq m�rro WiMo5RR1: corn—dy Engagement Wtmluw NZ. Conr"ming rei—unity Awl.buns Testing the.Conservations and Growth Framowo Com .01 1.1—A ng or❑ran Plan PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT 5 6 7 Slide #4 Status Report Work that has been completed: • Phase 4: • Development of Land Use&Recommendations Report(land use alternatives) Community Engagement Window 42 Work that is underway: • Phase 4: Community Engagement Window,42 Summary Report Develop Draft Plan Framework.Vision.and Goals Develop Plan Policies and Actions 8 9 Emily Gvino said this information is on the website. She said that the community 10 engagement technical report will be added to the website as well. 4 1 Slide#5 2 3 4 Slide #6 y.. r- r Community • • the Conservation ■ Growth ■ The second Community —--_ Engagement window— Testing the Conservation - -= and Growth Framework-was held in the fail of 2024. • This phase of engagement asked community members to 4 review modeled land use alternatives and draft vision themes and goals. ' 5 6 Emily Gvino said that the community was provided draft language to review. 7 8 Slide #7 -0 Community Engagement Window CEW#Z activities included: ✓ Staff tabling at three events (A.gW5t and%rpt—b,,20241 r s - V Five in-pe[50n meetings • r •`S Z (September and Ombe,29241 r. Oniine activities available (Srpt—bt r 25-N—hgr 3) 9 10 Emily Gvino said that county planning staff did a wonderful job at all of the community 1 1 engagement sessions. 5 1 Slide #8 Community Engagement W CEW#2 activities included: " v'Online Outreach: p ;p Social media,newsletters,bilingual flyers r ^-^- -® Direct Mailings - 1,OpiY+Rrroppr[ip5 Online surveys available a - 305 surveys wunpleted online 2 3 4 Slide #9 • • - :4 ILqLMWJ .ti 5 6 7 Slide #10 Engagement Objectivesro! The three objectives of Community Engagement Window#2 included: Engagement Satisfaction Representative Engagement / ?. Increased Engagement g 9 6 1 Slide #11 „ Engagement Objectives T Measuring representation of Engagement No response M 2:7% Other LJB�A% • Which racial Two or More Races W�R group da you White,/Caucasian �?g� most closely 1 % American Indian/Alaska Native 1 90% identify with? Black/African American i tfj Asi7.8% 0.3% •290 out of 305 respondents answered this 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 911 m question on the voluntary,self-reported exit 2 quest-noire. ■Orange County(2022 Census Data) ■Exit Questionnaire Responses` 3 Emily Gvino said that the community represents more closely the Census data for Orange 4 County. 5 6 Slide #12 Engagement Objectives Measuring representation of Engagement 8.746 Yes r� • Vo you identify as 913% Np Hispanic/Latinx? .6% Prefer Not to AnsmrlNp Resppnse '285 out of 30S respondents answered this 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 50% 90% 100% question on the voluntary,self-reported exit 7 questionnaire. ■Orange County 12022 Census Data) ■Exit Questionnaire Responses' 8 9 10 11 7 1 Slide #13 t Engagement Objectives Measuring Increased Engagement Benchmark: The Orange County Climate Action Plan Climate Action Community Community LUP2050 Total Plan Engagement Engagement Window#1 Window#2 Community Survey 510 completed 164 complete surveys 420 complete surveys 584 complete surveys surveys Draft CAP Symposium: 12 attendees Approximately 244 in Approximately 165 in 409 in person In Person Engagement person attendees at person attendees at attendees online Focuparticipants Groups: community events community events 44 participants total _J 2 Community Engagement window#3 will occur in late spring 2025. 3 Emily Gvino said they had a goal to meet or exceed the engagement from the Climate 4 Action Plan and they have surpassed the goal. 5 Chair Bedford asked if this allows for duplicates. 6 Emily Gvino said that there is a question that asked if the participants have participated in 7 previous engagement sessions and 72% were new to the process this time around. 8 9 Slide #14 Additional Public Inputs - Organizational Letters Received • Duke Forest Teaching and Research Laboratory • NC Wildlife Resources Commission • Sierra Club,Orange-Chatham Group Executive Committee • Triangle Connectivity Collaborative Personal Letters Received • Barry Jacobs • Michael Hughes • Megan Kimball m 10 11 Emily Gvino said that these letters will also be included in the report. 12 13 8 1 Slide #15 2 • • Ob .- Ene en • Takeaways from Community Engagement window#Z to Apply to Community Engagement window#3 • Engagement satisfaction:continue to offer multiple ways to participate with creative,fun,flexible,and accessible options • Representative engagement:Continue creating partnerships/connections and tailoring outreach efforts to support representative participation(such as African American,Hispanic/Latino,and Asian community members;youth:etc.) • Increased engagement:Community Engagement Window#3 will occur in the spring of 2025 to continue to increase overall engagement numbers. 3 4 Chair Bedford said that they are requesting that one of the sites for the next round of 5 engagement be in Carrboro or Chapel Hill. 6 Commissioner Richards asked who the partners were for events. 7 Emily Gvino said Jones Grove Baptist Church, Efland Cheeks Community Center, and EI 8 Centro. 9 Commissioner Richards asked for clarification on the number surveys that were 10 completed. 11 Emily Gvino said that 420 surveys were completed in total, with 305 completed online, 12 and the rest completed in person. 13 Cy Stober, Planning Director, said the paper surveys were entered by staff. 14 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if most of the online surveys were completed in 15 November or earlier on. She said that she heard a resident say the timeline should be extended. 16 Emily Gvino said the majority were around October 23-28th but she can provide more 17 detailed data. She said that it is most active when surveys first launch. 18 Cy Stober said online participation only spikes in participation after engagement events in 19 October, and there is another big spike when the County Manager sent the survey to employees 20 to complete. He said there was also a spike when county staff entered paper surveys. 21 22 Slide #16 k 23 9 1 Leigh Anne King continued the presentation: 2 3 Slide #17 Refresher on Question Being Tested Through Alternatives 411-1,. Which aspects of the Protein Critical watershed A reqs and Open spaces land use alternatives agricultural serve ratl LLanddss a best achieve the balance of sustainable development in Orange IM DEVELOPMENT County? TT Support Climate Advance Attainability R'p""!vpof Equitable Housing TIAard Upward Mobility Systems=micDe'llop am m 4 5 6 Slide #18 Refresher- on - - Baseline Alternative with Policy Updates 1�. i Enhance Agricultural Low-Impact Rural Mixed-Use Centers n and Environmental Conservation and New Employment Protections Neighborhoods and New in Strategic Locations. Employment in Strategic 7 Continue Current Policies Locations 8 9 10 10 1 Slide #19 2 3 4 Slide #20 WindowCommunity Engagement Outcomes • Participants were provided two ways to provide feedback both online or in person: • Short Survey(7 questions) • Long Survey(12 questions about the land use alternatives and 4 questions about the draft Vision Themes and Goals) • The same questions were posed to participants for both online engagement and in person meetings. m 5 6 7 Slide #21 WindowCommunity