HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 02-25-2025-Business Meeting 1
APPROVED 4115/25
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
SPECIAL MEETING
February 25, 2025
7:00 p.m.
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Special Meeting on Tuesday, February
25, 2025, at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, NC.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jamezetta Bedford, Vice-Chair Jean Hamilton
and Commissioners Marilyn Carter, Amy Fowler, Sally Greene, Earl McKee, and Phyllis Portie-
Ascott
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None.
COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Travis Myren, Deputy County Manager Caitlin
Fenhagen, and Clerk to the Board Laura Jensen. (All other staff members will be identified
appropriately below)
Chair Bedford called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.All commissioners were present.
Chair Bedford read the public charge. She explained the process for making public
comments for items not on the agenda vs. items that are on the agenda.
1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
Not applicable for special meetings.
2. Public Comments (Limited to One Hour)
a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
Tisha Abdul, Miss Orange County 2025 for the Miss America Organization, said this was
the inaugural competition for Miss Orange County/Chapel Hill. She said that she is a third-year
neuroscience student at UNC. She said the Miss America opportunity provides opportunities to
work on community enhancing initiatives and said she is working on the Smile 360 Initiative.
She said she has spoken to hundreds of children across North Carolina about oral health. She
said at the age of 14, she founded the first Cabarrus County 360 Smile Chapter and worked
with the Board of Commissioners in Cabarrus County to help bridge the gap between teenagers
and decision makers. She said that oral health is the foundation for overall health. She said that
she is grateful for the opportunity to share her accomplishments and speak to the Board
regarding the missions and said that she looks forward to working with each of them moving
forward. She said she will compete for Miss North Carolina in June.
Ila Monical, Miss Teen Orange County 2025 for the Miss America Organization, said she
is here to share her initiative to help others struggling with bullying and mental health issues.
She said it is called NAMI, Not My Story. She said that she created a podcast that has reached
5 states so far and focuses on mental health. She said that 20% of students report they have
been through bullying. She said that she is a junior in high school and is spreading the idea of
kindness and self-love. She said that she plans to attend visit McDougle Elementary School and
plans with NAMI at several other future events. She said she is thankful for the opportunities
given to her in Orange County and through the Miss America Opportunity.
b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
(These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda below.)
2
3. Announcements, Petitions and Comments by Board Members
Commissioner Greene said she attended the dedication of the historical marker on
February 1511 commemorating the lynchings of Washington Morrow, Daniel Morrow, and
Thomas Jefferson Morrow. She said she was honored to represent the Board at this event and
reread the apology approved by the Board a few years ago for all of the racial terror that took
place in the post-Civil War era in Orange County's history. She emphasized the importance of
remembering and understanding this history. She announced that the Drakeford Library grand
opening was rescheduled due to the weather last week and will be rescheduled in the future.
Commissioner Carter said she also attended the dedication of the historical marker on
February 15'. She said it was a moving experience. She said she looks forward to hearing
about upcoming events in March for Women's History Month and the celebration of Creek
Week. She said next week, she will be in Washington DC at the NACo conference and looks
forward to bringing information back to the Board.
Vice-Chair Hamilton said she would like to share some reflections to close Black History
Month. She said at the February 4tn meeting, the Board approved a proclamation for Black
History Month, and she thanked staff for their work on that proclamation and the organization of
Black History Month programming. She said she attended the dedication of the historical marker
along with other Commissioners this month. She said the purpose of Black History Month is to
reflect on the history of the United States and all of the people who contributed to building this
nation. She said while it was founded on noble ideals, it was founded in not-so-noble realities
like stolen land and stolen labor and the belief that some human beings were superior to others.
