HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 04-15-2025; 8-a - Minutes ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: April 15, 2025
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: February 25, 2025 Special Meeting
Attachment 2: March 6, 2025 Business Meeting
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with this item.
ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PLAN: This item supports:
• GUIDING PRINCIPLE — COMMUNICATION AND AWARENESS
We provide information and opportunities for engagement in a transparent manner so that
all in our community have knowledge, understanding, and a voice.
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 SPECIAL MEETING
5 February 25, 2025
6 7:00 p.m.
7
8 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Special Meeting on Tuesday, February
9 25, 2025, 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 Jean Hamilton
12 and Commissioners Marilyn Carter, Amy Fowler, Sally Greene, Earl McKee, and Phyllis Portie-
13 Ascott
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None.
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT. John Roberts
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT. County Manager Travis Myren, Deputy County Manager Caitlin
17 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 Chair Bedford read the public charge. She explained the process for making public
22 comments for items not on the agenda vs. items that are on the agenda.
23
24 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
25 Not applicable for special meetings.
26
27 2. Public Comments (Limited to One Hour)
28 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
29 Tisha Abdul, Miss Orange County 2025 for the Miss America Organization, said this was
30 the inaugural competition for Miss Orange County/Chapel Hill. She said that she is a third-year
31 neuroscience student at UNC. She said the Miss America opportunity provides opportunities to
32 work on community enhancing initiatives and said she is working on the Smile 360 Initiative. She
33 said she has spoken to hundreds of children across North Carolina about oral health. She said at
34 the age of 14, she founded the first Cabarrus County 360 Smile Chapter and worked with the
35 Board of Commissioners in Cabarrus County to help bridge the gap between teenagers and
36 decision makers. She said that oral health is the foundation for overall health. She said that she
37 is grateful for the opportunity to share her accomplishments and speak to the Board regarding the
38 missions and said that she looks forward to working with each of them moving forward. She said
39 she will compete for Miss North Carolina in June.
40 Ila Monical, Miss Teen Orange County 2025 for the Miss America Organization, said she
41 is here to share her initiative to help others struggling with bullying and mental health issues. She
42 said it is called NAMI, Not My Story. She said that she created a podcast that has reached 5 states
43 so far and focuses on mental health. She said that 20% of students report they have been through
44 bullying. She said that she is a junior in high school and is spreading the idea of kindness and
45 self-love. She said that she plans to attend visit McDougle Elementary School and plans with
46 NAMI at several other future events. She said she is thankful for the opportunities given to her in
47 Orange County and through the Miss America Opportunity.
48
49 b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
50 (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda below.)
51
2
1 3. Announcements, Petitions and Comments by Board Members
2 Commissioner Greene said she attended the dedication of the historical marker on
3 February 15th commemorating the lynchings of Washington Morrow, Daniel Morrow, and Thomas
4 Jefferson Morrow. She said she was honored to represent the Board at this event and reread the
5 apology approved by the Board a few years ago for all of the racial terror that took place in the
6 post-Civil War era in Orange County's history. She emphasized the importance of remembering
7 and understanding this history. She announced that the Drakeford Library grand opening was
8 rescheduled due to the weather last week and will be rescheduled in the future.
9 Commissioner Carter said she also attended the dedication of the historical marker on
10 February 15th. She said it was a moving experience. She said she looks forward to hearing about
11 upcoming events in March for Women's History Month and the celebration of Creek Week. She
12 said next week, she will be in Washington DC at the NACo conference and looks forward to
13 bringing information back to the Board.
14 Vice-Chair Hamilton said she would like to share some reflections to close Black History
15 Month. She said at the February 4th meeting, the Board approved a proclamation for Black History
16 Month, and she thanked staff for their work on that proclamation and the organization of Black
17 History Month programming. She said she attended the dedication of the historical marker along
18 with other Commissioners this month. She said the purpose of Black History Month is to reflect
19 on the history of the United States and all of the people who contributed to building this nation.
20 She said while it was founded on noble ideals, it was founded in not-so-noble realities like stolen
21 land and stolen labor and the belief that some human beings were superior to others. She said
22 we have progressed as a nation economically and socially towards fully embracing the noble
23 ideals like our national motto, "E Pluribus Unum" (out of many one), and our pledge, "with liberty
24 and justice for all". She said we have also moved away from some of our less noble ideals such
25 as cheating, lying, feelings of superiority, and exploitation. She said she hopes our nation can
26 make it back to what has made it great—its noble ideals. She said she is proud to be an American
27 of mostly African descent but also Native American and European descent and appreciates the
28 opportunity to serve the residents of Orange County. She said she looks forward to attending the
29 NACo conference next week with Commissioner Carter and will bring back what she learns to be
30 a better county commissioner.
31 Chair Bedford reminded the Board about an MOU with Carrboro, Chapel Hill, UNC on the
32 potential rails-to-trails project. She said the idea is that should UNC no longer use coal at the co-
33 gen plant, it might open the door for a rails-to-trail project, or even a multimodal project. She said
34 the DCHC MPO, now referred to as Triangle West Transportation Planning Organization (Triangle
35 West TPO) is working on applying for a $400,000 grant that requires a $100,000 match. She said
36 UNC has committed $20,000, the North Carolina Railroad Group has committed $50,000,
37 Carrboro and Chapel Hill have each committed $10,000, and the request is for Orange County to
38 commit $10,000 as well. She said the county's contribution does not have to be approved by the
39 Board officially but wanted to update Board members since she is the liaison to this group. She
40 said Amy Eckberg, Sustainability Coordinator, David Stancil, DEAPR Director, Nishith Trivedi,
41 Transportation Director, and the County Manager are all involved in these discussions. She said
42 there is opportunity here for housing, recreation, and multimodal use. She said if anyone has
43 concerns, to let the County Manager know in the next few days.
44 Commissioner Fowler said she attended the Triangle West TPO meeting this morning,
45 where the board voted to release several items for public comment, including TIP Amendment#6,
46 a Public Participation Plan, and Destination 2055 MTP Deficiency and Needs Analysis. She
47 encouraged anyone with ideas of how to improve transportation planning to visit the Triangle West
48 Transportation Planning Organization website. She said she also attended IDEAL, a collective
49 action group, policy subcommittee meeting focused on potential policy advocacy to increase
50 access to housing for folks with disabilities last week. She said she attended the Board of Health
51 meeting as well and they are continuing to work on educating families on the impacts of excessive
3
1 screen use on mental health. She said like other Commissioners, she appreciated the opportunity
2 to attend the unveiling of the commemorative placard at the old courthouse and said she is glad
3 to live in a community that is committed to acknowledging its past and attempting to right wrongs
4 despite what's happening at a national level. She said she is struggling to understand what is
5 happening at a national level and how to respond. She said she will continue to strive to make
6 her community thrive in all aspects of her life and to speak out when things are not okay. She
7 thanked Vice-Chair Hamilton for her comments.
8 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said since the last meeting, she was able to attend the Ag
9 Summit. She said she also attended the historical marker unveiling and two other Black History
10 Month events. She said hearing the bravery people had in face of the events of the time was
11 remarkable and made her ponder what she and others will do next. She said she attended the
12 Fireside Chat on Chapel Hill Transit, and she appreciated the lesson from a story about former
13 mayor Howard Lee and how he and the governor at the time put aside their differences to bring
14 transit to Chapel Hill. She said she also attended the unveiling for three new Pee Wee homes for
15 folks transitioning out of homelessness. Finally, she said she attended the Central Pines RPO
16 meeting and endorsed the 2024 Orange County Transportation Multimodal Plan.
17 Commissioner McKee said he appreciates the comments from other commissioners about
18 the memorial placard. He said we cannot change history, but it is critical that we do not forget it.
19 He announced there are representatives from both school districts presents as the Board
20 continues to discuss how to use the bond money approved by Orange County voters last fall. He
21 encouraged any residents interested in school capital projects to get involved in the discussions
22 with county commissioners and school board members soon.
23
24 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
25 a. Presentation of Annual Comprehensive Financial Report for FYE 6/30/2024 and
26 Approval of Audit Services Contract Amendment
27 The Board received a presentation on the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for
28 the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024; and approved an Audit Services Contract Amendment for
29 Fiscal Year 2024.
30
31 BACKGROUND: The ACFR reports on all financial activity of the County for the fiscal year July
32 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024. Mauldin and Jenkins, LLC, a firm of Certified Public Accountants,
33 audited the financial statements. The financial statements and audit are required by Chapter 159-
34 34 of the North Carolina General Statutes. The County prepares an Annual Comprehensive
35 Financial Report (ACFR) that meets the standards set by the Government Finance Officers
36 Association (GFOA). The ACFR is submitted to the GFOA to be awarded the Certificate of
37 Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. The financial report for the Orange County
38 Sportsplex, as required under the management contract, is included in the County's ACFR.
39
40 The County received an unmodified (clean) audit opinion on the financial statements received
41 from the audit. The financial audit results indicate compliance with County financial policies. The
42 Chief Financial Officer and representatives of Mauldin and Jenkins, LLC will cover highlights of
43 the report and answer any questions.
44
45 While completing the FY 2024 audit, Mauldin and Jenkins incurred $15,000 in additional cost
46 resulting from time spent on statement reconciliations due to a financial software error. This issue
47 has now been resolved. Under North Carolina General Statute 143-129(e)(2), certain professional
48 services including audit, legal and consulting are not subject to the same competitive bidding
49 requirements as goods and construction contracts. The governmental audit industry has
50 experienced a significant decrease in audit firms with the capacity to provide audit services of the
51 quality required by the County.
4
1
2 The attached Audit Services Contract Amendment increases the FY 2024 cost from $120,000 to
3 $135,000. The FY 2025, 2026 and 2027 audit budgets are expected to be $135,000, $140,000,
4 and $145,000 respectively. The County will be required to submit annual Local Government
5 Commission audit contracts for Board approval through the amended audit engagement period.
6
7 Gary Donaldson, Chief Finance Officer, reviewed the background information for this item.
8 He introduced LeAnn Bagasala of Mauldin and Jenkins, and she made the following presentation:
9
10 Slide #1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
-NA Presentation of Audit Results
June 30, 2024
11
12
13 Slide #2
Orange County,North Corolina
Agenda
Engagement Team
Overview of:
Audit Opinion
Financial Trends
Compfiance Report
Required Communications
Accounting Recommendations and Related Matters
Answer Questions
Auditrs Of9cussron&ArrWySfs(ADSA)
14 J�30.2f724
15
5
1 Slide#3
Orange County,North Carolina
I.tilltli tttttttf � f 300+
FIRM) M.
, I
t `t t•t tt = SINGLE AUDIiS PERFORMED LAST
�� UM YEAR COVERING OVER 55.3 r r BILLION OF FEDERAL GRANTS
CONSISTENTLY RANKED AS ATOP
ACCOUNTING FIRM IN THE U.S. TEAM MEMBERS DEDICATED
140+ TO SERVING THE I 156,000+
100+year - GOVERNMENTAL INDUSTRY - 1 _
�� HOURS ANNUALLY
HISTORY PROVIDED TO
OF QUALITY SERVICE • " ""�"���\� I GOVERNMENTAL CLIENTS
IY}} • _ CURRENT CLIENTS AWARDED
�J
Serve 700+ MAULDII\'_k F]EYNF.\S 1/5+ THE GFOA CERTIFICATE OF
— GOVERNMENT CLIENTS— - / EXCELLENCE
GOVERNMENTAL 4 �'/ 6 14,
PARTNERS 1 V vlcmv STATES OFl`ICES
Engagement Team Leaders
Tim Lyons,Engagement Partner I Grant Davis,Quality Review Partner I Chad Jackson,Manager
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
2 June 30,2024
3 LeAnn Bagasala reviewed the accomplishments of Mauldin and Jenkins and described
4 the work of each member of the audit team.
5
6 Slide #4
Orange County,North Carolina
Audit Opinion
Our Responsibility Under Auditing Standards Generally Accepted in the United States of
America(GARS)
We considered the internal control structure for the purpose of expressing our opinion on orange county,North Carolina's
(the"county')basic financial statements,not for the purpose of providing an opinion on the effectiveness of internal controls.
Our audit was performed In accordance with GAAS and Government Auditing Standards.
Our objective is to provide reasonable—not absolute—assurance that the basic financial statements are free of material
misstatement.
The basic financial statements are the responsibility ofthe Countys management.
We did not audit the financial statements of the Orange County ABC Board. The financial statements of the ABC Board were
audited by other auditors whose report was furnished to us,along with certain other required communications.Our opinion
on the Countys financial statements Is based solely on the report of the ocher auditors who performed the audit ofthe ABC
Board.The financial statements of the ABC Board were not audited in accordance with Government Auditing Standards.
Report on Basic Financial Statements
Unmodified("clean")opinion on basic financial statements.
Presented fairly in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Our responsibility does not extend beyond financial information contained in our report.
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
7
8 LeAnn Bagasala read the information on slide #4 and said, in short, this slide indicates
9 that Orange County received a "clean" audit.
6
1 Slide #5
Pli— OrongeCounry,North Carolino
Compliance Reports
Government Auditing Standards("Yellow Book")Report
The fount ial report package contains a report on our tests of the Countyrs internal controls and compliance
with laws,regulations,etc. The report is not intended to provide an opinion on internal controls nor is it
intended to provide a legal determination on the County's compliance with applicable laws and regulations.
This report and the procedures performed are required by Government Auditing 5raadords.
Compliance Reports
We were required to perform Single Audit procedu res on six(6)major programs(3 Federal and 3 State of
North Carol ina progra ms).
We issued a report on the Counv/s federal programs in accordance with the Uniform Guidance.That report
contained an unmodified opinion on compliance.
We Issued a report on the Cou nty's state programs In accord once with the State of North Carolina Single
Audit Implementation Act.That report contained an unmodified opinion on compliance.
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&4)
2 June 30,2024
3 LeAnn Bagasala the programs that were audited include the Medicaid Program, ARPA
4 Program, and Section 8 Housing. She said three state programs were also audited. She said in
5 total, the County received four unmodified, or clean, audit opinions.
6
7 Slide #6
Orange County,North Carolina
Financial Trends-Composition of Fund Balance
Trends from 2023 to 2024
Fund Balance Categories -General Fund n 2023 Fund Balance:$80.4M
50,000,000
45,000.000 0 2024 Fund Balance:$82.3M
40,000,000 0 Decrease to unassigned fund
35,000,000 balance of approximately
30,000,000 $3.3 million—mostly related
25,000,000 to the increase in the RSS
20,000,000 calculation required by the
15,000,000 State of North Carolina.
10,000,000 o Unassigned fund balanceas
5,000A00 , of June 30,2024,is 16.2%of
General Fund expenditures
2022 2023 2024 which is compliant with
County policy disclosed in
■Nanspendable ■Restricted ■Committed ■Assigned ■unassigned Note 1 to the F/S.
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
8 June 30,2024
9
10
1 Slide #7
NA T
Orange County,North Carolina
Financial Trends-General Fund Revenue
Otha.2.7%
Cho'qF5 10,5emee5.4 5%
imorg venll mai 71%
70 r...y 1•iAq,
70.39E
2024 2023 Fitt
Property Taxes IN.357,(155 188249.567 6,107.458
Sales Taxes 42,043.725 43.396,780 {763.055)
intergo*-mmerNai 19.664.355 19,363.115 201.240
Charges for sewas 12.504.920 14.035,772 (1.530.852)
01he, 7.444.289 4.195.050 3.249.239
2M.514.344 269.240,284 7,274.D60
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
2
3
4 Slide #8
>4f
Orange Coun ,North Catalina
Financial Trends-General Fund Revenue
Orange County,North Carolina
General Fund Revenues
Significant Fluctuations
sales Tax Revenues:
Article 39 $1G,4an,525 $17,03D,8V1
AMCIe 40 11.785.331 11.946.792
Article 42 8,240,839 8,5=318
Article 44 264,938 307,082
Medicaid Hold Ha rmiess 8,555,046 4,1328,152
Total $43,395,78D $42,543.725
FY2023 FY20M
Miscellaneous Revenues:
Investmentincome $ 1,809,873 $ 2,2fEZ680
Omer 2,3as,177 s,osi,aog
$ 4,195,050 S 7.444,289
Auditor's Discussion&Analysts(AD&A)
June 30,2024
5
6 LeAnn Bagasala explained that the amount for Medicaid Hold Harmless fluctuates every
7 year.
8
8
1 Slide#9
�T
_ Orange County,North Corolino
Financial Trends-Gene.ral Fund Egend1tures
2024 2023 Diff %age
Community services $ 14,704,939 $ 14.595,312 $ 109.627 5%
General government 12,367,020 13.103,299 (736,279) 4%
Pubfic safety 38.083,670 33.434,999 4,648,671 13%
Human Services 46,426,806 38.758,538 7.668,268 16%
Education 107,594,753 97,959,758 9.624,995 38%
Support services{'} 22,427,279 11,805,338 10.621,941 8%
Debt service(") 41.101,908 41.750.825 (648,917) 15%
$ 282,706,375 $ 251,418,069 $ 31,288,306 100%
%Support services for 2024 Include approximately$8.5 million of non-cash capital outlay related to the
recording of new leases and subscriptions under GAS&87M.
"Debt service expenditures includes approximately$21.2 million of principal and interest payments an
school-related debt for the fiscal year ended June 30,2024. When the balance of those payments is added
to non-debt service,total expenditures for education total approximately$728.8 million or 46%of total
General Fund+0ebt Service Fund expenditures.
Auditors Disoussion&Analysis{AD&4J
2 June 30,2024
3
4 Slide #10
�1 Orange County,North Carolina
Financial Trends-Proprietary Funds
Solid Waste Enterprise Fund
2024 2023 Change
Operating revenues 11.093,256 $ 11,001,798 $ 92,158
Operating expenses 11,903,792 9,430,416 2,473,375
Operating income (809,836) 1,571,382 (2,381,218)
Unrestricted net position 8,857,525 9,696,271 (838,746)
Operating cash flow 1.264,554 1.277,803 (13,249)
Overall cash flow 457,457 (502,536) 969,993
5portsPlex Enterprise Fund
2a24 2a23 Change
Operating revenues $ 5,497,730 $ 4.769,351 $ 728,379
Operating expenses 5.889.969 4,117,559 1,772,410
Operating income (392.239) 651,792 (1,044,031)
Unrestricted net position 318.997 647,736 (328,739)
Operating cash flow 257.861 1,116,326 (858,465)
Interfund transfers 746.694 - 746,694
Overall cash flow (381.919) 374,190 (756,109)
Auditors Disoussm&Analysis{AD&aJ
5 June 30,2024
6 LeAnn Bagasala said purchasing vehicles and an adjustment for the post-closure landfill
7 led to increased expenditures for the Solid Waste Enterprise Fund.
8
9
9
1 Slide #11
Orange County,North Carolina
Required Communications
Significant Accounting Policies
Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies.
The significare accounting policies used by the County are described in(Note 1 to the basic f nancial state ments.
During the current yea r,the County was required to implement the provisions of GASB Statement No.IW.
Accounting Changes and Error Corrections;this new standard did not have an impact on the County.
The policies used by the County are in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
In conslderingthe qualitative aspects of Its poll cles,the County is not Involved In any controversial or emerging
issues for which guidance is not available.