Engagement • Total of 420 surveys received • Approximately 115 surveys were received at in-person meetings and 305 were completed online • Approximately 286 short surveys and 134 long surveys were completed Gravelly Hill -60 American Legion -55 5u ys 115 305 420 EI Centra 15 A Ef-d Cheeks 16 Euit questionnaire 106 199 305 ones Grove 14 Tat.l 165 8 9 11 1 Slide #22 Community Engagement OutcomesI- Summary of Survey Responses:Vision Themes &Goals Short Survev: Strong support for Long survey: Strong support for all Vision Themes most Goals • Highest Support: Highest Support: Protect Critical watershed Areas and Open Environment,Parks,and Recreation(91%) Spaces and Preserve Agricultural Lands(85%) Working Lands and Open Space(84%) • Lowest Support: Lowest Support: Cultivate Sustainable Development(69!) Regional and Local Growth(46%) Advance Equitable Housing(67%) Economy and Employment 162%) 2 3 4 Slide #23 Community Engagement r . Outcomes Overall Takeaways • Strong support for changing ©range County's current approach to managing land use to both protect natural lands and support development of needed housing • Strong support for protecting priority agricultural,environmental,and rural lands • Desire to see more housing choices 5 6 7 12 1 Slide#24 Community • • • #2 Outcomes: Vision Themes Sample of engagement findings below. Full report will be available online. Do the Vision Themes address Orange County's needs over the next 25 years? 80% 70% 70% 50% 4 50% 44% 9% 48% 40% 30% 25% 22% 1B% 20% 15% 15% 11°� 15% 11 13% 1� B- 3% 3% 9% Cultivate Sustainable Protect Critical Watershed Advance Equitable Hnusing Implement Sustainable Development Areas and Open Spaces and Transportation Systems and Preserve Agricultural Lands Economic Development m Initiatives *263 out of 420 respondents 2 answered this question. ■1=Not very supportive ■2 3 4 ■5=Very Supportive 3 4 Slide #25 Community r r - Window Outcomes Overall Takeaways • Mixed support for higher-density residential mixed-use development and providing more employment opportunities • Split support for Rural Conservation Neighborhoods • Split support for expanding Economic Development Area near Mebane/1-85 • Support for Goals and Vision Themes, with some adjustments • Not as supportive of extension of public water and sewer,or development of private water and wastewater systems 5 6 7 8 13 1 Slide #26 7 Community Engagement Window #2 Outcomes Summary of Long Survey Responses: Land Use Alternatives T Land Use • pp 58% are satisfied with current approach to land use Alternative#1 Land Use • Majority of respondents (54%) support a focus on Alternative#2 protection of environmental, agricultural, watershed, and rural lands 2 3 4 Slide #27 Community Engagement W . . Outcomes -li Summary of Long Survey Responses:. Land Use Alternatives • Majority (52%) support encouraging new Rural Conservation Neighborhoods Land Use • Support is more evenly divided between: Alternative#3 Those who support(44%)and do not support(39%)allowing the development of private water and wastewater systems to support Rural Conservation Neighborhoods • Those who support(49%)and do not support(35%)including a new Economic Development Area south of West Ten Road • Those who support(41%)and do not support(46%)allowing two Land Use types of higher intensity mixed use developments Alternative#4 Those who support(48%)and do not support(41%)the extension of public water and sewer to support higher intensity mixed use 5 developments 6 Commissioner McKee said it seems like there is split support rather than no support for 7 extending water and sewer but on the previous slides for overall takeaways, it highlights that there 8 is not support for extending water and sewer. He said it is contradictory. 9 Leigh Anne King said she understands his point and can adjust that in the final report. She 10 said that the private wastewater was close, but the water was not as close. She said the point is 11 there is not strong support for either when compared to strongly supporting or not supporting. 12 Commissioner McKee said he wants the document to be as clear as possible because it 13 will be a major impact. 14 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if there are other factors to be considered like age and 15 income level for those who are being surveyed. She said the participation from the Asian 16 community is low and asked what the plan is to engage them. 14 1 Leigh Anne King said they do not have a plan specifically to engage that community but 2 are working on an approach. 3 Cy Stober said they learned helpful lessons from the Greene Tract community sessions, 4 and they will be building on relationships that they have developed in this process to reach further 5 to the community. He said that in terms of reaching out to younger people, they will work on that. 6 Commissioner Hamilton echoed Commissioner Portie-Ascott's concern about making 7 sure the survey results include other demographics other than diversity of race and ethnicity. She 8 said that economic lines and age would be important. She said that she is missing the "why" in 9 the summary. She said when there are numbers that are almost even support and not support, 10 she would like to get further into that. She said that she will need more information on what those 11 people are thinking. 12 Chair Bedford asked if the disaggregated data can be provided. 13 Emily Gvino said statistically valid information can be provided by demographic groups, 14 but they are not able to do that with this information because it was from a voluntary exit survey. 15 Commissioner Richards asked if people favor rural conservation neighborhoods, does that 16 depend on private water and sewer? She said this is an example but are any of the options 17 impossible to do without dependency on another item. She asked about how to make the 18 comments as connections in the plan. 19 Leigh Anne King said rural conservation neighborhoods could be supported by private 20 water and sewer or public if that was the choice. She said that mixed use would likely require 21 public infrastructure. She said it is her understanding that a cluster subdivision is allowed in the 22 county, with private water and wastewater systems being allowed and this would not be a huge 23 policy change. 24 Commissioner Richards asked if those connections will be made when the 25 recommendations are brought forward to the Board. 26 Leigh Anne King said yes. 27 Commissioner McKee asked if there is a way to tease out how rural residents answered 28 vs. how urban residents answered the survey. 29 Leigh Anne King said no, the exit surveys are separate from the land use survey. 30 Chair Bedford said it seems like everyone taking the survey seems to want everything, so 31 it is not really helping her. 32 Leigh Anne King said it seems they are asking the right questions, and most people want 33 to get to the sweet spot but their ideas of how to get there may be different. 34 Commissioner Hamilton said the geographic issues are important because it may be 35 separated by location. She said that Commissioner McKee mentioned it and it is important 36 because it gives context for maybe why people want different things which can inform the Board 37 as they try to balance that. 38 Cy Stober said when demographic information is asked it can depress survey results. He 39 said in the next engagement window, they can ask a question about Township or something 40 similar that would not be too identifying. 