Management Judgment/Accounting Estimates
Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based on
managemenrs knowledge and experience about past and current events and a ss u mptlons a bout future events.
The County uses various estimates as part of its financial reporting process-includ i ng actuarial assumptions.
Auditor's Viscuswon&Ar+alyws{Aa&A)
2 Juna 30.2024
3
4 Slide #12
>4f
Orange County,North Carolina
Re uired Communications Continued
Relationship with Management
We received full cooperation from the Countys management and staff.
There were no disagreememswith management on accounting issues or financial reporting matters.
Management Representation
We requested,and received,written representations from management relating to the accuracy of Information
included in the financial statements and the completeness and accuracy of various information requested by us.
• Consultation with other Accountants
To the best of our knowledge,management has not consulted with,or obtained opinions from,other independent
accountants during the year,nor did we face any issues requiring outside consultation.
Significant Issues Discussed with Management
There were no significant issues discussed with management related to business conditions,plans,or strategies
that may have affected the risk of material misstatement of the Financial statements.
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
5
6
7
8
10
1 Slide #13
T
Orange County,North Carolina
Required Communications{Continued]
Audit Adjustments
Several adj ustments were required during the conduct of the audit;these adjustments have been provided to
management and they have provided us with representations that the adjustments have been posted to the
Cou nVs general ledger.
We did not have any passed audit adjustments.
Financial Statement Disclosures
The footnote disclosures to the financial statements are also an integral part of the financial statements and the
process used by management to accumulate the information Included In the disclosures was the same process
used in accumulating the statements. The overall neutrality, consistency,and clarity of the disclosures was
considered as part of our audit.
• Information in Documents Containing Audited Financial Statements
Our responsibility for other information in documents containing the County's basic financial statements and our
report thereon does not extend beyond the information identified in our report.If you intend to publish or
otherwise reproduce the financkal statements and make reference to our firm,we must be provided with printers'
proof for our review and appproval before printing. You must also provide us with a copy of the final reproduced
material for our approval before is is distributed-
Auditor independence
In accordance with AtCPA professional s[andards.M&J is independent with regard to the County,its component
unit,and its respective financial reporting processes.
AuoGtor's Oiseussron&Analysis(AD&A)
2 June 30,2024
3
4 Slide #14
>4f
Orange County,North Carolina
Audit Findings
• 2024-001 Accounting for Cash Transactions and Reconciliation of Bank Accounts
Using the County's Enterprise Resource Planning(ERP)System
Issue: We noted the County's main operating bank account was not reconciled properly in a timely manner.
Internaf controls were not sufficient to detect material misstatements in the reporting of cash balances.
CausefContext The issues noted appear to result from system generated entries that were created in error during
a period of turnover in key positions at the beginning of the fiscal year under audit,internal controls were not
sufficlentto identify and correct these errors in a timely manner.
County Response: Finance met with the Enterprise Resource Planning software technical team and remedlated the
issue du ring the a udit engagement. Finance has updated our Accounting Policies and Procedure Manual to include
additional monthly processes to ensure that financial statements are properly presented in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles.The new Accounting Manager has reviewed these processes with his new
Accountants.
Aadifws Viscussron&Analysis{AD&A]
June 30.2024
5
6 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked what was happening with the reconciliation issue.
7 LeAnn Bagasala said there was a system issue resulting in one-sided entries and county
8 staff was unable to tell that the entries were not being recorded. She said this issue has been
9 corrected and steps have been taken to ensure it does not happen again in the future.
11
1 Slide #15
]\/ AT
� l Orange County,North Carolina
Audit Findings(Continued)
• 2024-o02 General Ledger Maintenance and Accounting for Fund Balance Using the
County's ERP System
Issue: Failure to ensure the Countyfs GL matched the final ACFR,as well as issues with former employees(who are
no longer with the County) posting journal entries in error caused beginning equity(fund balance and/or net
position)of several of the County's fundsto not properly roll-forward and reconcile with the prior year ACFR.
Cause/Context: During the fiscal year,there were entries made in the accounting system to fund balance by former
employees that are no longer with the County. These entries were made in error and were not identified and
corrected in a timely manner.
Effect: While the fund balance misstatement was identified and corrected during the audit process,the initial error
resulted in delays in financial statement preparation as additional time was required to investigate and adjustfund
balances. In total,we identified approximately$900,000 of differences that were required to be corrected between
the trial balances submitted for audit and the final version used in preparation of the County's financial statements.
County Response: Finance met with software technical team and remediated the issue during the audit
engagement. Finance has updated our Accounting Policies and Procedure Manual to include additional monthly
processes to ensure that financial statements are properly presented in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles.The new Accounting Manager has reviewed these processes with his new Accountants.
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
2
3 Commissioner McKee said he recalls a similar issue in the past. He asked what efforts
4 are being made to ensure accurate oversight.
5 Travis Myren asked Gary Donaldson to address Commissioner McKee's question.
6 Gary Donaldson said staff looked at gaps from the audit and have implemented additional
7 controls and process improvements as well as additional oversight from outside of the accounting
8 office to prevent these issues from happening again.
9 Commissioner McKee said he appreciates that effort because the money the county must
10 spend comes from residents directly.
11 Chair Bedford noted that the full Corrective Action Plan is in the Board's packet.
12
13
12
1 Slide #16
4WV Orange County,North Carolina
Audit Findings(Continued]
2024-003 Annual Financial Closeout and Preparation of Records for the Audit
Issue: The County's review and manual adjustments were not sufficient to prevent,or detect and correct,material
misstatements in the Couri financial statements-
Cause/Context: During the audit for the year ended June 30,2024,material audit adjustments were required to
correct current year balances in several audit areas:
Audit adjustments totaling approximately$6,350.000 were required to properly reflect debt proceeds,debt
payments,deb t p re m i u ms an d inte rest expen ditures 1 expen ses-
Audit adjustments totaling approximately S1.100,00D were required to correct the reporting of the County's
capital assets.The County incorrecty expensed construction costs that were capital in nature and should have
been reported as capital assets.
Across several of the Couno/s funds,issues were noted with both accounts payable and accounts receivable
balances. The amounts reported in the County's general ledger did not agree and reconcile with the
underlying detailed listings or subsidiary ledgers. These differences led to delays In receiving from the County
staff final accounts receivable and accounts payable balances with proper documentation to support the
ending balances reported-
Effect: While the errors were identified and corrected during the audit the incomplete financial close process
resulted in increased reconciliation efforts from County staff,increased potential risk for misstatements,and delays
in f nalixing financial statements,requiring additional review and adjustments.
County Response: The county acknowledges the audit finding and Is committed to Improving Its flnancall reporting
processes and internal controls to ensure compliance with generally accepted accounting principles(GAAP).We
recognize the need for enhanced financial statement preparation,reconciliations,and timely review processes to
prevent material misstate me nts a nd e n sure accurate f in a ncia I repo rt i ng-
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
2
3 Commissioner McKee emphasized that the issues here are not missing money, but mis-
4 entries into ledgers.
5
6 Slide #17
>4f
Orange County,North Carolina
Audit Findings(Continued}
• 2024-004 Reporting Requirements for Section 8 Housing Program
Public Housing Agencies{PHAsy are required to submit timely a Financial Assessment Sub-system(FASS-PHy GAAP-
based unaudited and audited financial information eteetronica lly to HUD- In the course of performing our Single
Audit testing,we noted the County had not submitted the 2023 FA55-PH report due to turnover in key positions.
No questioned casts noted.
The County completed the FA5S-PH report and it has been submitted to HUD for 2023;additionally,the County has
added this report to its annual year-end checklist going forward.
Management Point(Recommendation)
Accounting for Special Revenue Funds
During our review of the County's financial statements,we noted the DSS Payee Fund did not have any revenue or
expenditure activity for the fiscal year under audit. Based on our review of the general ledger activity,It appears the
County is still accounting for this fund as if it was still a custodial fund of the County where all amounts are received
as cash and offset with a corresponding liability.With the change in accounting standard that was brought about by
GASS 5tatement No.M,FiduciaryActrvides,this fund was reclassified to a special revenue fund in previous years and
should be reflecting the inflows it receives during the fiscal year as revenues and conversely,the outflows as
expenditures. Due to the fact that the activlty for the fiscal year ended June 30,2024,was not material,an audit
adjustment to reclassify the activity was not required. however,we recommend County staff implement additional
internal controls or additional annual closeout procedures to the ensure the amounts are properly recorded in
a ccorda nce with gen a rally accepted accounting p ri n ci pies(GAAP).
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
7
8
13
1 Slide #18
NAT
Orange County,North Carolina
New Accounting Pronouncements
New GASB Pronouncements for Future Years
Statement No.101,Compensated Absences was issued in June 2022 and is effective for rtscdl years beginning after
December 15,2023,which means the Countys fiscal year ended June 30.2025-
Statement No.103,Financial Reporting Model Improvements was issued In 2024 and Is effective for fiscal years
beginning after june 15,2025,which means the Countlrs fscaI year ended June 30,2026.This new standard wIA change
a few things In the Counrys ACFR(Management's Discusslon and Analysis;presentatlon of budgetary comparison
schedules;and the statement of revenues,expenses and changes In net position for the Counr)Is enterprise fund sj-
Current 1 Pending Major GASB Projects
• Revenue and Expense Recognition is another long-term project where the GASB is working to develop a comprehensive
application model for recognition of revenues and expenses from non-exchange, exchange, and exchange-like
transactions.
• Going Concern Uncertainties and severe Financial Stress is major project where the goal is to address Issues related to
dlsclosures regarding going concern uncertalntles and severe financial stress.This technical toplc is being examined by the
GASB due to a wide diversity in practice regarding required presentation on the face of the financial statements,
disc lasures,etc.
• Disclosures Related to Capital Assets is a project the GASB added to its agenda this year as a result of the new class of
assets{-right-to-use-assets)from the new standards(GASB 87,94 and 96). The exposure draft proposes new guidance
regarding the disclosure of certaln items related to capital assets.
Audifor's Di&w,,5forr&Ar+alyws{AD&A]
2 June 30,2024
3
4 Slide #19
>4f-
Orange County,North Carolina
Govt.Clients -Free Quarterly Continuing Education
• Since March of 2009- For Over 12 Years!!
Mauldin&Jenkins provides free gwrterly,svntinvirAg-education for all of our 2ovemmental clients. Topics are tailored to be
of interest to governmental entities, in an effort to accommodate our enure governmental dtent base,we offer the sessions
several times per quarter at a variety of client provided locations resulting in greater networking and knowledge sharing
among our governmental clients. We normally see approximately 180 people per quarter.Examples of subjects addressed in
the past few quarters Include:
• Accounting for Debt Issuances GASB Projects&Updates(ongoing&several sessions
• Achieving Excellence in Financial Reporting Human Capltal Management
Best Budgeting Practices,Policies and Processes Grant Accounting Processes and Controls
• Budget Preparation Internal Controls Over Accounts Payable,payroll and
• ACFR Preparation ttwo(2)day hands-on CWrse) Cash Disbursements
• Capital Asset Accounting Processes and Controls Internal Controls Over Receivables&the Revenue Cycle
• Col lateral i nation of Deposits and Investments I RS'S$URS,Pri manly Payroll Maners
Component Units Legal Conslderatlons for Debt Issuances&Disclosures
Cybersecurity Risk Management Policies and Procedures Manuals
• Evaluating Financial and Non-Financial Health of a Govt- Segregation of Duties
• Financial Report Card-Where Does Your Gm.Stand? Single Audits for Audltees
• Financial Reporting Model Improvements Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax(SPLOST)
• GA58 Nos-74&75,OPEB Standards Accounting,Reporting&Compliance
GASB No,77.Tax Abatement Disclosures Uniform Grant Reporting Requirements and the New
• GASB No.a4,Fiduciary Activities Single Audit
Auditar's Discussion&Analysis(A0&Af
5 June 30,2024
6
7
8
14
1 Slide #20
Questions & Comments
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
/�(T Thank You for the Opportunity to Serve
2
3 Commissioner Carter asked what the process is for the Board to receive updates on the
4 progress of the corrective actions in the audit.
5 Gary Donaldson said he can provide regular updates to the Board.
6 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said asked for the reason behind the contract amendment.
7 LeAnn Bagasala said it is a combination of several things, but ultimately the audit team
8 had to dedicate additional time above and beyond the initial contract.
9 Chair Bedford said for the 24t" consecutive year, Orange County was awarded the
10 Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for the for fiscal year 2023, as
11 well as the Distinguished Budget Presentation for the 32nd year in a row for the 2024 Budget
12 Document. She congratulated the Finance and Budget offices for those accomplishments. She
13 said there is a nice list of all the federal dollars Orange County receives as well as a list of funds
14 that are directly provided to residents in the packet. She asked for clarification on what the money
15 in the Library Development Fund can go toward.
16 Gary Donaldson said the permissible use for that money is general and would cover most
17 capital and operating expenses for the library.
18
19 A motion was made by Commissioner Carter, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to
20 approve the Audit Services Contract Amendment for the Fiscal Year 2024 audit services.
21
22 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
23
24 5. Public Hearings
25 None.
26
27 6. Regular Agenda
28 a. Project Management Options for School Construction
29 The Board continued discussion on how to approach project management for school projects
30 and provided direction to staff.
31
32 BACKGROUND: Over the past two years, the County has developed a plan to fund the
33 construction of new and renovated school facilities through the passage of the bond referendum.
34 During this planning period, the School Capital Needs Workgroup and Board members have
35 identified the importance of project management in successfully completing these projects.
15
1 However, the exact model of project management for the upcoming bond construction period has
2 yet to be decided by the County and the Districts.
3
4 At the January 21, 2025, Business Meeting, the Board began a discussion on Project
5 Management, but adjourned early due to inclement weather. At the meeting, Board members
6 requested additional information from experts to help inform the Board. County staff reached out
7 to Jessica Killian, Director of Program Management at Turner&Townsend Heery. In that role, Ms.
8 Killian has managed components of project and program management in major capital programs
9 for Guilford County Schools, as well as Beaufort County Schools in South Carolina, Douglas
10 County Schools District in Colorado, and Mapleton Public Schools in Colorado. In those four
11 projects, Ms. Killian has provided management for nearly $2.7 billion dollars in school capital
12 investment.
13
14 Ms. Killian will discuss some of the complexities and considerations around project management
15 that the County should consider in its decision. Ms. Killian will also differentiate the concept of
16 "program management', which includes all the oversight and coordination of multiple projects,
17 from the broader concept of"project management'. The County or Districts can utilize firms such
18 as Turner&Towsend Heery or Woolpert to provide this overarching program management of the
19 multiple projects to ensure consistency of projects, alignment of Board principles, and realize
20 some efficiencies. Individual projects would still require project management to ensure the
21 projects are completed on time and in budget. Ms. Killian previously presented to the Chapel Hill-
22 Carrboro City School District Finance, Facilities and Operations Board Subcommittee on the pros
23 and cons of different delivery methods.
24
25 Under State Statute, the school districts are responsible for school construction, and as such are
26 responsible for management, design, and construction oversight. Under the current model, the
27 districts hire either staff or a firm to provide program or project management, both for the annual
28 maintenance of existing facilities and for new construction. The school districts make all contracts,
29 decisions and payments regarding school construction and then bill the County for
30 reimbursement. The districts do not construct new facilities very frequently. The most recent new
31 school was the major renovation of Chapel Hill High School from the 2016 bond. In addition, both
32 districts had issues spending down their maintenance funding during the Covid-19 Pandemic. The
33 County encouraged both districts to expand their project management staff and fund them through
34 the Supplemental Deferred Maintenance funds.The County has identified these existing balances
35 as resources to implement the Woolpert recommendations and will work with the Districts to
36 create a plan that is consistent with the principles of the Woolpert recommendations using those
37 existing balances.
38
Unspent Capital Funds New Funding Available Maintenance
District Year End FY 2024 Budget FY 2025 Funds for FY 2025
Chapel Hill-Carrboro City $ $
Schools 6,609,365.29 16,224,511.00 $ 22,833,876.29
Orange County Schools 27,510,418.97 16,060,560.00 $ 43,570,978.97
Total 34,119,784.26 32,285,071.00 $ 66,404,855.26
39
40 Either district can also agree to allow the County to assume project management, contracting,
41 and oversight responsibilities through an Interlocal Agreement (ILA). That could allow the County
16
1 to provide additional control over the selection of the architect, project delivery method,
2 processing change orders and ultimate project delivery. The County could not compel the districts
3 to enter into these agreements, other than withholding bond funding.Therefore, the County would
4 likely need to work collaboratively with the districts to codify any responsibility sharing and
5 reporting tasks.
6
7 The Board can discuss how it wishes to proceed on these options and direct staff on how to
8 engage with the school districts on this conversation. There are no decision points for this meeting
9 for the Board. However, funds for design on school construction are planned to be authorized on
10 July 1, 2025 as part of the Capital Investment Plan.
11
12 Kirk Vaughn, Budget Director, introduced the item and began the following presentation:
13
14 Slide #1
i
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
School Construction Project
Management Discussion
February 20, 2025
BOCC Business Meeting
15
16
17 Slide #2
17
PROJECT MANAGEMENT CURRENT STATE
• Under State Statute, School ❑istricts are
responsible design, construction and
maintenance of school facilities, and County is
responsible for funding.
• In practice, that means that County authorizes
capital budgets for school districts. School
❑istricts make all decisions on management,
design and construction.
• School Districts file for reimbursement for all
expenses. County uses expenses to borrow in
Spring Financing
ORANGE COUWY
NORTH CAROLINA
1
2 Slide #3
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
For the County to have any direct say on School
Project Management, the County will need to enter
an ILA with the individual Districts.
• ILA could dictate delivery method,
standardization of scope/building materials,
change order and value engineering processes,
etc.
• Or ILA could delegate responsibility of design,
management and construction of school facilities
directly to the County.
• County can not compel districts to sign ILAs,
other than power of the purse. - ,
ORANGE COUNTY
NOKI-H C:AROLINA
3
4 Kirk Vaughn said the ILAs can be specific and there are several ways it can be designed.
5
6 Slide #4
18
PROJECT MANAGEMENT MODELS
Use of Pay-Go
Funds
District School Staff have the best Districts would have to build Provide funding to school
Managed PM understandings of the capacity to properly manage districts to expand PM.
(Current requirements in school projects.County oversight County can add
Process) construction.Most would be indirect.Districts additional FTE to review
responsive to eventual could have different levels of projects,manage
users of the facility. success. meetings and report to
the board.
County Economies of Scale on County staff not as familiar County will directly hire
Controlled running multiple projects with DPI requirements. Project Management.
PM simultaneously.Equity in County is more removed from
design/construction final users of school buildings.
decisions between districts.
Joint All stakeholders are Unless roles are very clearly Both County and School
Management recognized in process. defined,decisions will have Project Management will
unclear or duplicated be funded,based on the
approvals.Delaying projects split of responsibilities,
and causing overruns.
1
2
3
4 Slide #5
NEXT STEPS
• Jessica Killian to present on Program
Management
• Board to discuss preferences and direct staff in
how to engage with School Districts
• No decision required tonight.
• However, ILA negotiation process can be long,
and funds for planning are to be distributed July
1 , 2025.