41 Commissioner Fowler said if they sent out surveys to people who live around Gravelly Hill, 42 this seems like a very specific area. She said that it might explain the mix in survey results. She 43 asked if it is legal to do these surveys at the polls. 44 Leigh Anne King said Clarion has never done that. She said if they were to do that, they 45 would have had to use the short survey. 46 Chair Bedford said she attended the Voluntary Ag breakfast this morning and they are 47 close to presenting a document for preserving farmland. She said that her overall concern is how 48 Mebane annexations need to be factored into this update. 49 Leigh Anne King said they are staying plugged into the Mebane CLUP as a starting point. 50 She said that will be folded into their thinking with this plan. 15 1 Chair Bedford said they have increased their water capacity drastically and that will have 2 a big impact. 3 Leigh Anne King said this is an area that may require some joint planning because the 4 county and City of Mebane. 5 Chair Bedford asked if there is a way to see the data summarized based on the 6 engagement activities. 7 Leigh Anne King said the data is cumulative, and they do not have it broken out by 8 individual meeting. 9 Cy Stober said they will make that effort during the next engagement window. He said that 10 generally, the Orange Grove Baptist Church were concerned about lack of resources and how far 11 they had to drive. He said that is north of Hillsborough. He said that the Efland Cheeks Center 12 also had similar concerns. He said the larger community events were across the board. He said 13 that the event at EI Centro was mostly Carrboro residents, and they wanted more joint planning 14 between the county and towns, and they also expressed concern about the flight of people leaving 15 for more affordable housing. 16 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if residents were concerned that Mebane was growing 17 too fast. 18 Cy Stober said they were focused on industrial growth and if they would have access to 19 restaurants and lack of awareness of future changes. 20 21 Slide #28 Next Steps 7T • During the winter of 2024 and spring of 2025, the Project Team will be developing the plan.This includes: • Draft Plan Framework,vision, and Goals • Growth and Conservation Framework • Policies and Actions • Community Engagement Window#3: Unveiling the Plan is tentatively scheduled for May and June 2025. 22 23 24 16 1 Slide #29 Guidance from BOCC Given this feedback, does the BOCC support development of the following policies in the plan? • New approaches to encourage conservation subdivisions in the unincorporated portions of the County that protect high priority agricultural and environmental lands? • Policies to express support for more dense housing options within the municipalities? • Expansion of economic development opportunities near 1-85/Mebane? • Other? 2 3 Commissioner Fowler said she supports all 3. She said people do not want their taxes to 4 rise, so there is a need for corporate taxes to offset that. She said that expansion of economic 5 development in this area makes sense. She said that she thinks that some areas could have 6 been oversampled. 7 Vice-Chair Greene said she also supports all 3. She said they should support policies for 8 towns to build more dense housing. She said that affordable housing is better all-around if it is in 9 municipalities and close to schools and other amenities. She said she agrees with Commissioner 10 Fowler about corporate taxes to offset residential taxes. 11 Commissioner McKee said he agrees with Commissioner Fowler and Vice-Chair Greene. 12 He said that he is more acceptable to various types of subdivisions because he did a greenways 13 project five years ago and he almost does not recognize the area it has developed so much. He 14 said they have to be open to housing options for folks who don't want to live in town. He said that 15 corporate development will need to expand because without that, it will continue to impose higher 16 costs on homeowners. He said that he is constantly hearing about people being pushed out 17 because of unaffordability. 18 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she agrees with the other comments. She asked if there 19 needs to be a more in-depth discussion about water and sewer for conservation subdivisions. 20 She said that she agrees that economic development will have to expand beyond 40/85 corridor. 21 Chair Bedford asked what people thought of Land Use Alternative #3. 22 Leigh Anne King said 49% support and 35% do not support at south of West Ten Rd. 23 Chair Bedford asked if people were surveyed about the other nodes. 24 Leigh Anne King said those were included and in essence, they were asked in the first 25 alternative if they supported this as a way to manage development in the county. She said they 26 included the rural activity nodes in all four alternatives. 27 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said it would have been helpful to add schools to the maps 28 to help orient. 29 Leigh Anne King said they are thinking about that. 30 Commissioner Hamilton said she generally supports these policies but would feel more 31 comfortable with more information. She said she heard a lot from people who are already 32 concerned with the density of housing in Chapel Hill and Carrboro and support alternatives for 33 people who do not want to be in urban areas. She said that she would like to see economic 34 estimates of what could go in economic development areas. 17 1 Leigh Anne King said they could make estimates of general square footage outputs could 2 be, and more specifics would have to come later in this process. 3 Commissioner Hamilton said she wants to make sure that they are actually getting the 4 benefit of expanding economic development. 5 Commissioner Fowler said they contracted the economic development zone because of 6 lack of water and another issue. She asked if they would be back in talks with Durham and if there 7 are any updates on that location. 8 Cy Stober said he does not have an update on this, but they can resume conversations 9 with Durham. He said the challenge is on the wastewater side and environmental challenges due 10 to rock. He said it could be a policy recommendation in the plan, but more conversations would 11 have to happen with Durham. 12 Commissioner McKee said his two takeaways from tonight are any option other than 13 staying with what they are doing is going to be a difficult situation. He said that he sees no way to 14 do some of these things without putting pipe in the ground. He said even economic development 15 along 85 will require water and sewer. He said the second is that the percentages are not heavily 16 weighted for or against. 17 Commissioner Richards said she supports these three ideas. 18 Chair Bedford said she supports the first and will leave the second up to the towns. She 19 said she supports the expansion of economic development in the different nodes. 20 Vice-Chair Greene said all three towns are on track to increase housing density and she 21 sees the county plan as complementary to those plans. She said that rural conservation 22 subdivisions would involve individual communal septic systems because she does not see the 23 Board opening itself up to having to run water and sewer. 24 Commissioner McKee said if the Board supports economic development in the rural 25 nodes, it will require them to lay pipe. He said if they are going to talk about expanding, they need 26 to think about the pipe requirements because that will be what addresses the concerns and gives 27 a return on investment. 28 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if they can make these decisions without hearing from 29 the for-profit and non-profit developers because a developer might have additional insight. 30 Cy Stober said no targeted outreach has been done to constituent groups. He said that 31 they have presented to the affordable housing coalition but otherwise, no other interest groups to 32 have a deeper dive. He said that he will be bringing an information item to address the rural 33 conservation subdivisions in the future. 34 35 2. Discussion on Affordable Housing Bond/Capital Investment Plan (CIP) Scoring Matrix 36 The Board reviewed and discussed the incorporation of stakeholder feedback from the 2023 37 Requests for Proposals (RFP) process into the Affordable Housing Bond/Capital Investment Plan 38 (CIP)Scoring Matrix to create a more transparent, equitable, relevant, and effective process going 39 forward. 40 41 BACKGROUND: The Orange County Housing Department received feedback both during and 42 after the 2023 Affordable Housing Bond/CIP RFP process from applicants, residents on the 43 Affordable Housing Advisory Board (AHAB), and elected officials. The feedback was varied but 44 several themes emerged across groups: 45 46 • The scorecard was confusing and subjective, with poor definitions at times. 47 • The scorecard unfairly penalizes repair and rehabilitation projects. 48 • The scorecard does not sufficiently account for past performance of applicants. 49 • The scorecard does not sufficiently reward housing for 60% AMI (area median income) 50 and below. 18 1 • The scorecard does not sufficiently target residents with disabilities. 2 . The scorecard does not correctly value leveraging and repayment to County. 3 • The scorecard does not sufficiently reward Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing 4 (NOAH). 5 6 To that end, Housing staff drafted proposed changes to the scoring process as outlined below. 7 Changes are broken down by categories on the current 2023 scorecard: 8 9 General Changes 10 o Include Affordable Housing Advisory Board in an advisory and support role. Shift 11 scorecard responsibilities to an interdepartmental work group. Staff scores will be 12 presented to AHAB for comment before presenting to BOCC. 13 o Add 10% CIP carve-out for Repair and Rehabilitation, advancing stated Master 14 Aging strategic priorities and better supporting the existing affordable housing 15 stock (NOAH) on a per-dollar basis. A new scoring matrix will be created for repair 16 and rehabilitation proposals to be reviewed by the Board at a later date. 17 18 Threshold Requirements: require documentation of alignment with specific Strategic 19 Goals/Priorities (addition to current requirements is underlined) 20 o The application is complete with all required attachments and was submitted by 21 the established deadline. 22 o The project aligns with local affordable housing goals, strategies, and/or adopted 23 policies (if yes, specify the goal from the Strategic Plan or Master Aging Plan). 24 o Funding is for an eligible activity. 25 26 Income Targeting and Special Needs: give greater priority to projects serving 60% AMI 27 and below, which will indirectly support Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH); 28 and add an explanation for how the project serves special needs populations. 29 30 o What income range(s) and population(s) will the proposed project serve? 31 Income Level Current Score Proposed Score 61%-80% AM 1 10 10 31%-60% AM 1 15 25 30% AMI or below 25 35 32 33 34 o Does the project target people with special housing needs? If so, how? 35 Response Current Score Proposed Score Yes 20 20 No 0 0 36 37 38 The US Department of Housing and Urban Development defines people with 39 special housing needs as disabled, elderly, veterans, experiencing homelessness, 40 experiencing interpersonal violence, and holders of Section 8 or other vouchers. 41 Staff determined it was not advisable to separate the population of people with 42 disabilities for special consideration, as it could potentially violate Fair Housing 19 1 standards, where people with disabilities are categorized alongside both elderly 2 populations and families for legal protection. 3 4 Residency: delete due to difficulty screening and monitoring. 5 Response Current Score Proposed Score Yes 5 0 6 7 Leveraging: Prioritize projects than can repay bond funding, and reduce the number of 8 leveraging tiers from 6 to 4. 9 Tiers Current Score New Tiers Proposed Score 81%-100% 0 75%-100% 0 60%-80% 3 50%-75% 5 40%-59% 6 25%-50% 10 20%-39% 9 25% or less 20 10%-19% 15 Less than 10% 20 10 11 o Project repays bond funding (Principal-Only): Increase from 3 to 10 points. 12 Response Current Score Proposed Score Yes 13 110 13 14 o Project repays bond funding (Principal + Interest): Increase from 10 to 20 points. 15 Response Current Score Proposed Score Yes 110 20 16 17 In total, the leveraging category increases from 33 to 50 points. 18 19 Building and Site Design: Reduce points for accessibility, which is required for all new 20 construction and rehabilitation. 21 Response Current Score Proposed Score Yes 120 115 22 23 • Community Design: Better define terms, make points either/or to remove subjectivity. 24 Definitions Current Score Proposed Score Contributes to a mix of housing within Up to 3 3 existing neighborhood (no change to definition Eliminate bonus points for aesthetic Up to 3 0 appearance. Define accessibility to needed goods and Up to 4 4 services as one 1 mile 20 Define access to public transportation as Up to 5 5 '/2 mile Define traditionally underserved as Up to 3 3 unincorporated Orange Count 1 2 In total, the community design category decreases from 18 to 15 points. 3 4 Community Support/Sponsorship: Simplify to remove subjectivity 5 Definitions Current Score Proposed Score Coordination with other organizations Up to 6 6 Intended beneficiaries involved in Up to 6 6 planning with inclusive marketing Involved in the County's Consolidated Up to 4 0 Plan process Links to other community services Up to 4 4 6 7 In total, the Community Support category decreases from 20 to 16 points. 8 9 Developer Experience: Require additional documentation 10 11 o Require documentation to establish past regulatory compliance. 12 o Require documentation to establish past ability to meet budgets and timelines. For 13 transparency and accountability, scorer must list the documentation provided. 14 Score value remains unchanged (40 points) 15 16 Blake Rosser, Housing Director, introduced the item and made the following presentation: 17 18 Slide #1 'dot,ot ©RANGE COUNTY HOUSING DEPARTMENT Affordable Housing Bond/CIP Scoring Matrix Recommendations November 12, 2024. 