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH C:AROLINA
5
6 Kirk Vaughn introduced Jessica Killian, Program Management Director for Turner
7 Townsend Heery.
8
9 Jessica Killian made the following presentation:
19
1
2 Slide #1
Orange County— Bond
` Program Management
Industry Perspective and Discussion
�RZ� Febraap zo,zozg
We transform together.
3
4 Jessica Killian said she has talked to both school districts ahead of this meeting to ensure
5 they are aware as well. She said that she reviewed the market and the industry. She said that it
6 is important to have the support of the districts before speaking with the Board tonight. She said
7 that she has been in the building industry her entire career and has a master's degree in
8 construction management and is an engineer.
9
10
20
1 Slide #2
The objective
2 3
Review of Project and Program . Orange County Discuss the impactsOrange
ProgramManagement can utilize Bunty Schools and Chapel
Management Hill-Carrboro City Schools
2
3
4 Slide #3
Introduction '
Jessica Killian,PE,PMP Lr
Director—Program Management
d '
B.S.Arch Eng,M.Eng.Construction Management �nQQ ti
S1'ln„�
BEAU FORT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT,2023 BOND PROGRAM I BEAUFORT, {Ili.
SC 13a3RM e
PROGRAM EKECUTI YE.'.illowlnp the success of the 200 bond,voters approved a
ne n II.J -o undnue making improvements to[),Mct f-illtles.H—,y
Is providing Owner's Representationand Construction Management-Agent Services In P
a staff augmentation role and working dosely with the existing fadlltles department j 1e]P�0
employees. `{ a lyl
GUILFORD COUNTY SCHOOLS-OWNER'S REPRESENTATION I GUILFORD
COUNTY,NCI;1.281ir
PROGRAM EXECUTIVE,Owner's representative services for the program sands
.—Pa m,ones iofp-jn,site a o$1.1 bli im 1constr.11m,<aretruh,n,and post-
cupanry phase of projects ri a lr l.7 b c of€rt capital improvements under,C.CS'
2072 hood program-services also Include coFr esnmatirg and cortrmis services.
F
DOUGLASCOUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT BON O PROGRAM I CASTLE ROCK,CO
$330M
PROGRAM MANAGER.Prugram Manager to Douglas C—Ity 511-1 Uisii lit,the
third largest school di%Wa in Colorado,rmp€rlg a ng 1V P33C million bond program
after they passed a school funding bond fertile firsttime In ten years.This
exp"rrlca regotreo developing new processes ro track projects,estabnshing financial
reporting to communicate to internal staff and the entemal wmmunity,and working
With many differentproject teams as we implemented over 8l mlilion a day in
p ro]ec[5 during the summer of 2021,in add Lion to mulLlple other"summer wonder' R
Wars,
ears as well asp Jects at accupled educational and adminlstrative buildings during -s6y y
the school year.
MAPLETON PUBLIC SCHOOLS$200M BOND PROGRAM I DENVER,CO I$200M
PROGRAM MANAGER.Program Manager fora needy;200 milllen K-12 bond
program for Mapleton Ppbllc 5Ch0015,which consisted of over 10 new-bulld and
VlL"".':. •�
addition elementaryand high school Projedson multiple occupledcampusee.Atany '
gven pen g year program, gng f i point Burin [his four Jessica was mane 3-ti P2t million
SChgpl projects In various stages of desgrt and CpnS[ryC[Ipn,in addition[o[h¢master
budget,cash flow,and schedule for the entire program.These projects consisted
p rimarfly of DeslgnfBvild delivery. 1 I
6
7
8
21
1 Slide #4
Program Vs Project Management
Program Management Project Management
CAZ) A-6
What Happens at the Program Level? What Happens at the Project Level?
U Establish Program Goals U Procurement of design and Construction Teams
❑DeveloplValldate Budget Magnitude Q Project-Level Budgeting and Scheduling
❑InCludes Cash flaw ❑cost estimates
❑DeveloplValldate Schedule Adequacy ❑Critical path schedules
❑Develop Project Management Plan ❑Design Specifications and Standards
Consistent strategies U Bid evaluations
❑Consistent reporting U Design Phase Coordination and Oversight
❑Define Roles and Responsibilities ❑Construction Phase Coordination and Oversight
u Levels of authority and key checkpoints Q Other Vendor Coordination(FF&E,MatenalsTesting,
❑Pupllc Relations/Communications Strategy Commissioning)
ESCAELISII COMPRETIENSA'CAND CO:TSTaINTAPPR0ACII FACILUATING PROJECT PROGRESS AND COM FtZrION
Ta re.nxnn iee�
2
3 Jessica Killian said at the program level, program goals are established. She said that a
4 lot of this was done in pre-bond planning. She said the project level is about the construction
5 process and project management is specific to each project. She said they will lay out a plan at
6 the very beginning for the ten-year schedule of projects.
7 Commissioner McKee asked who specifically will be outlining the ten-year schedule of
8 projects.
9 Jessica Killian said first is the county and the school districts and the second group is the
10 program management office that will be contracted to run this. She said that it is a dual purpose
11 "we."
12 Commissioner Fowler asked how the Woolpert Report fits into this because it was very
13 expensive and detailed the needs.
14 Jessica Killian said program management is about implementing those decisions.
15 Commissioner Fowler asked who will be making sure that the projects align with the report.
16 Jessica Killian said the report is a couple of years old and there may be tweaks needed.
17 Travis Myren said decisions about projects will be made during the annual CIP process
18 and if projects are inconsistent with the Woolpert Report, he assumed that the Board will not
19 approve those for funding.
20 Vice-Chair Hamilton asked how project management works with the CIP, changes in the
21 environment, such as the cost of materials, and coordinating projects for cost-savings.
22 Jessica Killian said program management looks at all of that, while project management
23 focuses on one individual project. She said program management also involves planning ahead
24 and taking construction changes into account so there is money for projects at the beginning,
25 middle, and end.
26 Commissioner McKee asked how to avoid blindly following the Woolpert report and the
27 ever-evolving reality faced by the school districts.
28 Travis Myren said that is why they will do an annual review of projects and make decisions
29 based on the current needs.
30 Commissioner McKee asked how those differences will be discerned.
22
1 Travis Myren said there would be a ten-year plan.
2 Commissioner McKee said that his concern that in today's environment, a ten-year plan
3 is very difficult to determine.
4 Travis Myren said that he would rather have a plan that not have a plan.
5 Commissioner McKee said that he agrees with a plan but wants to make sure that once
6 they get to phase 3, there is money available to do those. He said he wants to be very careful to
7 have management, staff, and Boards on the same page going from day one. He said this will be
8 a very complicated thing.
9 Commissioner Fowler asked if the school districts have the responsibility to design and
10 program, how does program management work if they do not want to do what the Board says.
11 Travis Myren said if the Board does not agree with a request from the schools, they do not
12 have to approve it.
13
14 Slide #5
Why Program Management?
❑ Adequate Planning
❑ Program management ensures that a plan is developed from the
beginning to ensure achievement of all goals,no matter the timing
❑ Consistent Decision Making
❑ When a program manager is wrapped around project.management,
■ there is a singular point of contact to ensure consistency of approach
❑ Clarity for Decision Makers
. . ❑ A well-structured Project Management Plan identifies stakeholders
and their roles,and puts decision making at the Iowest effective level
* Experts at Every Level
❑ A Program Manager is focused on the long-term results and the high-
level approach to implementation
❑ A Project Manager is focused on the day-to-day of the project and
facilitating short-term,tangible outcomes
0 Efficiency of Approach
❑ One team working together to achieve results at all levels
Tv 6 re.nxnn w q ,
15
16
17
23
1 Slide #6
Multi-Tiered Approach In One Team
Program Management Project Management
C&�)6 A-6
County-Level Program Management District-Level Project Management
C]Master Budget for all Bond Projects 0 Detailed Project Budget based on Project-Specific Scope
u Aligned cash Flow u Variances in site,scope,use addressed
❑Consistently defined pudget for each project Cl Detailed Project Scheduled eased on Project•Speclf[c Scope
❑Master Schedule for all Bond Projects ❑Adjustments based an project and capacity of the District
❑Aligned cash Flow ri Incorporates coordination with the County
o Transparency of expectations J Project-specific contact to focus responsibility
❑Single Paint of Contact u Expertise and accountabIIity at the project level
o Consistent reporting ❑Dedicated professional with experience in the project
Li Consistent decision making ❑Accountability to OCSOC Major Project Planning Policy
❑Prlontizatlon of QCBQC Major Project Planning Policy u Project-speclflc design standards aligned to District
LOOKING ATTHE WHOLE PROGRAM FOR SOLUTIONS AL1GNiNGTHESOLUTION WITH DiSrRI[Tr NEEDS
Ta re.nxnn nee-,
2
3 Commissioner McKee said he would appreciate having all stakeholders at the table and
4 that both districts are able to provide input.
5
6 Slide #7
1 Orange County Program Management
0 As the Funding Authority,Orange County's cash flow must align
with bond cash flow model and construction cash flow
Cl Utilizing a Program Manager provides industry expertise to provide
an overall funding(budget management)and execution(schedule
management)strategy that meets the needs of all three stakeholders
■ ❑ Time=Money:What maximizes the financial Impact of the County
and the educational mandate of the Districts?
. . . ❑Transparency of communication and consistent deliverables will
build trust and buy-in
❑ Communication and reporting will he from a singular point of
contact and all project information will be readily available
❑ The Orange County Board of Commissioners Major Project Planning
Policy Addendum will be consistently applied
0 Knowledgeable and dedicated team provides expertise and
efficiency
❑ An equitable implementation of approach reduces questions and
confusion
7
8
9
10
24
1 Slide#8
Impacts to School District
Equitable Decision Defined Project Collaborative Process Defined Plan
Making Authority
❑ With consistent Program ❑ Authorization for project- ❑ Program Manager and -1 The program plan is
Management,the County's level decisions is established project Managers are developed now so it can be
decisions are equitably at the beginning of the empowered to work clearly executed moving
applied to the School Program collaboratively for a solutiu>> forward
Districts ❑ Funding,Design,and by knowing needs of the J Adjustments to the plan are
0 There is it clear line of Planning rules and County and the Districts) made in agreement with the
communication between the responsibilities should be ❑ Project status can be quick], U A and the stakeholders
County and the Districts established by an ILA and clearly communicated
❑ A Program Manager
because of the Program ❑ Places decision making at because no team is working maintains the big picture
Manager who contracts the the lowest level in a silo focus to achieve project
Project Managers ❑ Minimize the"blame game" success for the whole bond
Fume.■Tnn'nuM neery CeMiee.�ie' � B
2
3
4 Slide #9
DISCUSSION
i
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
CHAPEL HILL- i Orange
ARRBORO County
CITY SCHOOLS Schools
NOGTN CAPO, '
_i rn®TwvnSeM Hrery _
5
6 Commissioner Greene said the Board knows what the Woolpert principles are, and she
7 thinks the Board can achieve common ground with both school districts as this goes forward.
8 Commissioner Carter said she is a big fan of program management and thinks it is vitally
9 important. She said the piece about clarifying roles is critical. She said she appreciates the county
10 manager's mention of annual reviews as an opportunity to ensure they are adjusting as needed
25
1 consistent with the principles they have agreed to. She said she is interested in the financial
2 aspects of the ILAs and allows for an effective and timely management.
3 Vice-Chair Hamilton asked to return to the last slide. She asked if the program manager
4 hires the project managers.
5 Jessica Killian said it is all part of the big team. She said that the recommendation is that
6 it is one company. She said they would report through the program management office and that
7 would ensure consistency in the reports. She said other contractual relationships can get messy
8 and it is almost always better to have everything under the same umbrella. She sees this moving
9 forward as a PMO, but everyone must be involved on the decisions.
10 Vice-Chair Hamilton asked how program managers will be accountable to the county.
11 Jessica Killian said monthly reports on projects, reporting on milestones in the master
12 plan, and perhaps a dashboard for voters to see.
13 Travis Myren said there will be a collaborative solicitation process to choose a program
14 management firm.
15 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she's in favor of an approach that gives them improved
16 communication and more consistency. She said that voters have been concerned about the bonds
17 and overspending and she is grateful that they will do all they can do to deliver what they
18 promised. She said that she supports program management.
19 Commissioner Fowler said she is in favor of a program manager. She asked if the school
20 districts are in favor of having this setup.
21 Jessica Killian said they want to make sure they are not left out of the project. She said
22 that program management is a specific skill and project management is a separate set of skills.
23 She said the decisions must be made by those making the decisions. She said it is about trust
24 and relationships and that is why it is important to get everyone in the room.
25 Commissioner Fowler asked if the RFQ is for program management and if they must be
26 the same company and if it is more efficient when it is.
27 Chair Bedford asked if they must use the same project manager for the different builds.
28 Jessica Killian said the project holders are the decision makers. She said that the
29 recommendation is one firm that does program management (director) with multiple project
30 managers.
31 Commissioner McKee said he does not have an issue with program management. He said
32 that he wants the Board and both school systems to be kept informed and to be involved and
33 updated along the way. He said that he wants to make sure there is nothing missing.
34 Chair Bedford asked the difference between a construction manager at risk vs. project
35 manager.
36 Jessica Killian said they are different. She said the construction manager at risk is the
37 constructor and they are taking a risk by being involved in the design phase. She said that they
38 are construction related. She said that the project manager is involved from the beginning and
39 managing the process. She said they are not involved with the actual construction.
40 Chair Bedford asked Commissioner Fowler how management of construction of Chapel
41 Hill High School was done. She said when she was on the schoolboard, there was someone on
42 staff that had a background in construction that managed the project.
43 Commissioner Fowler said they hired a construction manager at-risk but there was an act
44 of God clause that was triggered, and they ended up having to pay more than the not to exceed
45 price due to this. She said they had just hired a new principal and the former principal stayed on
46 to assume the project manager role and she said that she is not sure that this is the most effective
47 way for the management to be done.
48 Jessica Killian said there are a couple of different things that happen in school districts.
49 She said there are deferred projects and there are project managers that handle this type of thing.
50 She said a feature of hiring a program manager is that they are not staff, and they can scale as
51 needed. She said in ten-years when it is over, there is not a need to continue to employ them.
26
1 She said that it is their job to make sure that the bond funds are implemented as they were
2 designed to do, and this allows the school staff to continue to do the work they were already doing.
3 Chair Bedford asked if the school districts are still hiring their own architects and
4 construction companies.
5 Jessica Killian said the schools would still be approving the contracts, but the program
6 manager would assist in running the RFQs and being part of that process.
7 Chair Bedford asked how design-build fits into this.
8 Jessica Killian said that design-build is a delivery method. She said that a single entity is
9 hired to design and build the project.
10 Chair Bedford asked if the schools would then still be a decision maker.
11 Jessica Killian said yes and that the Board is the funding authority. She said that the way
12 that the schools contract to have projects completed should not interfere with the funding. She
13 said they may be more comfortable with different methods and maybe there are reasons for one
14 delivery over another one, but this goes under their authority, and this could be something
15 included in the ILA.
16 Travis Myren said the program manager would help choose a delivery method that fits
17 best with any set of circumstances.
18 Chair Bedford said she doesn't see three new schools happening with the financial
19 outlook. She said that she wants to manage expectations. She said that the school boards and
20 county commissioners should work on managing expectations. She said that besides major
21 projects and high priority needs, there are other schools that need to be kept running. She asked
22 if the program manager has any influence in the schools that continue to operate during the
23 projects.
24 Jessica Killian said the discussions so far have been about bond program management.
25 She said the industry could also support doing bond and deferred maintenance. She said it really
26 depends and that would depend on how the school districts feel.
27 Chair Bedford said pay-go is also involved. She said they had previously said they may
28 need to add a support person in-house, and the manager will have to determine if it is more
29 efficient to do an RFP for a consultant, or if the county could support an in-house position.
30 Commissioner Fowler asked how much program management costs and what it includes.
31 Jessica Killian said she cannot fully answer that without knowing all they need. She said
32 that all of what Commissioner Fowler mentioned would be part of program management
33 agreement, but she can't give a figure until she has an idea of what the county is looking for
34 service-wise.
35 Chair Bedford invited Anne Purcell, OCS Board of Education Chair, to speak on behalf of
36 OCS Board of Education. Anne Purcell said when she was principal they requested funds for a
37 new auditorium. She said that she was heavily involved in the program management and had to
38 go to all the meetings. She said that she knows that Mr. Davis is in favor of having a project
39 manager and he has experience building several schools in other districts. She said she thinks
40 he and CHCCS staff have had conversations and are in favor. She said they all want to be
41 transparent with constituents about the money and where it's going.
42 Jessica Killian said that it will be different having program management at the county, but
43 it is because there are two school districts, and it is a unique situation.
44 Chair Bedford also invited Al Ciarochi to speak.
45 Al Ciarochi said CHCCS is in support of program-project management. He said they made
46 very strong commitments to the citizens, and they are ready to make the next step. He said that
47 it is important for transparency and delivering on what was promised. He said they are in favor of
48 higher-level program management as long as they are at the table for the design process.
49 Commissioner McKee said he looks forward to continuing these conversations with the
50 school districts. He said that this is $400 million and that is a hard number for him to get his head
51 around. He said that without the interest added, it is right at $2,500 per Orange County resident
27
1 over the next 10 years. He said for a family of four, the impact is $10,000 per family over the next
2 ten years, and they really need to make sure that they get this right.
3 Chair Bedford said she agrees with moving forward with a program manager and wants
4 more information and detail from school districts.
5 Travis Myren said the next step would be to authorize the Manager to move forward with
6 ILA discussions with the school districts.
7 Vice-Chair Hamilton said she agrees with starting the ILA process and that it will be an
8 iterative process. She said there will be discussions and feedback. She said they can see if this
9 works but they have to get started because time is money.
10 Chair Bedford asked Travis Myren to check with surrounding districts and communities for
11 references and what feedback they might have.
12 Travis Myren said they have already started that.
13
14 b. Orange County's Proposed 2025 Priority Legislative Issues
15 The Board reviewed and discussed the proposed Orange County 2025 Priority Legislative Issues
16 as developed by the Legislative Issues Work Group (LIWG) and any other potential items for
17 inclusion in Orange County's legislative agenda package for the 2025 North Carolina General
18 Assembly Session and approved the Orange County 2025 Priority Legislative Issues document
19 for submittal to Orange County's legislative delegation.
20 BACKGROUND: Orange County's Legislative Breakfast with Orange County's legislative
21 delegation, in conjunction with the 2025 North Carolina General Assembly session, is scheduled
22 for February 27, 2025. The Board of Commissioners has historically approved a set of legislative
23 issues each year for presentation to/discussion with the delegation.
24
25 The Board historically has appointed two members to work with staff on a Legislative Issues Work
26 Group (LIWG)to develop a proposed legislative document. Based on the work of the LIWG, the
27 BOCC has then reviewed and approved a package of legislative items to present to Orange
28 County's legislative delegation. Commissioners Amy Fowler and Jean Hamilton are serving on
29 the 2025 LIWG and have worked with staff on the attached 2025 legislative package.
30
31 As the LIWG considered its approach for this year, the Group (similar to recent years) decided
32 to identify a short list of Legislative Priority Issues. The Group ultimately developed twelve
33 (12) Priority Issues, acknowledging that the full Board of Commissioners may consider modifying
34 the list, exchanging one item for another item, other potential revisions, etc.