19 20 21 21 1 Slide #2 Stalceholder Concerns tr Process and Scorecard confusing and subjective Leveraging and repayment to county needs to be reevaluated The following criteria and/or projects need more prioritization: Repair/rehabilitation projects Applicant past performance/accountability Housing for 60%AMI and below Residents with disabilities Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH) ORANGE COUNTY +�► HOUSING DEPARTMENT 2 3 4 Slide #3 General changes to process Affordable Housing Advisory Board (AHAB) will not score projects AHAB scared projects for first time in 2023 Scoring shifts back to staff interdepartmental work group • Staff will present scores to AHAB for comment before BOCC Add 10% CIP carve-out for Repair/Rehabilitation New scoring matrix will be created for repair/rehabilitation proposals, to be reviewed by the Board at a later date. Simplify scorecard, prioritize 60%AMI or below projects, assess applicants" past performance, and streamline monitoring/evaluation ORANGE COUNTY O HOUSING DEPARTMENT 5 6 Commissioner Fowler asked if this precludes them from applying to the other part. 7 Blake Rosser said it would not, but it might make it difficult to complete. He said that they 8 can discuss how to weigh that scorecard. He said that having a separate pool might take care of 9 that issue. 10 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked the annual income equivalent to 60% AMI. 11 Aaron Cohen said for a family of 4 it is roughly $82,000, but it depends on family size. 12 Blake Rosser said the last two items they feel will address the concerns about naturally 13 affordable housing. 14 15 22 1 Slide #4 Scorecard changes Old Points Now Points Threshold Requirements Require documentation of alignment with specific Strategic NIA Plan Goals/Priorities Income Targeting and Special Add greater weight to 60%AMI and below 60%AMI: 10 10 Needs Require explanation for how project serves special needs 60%AMI: 15 25 populations. 30%AMI:25 35 • Considered specifically targeting people with disabilities, but fair Housing concerns raised Residency Delete due to difficulty screening and monitoring 5 0 Leveraging Prioritize projects that can repay bund funding 33 50 • Increased points from 3 to 10 and 10 to 20 for projects that can repay Principal ,or Principal +Interest, respectively • Simplify number of tiers from 6 to 4 • New Tiers for percent of project County-funded: 75-100%:0 pts 50-75%:5 pts 25-50%:10 pts 0-25%:20 pts Building/Site Design Remove points for accessibility(modem requirement) 20 15 2 3 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if they were using the HUD definition for disability. 4 Blake Rosser said yes. 5 Commissioner Fowler said she appreciates this change. 6 Blake Rosser said some questions are either or rather than a range in an effort to remove 7 the subjectivity. 8 Vice-Chair Greene said that not all projects are designed to be able to repay the bond 9 funding. She said that some applicants might feel that it is not fair. She asked if they had a 10 conversation with affordable housing providers about this and if there is a plan to talk with them. 11 Blake Rosser said this is the first draft, so they are here to get feedback and will seek 12 other feedback. 13 Chair Bedford asked what accessibility means. 14 Blake Rosser said it makes the property ADA compliant with ramps, number of accessible 15 units, etc. 16 Aaron Cohen said universal designs are still captured in the scorecard and this just 17 removes redundancy around legal ADA requirement. 18 19 20 23 1 Slide #5 Scorecard changes Old Points New Points Community Design Better define terms: 18 15 "Accessibility to needed Goods and Services"=wlin 1 mi "Access to Public Transportation" =wlin'/z mi "Traditionally underserved" part of the county= unincorporated Orange County • Change point awards from"up to"to either/or in order to increase objectivity • Eliminate bonus points for aesthetic appearance Community Change point awards from"up to"to eitherlor in order to 20 16 Support/Sponsorship increase objectivity • Delete criterion of participation in Consolidated Plan Developer Experience Require additional documentation, and that documentation 40 40 be listed by scorer ORANGE COUNTY O HOUSING DEPARTMENT 2 3 Commissioner Fowler asked where the information regarding the proximity to public 4 transportation was gathered. 5 Commissioner Greene said that planners talk about 1/2 mile but that needs to be nuanced 6 because people do not want to walk more than '/4 mile for certain modes but '/2 mile for faster 7 transit options. 8 Commissioner Fowler asked what language the public transportation plan used for the 9 mileage. 10 Commissioner Greene said that she would then propose that the transportation plan 11 language also be changed from 3/4 to '/4 mile. She said that this is a scoring matrix and that they 12 should challenge applicants to meet the '/4 mile. She said that way either everyone will get it, or 13 no one will. 14 Chair Bedford said that those are two good comments, and they will be given to the 15 manager to work on. 16 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked how traditionally underserved areas of the county will 17 overlap with the access to transportation. 18 Vice-Chair Greene said there are some traditionally underserved areas in the towns and 19 not just unincorporated areas. She said that she wanted it to be possible to increase the number 20 and frequency of bus trips to neighborhoods like northside. 21 Blake Rosser said they will take that into account and the underserved areas in the towns 22 are harder to identify. 23 Aaron Cohen said community development is studying hotspots for housing displacement 24 in the towns and those findings could be incorporated. 24 1 Commissioner Hamilton asked how they determined the 10% carve out for rehabilitation. 2 Blake Rosser said they are looking at it in conjunction with the way federal funds are 3 distributed through HOME funds. He said they analyzed that using a smaller pot of funds for repair 4 and rehab makes the most sense so larger pots of money can be used for projects with more 5 impact. 6 Aaron Cohen said most of their funding comes from the state and these figures of 7 $500,000 over a five-year period represent a 1:1 match. 8 Commissioner Hamilton said she asked that because as she canvassed, she saw there 9 are a lot of homes that need repair. 10 Blake Rosser said they are aware of a high community need for this as well. 11 Aaron Cohen said the UNC lab has a 200-resident waiting list. 12 Chair Bedford said that Justice United says it is near$2 million. She asked for clarification 13 on the federal dollars. 14 Blake Rosser said the HOME program is dedicated to either development, acquisition, 15 rehab, tenant-based assistance, and that is decided based on the consolidated plan. He said they 16 have been thinking strategically about how to get the most bang for the buck and repair and rehab 17 along with tenant assistance seems to the be two. 18 Chair Bedford asked what coordination with other organizations would look like (from the 19 scorecard). 20 Blake Rosser said that would be if there are multiple partners or an MOU between multiple 21 partners applying. 22 Chair Bedford asked what "links to other community services" means on the scorecard. 23 Aaron Cohen said that was pulled from the previous scorecard and from what he can tell 24 is that it was used to show links to other ongoing community services whether those are inside or 25 outside of Orange County. 26 Chair Beford said that she thinks the inclusive language regarding marketing on the 27 scorecard needs work. 28 Aaron Cohen said that they can find a broader meaning or reflective language that is 29 clearer. 30 Vice-Chair Greene said she supports rewarding those including folks with lived 31 experience. Unsure about the word marketing. 32 Chair Bedford said she agrees. She asked about developer experience. 33 Blake Rosser said that they are looking for additional documents rather than just a 34 rubberstamp. 35 Chair Bedford said that this is very similar to the outside agency funding and unfair to 36 newcomers. She said that she does not think it is relevant. She said there might be other groups. 37 Commissioner Fowler said she thought the developer score was about experience with a 38 developer and not with the Board. 39 Chair Bedford said as worded, it would still eliminate new recipients. 40 Commissioner Greene said that when she was on the Chapel Hill Town Council, she 41 experienced a church applying for housing development funds and it had to be considered in a 42 way that had never been done because they were partnering with builders. 43 Commissioner Hamilton said they need to have the services and cannot afford not to. 44 Commissioner McKee said repair/rehab has no visibility/impact from a publicity standpoint. 45 He said that he would rather eliminate a person with good intentions rather than approve and 46 have a crash and burn of their funding. He said that without dedicating a portion to rehab, 47 affordable housing projects will dominate conversation and repair/rehab will get lost in the 48 conversation. He said at that point, the houses will then be beyond repair. 49 Commissioner Richards said that leverage is important but challenged them to think about 50 ways to exercise the leverage other than ability to repay. 25 1 Chair Bedford said that the history is that Habitat scored higher, but they provided the 2 award to Empowerment because of the impact on the need. 3 Commissioner Fowler said that she thought that leveraging was based on leveraging of 4 the county's funds. 5 Blake Rosser said it is not gone, and he will take the discussion and come back with 6 options. 7 Commissioner Hamilton said that she agrees that the ability to repay should not be the 8 only way that leverage is used. 9 Commissioner Richards said that she agrees. 10 Chair Bedford said that if you are discussing impact, leveraging is important to consider 11 and that she thinks the points are just too much for that category. 12 Commissioner Hamilton said they have to think about long term and what's sustainable 13 vs. individual past examples. She said they also have to think of the impact of the differences and 14 that they could score projects using new and old score cards. 15 Vice-Chair Greene said the intangible impact is going to be hard to measure. She said 16 some projects structurally do not have the ability to pay money back and she does not want to 17 hold that against them. She said that she is comfortable with the score being based on capacity 18 to bring in additional money for the project. 19 Chair Bedford said that she was reading it thinking about tax-credits and investors 20 because she cannot envision that they can pay the funds back. 21 Blake Rosser said that the homebuyer assistance programs, such as no or low interest 22 loans, could be paid back. He said that he wonders if prioritizing the money to attract other money 23 unintentionally favors existing organizations. 24 Chair Bedford said that it unintentionally favors Habitat. 25 Commissioner Fowler said that it is useful because leveraging can be beneficial. 26 Chair Bedford asked about the 10% car route. She said they should be looking into what 27 type of housing they want. She said if they have funds to spend, where should they focus spending 28 to accomplish it. She said the rubric should be written to fit that need and priority should be placed 29 on naturally occurring affordable housing. She said that she is not sure if borrowed money could 30 be used for those projects. She said that she likes the idea of having a different rubric and she 31 does not think they should be deciding a percentage or amount at this point. 32 Commissioner McKee asked if Chair Bedford was suggesting eliminating the carve-out. 33 Chair Bedford said that she is saying they should be flexible and not identify a percentage 34 or number yet. She said that the CIP shows them funds available. She said they can have 35 retraining at the retreat on housing. 36 Commissioner McKee said that his worry is that the repair/rehab has no visibility. He said 37 that if they do not set a dedicated amount to these projects, they will basically be lost in the 38 conversation and end up with much less funding. 39 Commissioner Fowler said that 10% is a reasonable place to start and maybe it is changed 40 next year. 41 Commissioner Greene agreed with 10% to start for repair/rehab. 42 Chair Bedford said that this is out for 2-3 years. 43 Commissioner Greene said she is in favor. 44 Travis Myren said that they have asked the bond council to see if they can use borrowed 45 money for rehab and repair. 46 Commissioner McKee said that even if they cannot it could free up funds. 47 Travis Myren said it is in operating so it cannot supplant funds. 48 Chair Bedford said that she thinks that the scoring of units needs to be weighted based 49 on the number supplied. 50 Commissioner Fowler said it was changed last year but the standard for disabled is no 51 more than 20% and that is why she like the way the question was changed. 26 1 Chair Bedford said that if they say yes then they get all the points and that needs to be 2 changed. 3 Commissioner Fowler said the question could be amended to ask if they have a minimum 4 of 10%. 5 Chair Bedford agreed. 6 7 Slide #6 Please contact County Manager or Housing Director with questions •Blake Rosser •brosser@orangecountync.gov 919-245-2492 ORANGECOUNTY O HOUSING DEPARTMENT 8 9 10 3. Additional Discussion on School Capital Funding Policy 11 The Board reviewed and provided feedback on a revised draft School Capital Funding Policy 12 prepared by staff, as well as an additional Major Project Planning Addendum. 13 14 BACKGROUND: At its October 8, 2024 work session, the Board of Commissioners received a 15 draft of the School Capital Funding Policy, which sets new definitions and guidelines for school 16 capital funding, uses, and allocation methods. The Board made a series of clarifications and 17 corrections to the draft policy. Attachment A provides the new School Capital Funding Draft, with 18 Attachment B showing any redline changes from the prior draft for easy comparison. 19 20 In addition, the Board requested that staff review the 2008 Policy on Funding and Planning School 21 Construction and incorporate elements from that document into a new planning addendum policy. 22 County staff have drafted this document in Attachment C. This includes both elements that were 23 present in the original text, as well as concerns that have been raised during the last two years, 24 either in Board meetings or in the School Capital Needs Workgroup discussions. Staff requests 25 the Board review both drafts to ensure that staff correctly present the Board's and the County's 26 priorities during this upcoming period of major school construction. 27 28 The Board can provide feedback and staff will incorporate that information into finalized policies. 