35
36 The LIWG also acknowledged Board members' previous comments on organizing the issues by
37 topic area similar to the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners (NCACC) and
38 listing the topics in priority order:
39
40 The Board will need to discuss the materials as provided by the LIWG.
41
42 The work of the Legislative Issues Work Group to this point is based on the current information
43 available for the 2025 General Assembly Session. The issues addressed by the Group may
44 evolve and change over the session and require additional attention by the Group and Board of
45 Commissioners. New issues may also arise necessitating additional review.
46
47 Commissioner Fowler told the Board that there were no major changes from last year's
48 priorities.
28
1 Commissioner Greene said she supports this list of priorities and would like to also discuss
2 an issue for Habitat homeowners that results in their tax bill being disproportionate to what they
3 pay for their home. She said this issue can only be addressed through legislation.
4 The Board agreed by consensus.
5 Commissioner Carter said she appreciated that the legislative goals are aligned with the
6 NCACC's goals.
7 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked to add a goal to seek legislation to provide recurring
8 funding to State affordable housing programs such as the Workforce Housing Loan Program to
9 enhance opportunities for local government employees to reside in the jurisdictions they serve.
10 The Board agreed by consensus.
11
12 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Greene to
13 approve the Orange County 2025 Priority Legislative Issues document, with Commissioner
14 Portie-Ascott's addition, for submittal to Orange County's legislative delegation.
15
16 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
17
18 7. Reports
19 a. 2025 Orange County Revaluation Presentation
20 The Board received an overview of findings and plans of the 2025 countywide revaluation.
21
22 BACKGROUND: The Tax Office is nearing completion of the 2025 revaluation of real property to
23 reflect market value as of the appraisal date of January 1, 2025. Revaluations are mandated by
24 the North Carolina General Statutes and needed to realign the values of real property throughout
25 the County to maintain equitable and uniform property values among property owners. Market
26 values are shaped by property sales, and the Tax Office's responsibility is to look at those sales,
27 interpret the market data, and estimate market values for all properties within Orange County.
28
29 The Assessment Team compiles sales, data from property owners, and information from
30 professionals for a full understanding of the Orange County real estate market. As has occurred
31 in the past, the Tax Office contracted with an outside vendor to provide data on commercial
32 properties in the County.
33
34 Conducting a countywide revaluation takes significant effort and staff dedication. Assessment
35 staff began working on the 2025 revaluation in 2023. Orange County has approximately 58,700
36 real property parcels, and each of those parcels has been reviewed to reflect a current estimate
37 of market value. Notices providing the newly updated values will be mailed early to mid-March.
38 An Appeal Form and a list of Revaluation Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) will be included
39 with each notice. A copy of the FAQs is also attached to this abstract.
40
41 Nancy Freeman, Orange County Tax Administrator, introduced the item and made the
42 following presentation:
43
44
29
1 Slide #1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
2025 Revaluation
Presentation
February 20, 2025
Presenter
Nancy T Freeman
Orange County Tax Administrator
2
3
4 Slide #2
What is Revaluation?
• Process of updating real property tax assessment to
market value and present-use value as of a single
appraisal date
Primary goal is to equalize tax base
• Re-establish the fairness of the tax burden between
properties, which change in value at different rates by
location and property type.
• All residential and commercial land throughout Orange
County and permanent structures
• Does not include Personal Property which is reappraised
annually
2 OR
OR H ANGE cn COUNTY
5
6
7
30
1 Slide #3
Equalization Example
Reappraisal purpose is equalization of assessed value so that all
property owners pay at 100% of market value. This shows how the
market value evolves in the years between revaluations.
• At the 2021 revaluation, Home A is assessed at$205,100,tax bill of
$640. Home B is assessed at$295,300,tax bill of$920,
Both of these homes sell for$320,000 in 2023
Even though both properties sold in 2023 for a higher amount, the
value and tax amounts do not change for either property in 2024.As
a result, in 2024 Home A is paying a property tax bill that is based on
only 64%of its market value, while Home B is paying property tax
based on only 92% of its market value.
• At the 2025 revaluation, both homes are valued at$320,000, and
the 2025 property tax bill for each home is$1,000.
ORANGE COUNTY
3 NORTH CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #4
Commercial Appraisal
• Contracting with Analytical Consultants, a local
commercial real estate appraisal firm.
• Analytical Consultants provided market research
and sales, then they provided value estimates to
County Assessment staff.
• orange County senior appraisal staff reviewed
recommended values and determined the final
value.
ORANGE COUNTY
4 NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
31
1 Slide #5
Residential Appraisal
• Residential properties valued by Orange County Appraisal Team
— Each appraiser is certified by the North Carolina Department of
Revenue(NCDOR)
— Must pass required courses&maintain certification with continuing
education
— Must attend NCDOR Sales-Qualifying Training
Each sale in Orange County is reviewed and categorized as
qualified or non-qualified sale
— "Arms Length Transaction"=Qualified Sale
— Purpose is to eliminate sales not indicative of a fair market transaction
— Two years of sales included in sales bank used to shape the values for
the revaluation.
— Sales bank is available on our website. 8,613 sales range from January
1, 2021 through December 31, 2024.
ORANGE COUNTY
5 NORTH CAROLINA
2
3 Commissioner McKee said a resident asked how homes in Orange County are appraised
4 because he responded to a resident's question and said that they do not come to each property
5 individually.
6 Nancy Freeman said that is correct and Orange County does a mass appraisal process.
7 She said this means the appeals process is very important for making any corrections.
8
9 Slide #6
Comparison to Other Counties
❑Orange County estimates 49.5% increase countywide
❑Survey of counties conducting a revaluation in 2625 show
average county-wide growth of 61%, and median of
55.5%.
❑Range from 25% to 88%
❑Twenty-one counties in the survey
ORANGE COUNTY
6 NORTH CAROLINA
10
32
1 Slide #7
Mandatory Revaluation
In counties with rapid property value changes, state law may
require earlier reappraisals. North Carolina Department of
Revenue (NCDOR) monitors the amount of change in property
values by reviewing the sales ratio between revaluations.
• If sales ratio becomes too high or low, NCDOR mandates the county
to conduct a revaluation sooner.
• Orange County's marked growth in real estate prices since 2021 led
the state to mandate a reappraisal by January 1, 2025.
• Next reappraisal already set for 2025 but could not postpone the
2025 reappraisal.
ORANGE COUNTY
7 NORTH CAROLINA
2
3 She said the county's final sales ratio were 64.5% and this is well within the range.
4
5 Slide #8
Neighborhood Reviews
Approximately 10,000 field reviews to be completed, three times
more than were completed prior to the 2021 Revaluation.
❖ 2021 Field Review Count affected by COVID restrictions
•:• Includes neighborhoods that have experienced the most appeals since
2021
❖ Ensures no underlying issues that could affect all properties in the
neighborhood
a O NRAN HECOUNTY
CAROLINA
7
8
33
1 Slide #9
Northside Neighborhood Conservation District
Collaboration with NC Housing Coalition and Jackson
Center
• Building type "Designed Rental Single Unit Residence"
used to identify properties designed for rental
Definition: Single unit residential property designed with
bedroom/bath count atypical for its size in comparison with other
same sized single-family residences
Example: 800 square foot residence with 4 bedrooms and 3
baths; 3 bedrooms and 2 baths is typical
9 OI+IRANGE OR H C,COUNTY
O 1N Y
2
3 Nancy Freeman clarified that 800 sq. ft. should read 1800 sq. ft.
4
5 Slide #10
Northside Neighborhood Conser-vation District
Approximately 100 properties field reviewed
• Combined into two neighborhoods that include only
property under the neighborhood conservation
restrictions
Current sales show little to no influence based on
whether the property is conforming or legal non-
conforming
• Based on recent sales, overall values increased 40-60%
in these neighborhoods
10 ORANGE COUNTY
NORT6
7
8
9
34
1 Slide #11
*Current Revaluation Results
2025 All Properties , Estimated Assesse Percentage Chang
County $29,968,822,147 49.5°%
Carrboro $3,755,798,993 46%
Chapel Hill $12,203,970,637 47.1%
Hillsborough $2,018,551,459 45.9%
Mebane $1,063,191,851 47.4%
*These values are not yet finalized.
•..:ram
ORANGE COUNTY
30 NORTH CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #12
Current Revaluation Results (continued)
• Cou ntywide (values not final)
Improved Residential Sales: Sales Ratio 99.4 COD: 8.6
Improved Commercial Sales: Sales Ratio 100 COD: 7.4
Vacant Land Sales: Sales Rati❑ 100 COD. 19.2
• Sales Ratios are verified by category of property.The ratios indicate
tax assessments represent about 100% of current market sales.The
coefficient of dispersion (COD) indicates the data spread, and the
goal is 15 or lower
ORANGE COUNTY
12 NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
35
1 Slide #13
Current Revaluation Results (continued)
Median Sales Coefficient of
MdMdMVM&n Ratio IFActual Dispersion Actual
Countywide .90-1.10 99.8 5.0-15.0 9.4
Chapel Hill .90-1.1❑ 99.7 5.0-15.❑ 9.1
Carrboro .90-1.10 97.0 5.0-15.0 9.0
Hillsborough .90-1.10 100 5.0-15.0 9.0
Mebane .90-1.1❑ 101 5.0-1,5.0 4.9
33 OR O RTHG CA COUNT
Y
2
3
4 Slide #14
Current Revaluation Results (continued)
2025 Estimated Median Home Values
Median - ■ Median
Value Price
• $490,400 $480,000
• • $539,600 $612,500
Chapel Hill $636,000 $660,000
Hillsborough $415,400 $423,000
- • . - $349,500 $385,500
,a ORANGE�COUROLINVTY
5
6 Vice-Chair Hamilton said for everyone except the county, the assessed value is a little less
7 than the median sale price. She asked why the county's ratio is higher than actual.
8 Nancy Freeman said she will look into the reason for that and report back to the Board.
9
10
36
1 Slide #15
Revaluation Notice Mailing
Notices to be mailed mid-March, will include:
➢Valuation Notice
➢ FAQ in English & Spanish: revaluation basics
➢ New Simplified Informal Appeal Form
ORANGE COUNTY
15 NORTH CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #16
Community outreach
■ Press Release February 15,2025
■ Community Outreach Events to begin in March
• Reaching out to community centers, churches, civic
organizations with the help of Community Relations team
■ Presentations to include Revaluation Information,Appeal
Process,Tax Assistance Programs & Payment Options
�,
ORANGE COUNTY
16 NORTH CAROLINA
5
6 Commissioner McKee said he received a call from a church that wants to host an event
7 and will touch base with staff.
8
9
37
1 Slide #17
Appeal Process
■ Informal appeals are handled by appraisal staff.The Informal
Appeals period begins when revaluation notices are mailed in Mid-
March and ends April 30, 2025
• Formal appeals are heard and decided by the Orange County Board
of Equalization and Review (BOER).The Formal Appeals period
begins May 1,2025 and ends July 31, 2025.
• Anticipate up to 2,500 informal appeals and 750 formal appeals.
• Appeal levels for 2021 were low due to pandemic: 1,681 informal,
381 formal appeals
ORANGE COUNTY
17 NORTH CAROLINA
2
3
4 Slide #18
Appeal Process
• Reduction in value due to appeals is accounted for in the
estimated tax base. Estimation based on historical
percentage of reduction from prior revaluation years.
• Our goal is to process appeals as quickly as possible to
provide the best resolution for property owners and uphold fair
and equitable valuation
ORANGE COUNTY
is NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
38
1 Slide #19
Appeal Assistance
Review property characteristics at Real Property Search
Webpage: https:,/,/property.spatialest.com./nc/orange/#Z
Compare property to nearby property sales at Comper
Webpage:
https:././nc-oranae-citizen.comper.info./tem12late.asi2x
Submit appeal form included with revaluation notice, or
complete appeal process online:
httR$://O R peca ls.sp at i o I e st.com/nc-orca ng e#/
19 ONANGE
ORTH CAROLINA COUNTY
2
3
4 Slide #20
For More Information
Contact the Orange County Tax Office:
919-245-2100, option 2
reval(d7orangecountync.gov
Live chat by visiting:
www.oranaecountync.aov/departments/tax/
ORANGE COUNTY
18 NORTH CAROLINA
5
6 Commissioner Carter asked about the designated rental single-unit residents and asked
7 if that designation is being applied in other areas of the county.
8 Roger Gunn, Real Property Appraiser Manager said yes where they are aware of it. He
9 said it is primarily near UNC.
10
39
1 b. Longtime Homeowner Assistance (LHA) Program Report— 2024 Results
2 The Board received a report on the results of the Calendar Year 2024 Longtime Homeowner
3 Assistance (LHA) program, which provides assistance to longtime low-income Orange County
4 homeowners on their property tax bill.
5
6 BACKGROUND: For 2024, Housing staff again utilized the Orange County Board of
7 Commissioners 2023 authorized updates to the program design for the Longtime Homeowner
8 Assistance (LHA) program to:
9 • Increase the baseline minimum award amount: a minimum award amount of$200
10 • Introduce a baseline maximum award amount: $1,500
11 • And use the HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) and Housing Trust Fund
12 (HTF) Homeownership Value Limits ("95% limits") as the maximum home value eligible
13 for the Longtime Homeowner Assistance program.
14 County staff worked with community partners on a five-month media campaign to increase
15 awareness about program eligibility and how to apply, with the goal of increasing the number of
16 program applicants from 2023. LHA media campaign efforts in 2024 included:
17 • The Tax Office sent the LHA program information flyer alongside the 2024 Tax Bills that
18 were mailed in August 2024.
19 • County staff worked with community partners at the Jackson Center, Homeowners United,
20 and Justice United to promote the LHA program.
21 • Organized visits to local churches and the Rogers Road and Cedar Grove Community
22 Centers to complete LHA applications and distribute LHA flyers.
23 • Partnered with church congregations in Orange County, including in northern Orange, to
24 share information.
25
26 Unlike previous years, advertisements were not placed in area newspapers. This saved the
27 County more than $10,000 in administrative costs and did not appear to impact the accessibility
28 of the program (the number of applications increased from this year from 2023 by 11%).
29
30 Staff calculated award amounts using the following guidelines:
31
32 • All applicants were arranged in priority order
33 o FIRST: Tax Burden, largest to smallest
34 o SECOND: Length in Home, longest to shortest
35 o THIRD: Age, oldest to youngest
36 • Full awards were allocated to as many participants as possible using $75,000 of the
37 $250,000 available funding.
38 • Staff determined a multiplying factor for the remaining $175,000 in available funding and
39 used this to reduce all other awards by the same percentage.
40 • All eligible homeowners received a minimum award amount of $200 or up to the full
41 amount of the County portion of their tax bill if it was less than $200.
42 • Award amounts were the County portion of the tax bill less 2%of the applicant's household
43 income.
44
45 Between August 1 and December 15, 2024, the County received 604 applications and awarded
46 $323,824 (including $73,824 in Town of Chapel Hill supplemental funding) to 484 households for
47 property tax assistance. The minimum award amount was $200. The average award amount for
48 recipients was $498.01, and the median award amount was $369.77.
49
40
1 LHA Applications Submitted
2
3 2023 2024
4 Number Percentage Number Percentage
5
6 Eligible
7 Applications 484 90% 502 83%
8 Ineligible
9 Applications 57 10% 102 17%
10
11 TOTAL 542 604
12
13 LHA Award Amounts
14
15 2023 2024
16 Number Percentage Number Percentage
17
18 $101-$200 123 25% 129 26%
19 $201-$300 67 14% 54 11%
20
21 $301-$500 127 26% 102 20%
22
23 $501-$999 97 20% 112 22%
24 $1,000+ 70 14% 105 21%
25 TOTAL 484 502
26
27 The County received the highest number of LHA applications during August. 83% of all received
28 applications were approved. The most common reason for application denial was applicants not
29 including the property tax form in their final application, which indicates the specific property for
30 which the applicant is requesting assistance. The demographics of LHA awardees is as follows:
Racial Demographics of LHAAwardees
2023 2024 34
:1S
Number Percentage Number Percentage
:17
White 273 56% 282 56%38
�9
Black 99 20% 101 20%40
41
Asian 40 8% 39 8% 42
41
Other 12 2% 25 5% 44
45
Undisclosed 60 12% 55 11%46
47
TOTAL 484 502 48
Age Demographics of LHAAwardees
41
2023 2024 1
2
Number Percent Number Percept
4
1555 86 18% 86 17°/.5
6
56-60 38 12% 37 7%7
8
61-65 58 12% 63 13%9
10 A"Last Chance" award round of $20,000 was
66-70 81 17% 82 16o1 developed to address the number of
12 applications that either: 1) Failed to submit a
71-75 78 16% 91 18 OP copy of their property tax; 2) Demonstrated
14 difficulty in navigating the application process;
76-80 56 12% 69 1409 or 3) Exhibited other extenuating
16 circumstances. This ensured that the
81-85 40 8% 36 7°/�7 administrative burden did not prevent
18 applicants from receiving needed funds. Cost
86+ 42 9% 38 80A9 savings from office supplies, administrative
20 savings during the LHA process, and other
No data 5 1% 0 0°/g1 pre-existing Housing budget savings were
22 used to fund this award round. The award
TOTAL 484 502 23 amounts are as follows:
24
25
"Last Chance"Award Amounts 26
27
Number Percentage 28
29
30
$200 67 75% 31
32
$201- 18 20% 33
$300 34
$301- 35
$500 2 2% 36
$501- 37
$999 1 1% 38
39
40 As a result of the Last Chance fund, a total of 591
$1,000+ 1 1% 41 people received support through the Longtime
42 Homeowner Assistance program. This represents a
TOTAL 89 100% 43 22% increase in recipients compared with the
44 previous year. This data suggests that the program
45 continues to address a critical need within the Orange County community, a conclusion
46 substantiated by anecdotal evidence from community members who benefitted from the program.
47
48 The Housing staff is developing administrative changes to the program to prevent the need for
49 this type of Last Chance fund in the future. The demographics of the Last Chance recipients are
50 as follows:
51
42
Age Demographics of LHA Racial Demographics of LHA Last
Last Chance Awardees Chance Awardees
Number Percentage Number Percentage
>_55 11 12% White 44 49.4%
56-60 8 9% Black 18 20.2%
61-65 8 9% Asian 3 3.4%
66-70 11 12% Other 2 2.2%
71-75 13 15% Undisclosed 22 24.7%
76-80 12 12% TOTAL 89 100%
81-85 7 8%
86+ 4 4%
No 15 17%
data
TOTAL 89 98%
1
2 Blake Rosser, Housing Director, introduced the item and made the following
3 presentation:
4
5 Slide #1
ORANGE COUNTY
0 HOUSING DEPARTMENT
Results of CY24 Longtime Homeowner
Assistance (LHA) Program
February 20, 2025
6
43
1 Slide #2
Program impact increased from 2023
604 applications received, 502 Awarded
$323,824 awarded ($73,824 from Chapel Hill)
• Minimum Award amount: $200
• Average Award amount: $498
• Median: $369.77
• Most common reason for denial: No property tax bill
submitted with application
ORANGE COUNTY
�► HOUSING DEPARTMENT
2
3 Blake Rosser said staff has figured out a workaround for people who were initially denied
4 due to not submitting their property tax bill with the application.
5
6 Slide #3
Side-by-side comparison, 2023-24
2023 2024
Number Percentage Number Percentage
484 90% 502 83%
57 10% 102 17%
542 DD4
- 2023 2024
- Number Percentage Number Percentage
123 251A 129 26%
-Tg ff--= 67 14% 54 11%,
'®. " 127 261/4 102 20%
N ' 97 20% 112 22%
70 14% 105 21%
'® 404 502
ORANGE COUNTY
HOUSING DEPARTMENT
s
9
44
1 Slide #4
Racial, Age demographics remain similar
across years
• 2023 2024 2023 2024
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percentage Number Percentage
® 86 18% 86 17% ® 273 56°% 282 56°%
®� 38 12% 37 7% ® 99 20% 101 20%
56 12/ 63 13% ® 40 8% 39 8%
81 17% 82 1 %
® 12 2% 25 5°%
® 78 16% 91 18%
60 12% 55 11%
®i 56 12% 69 14% 484 502
40 8% 36 7%
11110111111 42 9% 38 8%
5 1% 0 0%
484 502
ORANGE COUNTY
Q HOUSING DEPARTMENT
z
3
4 Slide #5
For any questions:
- Blake Rosser
• brosser@orangecountync.gov
° 919-245-2492
nORANGE COUNTY
HOUSING DEPARTMENT
5
45
1 Chair Bedford asked if there are recommended changes for the program.
2 Blake Rosser said he does not have any changes at this time. He said that more funding
3 would always be better.
4
5 c. Draft Orange County Fiscal Year 2026 Annual Work Program for Transit
6 The Board received a report on the draft Orange County Fiscal Year 2026 Annual Work Program
7 for transit and provide comments on the Work Program.
8 BACKGROUND: In June 2024, the Orange County Staff Work Group (SWG) officially endorsed
9 the process and timeline for developing the Fiscal Year 2026 (FY26) Annual Work Program
10 (AWP). Recognizing the importance of efficiency and alignment with key stakeholders, the SWG
11 revisited the initial schedule during its September 2024 meeting, making strategic refinements to
12 further streamline the approval process. These adjustments were designed to enhance
13 coordination among participating agencies and ensure a more structured approach to meeting
14 critical deadlines.
15
16 Following these refinements, member jurisdictions, in close collaboration with Orange County and
17 GoTriangle, undertook a comprehensive effort to compile and submit all necessary materials. This
18 collaborative approach facilitated smooth and timely preparation of the draft AWP, enabling its
19 completion ahead of the holiday season. By proactively addressing potential bottlenecks and
20 ensuring thorough documentation, stakeholders successfully laid the groundwork for a well-
21 organized and effective annual transit tax budget for FY26.
22
23 The Draft FY26 AWP (Attachment 1) has been carefully prepared by Orange County, in its role
24 as SWG administrator, through a thorough and collaborative process over the past several
25 months. The draft has been publicly reviewed and deliberated during the December 2024 and
26 January 2025 SWG meetings, ensuring transparency and alignment with the priorities of all
27 stakeholders. Every project request has been thoughtfully considered and incorporated, and the
28 financial model remains stable and sustainable, fully adhering to approved governing documents,
29 including global agreements.
30
31 After two (2) months of dedicated effort and extensive coordination, County staff is confident that
32 the Draft FY26 AWP is comprehensive, fiscally responsible, and ready for public review.
33
34 Next steps per the approved schedule:
35 • Finalize Annual Work Program - February 28, 2025
36 • SWG — Recommend Approval - March 19, 2025
37 • BOCC— Public Hearing and Approval - April 16, 2025
38 • GoTriangle —Approval - June 17, 2025
39
40 The FY26 Annual Work Program will come back to Board of County Commissioners for a public
41 hearing and action at the April 16, 2025, Business meeting per the approved schedule.
42
43 Nishith Trivedi, Transportation Director, introduced the item and made the following
44 presentation:
45
46
46
1 Slide #1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
FY26 Annual Work Program
2
3
4 Slide #2
Outline
1. Background
2. Planning Process
1. Process
3. AWP
1. Highlights
2. Recommendations
4. Action
5 z
6
7
47
1 Slide #3
FY25 Work Program Overview
111 rah M-
V-
-rig—
...tY o.anse co�nr
transit plan pdate liansi Plan FY256nnu s,W——9—
.1.1 u
Annual Program w/Budget
Long Term Vision w/Financial Model Ordinance
• Approved & Programmed Projects • July 1 —June 30
• Updated at County Discretion or 4 • Amended Quarterly
years
Approved by: ORANGE
COUNTY Triangle
2
3
4 Slide #4
FY26 Work Program — Process
Orange County » Annual Work » Operating/Capital
Transit Plan Program Agreements
Long Range Vision Annual Budget Detail Project
Programed Projects Project Sheets Sheets
Legal Commitment
Project Results/Reports • f
Reimbursement
Quarterly reports by sponsor Quarterly
Q2 and Q4 reports by SWG reimbursement
Admin and Go Triangle Of local funds
Durham County
Transit Tracker
6
7
48
1 Slide #5
FY26 Work Program - Process
Feb • Draft Presented to
2025 BOCC
MarCh • SWG revise and
LW 2025 recommend AWP
April • BOCC Public
' Hearing and
25 Action
June • Go Triangle
2025 Action
2
3
4 Slide #6
FY26 AWP - O erations/Administration
Ap C.atego ID Admire and Op*mtin8 Project R uerts FY26 Request
GoTrian M Tax District Administration 22GOTAD01 Tax DisMct Administration-Financial Dversi ht Staff $ 201,720
GoTriangle Tax District Administration 21GOTADII Tax District Administration-Financial 0—sight-Su rt Services O $ 81,305
GoTrian le Tax District Administration 21GOTAD21 Tax District Administration-Financial services $ 45,876
Gatriart le Ta.District Administration 21GOTADZ2 Tax District Administration-Audlt Services $ 81675
GoTrian le Transit Plan Administration 19GOTpO02 Transit Customer Su $ 12,492
GaTriart le Transit Plan Administration 21GOTAD02 TPA-"ram Management Staff $ 26,922
Ga7rianle Transit Plan Administration 21GOTAD03 TPA-Project lmpktm WianStall $ 182,316
GaTrian M Transit Plan Administration 22GOTA004 TPA-Legal and Real Estate-Support Stall $ 126,807
Go7riart le Transit Plan Administration 2160TA005 TPA-Marketi ,Communication and PE-Su rt Staff $ 56,ZI4
GoTriangle Transit Plan Administration 22GOTADOG TPA-Regional Technology and Administration-Support Staff $ 82,274
GO': le Transit Plan Administration 21GOTAD12 TPA-Marketing,Communication and PE-Support Services $ 34,0311
GoTr{n le Transit Plan Administration 21GOTAD13 TPA-Transit Planning-Support Services $ 47,057
GoTriangle Transit O rations 19GOTI-S08 Paratransit Services $ 25,178
GoTriangle Transit Operations 20GOTTS03 Route 40D1 rovements $ 11500,547
GoTrian le Transit Operations 20GOTT505 Route OD%Irn—nnents $ 231,439
GoTrian le Transit O rattans 2000TTSO6 Route CRx lm rovements $ 79,676
Go7rian le TransitO O0]rations ZIGOTO Ywth GOPass $ 19,061
Go7rian le Transit 21GOT0002 Fare Collection Terhnol $ 20,461
GoTrian le Transit Operations 24GOTTP22 TAP Low Weahh GO— $ 82,500
GoTriangle Transit operations NEW GoTriarsgle Bus Stop and Property operations and maintenance $ 18,soO
DCHC MPO Transit Plan Administration 24MPOAD0I Orange Coun Staff Working Group Partici atian $ 41,821
Chapel MAI/ChUr Transit Plan Administration 24CHTtS13 Transi t Planner l $ 90,D0O
Chapel HII!/CHT Transit Plan Administration 24CHT 1S1d Bus Sto Amenities 7erhnlclan $ 60.000
Chapel HTIVCHT Transit Operations I New I Onboard Technology OPJOC Technician $ 90,000
Chapel HII/CHT Transit Operations 19CHTT502 Increased Cost of Existing services $ 794,719
Oran a Coun /OPT Transit Operations 29OFTTSOI Continuation of Transit Services Fixed Roure $ 182,000•
Oran a Coun (OPT Transit O rations 24OPTT501 Continuatan of Transit Services Rural Route $ 455,000•
OrangeCounty/OPT Transit O rations 19OP1 T502 Increase Cost of ExistingServices ICES $ 69,179
Oran eCwn /OPT TransitO rations 2ODPTTSO4 Flill,ho.ghCircu lator 2.O $ 379A96•
Ora a Cwn /OPT Transit O rations 20OPTT506 OPT Mobil on Demand $ 455,DD0•
Oraltge(.aunty/OPT Tran sit Alan Administrai lore 24OPFT501 SWG Administrator S 64,193
Total Op—tin Requests $ 9,282,746
5 New Request E Revised Request g
6
49
1 Slide #7
FY26 AWP - Capital
Agency Category ID Capital Project Requests Prior
Yieew FY26 Regwst
BalaGoTrian le Vehicle Acquisition 22GOTVPOJ Bus Purchases 5 766,166
GoTrian le Vehicle Acquisition 22GOTVPUI Bus Purchases $ 216,667 $ 350,000
GoTriangle Vehicle Acquisition 25GOTVP04 PHEVVehkcles $ 25,000 5
GoTrian le Transit Infrastructure 19GOTCO01 ERP Systen, $ 8,531
GOTrlan le Capital Pianni 21GOTCQDI Orl in Destinatl—Sure $ 245,000
GoTriangle Capital Planning 21GOTC003 Transit Facilities Study $ 18,702
GoTrianle Ca 'at Planning 25GOTCDIB I It ienal Y-h..Igy PIanUpdate $ 25,000
GoTriarille Capital Planning 22GOTC002 Short Range Transit Plan Update $ 35.000
GoTrian le Transit Infrastructure ISWTCDI2 Bus Stop
Im menu $ 177,074
GoTrian le Transit infrastructure 20GOTCDO3 MobOe TickeNn Valldators S 43,372
Got,n le Transit Infrastructure 22GOTCA01 Priority Transit Access I royements $ 94,720
GoTriangle Transit Infrastructure 25GOTCDOI Hillsborough Park and Ride $ RMAM
Gol0aniile Transit Infrastructure 26GOTCD15 Forhdam 8W.Transit Access Im m oveents $ 500.000
43.7nan le Transit Infrastructure LRT LRT-Chapel Hill $ 138,046
Orange County/OPT Capital Planning 24OPTAD06 NCDOT FAST 2 Study 105,000
Orange Cou /OPT Transit Infrastructure 24OPM12 Tra u $ 200AM
Orange County/OPT Vehicle Acquisition 24OPTCD21 Mobility On Demand Vehicles $ 250,000
Orange County/OPT Transit Infrastructure 26OPTVP13 Expansion Bus Acquisitions $
Town of Carrboro Capital Planning ISTOCC002 Estes DrNe Transit Aocm Study(comb CD01) $ 106,296
Town of Carrbom Transit Infrastructure :24CHTCD14
3 203 Connector Sidewalk $ 120,283
Tom of Carrboro Transit Infrastructure 2 West Main Street Sidewalk $ 110.919
Chapel Hill/CHT Capital Planning Chapel Hill Transit Short Ran a Transit Plan 5 250,000
Chapel HiIVCKT Capitaf Plannin S Sate Streets for All(S54A)Grant $ 50,000
Chapel Hill/CHT Transit Infrastructure I Bus Shelter Ught}ng $ 53,148
Chapel HiIVCHT Transit infrastructure 3 North South BRT $ 81000,000
Chapel Hill/[HT Transit infrastructure 25CHTVPI5 Repower for Vehicles(combine with 26VP15) 5 209,684
Chapel HiIVCHT Transit hdrastructurc I NEW Commercial OC Fast Chargers for Battery Electric Buses I I $ 2WAM
2 Total CapRal Requests I $ 14,a96,1341 $ 5,319,446
3 Chair Bedford asked what the Fordham Blvd. project is addressing.
4 Nishith Trivedi said he will follow up with more specific information.
5
6 Slide #8
FY26 Work Program - Operating/ Admin
Sum of FY26 Request
$1,604.868
$3,051,033
Chapel HiIUCHT
Go Triangle
Triangle West TPO
Orange County
$41,821
$3,585,023
7
50
1 Slide #9
FY26 Work Program Capital
Prior Year Balance—Carry Forward
$1,040,616 $416,036
$555,000
$3,923,650
$8,562,832
FY26 -Request
$719,897
$2,055,583
Chapel Hill/CHT $918,966
Go Triangle
Carrboro $
Hillsborough
$1,625.000
2 Orange County
3
4 Slide #10
$z0,000.w0
$18,D00,000
S16,000,0°o
S 14.000.000
S12000,0°0
510,000,000
S8.000.000
$6An0,00o
54,000.000
FY26 5zo00,0°0
WorkCapital Planning Vehicle Acquisition Transit infrastructure
Program $12,000,OM
Capital
58.000,000
$s.o00 000
$4.000,000
. Prior Year Balance
(carry forward) Sz.000,000
FY26 Request 3 ■ -
5 Chapel HHUCHT GoTriangle Crange C—Vn OPT Town of Carrboro Town of HNistomugh
6
7
51
1 Slide #11
Action
The Manager recommends BOCC review the Orange County FY26 Annual Work
Program and provide comments.
2 „
3 Nishith Trivedi said this item will come back to the Board for a public hearing in April.
4 Commissioner Carter asked about the fund balance utilization note on page 86 of the
5 packet. She asked if that would show up on one of the previous charts.
6 Nishith Trivedi said he will provide more information to the Board on the fund balance once
7 he gets a specific figure from GoTriangle.
8 Chair Bedford thanked Nishith Trivedi for his work on this.
9
10 8. Consent Agenda
11
12 • Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
13 • Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
14 • Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
15
16 A motion was made by Vice-Chair Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to
17 approve the consent agenda.
18
19 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
20
21 a. Minutes
22 The Board approved the draft minutes for the January 17, 2025, and January 21, 2025 BOCC
23 Meetings as submitted by the Clerk to the Board.
24 b. Proclamation Declaring February 25, 2025, as Spay Neuter Day in Orange County
25 The Board approved a proclamation officially proclaiming February 25, 2025, as "Spay Neuter
26 Day" in Orange County.
27 c. Orange County Fiscal Year 2025 Q3 Annual Work Program Amendment for Transit
28 The Board approved a Fiscal Year 2025 Q3 Annual Work Program Amendment for transit.
29 d. Global Agreements for Operating and Capital Projects for Transit
30 The Board approved Global Agreements for operating and capital projects for transit between
31 GoTriangle and Orange County
32
33
52
1 e. Sunsetting of the School Capital Needs Work Group
2 The Board concluded the School Capital Needs Work Group's activities and formally sunseted
3 the Group.
4 f. Boards and Commissions —Appointments
5 The Board approved the Boards and Commissions appointments as reviewed and discussed
6 during the February 11, 2025, Work Session.
7 g. Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget Amendment#6
8 The Board approved budget, grant, and capital project ordinance amendments for Fiscal Year
9 2024-25.
10
11 9. County Manager's Report
12 Travis Myren had no report for the Board.
13
14 10. County Attorney's Report
15 John Roberts said he has some recent developments in the case he was going to discuss
16 with the Board in closed session that removes the urgency for discussion.
17 Laura Jensen said there is no urgency to approve the closed session minutes.
18 The Board decided not to hold a closed session.
19
20 11. Appointments
21 None.
22
23 12. Information Items
24 • Memorandum — FY 2025 Pension Spiking Review
25 • Memorandum — Financial Report - Second Quarter FY 2024-25
26 • Memorandum — NC Mountains to Sea Trail Progress Report
27
28 13. Closed Session
29 Based on the County Attorney's Report, the Board did not enter into closed session.
30
31 Adjournment
32
33 A motion was made by Commissioner Greene, seconded by Vice-Chair Hamilton, to
34 adjourn the meeting at 10:00 p.m.
35
36 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
37
38 Jamezetta Bedford, Chair
39
40
41 Recorded by Tara May, Deputy Clerk to the Board
42
43 Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board
Attachment 2
1
1 DRAFT MINUTES
2 ORANGE COUNTY
3 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
4 BUSINESS MEETING
5 March 6, 2025
6 7:00 p.m.
7
8 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Business Meeting on Thursday, March 6,
9 2025, at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Human Services Center in Hillsborough, NC.
10
11 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT. Chair Jamezetta Bedford, Vice-Chair Jean Hamilton
12 and Commissioners Marilyn Carter,Amy Fowler, Sally Greene, and Earl McKee
13 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioner Phyllis Portie-Ascott
14 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT. John Roberts
15 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Travis Myren, Deputy County Manager Caitlin
16 Fenhagen, and Clerk to the Board Laura Jensen. (All other staff members will be identified
17 appropriately below)
18
19 Chair Bedford called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. All commissioners were present
20 except Commissioner Portie-Ascott.
21 Chair Bedford read the public charge. She explained the process for making public
22 comments for items not on the agenda vs. items that are on the agenda. She indicated that only
23 the five people that signed up to speak for item 5-a on February 4, 2025 and were unable to speak
24 will be allowed to speak during the public hearing.
25
26 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
27 None.
28
29
30 2. Public Comments (Limited to One Hour)
31 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
32 None.
33
34
35 b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
36 (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda below.)
37
38 3. Announcements, Petitions and Comments by Board Members
39 Commissioner McKee said he is the Board's representative on the Orange County Fire
40 Chief's Association and attended their meeting last night. He said Orange County had a 19-acre
41 wood fire the previous Sunday and commended the many fire departments that responded and
42 got the fire under control. He said part of the discussion at the meeting centered around
43 communications towers and additional equipment that are going to be implemented over the next
44 few years. He said these are costly, but worth it for community safety.
45 Commissioner Carter said that she and Vice-Chair Hamilton had the privilege to attend
46 the NACo conference in Washington, D.C. this past week. She said they were able to spotlight
47 the work of the Stepping Up Initiative here in Orange County, which started in 2015. She said she
48 is looking forward to getting feedback from county commissioners across the country on that
49 initiative. She explained that the courts, the Sheriff, larger law enforcement community,
50 Emergency Services, and numerous other partners have participated over the years with the
51 Criminal Justice Resources Department on the Stepping Up Initiative. She shared that the
2
1 average pre-trial population is down significantly over the 10 years of the initiative, and they are
2 seeing a significantly higher number of referrals for behavioral health services. She said during
3 the NACo legislative conference, common problems for counties across the country were
4 discussed, including potential Medicaid cuts and work requirements, potential cuts to
5 Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programs (SNAP), potential cuts to Temporary Assistance for
6 Needy Families (TANF) and child protective services, potential cuts and/or reform to FEMA,
7 removal of federal tax exemptions on interest received on municipal bonds. She said the removal
8 of federal tax exemptions would have a significant impact on the county's purchase ability for
9 bonds and all county bonds across the country. She said NACo and NCACC are bringing these
10 issues forward to legislators at the national level. She said Vice-Chair Hamilton can add some
11 additional perspective during her comments.