29 The finalized policies will be presented again to the Board before the presentation of the 30 Manager's Recommended Capital Investment Plan in April 2025. 31 32 27 1 Kirk Vaughn, Budget Director, introduced the item and made the following presentation: 2 3 Slide #1 ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA Additional School Capital Funding Policy November 12,2024 BOCC Worksession 4 5 Kirk Vaughn noted that the bond on the November 5th ballot passed. He said it was the 6 largest bond to pass in North Carolina. 7 8 Slide #2 UPDATE TO SCHOOL CAPITAL FUNDING POLICY • Two new sections — Defining that sales tax and property tax are the underlying source for school capital funding — Providing additional language on amending Major Project budgets • Language changes throughout, providing additional flexibility to future boards 10 Chair Bedford asked questions based on attachment B in the agenda packet. She asked 11 for a refresher on what "pay-go" is. 12 Kirk Vaughn said pay-go is cash. 13 Chair Bedford said deleting the word "or" from the parentheses, so it reads (cash) makes 14 it clearer that pay-go is cash. She said her next question is about the "Oversight and 15 Amendments" section of attachment B. She asked what the timing will be like for budget 16 amendment requests from the school districts. 17 Kirk Vaughn said school districts are asked to submit the budget amendment request 18 before the end of the fiscal year and give county staff enough time to make the change so there 19 are no surprises at year end. 20 Chair Bedford said suggested adding the phrase "and high priority needs" after "...for all 21 Major Projects..." in the second paragraph in the "Oversight and Amendments" section of 22 attachment B. She said this would allow the working group to stay better informed. Chair Bedford 23 suggested being specific about at which type of board meeting funds will be reallocated in the last 24 sentence of the "Emergencies" section. She also indicated that the "Recission" section should 25 read "This policy supersedes any school capital funding policy in place prior to this date." 28 1 Slide #3 MAJOR PROJECT PLANNING ADDENDUM • On October 81", Board asked to see incorporation of ideas from the 2008 Policy on Planning and Funding School Capital projects into a policy. • This incorporates those as well as concepts that have been promoted in Board meetings and School Capital Needs Workgroup. • Goal of this document is to communicate expectations and priorities of BoCC to School Districts and residents. • Can be used while larger decisions around Construction Standards and Joint Project Management are still in deliberation. ORANGE COUNTY NOR-1 FI CAROL7.NA 2 3 Chair Bedford said she appreciates this slide. 4 Commissioner Richards asked if the point of this policy is to be a guide while other 5 standards and policies are being figured out. 6 Travis Myren said this would be a long-term planning guideline with themes from the 7 Woolpert Report and will stand beside more detailed school construction standards. 8 Commissioner Richards said community usage of school space is an important payback 9 for the community for the investment they are making in the schools, and the school districts have 10 had the ability to say no. She said this needs to be thought about because communities invest in 11 schools and schools can be a resource to the community to utilize. 12 Chair Bedford said a different discussion could happen outside of project planning about 13 facility usage. 14 Commissioner Richards said making schools more of a resource to community members 15 is important, especially considering this was the largest bond in NC to pass. 16 Chair Bedford asked about the timing. 17 Kirk Vaughn said this would apply before the school starts being built. 18 Commissioner Hamilton said she agrees with Commissioner Richards to a point but wants 19 to make sure decisions are made that will not undermine the minimal dollars available to meet 20 the needs of students. To a separate point, Commissioner Hamilton said in the first paragraph of 21 the addendum (attachment C), "replace the oldest facilities" should be changed to "replace and 22 renovate older facilities" to describe the Board's intent more accurately. 23 Chair Bedford asked to add "etc." to the end of the paragraph under "Equitably between 24 School Districts" to add flexibility. She asked what is meant by "Capacity" as one of the County's 25 priorities. 26 Kirk Vaughn said it attempts to get at the idea of "newer and fewer" from the Woolpert 27 Study. He said under the current policy, any increase in school capacity would not be allowed, 28 but the idea here is that if there are newer and fewer schools, a 400-student capacity school could 29 be taken offline and replaced with a school that has the capacity for 600 students. He said he can 30 clarify the wording in this section. 31 Chair Bedford said she thinks there need to be staff procedures with timelines so there is 32 control over the money and the projects. 33 Kirk said some of that is in the policy and there will also be a staff working group to work 34 through the process at each step. 35 36 29 1 Slide #4 MAJOR PROJECT PLANNING ADDENDUM • Review Policy from big picture to in depth. • Does this policy address the concerns of the Board in planning Major Projects? • Does the Board agree with the list of major priorities, are there any significant omissions that should be explicitly stated? • Does the policy language accurately describe the Board's intent? ORANGE COUNTY 2 WORTH CAROLINA 3 4 Slide #5 MAJOR PROJECT PLANNING ADDENDUM Priorities for Design and Planning • Educationally Adequate • Flexibly designed for Future Standards • Equitability between School Districts • Sustainability& Life Cycle Costing • Safety • Community Usage • Capacity ORANGE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 5 6 7 Slide #6 MAJOR PROJECT PLANNING ADDENDUM Priorities for Site Selection • Acreage Standards • Environmental Factors • Availability of Utilities • Total Project Costing • Potential for Joint Park Sites • Safe Routes to Schools ORANGE COUNTY 8 NORTH CAROLINA 30 1 Slide #7 QUESTIONS? Additional Questions on either policy document? 0Rvr,,,7CO: Ni 3 4 4. Advisory Board on Aging —Appointment Discussion 5 The Board discussed an appointment to the Advisory Board on Aging 6 7 BACKGROUND: The Advisory Board on Aging suggests policy and makes recommendations to 8 the Board of Commissioners and the Department on Aging while acting as the liaison between 9 older adults of the County and County government. It is charged with promoting needed services, 10 programs, and funding that impacts older residents. 11 12 The Board of County Commissioners appoints all twelve (12) members. 13 14 The following individual is recommended for Board consideration: 15 NAME POSITION TYPE OF EXPIRATION DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT DATE TERM Dr. Joanne At-Large First Full Term 06/30/2027 Wilson 16 17 If the individual listed above is appointed, no vacancies remain. 18 19 Tara May introduced the item. 20 The Board agreed by consensus on the recommended applicant. 