12 Commissioner Fowler said she attended the Family Success Alliance Care Coalition
13 meeting and discussed mini grants, access to care, social determinants of health, and behavioral
14 health. She said there will be three CHIP meetings in March at Solid Waste in Chapel Hill. Said
15 she attended the Board of Health meeting last week and received a presentation from Town of
16 Chapel Hill staff presentation about projects to improve safety and slowing traffic and received a
17 presentation of the Board of Health's draft budget for next year.
18 Chair Bedford said the Drakeford Library Complex grand opening was postponed due to
19 snow and will now be held on March 21 st 11:00 am. She said in addition to the library, Carrboro
20 has office space and public services there and the Skills Development Center is also located
21 there. Chair Bedford brought attention to the proclamations on the consent agenda tonight
22 including Creek Week and World Water Day.
23 Vice-Chair Hamilton said she attended the Central Pines Regional Council Executive
24 Board meeting along with Commissioner Greene. She said that Central Pines has been working
25 for a couple of years to lay the groundwork for a regional visioning process called Connected
26 Region 2050. She said they are looking at a funding plan including funding from member local
27 governments with populations over 20,000. She said the Board may be interested in receiving a
28 presentation before committing any funds. She shared that Commissioner Carter was videotaped
29 sharing information on the Stepping Up Initiative and encouraged everyone to watch it when that
30 video is shared. She thanked Commissioner Carter for her comments about the NACo conference
31 and said she would like to share something she learned. She explained that there are two budget
32 processes happening at the federal level; one is a continuing resolution expiring March 14th that
33 maintains funding for the federal government until the end of this fiscal year, September 30th. She
34 said because this was not a normal budget passage, it required continuing resolutions to keep
35 the government operating. She said the federal government may shutdown on March 14th if
36 Congress doesn't pass a continuing resolution. Additionally, she said there is another process
37 called budget reconciliation, a special legislative process that can quickly advance high-priority
38 fiscal legislation. She said in the Senate, those bills are not subject to filibuster, so a simple
39 majority can pass it. She said it is her understanding that cuts to some of the issues Commissioner
40 Carter highlighted are in the budget reconciliation because there is a desire to extend tax cuts
41 that would expire December of 2025 and spending cuts are needed in order to offset the $4.5
42 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years. She explained this provides context for why potential cuts to
43 Medicaid, etc. are on the table.
44 Commissioner Greene said the search for a new GoTriangle CEO is narrowing down. In
45 the spirit of what was just shared, she said one of the candidates was a late entry to the pool
46 because she was just laid off from the Federal Transit Administration in February.
47
48
49
3
1 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/Special Presentations
2 a. Women's History Month Proclamation
3 The Board adopted a proclamation designating March 2025 as Women's History Month in Orange
4 County.
5
6 BACKGROUND: The celebration of Women's History Month traces its roots to the socialist and
7 labor movements in New York City. The first Women's Day took place on February 28, 1909,
8 marking the one-year anniversary of the garment workers' strikes in which thousands of women
9 marched for economic rights. This strike followed another in 1857, when garment workers took to
10 the streets demanding equal rights and a 10-hour workday. Within two years, the movement grew
11 into an international event. In 1975, the United Nations officially recognized International Women's
12 Day, which will be celebrated on March 8, 2025.
13
14 When Women's History Month was first established, feminists in the United States saw it as an
15 opportunity to highlight the contributions of women — contributions that had been largely
16 overlooked in American history. The celebration began as a national observance in 1981, when
17 Congress authorized and requested that President Jimmy Carter proclaim the week of March 7,
18 1982, as "Women's History Week." In 1987, the Women's History Month Project successfully
19 petitioned Congress to expand the celebration to the entire month of March. President Ronald
20 Reagan was the first to issue a proclamation declaring March as Women's History Month.
21
22 Today, local, state, and federal government agencies continue this tradition, recognizing March
23 as Women's History Month with events, programs, and celebrations.
24
25 Attached is a flyer to the County-sponsored Color Me Bad Event, a Women's Retreat examining
26 rest as resilience and resistance. Tricia Hersey, an American poet, performance artist, and
27 activist, popularized this concept, arguing that rest is a direct challenge to systems of oppression
28 that demand constant productivity, especially from women. The Color Me Bad event will occur on
29 March 22, 2025.
30
31 County staff are also in the process of completing planning for a film and panel discussion
32 centered around the life and work of Pauli Murray. This event is being planned in collaboration
33 with the Pauli Murray Center.
34
35 Courtney McLaughlin, Community Engagement & Outreach Coordinator, reviewed the
36 background information for this item.
37 Commissioners read the following proclamation in turn:
38
39 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
40 WOMEN'S HISTORY MONTH
41 PROCLAMATION
42
43 WHEREAS, American women of every race, class, and background have shaped our
44 nation through their innovation, creativity, and leadership—successfully rewriting the narrative for
45 a nation that has not always recognized their contributions; and
46
47 WHEREAS, American women have played and continue to play vital economic, cultural,
48 and social roles in every sphere of the life of the nation—excelling in academics, the arts, politics,
49 medicine, sports, and beyond —while navigating challenges both seen and unseen; and
50
4
1 WHEREAS, women have been at the forefront of every major progressive social change
2 movement, often advocating for justice when their own struggles were overlooked, including the
3 suffrage movement, the abolitionist movement, the industrial labor movement, the Civil Rights
4 Movement, and many more; and
5
6 WHEREAS, the courage of countless trailblazing American women has shattered barriers
7 and glass ceilings, inspired countless people regardless of their gender, sparked groundbreaking
8 discoveries, and generally propelled America to a more just and equitable society; and
9
10 WHEREAS, despite critical contributions, women's stories have been too often
11 marginalized in the teaching and retelling of history, making it our collective responsibility to uplift
12 and honor the women who have shaped our past and continue to shape our future; and
13
14 WHEREAS, Orange County is committed to fostering True Community, which Reverend
15 Dr. Pauli Murray defined as "being based upon equality, mutuality, and reciprocity," and will
16 continue to elevate the dialogue on women's history and their collective power in shaping a more
17 just and equitable society;
18
19 NOW, THEREFORE, do we, the Board of Commissioners of Orange County, North
20 Carolina hereby proclaim March 2025 as "Women's History Month" and commend this
21 observance to Orange County residents and call upon them to recognize the women in their lives
22 with appropriate programs, activities and celebrations.
23
24 THIS THE 6t" DAY OF MARCH, 2025.
25
26
27 Jamezetta Bedford, Chair
28 Orange County Board of
29 Commissioners
30
31 A motion was made by Commissioner Greene, seconded by Vice-Chair Hamilton, to
32 approve the proclamation.
33
34 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
35
36
37 5. Public Hearings
38 a. Continuation of Public Hearing — Applications for Zoning Atlas Amendment,
39 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, & UDO Text Amendments to Realize "Fiddlehead
40 Corner", a Master Plan Development — Conditional District on an Unaddressed Parcel
41 on Morrow Mill Road at Gold Mine Loop, Bingham Township
42 The Board continued the public hearing opened at the Board of Commissioners' February 4, 2025,
43 Business meeting, received public comment from individuals previously signed up to speak who
44 have not yet spoken, received the Planning Board and staff recommendations, closed the public
45 hearing, deliberated, and considered action on applicant-initiated amendments to the A) Zoning
46 Atlas, B) Comprehensive Plan, and C) Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) text to realize a
47 Master Plan Development — Conditional District (MPD-CD) on a +/-90.133-acre unaddressed
48 property(PIN: 9739-72-0339)located off Morrow Mill Road at Gold Mine Loop, within the Bingham
49 Township.
50
5
1 BACKGROUND: On February 4, 2025, the Orange County BOCC opened a public hearing to
2 consider applicant, staff, and public comments upon the three (3) applications addressed in this
3 abstract. All supporting materials, including, but not limited to, the applications, staff reports and
4 analysis, and supporting documentation, can be found within Item 5-a at this link:
5 https://www.orangecountync.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/ 02042025-2185. The
6 unabridged versions of the Traffic Impact Assessment, Water Supply Report, and Wastewater
7 Treatment System Report with all technical appendices, can be found here:
8 https://centralPermits.orangecountync.gov/EnerGov Prod/SelfService#/plan/e63acbd9-28f5-
9 4398-a638-6a579665c9cc?tab=attachments.)
10
11 As detailed in Section A below, the applicant's proposed rezoning is:
12
13 From: AR (Agricultural Residential)
14
15 To: MPD-CD (Master Plan Development— Conditional District)
16
17 The Zoning Atlas amendment, as presented, is presently inconsistent with the 2030
18 Comprehensive Plan and does not conform with the regulations of the adopted UDO. North
19 Carolina General Statute (NCGS) 160D-605 requires the BOCC to make a statement as to
20 whether a zoning action is or is not consistent with the adopted comprehensive land use plan.
21 The applicant has applied for a Comprehensive Plan amendment (Section B below) to:
22
23 1) expand the Rural Neighborhood Activity Node; and
24 2) reflect that the proposed zoning to MPD-CD of the subject property is consistent with the
25 Comprehensive Plan's Appendix F.
26
27 Should these amendments be made by BOCC action, the Zoning Atlas amendment could be
28 considered "consistent"with the adopted 2030 Comprehensive Plan, as referenced in Attachment
29 A7. Other considerations could determine that the Zoning Atlas amendment remains inconsistent
30 with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, regardless of the amendment (Attachment A8).
31
32 Consistent with the Comprehensive Plan amendment, a UDO amendment to Section 3.8 (Section
33 C below) is needed to address the MPD-CD zoning district and where it is recommended for use
34 throughout the County. The UDO is also proposed for amendment in Section 5.2 and Article 10
35 to allow for Family Care Facilities in MPD-CD zoning districts, as proposed in the applicant's
36 narrative. The latter amendments will also bring the UDO into conformance with State statutory
37 language requiring Family Care Facilities to be allowed in all residential zoning districts and, as
38 discussed below, is recommended for approval by the Planning Director regardless of the actions
39 on the other proposed amendments. All UDO amendments are required actions to allow for the
40 Zoning Atlas amendment to be in conformance with Orange County's land use regulations.
41
42 The BOCC is presented with four (4) actions within this public hearing: one associated with the
43 Zoning Atlas amendment; one associated with the amendments to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan;
44 and two different actions, one staff-recommended and the other integral to the comprehensive
45 plan amendments, related to the applicant-initiated text amendments. As discussed in more detail
46 below, the Planning Board recommended denial of all three presented applications for
47 amendment (Attachment A5).
48
49
6
1 SECTION A: ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT
2
3 BACKGROUND: On December 29, 2023, Orange County received a Conditional Zoning Atlas
4 Amendment application (Attachment Al) proposing to rezone 90.133 acres of property (PIN:
5 9739-72-0339) off Morrow Mill Road at Gold Mine Loop, within Bingham Township. The
6 application is accompanied by a master plan for "Fiddlehead Corner", a 150-dwelling unit
7 community featuring multifamily, townhome, and single-family housing options intermixed with a
8 community center, fitness center, and accessible gardens and walking trails. Two "Family Care"
9 centers are also featured in the master plan. This land use must be enabled as a permitted use
10 within MPD-CD districts through a text amendment to UDO Section 5.2 and Article 10 (Section
11 C). The community will feature a network of private roads that rely upon a public collector street
12 that will intersect with both Morrow Mill Road and Gold Mine Loop. As discussed in Section B,
13 the property lies partly within a Rural Neighborhood Activity Node as well as an Agricultural
14 Residential area, as shown on the adopted Future Land Use Map of the 2030 Comprehensive
15 Plan. The Staff Report in Attachment A2 contains additional information, maps, and analysis that
16 accounts for this relationship with the County's adopted comprehensive plan and LIDO, as well
17 as the context of the property's zoning and proposed land use relative to the local area. Approval
18 of a site-specific plan is part of the conditional district rezoning process, and the master plan and
19 any agreed-upon conditions (Attachment Al) are binding to the property and any development
20 permitted upon it.
21
22 Conditional zoning allows for conditions to be voluntarily imposed upon a property that regulate it
23 in unique ways related to the uses proposed for that property. Approval of a master plan — rather
24 than a more detailed site plan — is part of the MPD-CD rezoning process. Master Plan districts
25 are intended "...to provide for unified large scale subdivisions, nonresidential, and mixed-use
26 developments that promote economical and efficient land use, improved level of amenities,
27 appropriate and harmonious variety, creative design, and a better environment through the
28 approval of a general concept Master Plan the permits defined flexibility to accommodate
29 land use adjustments in response to evolving market trends" (staff emphasis; Orange County
30 UDO, p.3-63). Development of the property must be in accordance with an approved master plan
31 and any conditions imposed as part of the MPD-CD rezoning process. Staff has recommended
32 the imposition of conditions, as presented by the applicant (Attachment All) and included in the
33 drafted Ordinance of approval (Attachment A9). The applicant has not requested conditions to
34 deviate from the UDO's development standards.
35
36 Should the application be approved, development of the property will be permitted only through
37 the review and approval of a submitted site plan application(s) in accordance with Section 2.5 of
38 the UDO. This allows for staff to verify all imposed conditions are adhered to, and allow for final
39 review by members of the County's Development Advisory Committee (DAC) as detailed within
40 Section 1.9 of the UDO.
41
42 PROPOSED CONDITIONS: The applicant provided updated conditions to the Planning
43 Director on December 19, 2024, (Attachment Al) reflecting the discussion and stated
44 commitments made at the July 10, 2024 Planning Board meeting. Pursuant to UDO Section
45 2.9.1(F)(3), mutually agreed-upon conditions can be imposed on the MPD-CD as part of this
46 process if they address:
47
48 a. The compatibility of the proposed development with surrounding property,
49 b. Proposed support facilities (i.e. roadways, and access points, screening and buffer
50 areas, the timing of development, etc.), and/or
1 c. All other matters the County may find reasonable and appropriate or the petitioner may
2 propose.
3
4 Attachments Al & A9 provide more detail on the mutually agreed-upon conditions, which are
5 summarized here:
6 1. Project shall be completed as presented in approved master plan/application packet,
7 which details amenities and landscaping commitments, and includes the narrative
8 phasing plan (Attachment Al).
9
10 2. A NC State Licensed Provider will operate the featured Family Care Facility homes;
11
12 3. The Fiddlehead Neighborhood Commons Building will be constructed as part of Phase
13 1 and will provide a full kitchen, meeting rooms, gathering rooms for collective meals
14 for residents and guests, fitness/exercise rooms/equipment, office space for remote
15 and in person medical therapy including vaccination clinics, etc.;
16
17 4. The Health & Fitness Center shall be constructed as part of Phase 2 or 3 and will
18 include an exercise pool and fitness equipment;
19
20 5. The maximum number of bedrooms permitted shall be 300; and
21
22 6. Provision of Type E (75') and F (100') perimeter buffers for the entire property.
23
24 Other conditions are detailed by the applicant, but are redundant with UDO development
25 standards and/or commitments already detailed previously in the narrative and/or site plan.
26
27 ZONING APPLICATION REVIEW PROCESS: A MPD-CD rezoning application requires
28 submission of a master plan consistent with the provisions of Section 6.7 of the UDO. The typical
29 cadence for review is as follows:
30
31 • First Action —Applicant holds a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM).
32 Staff Comment: The Neighborhood Information Meeting was held on April 15,
33 2024, at 6 pm at the Orange County Public Library. Notes from this meeting are
34 in Attachment A4.
35 0 Second Action — The Planning Board reviews the application at a regular meeting
36 and makes a recommendation to the BOCC.
37 Staff Comment: The Planning Board reviewed this application at its regular
38 meetings on June 5 and July 10, 2024. Minutes from these meetings are in
39 Attachment A5.
40 • Third Action — The BOCC receives the Planning Board and staff recommendations
41 at an advertised public hearing and makes a decision on the application.
42 Staff Comment: The public hearing was opened by the BOCC on February 4,
43 2025, and continued to March 6 by a unanimous vote. In accordance with Section
44 2.8.7 of the LIDO, notices of the public hearing were mailed via first class mail to
45 property owners within 1,000 feet of the subject parcel. These notices were mailed
46 on January 17, 2025, 18 days before the meeting. Staff also posted the subject
47 parcel with a sign [or signs] on January 21, 2025, 14 days before the meeting. See
48 Attachment A3 for the notification materials.
8
1 SECTION B: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
2
3 Concurrent with the Zoning Atlas application, Hands Four Development Cooperative submitted
4 an application (Attachment 131) to amend the Comprehensive Plan to 1) expand the Rural
5 Neighborhood Activity Node (RNAN) at Morrow Mill Road and NC 54 on the Future Land Use
6 Map (FLUM); and 2) add the MPD-CD zoning district as an allowable zoning district in the RNAN
7 on the Appendix F Land Use and Zoning Matrix. State law and the UDO require the Board to
8 make a finding of consistency with the adopted Comprehensive Plan when making land use
9 changes. The proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are necessary for the Board to
10 make this consistency finding in regard to the submitted Fiddlehead Corner zoning application
11 detailed in Section A above.
12
13 "The [Orange County 2030 Comprehensive Plan] Future Land Use Map (FLUM) defines the
14 location of coordinated and appropriate land use classes and is designed to accommodate a
15 particular combination of land uses that would achieve a desired pattern of development... [t]he
16 Map also provides the development community and staff with clear guidance to the locations in
17 the County where re-zonings may be appropriate and where they are not" (2030 Comprehensive
18 Plan, p. 5-15).
19
20 The subject property is currently split between two Future Land Use Classes, Agricultural
21 Residential (AR) and Rural Neighborhood Activity Node (RNAN). These land use classes provide
22 guidance on how the property may be used and regulated through zoning.
23
24 "Agricultural Residential" is defined in the Comprehensive Plan as, "Land in the rural areas
25 where the prevailing land use activities are related to the land (agriculture, forestry) and
26 which is an appropriate location for the continuation of these uses."
27
28 "Rural Neighborhood Activity Node" (RNAN) is defined in the Comprehensive Plan as,
29 "Land focused on designated road intersections within the rural area that is appropriate
30 for small-scale commercial uses characteristic of"Mom and Pop"convenience stores and
31 gas stations."
32
33 The proposed FLUM amendment expands the RNAN at Morrow Mill Road and NC-54 from its
34 current +/-18.493 acres to the full 90.133 acres of the property. The expanded area realized
35 through the proposed amendment is +/-71.64 acres (Attachments B2 and 134).
36
37 The applicant also proposes to amend the Comprehensive Plan's Land Use and Zoning Matrix in
38 Appendix F to allow the MPD-CD zoning district within the RNAN future land use classification
39 (Attachment 133). The Comprehensive Plan Appendix F: Land Use and Zoning Matrix links the
40 County UDO's zoning districts to the future land use classifications and overlays. If a zoning
41 district is not listed as compatible with a land use classification in the Matrix, it is determined to
42 be inconsistent with the County's adopted Comprehensive Plan.
43
44 Analysis
45 Section 2.3.2(B) of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) states, "For
46 the purpose of establishing and maintaining sound, stable, and desirable development within
47 Orange County, the Comprehensive Plan or portion thereof shall not be amended except as
48 follows:
49
50 (1) Because of changed or changing conditions in a particular area or areas of the County;
51 (2) To correct an error or omission; or
9
1 (3) In response to a change in the policies, objectives, principles or standards governing
2 the physical development of the County."