21 22 5. Animal Services Hearing Panel Pool —Appointments Discussion 23 The Board discussed appointments to the Animal Services Hearing Panel Pool. 24 BACKGROUND: The charge of the Animal Services Hearing Panel Pool is to hear appeals 25 concerning violations of the Orange County Code of Ordinances, Chapter 4 ("Animal Control 26 Ordinance"), as provided in the Orange County Code of Ordinances, Section 4-53 Appeals, and 27 also potentially dangerous dog appeals as prescribed by North Carolina General Statute §67- 28 4.1(c). It is the responsibility of pool members to conduct fair and impartial hearings for these 29 appeals and they will receive training in both law and proper procedure prior to participating in a 30 hearing. 31 32 The Board of County Commissioners appoints twelve (12) members, with representation from 33 various fields. There are also two (2) members representing the Towns of Carrboro, Chapel Hill, 34 and Hillsborough. 31 1 2 The following positions are presented for Board consideration: 3 NAME POSITION TYPE OF EXPIRATION DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT DATE TERM BOCC Town of Carrboro First Full Term 03/31/2027 Appointee BOCC At-Large Partial Term 03/31/2026 Appointee Unincorporated 4 5 If the positions listed above are filled, the following vacancies remain: 6 POSITION EXPIRATION VACANCY INFORMATION DESIGNATION DATE Town of Carrboro 03/31/2026 Vacant since 03/31/2023 Town of Chapel 03/31/2026 Vacant since 03/31/2023 Hill Town of 03/31/2025 Vacant since 03/31/2022 Hillsborough At-Large 03/31/2025 Vacant since 03/31/2022 At-Large 03/31/2026 Vacant since 03/31/2023 7 8 Tara May introduced the item. 9 The Board agreed by consensus to appoint Benjamin King and Michael Dempsey to the 10 identified positions. 11 12 6. Chapel Hill Orange County Visitors Bureau Advisory Board —Appointments Discussion 13 The Board discussed appointments to the Chapel Hill Orange County Visitors Bureau Advisory 14 Board. 15 16 BACKGROUND: The Chapel Hill Orange County Visitors Bureau Advisory Board is charged with 17 developing and coordinating visitor services in Orange County. It also implements marketing 18 programs that will enhance economic activity and quality of life in the community. 19 20 The Board of County Commissioners appoints all seventeen (17) members, with representation 21 from specific entities and fields. 22 23 The following individuals are recommended for Board consideration: 24 NAME POSITION TYPE OF EXPIRATION DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT DATE TERM Craig Lloyd Orange First Full Term 12/31/2026 County/Hillsborough Chamber of Commerce Allison Reid UNC Chapel Hill First Full Term 12/31/2027 25 26 If the individuals listed above are appointed, the following vacancies remain: 32 POSITION EXPIRATION VACANCY INFORMATION DESIGNATION DATE Economic 12/31/2026 Vacant since 06/30/2024 Development Advisory Board Orange County 12/31/2027 Vacant since 10/24/2024 Lodging 1 2 Tara May introduced the item. 3 The Board agreed by consensus to appoint Craig Lloyd to the Chamber of Commerce 4 position and Allison Reid as the UNC Chapel Hill representative. 5 6 7. Commission for the Environment—Appointments Discussion 7 The Board discussed appointments to the Commission for the Environment. 8 9 BACKGROUND: The Commission for the Environment advises the Board of Commissioners on 10 matters affecting the environment with particular emphasis on protection. It educates the public 11 and local officials on environmental issues and performs special studies and projects. It also 12 recommends environmental initiatives and study changes in environmental science and local and 13 federal regulations. 14 15 The Board of County Commissioners appoints all fifteen (15)At-Large members. 16 17 The following individuals are recommended for Board consideration: 18 NAME POSITION TYPE OF EXPIRATION DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT DATE TERM Regina Baratta At-Large Second Full Term 12/31/2027 Patrick At-Large First Full Term 12/31/2027 Fn'Pierre (reappointment) Aimee At-Large First Full Term 12/31/2027 Vandemark (reappointment) Jane Harris At-Large First Full Term 12/31/2027 (reappointment) 19 20 If the individuals listed above are appointed, the following vacancy remains: 21 POSITION EXPIRATION VACANCY INFORMATION DESIGNATION DATE At-Large 12/31/2024 Vacant since 09/09/2024 22 23 Tara May introduced the item. 24 The Board agreed by consensus on the recommended reappointments. 25 26 33 1 8. Human Relations Commission —Appointments Discussion 2 The Board discussed appointments to the Human Relations Commission. 3 4 BACKGROUND: The Human Relations Commission advises the Board of County 5 Commissioners on solutions to problems in the field of human relationships. It also makes 6 recommendations designed to promote goodwill and harmony among groups in the County 7 irrespective of their race, color, creed, religion, ancestry, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, 8 disability, age, marital status, or status with regard to public assistance. 9 10 The Board of County Commissioners appoints all twelve (12) members. 11 12 The following individuals are recommended for Board consideration: 13 NAME POSITION TYPE OF EXPIRATION DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT DATE TERM Alexander At-Large First Full Term 06/30/2027 Fowler Cory Ho ans At-Large First Full Term 09/30/2027 Shane Lukas At-Large Partial Term 09/30/2025 14 15 If the individuals listed above are appointed, the following vacancies remain: 16 POSITION EXPIRATION VACANCY INFORMATION DESIGNATION DATE At-Large 09/30/2027 Vacant since 09/30/2024 Town of Chapel 06/30/2025 Vacant since 09/23/2024 Hill 17 Tara May introduced the item. 18 The Board agreed by consensus on the recommended applicants. 19 20 9. Orange County Parks and Recreation Council —Appointments Discussion 21 The Board discussed appointments to the Orange County Parks and Recreation Council. 22 23 BACKGROUND: The Orange County Parks and Recreation Council consults with and advises 24 the Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks and Recreation, and the Board of County 25 Commissioners on matters affecting parks planning, development and operation; recreation 26 facilities, policies, and programs; and public trails and open space. 27 28 The Board of County Commissioners appoints all twelve (12) members with representatives from 29 each of the county's townships plus its municipalities, as well as two (2) non-voting youth 30 delegates. 31 32 The following individuals are recommended for Board consideration: 33 34 NAME POSITION DESCRIPTION TYPE OF EXPIRATION APPOINTMENT DATE TERM Shahnaz Eno Township First Full Term 12/31/2027 "GiGi" Rashdi Benjamin King Carrboro City Limits First Full Term 03/31/2027 1 2 If the individuals listed above are appointed, the following vacancies remain: 3 POSITION EXPIRATION VACANCY INFORMATION DESIGNATION DATE Hillsborough 03/31/2025 Vacant since 05/03/2024 Township Little River 03/31/2026 Vacant since 08/18/2023 Township Hillsborough Town 09/30/2025 Vacant since 09/17/2024 Limits Youth Member 12/31/2025 Vacant since 06/20/2024 Youth Member 03/31/2026 Vacant since 03/06/2024 4 5 Tara May introduced the item. 6 The Board agreed by consensus to appoint the recommended applicants. 7 8 Adjournment 9 10 A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler, seconded by Commissioner Hamilton, to 11 adjourn the meeting at 9:52 p.m. 12 13 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 14 15 16 17 Jamezetta Bedford, Chair 18 19 20 Recorded by Tara May, Deputy Clerk to the Board 21 22 Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board.