3
4 The Applicant's request for Comprehensive Plan amendments (FLUM and Appendix F)
5 discussed herein are based upon "(1)" above and the premise that changes have occurred
6 and are occurring in the County. The burden of demonstrating that an application complies
7 with approval criteria belongs with the Applicant and is reflected in their Letter of Request
8 (Attachment 131). The letter cites demographic information included in the Orange County
9 Master Aging Plan and the need to accommodate significant growth in the percentage of
10 County adults ages 65+ with increased housing and neighborhoods designed to meet the
11 needs of seniors. Staff analysis focuses on the development status of the RNANs countywide,
12 not just at the local area (Morrow Mill Road and NC 54 intersection) of the zoning case.
13
14 Rural Neighborhood Activity Node (RNAN) at Morrow Mill Road
15 The 2030 Comprehensive Plan does not define an explicit purpose for activity nodes, but the
16 Plan's principles, goals, and objectives all detail the need to minimize inefficient patterns of
17 "rural sprawl" and realize efficient and compact use of the land using two basic strategies:
18 activity nodes and infill development. The activity node strategy serves to cluster non-
19 residential development at major intersections throughout the County in locations appropriate
20 for serving the needs of the local residents.
21
22 All ten (10) RNANs have been included on the FLUM since 1981, and the majority of the
23 developed non-residential uses existed at that time. Attachment B4 is a summary of the areas
24 (in acreage) of present development status and land uses within the RNAN at Morrow Milll
25 Road and NC 54. Approximately 46 acres (37%) within the existing node of 125 total acres
26 have been developed. Existing non-residential land uses include the PSM Food Mart,
27 Piedmont Feed and Garden Center, and the UNC-Chapel Hill Facility Support Building.
28 Although 76-acres remain "undeveloped," this designation does not take into account site-
29 specific characteristics such as stream and landscaping buffers, road rights-of-way, and
30 stormwater control measures that are required of new development. While there is remaining
31 development capacity within the existing RNAN at NC 54 and Morrow Mill Road, it is
32 insufficient to practically accommodate a development the size of Fiddlehead Corner.
33
34 Impacts to Rural Neighborhood Activity Nodes (RNANs) Countywide
35 Hands Four Development is requesting MPD-CD (Master Plan Development — Conditional
36 District)zoning, which is not currently listed as a compatible district for the RNAN Future Land
37 Use classification within the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, Appendix F: Land Use and Zoning
38 Matrix (Attachment 133). The zoning districts currently compatible within RNANs include:
39
40 - LC-1 (Local Commercial-1);
41 - NC-2 (Neighborhood Commercial-2);
42 - ASE-CD (Agricultural Support Enterprises - Conditional District);
43 - R-CD (Residential - Conditional District); and
44 - NR-CD (Non-Residential - Conditional District).
45
46 Attachment B5, "RNAN Countywide and Existing Development Status" and Attachment B6,
47 "RNAN Countywide and Existing Zoning," offer some analysis of how much potential this
48 amendment may create for MPD-CD rezoning requests countywide. There are a total of ten
49 (10) RNANs in Orange County. All ten (10) RNANs were included on the FLUM since it was
50 originally adopted in 1981 and have largely not been developed since that time.Approximately
51 580 acres (49.7%) within the RNANs are already developed, leaving 512 parcel acres
10
1 "undeveloped". As previously noted, this does not account for site specific characteristics and
2 development constraints (e.g. required buffers).
3
4 The MPD-CD zoning district was originally established to provide a mechanism through which
5 innovative development proposals could move forward for consideration by Orange County
6 through a legislative land use planning process that was transparent, fair, open, efficient, and
7 responsive. The intent of the MPD-CD zoning district is, in part, "...to provide opportunity for
8 unified large-scale subdivisions, non-residential, and mixed-use developments to be considered."
9 Allowance of the MPD-CD zoning district use more broadly throughout the County may help
10 accomplish the Comprehensive Plan's vision for activity nodes, inviting innovative mixtures of
11 uses, including differing forms of residential uses and creative designs, at key intersections
12 throughout the County.
13
14 Any proposal of MPD-CD zoning in the RNANs would require administration of a zoning
15 application and be accompanied by the requisite public notification and public hearing for input
16 from property owners in the surrounding area. Fiddlehead Corner, the applicant's zoning
17 proposal, is following this process and offers a procedural template that future applicants might
18 use for reference and guidance.
19
20 SECTION C: UDO TEXT AMENDMENTS
21
22 Hands Four Development Cooperative submitted an application in December 2023, and modified
23 in March 2024, to amend the text of the UDO's Table of Permitted Uses to add "Family Care
24 Facility" as a permitted use in the MPD-CD zoning district (Attachment Cl) and to complement
25 the proposed amendments to Appendix F of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. While this applicant-
26 initiated text amendment is necessary for the MPD-CD rezoning application, as presented, staff
27 must evaluate if"Family Care Home" is an appropriate use for consideration within the MPD-CD
28 zoning district countywide.
29
30 Applications for a conditional zoning district must include all uses contemplated within a
31 development project as part of the conditions accompanying the rezoning approval. The proposed
32 allowable uses are specified in the UDO's Section 5.2, the Table of Permitted Uses, including
33 whether use-specific standards are required. Furthermore, a MPD-CD approval must "... be
34 located in such a manner as to be compatible with the character of existing development of
35 surrounding properties, thus ensuring the continued conservation of building values and
36 encouraging the most appropriate use of land in the county. Therefore, when evaluating an
37 application for this district, emphasis shall be _-ggiven to the location of the proposed
38 development, the relationship of the site and site development plan to adjoining property,
39 and the development itself' (emphasis by staff).
40
41 Additionally, the applicant is proposing a UDO text amendment to allow MPD-CD districts in
42 RNANs, as defined in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. This amendment is complementary to the
43 application to amend the Comprehensive Plan's Appendix F. The following sentence in Section
44 3.8, MPD-CD Chart, District Specific Development Standards, #1 would be rewritten as follows
45 (red text is the proposed amendment language):
46
47 1. MPD-CD districts shall be limited to Transition Land Use Categories within the Orange
48 County Planning Jurisdiction and Rural Neighborhood Activity Nodes and Rural
49 Community Nodes, as defined in the Orange County Comprehensive Plan.
50
51
11
1 ANALYSIS
2
3 The UDO (in Article 10) defers definition of a Family Care Facility to State statutes where it is
4 defined as (NCGS 160D-907):
5
6 A home with support and supervisory personnel that provides room and board, personal
7 care, and habilitation services in a family environment for not more than six resident
8 persons with disabilities.
9
10 The statute further defines a "person with disabilities" as:
11
12 A person with a temporary or permanent physical, emotional, or mental disability,
13 including, but not limited to, an intellectual or other developmental disability, cerebral
14 palsy, epilepsy, autism, hearing and sight impairments, emotional disturbances, and
15 orthopedic impairments but not including persons with a mental illness who are dangerous
16 to others as defined in G.S. 122C-3(11)b.
17
18 Additionally, the statute stipulates:
19
20 A family care home is deemed a residential use of property for zoning purposes and is a
21 permissible use in all residential districts. No local government shall require that a family
22 care home, its owner, or operator obtain, because of the use, a special use permit or
23 variance from any such zoning regulation; however, a local government may prohibit a
24 family care home from being located within a one-half mile radius of an existing family
25 care home.
26
27 In accordance with the State law, the County's Table of Permitted Uses allows Family Care
28 Homes (use #44 in Section 5.2 of the UDO) in all residential zoning districts. The use is also
29 allowable in the zoning districts. This use is currently permitted by-right (consistent with State
30 statutes that address the use) in the County's 16 conventional zoning districts and Residential
31 - Conditional District and Non-Residential - Conditional District.
32
33 As stated in Article 3 of the LIDO, the purpose of the MPD-CD district includes the potential
34 for residential uses (emphasis by staff):
35
36 ...to provide for unified large scale subdivisions, non-residential, and mixed-use
37 developments that promote economical and efficient land use, improved level of
38 amenities, appropriate and harmonious variety, creative design, and a better environment
39 through the approval of a general concept Master Plan the permits defined flexibility to
40 accommodate land use adjustments in response to evolving market trends.
41
42 As such, MPD-CD districts currently allow for residential uses but not "family care homes",
43 inconsistent with the statutory requirements. Furthermore, as included in the Application
44 narrative, Orange County has adopted plans supporting diversified housing options for a
45 variety of populations.
46
47 Link to Countywide Strategic Plan:
48 https://www.orangecountync.gov/DocumentCenter/View/26972/Orange-County-Strategic-
49 Plan?bidld=
50
12
1 Link to currently adopted Comprehensive Plan:
2 https://www.orangecountync.gov/1238/Comprehensive-Land-Use
3
4 Link to Master Aging Plan: https://www.orangecountync.gov/203/Master-Aging-Plan
5
6 Link to Consolidated (Housing) Plan:
7 https://www.orangecountync.gov/DocumentCenter/View/l0806/Orange-County-NC-
8 Consolidated-Plan-FINAL?bidld=)
9
10 Staff has reviewed the options presented in the Application and recommends that Family Care
11 Facility be added as a permitted use in the MPD-CD zoning district by adding an asterisk (*)
12 to the appropriate column on the line for use #44 (Family Care Facility). In reviewing the
13 application, staff discovered the definition of "Family Care Facility" in Article 10 (Definitions)
14 of the UDO contains an outdated reference to a State statute. Therefore, staff is
15 recommending an update to the definition as shown (red text is the proposed amendment
16 language):
17
18 Family Care Facility
19 A facility which meets the definition of a family care home in NCGS 168 21 160D-907.
20
21 Staff does not recommend the applicant's proposal to require additional use standards (by
22 adding a delta [A] symbol), as the State deems Family Care Facilities a permissible use in all
23 residential districts and discourages additional requirements beyond those in place for similar
24 residential uses. Family Care Facility is a permitted use (*) in all other Orange County zoning
25 districts that allow the use, and to introduce additional standards exclusively for the MPD-CD
26 is not recommended.
27
28 Staff review of the amendment to UDO Section 3.8 regarding consistency with the
29 Comprehensive Plan only determined that the Board of Commissioners must act in
30 coordination with its action regarding the presented Comprehensive Plan amendments. The
31 UDO text amendment is unwarranted without the corresponding amendments to the
32 Comprehensive Plan.
33
34 PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION
35 The Planning Board reviewed this application at its regular meetings on June 5 and July 10, 2024
36 (Attachment A5). The Planning Board made three motions, all recommending the Board of County
37 Commissioners vote to deny the applications. The text amendment application was voted upon
38 8 — 1 to recommend denial, with the dissent being related to the need to bring the UDO into
39 alignment with NC General Statutes. The Planning Board voted unanimously (9 — 0) to
40 recommend that the BOCC vote to deny the 2030 Comprehensive Plan amendment because the
41 extension of the MPD-CD zoning district to rural activity nodes is inconsistent with the
42 comprehensive plan. The Planning Board also voted unanimously (9 — 0) to recommend denial
43 of the Zoning Atlas amendment application due to its present inconsistencies with the County's
44 adopted comprehensive plan and nonconformity with its adopted UDO, as reflected in the
45 Statement of Inconsistency (Attachment A8).
46
47 PLANNING DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATIONS
48 The consistency of the Zoning Atlas Amendment with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan relies, in
49 part, on the Comprehensive Plan Amendments, [Attachments B1 — B7 (MA23-0004)]. As
50 discussed herein, the amendments to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan's FLUM and Appendix F are
51 necessary for a consistency finding on the zoning action, as required by NCGS 160D-605.
13
1
2 Similarly, the amendment of the text of the County's UDO [Attachments C1 —C5 (TXTA23-0001)]
3 is required to ensure the conformance of the Zoning Atlas amendment with the UDO text. As
4 discussed herein, the amendment to Section 3.8 is complementary with the proposed
5 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Atlas amendments, and the action should be consistent with
6 those actions. The amendment to allow Family Care Facilities in the MPD-CD zoning district and
7 update this land use definition in Article 10 is recommended by the Planning Director regardless
8 of actions directly related to the other proposed amendments.
9
10 Accordingly, the Planning Director recommends the following actions to the Board of County
11 Commissioners, which features four (4) motions to be voted upon:
12
13 1) Continue the public hearing, receive public comments, and consider the Planning
14 Board recommendations of denial on all three (3) applications;
15 2) Close the public hearing;
16 3) Consider and deliberate on the three (3) applications for action, with reference to the
17 Staff Report on the zoning atlas amendment (Attachment A2), featuring analyses of
18 UDO compliance, Comprehensive Plan Consistency, impact of the use to the
19 surrounding area, and safety and efficiency of land use;
20 4) Vote to Approve the Staff-Recommended UDO Text Amendments to Section 5.2
21 and Article 10 (as reflected in the Statement of Consistency(Attachment C4)and UDO
22 Text Amendment Ordinance (Attachment C5);
23 5) Vote on the Applicant-Initiated UDO Text Amendments to amend Section 3.8
24 (consistent with the Comprehensive Plan action, as reflected in the Statement of
25 Consistency (Attachment C2) and UDO Text Amendments Ordinance (Attachment
26 C3);
27 6) Vote to Approve or Deny the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, as reflected
28 in the attached Resolution of Approval (Attachment B7); and
29 7) Vote to Approve the Statement of Consistency (Attachment A7) and Zoning Atlas
30 Amendment (Attachment A9)
31 OR
32 Vote to Deny the Zoning Atlas Amendment, including a statement as to why the
33 application is not reasonable and/or not in the public interest, as detailed in the
34 Statement of Inconsistency (Attachment A8).
35
36 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Vice-Chair Hamilton to
37 continue the public hearing from February 4, 2025.
38
39 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
40
41 Chair Bedford invited individuals that signed up to speak at the February 4, 2025 meeting
42 but did not get a chance to speak to come forward to make comment. She indicated that only
43 those individuals would be allowed to speak during this public hearing.
44
45 No one who previously signed up to speak was present.
46
47 Chair Bedford invited the applicant to come forward.
48 LeAnn Brown provided clarification on some common questions about the project. She
49 said they sent a letter to clarify, and she hopes that resolved a lot of them. She said they also
50 addressed wastewater and said they have an expert in attendance if any further questions need
51 to be addressed. She said clarified that this is not a commercial use but rather a residential use
14
1 with amenities. She said the only car wash would be one that is allowed for use by the residents
2 and not a commercial application. She said that this is cluster but not high-density. She said it
3 comes to 1.1 units per acre and is similar to all single-family residents in the area. She said this
4 is a policy concept that allows units to be build closer to one another and the reason this is so
5 important is to maintain greenspace. She said that the 2050 plan that is being considered now
6 proposes the cluster concept at 60% and they have requested almost 70% and they believe this
7 type of development will create more open space and is perfect for seniors. She said it is a vision
8 for how to conserve land and provide housing for people in a meaningful way. She said the policy
9 and vision for creating this type of open space development is met and it provides housing that is
10 priced well for seniors. She said that the zoning they have sought, if approved, also has a follow
11 up process for the details of the site-plan.
12
13 One of the people who signed up to speak on February 4t" arrived and was recognized by
14 the Chair to speak.
15
16 Dante Bowman, Jr. said he opposes this development because it is being proposed along
17 the Haw River. He said his Occoneechee ancestors settled there, and he thinks it is disrespectful
18 to wildlife, water, and his people. He said they will kill wildlife and destroy habitats. He asked the
19 Board to consider these comments.
20
21 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Carter, to close
22 the public hearing.
23
24 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
25
26 Commissioner McKee asked about the rationale for consistency in changing the activity
27 node.
28 Scott Radway said that the applicant supports the rural economic development nodes. He
29 said they believe that what is proposed in the zoning proposal and the changes to the
30 Comprehensive Plan are respectful to the node. He said the node has been there for around 40
31 years or longer and the reasons for putting it there were appropriate at the time. He said that this
32 allows them to respect the node and to think about where they might want to go and if it still serves
33 the purpose as intended when it was created. He said there is no clear policy on the nodes. He
34 said they can be residential or commercial. He said all ten of the nodes have variations of what is
35 in them. He said the concept of a rural conservation neighborhood is a strong concept in the plans
36 and the UDO. He said it is appropriate to marry the concept with the nodes rather than going
37 deeper into the rural area. He said every node has different characteristics and he suggests that
38 the Board can decide whether it is appropriate in any specific location. He said they are doing this
39 in a fashion that has a limited overall impact on transportation and schools.
40 Commissioner McKee said he agrees with what they are saying that the language of the
41 node does not lock in on everything that could be developed on them. He asked if the expansion
42 of the node for residential radically changes and if that sets a precedent for all the others. He said
43 the intent of the nodes to be located at intersections was to develop some type of commercial
44 developments in the nodes.
45 Scott Radway said what they are proposing is already allowed in the nodes based on
46 zoning. He said that if they want the areas to function as nodes and avoid applications for strip
47 commercial, there is a good argument to make that there needs to be a residential population that
48 can support the node in economic concerns. He said there are non-residential uses, and the
49 addition of residential spending power does not damage the node. He said it is a tough choice,
50 and they believe that the application would not damage the node.
15
1 Commissioner Carter said Commissioners are using 2030 Plan to make their decision, but
2 she understands there is another plan being developed currently for future planning decisions.
3 She said as she looks at the current 2050 Comprehensive Plan, there are goals speaking to future
4 developments that would support businesses and are built in an environmentally conscientious
5 way. She said as they consider what is on its face, a very worthy project, they must use very
6 specific goals that will guide the Board in decision making. She highlighted the need for water and
7 sewer infrastructure in the 2050 plan.
8 Scott Radway agreed there is a great challenge to provide housing opportunities in a good
9 fashion that lives up to environmental, social, and other goals. He said the other layer is how to
10 do that in the current infrastructure or the infrastructure you can reasonably expect to have in the
11 future. He said the county has had real problems with water and sewer. He said there are things
12 that really fit together but infrastructure for safe wells and wastewater includes what you are
13 allowed to do with engineered wastewater systems and how they can reach a higher level of
14 treatment of that. He said he thinks they have provided that information. He said the question is
15 whether the Board is willing to let what is allowed happen and with a large amount of safety. He
16 said the applicant has greatly reviewed the water and soils for wastewater and they feel they have
17 addressed the need. He said that they will abide by the higher impervious surface standards of
18 neighboring nodes. He suggested those standards be put into this district and to other nodes as
19 well.
20 Vice-Chair Hamilton said there seemed to be back and forth on whether this would be a
21 55+ community in earlier stages of the process.
22 Chair Bedford said the Board received an email on that this afternoon.
23 LeAnn Brown said the intention is for this to be a 55+ community and meet all the
24 necessary federal requirements. She said there is question from a county perspective, and it is
25 up to the Board if they would like to make that a condition. She said that if it becomes enforceable,
26 it would be enforced by the county zoning administrator. She said whether it is a condition or not,
27 that is the plan. She said they are in agreement if the Board wants to include the condition.
28 Commissioner Fowler asked if there is a limit to percentage of land that can be
29 development.
30 Cy Stober said the activity nodes have a threshold for non-residential uses, but the zoning
31 ordinance does not address conditional zoning districts. He said non-residential uses could be
32 allowed with conditional zoning districts. He said that for conventional zoning districts, there are
33 different thresholds. He said there is available balance for commercial development in this node
34 and this would not take away from the ability to put commercial uses in the node.
35 Commissioner Fowler asked if the applicant would be willing to have a condition about
36 addressing any remediation for neighboring wells that may be impacted.
37 LeAnn Brown said the applicant has tried to address this issue, but Orange County has
38 not dealt with de-watering and there are no standards. She said that their research discovered
39 that there was a concern about neighboring well issues in Wake County and Wake County
40 investigated a program in place that has not been used for 15 years. She said they do not know
41 what a condition like that would look like because a well can run dry for other reasons. She said
42 they would have to determine if the wells are drawing from the same aquafer. She said the rules
43 in bringing the well up would include determination of the aquafer it is tapped into and if the use
44 is affecting other wells. She said if they were to affect someone's well, that would be one thing
45 but if people had problems with wells otherwise, it is a different situation. She said that Wake
46 County has 600 community wells, and they have not dealt with a dewatering program. She said
47 she is unsure how to write the condition. She said the applicant would consider such a condition
48 if it did not require the applicant to pay to research the cause of the neighboring well issues.
49 Commissioner McKee said he is more concerned about wastewater treatment systems.
50 He said that he knows they are relatively safe and reliable. He asked if the applicant be willing to
16
1 assume all responsibility for all expenses incurred if it failed any time in the next 50 years, to pull
2 in public sewer.
3 Kevin Davidson said if the system had a malfunction or issue, it could be corrected. He
4 said if the concern is drain field, rules require a back-up drain field that is already permitted. He
5 said he is not aware of a system that uses this technology that says if it can fail how do we fix it,
6 he said they can fix the physical piece. He said that they have a backup drain field. He said that
7 bringing in city sewer is not a fix for the septic but if the line has been run, then he would guess
8 they would connect to it, but he can't foresee a situation where it would be reasonable to extend
9 city sewer.
10 Commissioner McKee said his concern is to look after the finances of the county and if no
11 one else would or could put in municipal sewer, it would fall to the county. He said he is trying to
12 protect Orange County taxpayers from a potential cost in the future.
13 Kevin Davidson said if a single-family residence system fails, they first try to find an onsite
14 system. He said a lot of older systems do not have backup repair fields. He said they then permit
15 discharge permits for those individual homeowners. He said there are times that DEQ will not
16 permit a new system. He said in that situation, the homeowner has the option of going on a
17 permanent pump and haul system. He said the homeowner, every time the septic fills up, has a
18 pumper come in and haul it away. He said the same thing could be done on the system they are
19 proposing.
20 Commissioner McKee said he is hearing that the applicant would not be open to that
21 condition.
22 LeAnn Brown said if the conditional zoning is approved, it is approved with this system.
23 She said if they get to a place where they could not provide a waste system, she said they would
24 already be out of compliance with the state laws of North Carolina. She said those laws govern
25 what they have to do for sewer. She said they would be out of compliance with the permit if they
26 did not repair the problem. She said this would not fall to the county because they would not be
27 the permit holder. She said that she does not want to agree to a condition that is 50 years out
28 when they do not know what it might look like so far out.
29 Kevin Davidson said that if they do not have a functioning system, they cannot occupy the
30 property.
31 Commissioner Greene said one thing she has learned is that water comes up through the
32 limestone. She asked how they know where the aquafers are.
33 Edwin Cox said there is an overlying layer of subsoil that is loose material that has
34 weathered out of the rock, below is bedrock with fractures filled with water. He said they drill down
35 into the fracture to draw up water. He said that if you do not hit a fracture, there will be a dry well.
36 He said in many locations you hit a fracture and start to pump water out. He said as it pumps out,
37 the level of the water in the fracture starts to drop, and the depth of draw down is at a lesser and
38 lesser depth that radiates out in the shape of a cone. He said that is called the cone of depression.
39 He said there are engineering methods for determining the cone of depression called the zone of
40 influence. He said the zone of influence that is practical to consider is 1000 ft radius. He said that
41 the location of this well is more than 1000 ft of any possible wells except one to the south. He said
42 it is very unlikely that they would interfere with the function of that well. He said the water is
43 recharged into the fractures from the overlying subsoil. He said they do not draw water out of the
44 subsoil because it would be too slow. He said that the fracture water is a bit slower to fill and
45 depends on many factors, including precipitation.
46 Commissioner Greene asked again if the 1,000 ft. is a rule of thumb.
47 Edwin Cox said yes. He said Guilford County has a rule when putting in new community
48 wells, that they must do a draw down test. He said a community well is anything over 10,000
49 gallons a day in Guilford County. He said it is only required if there is a private well within 1000
50 feet of the well that is being drilled.
51 Commissioner Fowler asked how difficult a draw down test is.
17
1 Edwin Cox said they put a pump down and run it for 24 hours and measure the water for
2 the full 24 hours. He said it is measured by gallons per minute over the time to make sure it meets
3 the requirements. He said it is monitored after the drawdown to see how quickly it recharges.
4 Vice-Chair Hamilton said she wanted to start the deliberations. She said she appreciates
5 this novel approach to providing housing for seniors. She said what concerns her is the purpose
6 of the rural neighborhood activity node. She said she does not see this development as that. She
7 said it is a residential community for a group of people and a family care home. She said it is not
8 consistent with that node and allowing it would change the character of the area. She said it is
9 hard to imagine it would be affordable given the cost of development. She said it would be
10 appropriate for an area with water and sewer. She said it is important to support farmers in a rural
11 environment and the current zoning does that. She said she does not see this development as
12 consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
13 Chair Bedford said she thought it was great to have the month in between meetings to get
14 additional information. She said the idea and concept of clustering houses is wise and will support
15 that in the upcoming 2050 Plan. She said that failures are to be expected in any sewer system
16 and those who use it have to pay for it so that isn't a concern for her. She said she appreciated
17 learning more about the water supply, but it is not a concern for her either. She said the request
18 to change the rural neighborhood activity node is not a good idea. She said she went out to the
19 area and saw the variety of housing in the area. She said the Comprehensive Plan has worked
20 to preserve the rural environment and cluster development has been in urban areas. She said
21 she is going to vote to allow family care facilities but does not think that putting this project in that
22 location is not a good fit and will not be supporting it.
23 Commissioner McKee said the entire project hinges on changing the rural activity node.
24 He said he has concern about expanding uses for these nodes outside of what was originally
25 implied.
26 Commissioner Carter said this Board has given a lot of thought to the work of the applicant
27 and concerns of residents. She said it is important to set a direction and be consistent. She said
28 she feels it would take away from consistency. She said that looking at the concerns brought up
29 in the discussion, along with the use in the place where it is being proposed, she is not comfortable
30 with voting yes to this project in this location. She said that she is in favor of clustered development
31 in areas where it is allowed.
32 Commissioner Fowler said there were a lot of desirable parts about this project and
33 appreciates the applicant's willingness to propose conditions.
34 Commissioner Greene said she responded to a request from neighbors to talk and hear
35 their concerns. She said she met with Scott Radway on the site and contacted former
36 commissioner Barry Jacobs and Roger Walden, a retired planner from Chapel Hill. She said both
37 were around during the planning of the rural buffer and the water sewer planning framework. She
38 said the notion of clustered subdivisions was in their minds at the beginning, but there was not
39 the market demand or wherewithal to create the momentum for them. She said the notion that it
40 disrupts farmland by placing cluster housing is not consistent with the plan that goes back to the
41 1980s. She said she appreciates the information about the wastewater. She said there have been
42 concerns about lighting, but she does not think that it will be particularly disruptive because they
43 will follow dark sky rules. She said it is hard to imagine it would be too noisy. She said she
44 appreciated the letter from Sherry Roseman about the alignment with the Master Aging Plan. She
45 said unless it was to be subsidized, it would not be affordable to most but would be less than
46 "McMansions". She said she is not particularly troubled about the zoning issue and thinks there
47 is support for the argument that additional residents would support commercial development in
48 the node. She said with all that being said, she can't get past the amount of water that will be
49 used. She said the impact this may have on residents in 30-50 years cannot be predicted. She
50 said she does not want to run water and sewer lines all over southwestern Orange County.
51
18
1 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Carter, to
2 approve the Staff-Recommended UDO Text Amendments to the Family Care Facilities language
3 in Section 5.2 and Article 10 (as reflected in the Statement of Consistency (Attachment C4) and
4 UDO Text Amendment Ordinance (Attachment C5).
5
6 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
7
8 A motion was made by Commissioner Carter, seconded by Commissioner Greene to deny
9 the Applicant-Initiated UDO Text Amendments to amend Section 3.8 (consistent with the
10 Comprehensive Plan action, as reflected in the Statement of Consistency (Attachment C2) and
11 UDO Text Amendments Ordinance (Attachment C3).
12
13 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
14
15 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Vice-Chair Hamilton, to deny
16 the Comprehensive Plan Amendments, as reflected in the attached Resolution of Approval
17 (Attachment 137).
18
19 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
20
21 A motion was made by Chair Bedford, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to deny the
22 application, and approved the following Statement of Inconsistency (Attachment A8):
23
24 Attachment A8
25
26 STATEMENT OF INCONSISTENCY
27 OF A PROPOSED ZONING ATLAS MAP AMENDMENT
28 WITH THE ADOPTED ORANGE COUNTY 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
29 AND
30 OTHER APPLICABLE ADOPTED PLANS
31
32 An applicant-initiated amendment (MA23-0003) to the Zoning Atlas has been reviewed to rezone
33 a parcel as follows:
Parcel Owner of
Identification Township Record Current Zoning Proposed Zoning
Number (PIN)
■ Agricultural Master Plan
Hands Four Residential (AR) Development—
9739-72-0339 Bingham Development Haw River Conditional District
(HD4) Unprotected Haw River
Watershed Unprotected
Watershed
34
19
1 The Board of County Commissioners hereby finds:
2 a. The requirements of Section 2.8 Zoning Atlas and Unified Development Ordinance
3 Amendments and 2.9.1 Conditional Districts of the UDO have been reviewed and
4 determined to be unacceptable due to the potential impacts upon surrounding properties,
5 as required by Sections 2.5 of the Orange County UDO; and,
6
7 b. Pursuant to Sections 1.1.5 Statement of Intent - Amendments, and 1.1.7 Conformance
8 with Adopted Plans of the UDO and to 160D-605(a) Governing Board Statement— Plan
9 Consistency of the North Carolina General Statutes, the Board finds that the amendment
10 is inconsistent with the "Rural Neighborhood Activity Node" classification, as defined in
11 the 2030 Comprehensive Plan: Land focused on designated road intersections within the
12 rural area that is appropriate for small-scale commercial uses characteristic of"Mom and
13 Pop"convenience stores and gas stations.
14 As presented, Fiddlehead Corner's zoning application is inconsistent with both Orange
15 County's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) and 2030 Comprehensive Plan,
16 including the Future Land Use Map. The Master Plan Development— Conditional District
17 zoning application is not supported in the Comprehensive Plan's Appendix F Land Use
18 Matrix, nor in the identified Future Land Use classifications specified in the zoning district's
19 description in Article 3 of the UDO. Approval of the zoning application would require
20 amendment of these texts to bring the application into consistency and conformance with
21 the county's adopted plans and regulations.As such, it is non-conforming and inconsistent
22 with the county's adopted ordinance and plans, respectively, and cannot be approved.
23 Furthermore, the majority of the proposed development lies outside the "Rural
24 Neighborhood Activity Node" in an "Agricultural Residential" Future Land Use
25 Classification. This land use is described in the Comprehensive Plan as where
26 "[a]gricultural activities and associated residential and commercial uses predominate".The
27 proposed development is a 150-unit master plan development subdivision at a density of
28 approximately 5 dwelling units per acre, and features multifamily structures and a layout
29 that is more suitable for, as acknowledged in the applicant's narrative, an urban
30 environment; it does not fit in an Agricultural Residential area.
31 As such, the following principles, goals, and objectives of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan
32 are inconsistent with the Fiddlehead Corner Master Plan Development — Conditional
33 District proposal:
34 Planning Principle 2, Sustainable Growth and Development
35 Growth and development within the county should occur in a pattern, location, and density
36 that is sustainable over the long-term.
37 Planning Principle 5, Preservation of Rural Land Use Pattern
38 The County's rural areas are a cherished component of the County's character. Future
39 development should preserve and enhance the county's rural landscape.
40 Planning Principle 8, Preservation of Community Character
41 Future growth and development should occur in a manner that preserves and enhances
42 the existing character of the County, its townships, and rural crossroads communities.
20
1 Housing Objective H-1.5
2 Ensure that a variety of housing types can be developed throughout the County in a
3 sustainable manner that locates housing near employment centers and commercial
4 centers and that efficiently uses existing and planned public services.
5 Land Use Element Overarching Goal
6 Coordination of the amount, location, pattern, and designation of future land uses, with
7 availability of County services and facilities sufficient to meet the needs of Orange
8 County's population and economy consistent with other Comprehensive Plan element
9 goals and objectives.
10 Land Use Goal 2
11 Land uses that are appropriate to on-site environmental conditions and features, and that
12 protect natural resources, cultural resources, and community character.
13 Land Use Goal 3
14 A variety of land uses that are coordinated within a program and pattern that limits sprawl,
15 preserves community and rural character, minimizes land use conflicts, supported by an
16 efficient and balanced transportation system.
17 Land Use Objective LU-3.1
18 Discourage urban sprawl, encourage a separation of urban and rural land uses, and direct
19 new development into areas where necessary community facilities and services exist
20 through periodic updates to the Land Use Plan.
21 Land Use Objective LU-3.2
22 Coordinate land use patterns to facilitate the expanded use of non-auto modes of travel,
23 the increased occupancy of automobiles, and the development and use of an energy-
24 efficient transportation system.
25 Land Use Objective LU-3.4
26 Recognize the right to farm and discourage the location of new non-farm development,
27 particularly more intensive residential development, within farming areas to minimize the
28 incidence of complaints and nuisance suits against farm operations.
29 Natural and Cultural Resources Overarching Goal
30 A sustainable balance and appreciation of natural, cultural and agricultural resources.
31 Natural and Cultural Resources Objective NA-13
32 Promote clustering of residential development and dedication of large areas of
33 undisturbed land for low-impact recreational use by residents and for wildlife habitat.
34 Where feasible, these areas should be contiguous to neighboring tracts of undisturbed
35 land.
36 Natural and Cultural Resources Objective NA-17
37 Maintain and protect land that contains valuable productive resources, such as prime
38 farmland and prime forestland, by directing incompatible development away from these
39 areas.
21
1 Transportation Goal 3
2 Integrated land use planning and transportation planning that serves existing
3 development, supports future development, and is consistent with the County's land use
4 plans which include provisions for preserving the natural environment and community
5 character.
6
7 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
8
9
10 6. Regular Agenda
11 None.
12
13 7. Reports
14 None.
15
16 8. Consent Agenda
17
18 • Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
19 • Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
20 • Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
21
22 A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to
23 approve the consent agenda.
24
25 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
26
27 a. Minutes — NONE
28 b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds
29 The Board adopted a resolution to release motor vehicle property tax values for six (6)
30 taxpayers with a total of six (6) bills that will result in a reduction of revenue.
31 c. Property Tax Releases/Refunds
32 The Board adopted a resolution to release property tax values for five (5) taxpayers with a
33 total of five (5) bills that will result in a reduction of revenue.
34 d. Late Applications for Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion
35 The Board approved two (2) untimely applications for exemption/exclusion from ad valorem
36 taxation for two (2) bills for the 2024 tax year.
37 e. World Water Day Proclamation
38 The Board approved a proclamation designating March 22, 2025, as World Water Day in
39 Orange County.
40 f. Oranqe County Creek Week 2025 Proclamation
41 The Board will consider approving a proclamation declaring March 15-22, 2025, as "Orange
42 County Creek Week."
43 g. Contract Amendment with Farragut Systems, Inc. for Land Records Computer Assisted
44 Mass Appraisal (LR CAMA) System Conversion Protect
45 The Board:
46 1) approved a contract amendment with Farragut Systems, Inc. for an addendum to the
47 Orange County Land Records Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal (LR CAMA) system
48 conversion project that provides additional support from Farragut to assist with data extraction
49 and validation; and
22
1 2) authorized the County Manager to execute the contract amendment, subject to final review
2 by the County Attorney, and any subsequent amendments on behalf of the Board.
3 h. Sportsplex Indoor Swimming Pool HVAC Unit Replacement Contract Award and
4 Approval of Budget Amendment#6-A
5 The Board:
6 1) approved the County entering into a construction contract with Comfort Systems, USA, for
7 the replacement of a Sportsplex Indoor Pool Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC)
8 unit;
9 2) authorized the County Manager to execute the Agreement, subject to final review by the
10 County Attorney, and any subsequent amendments for contingent and unforeseen
11 requirements up to the approved budget amount on behalf of the Board; and
12 3) approved Budget Amendment#6-A to provide for the total cost of the project.
13 i. Administrative Correction to USDA Lease at Bonnie B. Davis Environmental and
14 Agricultural Center
15 The Board:
16 1) approved a lease amendment to the United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA)
17 lease for a portion of the Bonnie B. Davis Environmental and Agricultural Center to correct a
18 USDA administrative error; and
19 2) authorized the County Manager to sign the amendment, upon final review by the County
20 Attorney.
21 j. Award of Professional Services Agreement for County Grounds Maintenance
22 The Board approved and authorized the Manager to execute a Professional Services
23 Agreement with Murray's Landscape Maintenance and Horticultural Services for the
24 maintenance of Orange County facility grounds.
25
26 9. County Manager's Report
27 Travis Myren reminded the Board of the next meeting on March 11t" and shared a couple
28 of topics that will be on the agenda. He informed the Board that a federal grant awarded to
29 Durham, Orange, and Granville Counties by the Department of Energy has been put on hold. He
30 said it was a $1.5 million grant for energy efficiency. He also informed the Board that the USDA
31 lease at the Bonnie B. Davis Environment and Agricultural Center that was on the consent agenda
32 may be terminated.
33 Vice-Chair Hamilton asked what portion of the $1.5 million grant Orange County's share
34 was.
35 Travis Myren said he will follow up with that information.
36
37 10. County Attorney's Report
38 John Roberts said that in the past, the Board was provided a better guide for navigating
39 complicated votes like the one they took tonight, and he will make sure that is available for future
40 votes.
41
42 11.Appointments
43 None.
44
45 12. Information Items
46 • February 25, 2025 BOCC Special Meeting Follow-up Actions List
47 • Tax Collector's Report— Numerical Analysis
48 • Tax Collector's Report— Measure of Enforced Collections
49 • Tax Collector's Report— Foreclosure Chart
50 • Tax Assessor's Report— Releases/Refunds under $100
23
1 13. Closed Session
2 None.
3
4 Adjournment
5
6 A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler, seconded by Vice-Chair Hamilton, to
7 adjourn the meeting at 8:48 p.m.
8
9 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
10
11 Jamezetta Bedford, Chair
12
13
14 Recorded by Tara May, Deputy Clerk to the Board
15
16 Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board