She said we have progressed as a nation economically and socially towards fully embracing the
noble ideals like our national motto, "E Pluribus Unum" (out of many one), and our pledge, "with
liberty and justice for all". She said we have also moved away from some of our less noble
ideals such as cheating, lying, feelings of superiority, and exploitation. She said she hopes our
nation can make it back to what has made it great— its noble ideals. She said she is proud to be
an American of mostly African descent but also Native American and European descent and
appreciates the opportunity to serve the residents of Orange County. She said she looks
forward to attending the NACo conference next week with Commissioner Carter and will bring
back what she learns to be a better county commissioner.
Chair Bedford reminded the Board about an MOU with Carrboro, Chapel Hill, UNC on
the potential rails-to-trails project. She said the idea is that should UNC no longer use coal at
the co-gen plant, it might open the door for a rails-to-trail project, or even a multimodal project.
She said the DCHC MPO, now referred to as Triangle West Transportation Planning
Organization (Triangle West TPO) is working on applying for a $400,000 grant that requires a
$100,000 match. She said UNC has committed $20,000, the North Carolina Railroad Group has
committed $50,000, Carrboro and Chapel Hill have each committed $10,000, and the request is
for Orange County to commit $10,000 as well. She said the county's contribution does not have
to be approved by the Board officially but wanted to update Board members since she is the
liaison to this group. She said Amy Eckberg, Sustainability Coordinator, David Stancil, DEAPR
Director, Nishith Trivedi, Transportation Director, and the County Manager are all involved in
these discussions. She said there is opportunity here for housing, recreation, and multimodal
use. She said if anyone has concerns, to let the County Manager know in the next few days.
Commissioner Fowler said she attended the Triangle West TPO meeting this morning,
where the board voted to release several items for public comment, including TIP Amendment
#6, a Public Participation Plan, and Destination 2055 MTP Deficiency and Needs Analysis. She
encouraged anyone with ideas of how to improve transportation planning to visit the Triangle
West Transportation Planning Organization website. She said she also attended IDEAL, a
collective action group, policy subcommittee meeting focused on potential policy advocacy to
increase access to housing for folks with disabilities last week. She said she attended the Board
of Health meeting as well and they are continuing to work on educating families on the impacts
3
of excessive screen use on mental health. She said like other Commissioners, she appreciated
the opportunity to attend the unveiling of the commemorative placard at the old courthouse and
said she is glad to live in a community that is committed to acknowledging its past and
attempting to right wrongs despite what's happening at a national level. She said she is
struggling to understand what is happening at a national level and how to respond. She said she
will continue to strive to make her community thrive in all aspects of her life and to speak out
when things are not okay. She thanked Vice-Chair Hamilton for her comments.
Commissioner Portie-Ascott said since the last meeting, she was able to attend the Ag
Summit. She said she also attended the historical marker unveiling and two other Black History
Month events. She said hearing the bravery people had in face of the events of the time was
remarkable and made her ponder what she and others will do next. She said she attended the
Fireside Chat on Chapel Hill Transit, and she appreciated the lesson from a story about former
mayor Howard Lee and how he and the governor at the time put aside their differences to bring
transit to Chapel Hill. She said she also attended the unveiling for three new Pee Wee homes
for folks transitioning out of homelessness. Finally, she said she attended the Central Pines
RPO meeting and endorsed the 2024 Orange County Transportation Multimodal Plan.
Commissioner McKee said he appreciates the comments from other commissioners
about the memorial placard. He said we cannot change history, but it is critical that we do not
forget it. He announced there are representatives from both school districts presents as the
Board continues to discuss how to use the bond money approved by Orange County voters last
fall. He encouraged any residents interested in school capital projects to get involved in the
discussions with county commissioners and school board members soon.
4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
a. Presentation of Annual Comprehensive Financial Report for FYE 6/30/2024 and
Approval of Audit Services Contract Amendment
The Board received a presentation on the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024; and approved an Audit Services Contract Amendment for
Fiscal Year 2024.
BACKGROUND: The ACFR reports on all financial activity of the County for the fiscal year July
1, 2023, through June 30, 2024. Mauldin and Jenkins, LLC, a firm of Certified Public
Accountants, audited the financial statements. The financial statements and audit are required
by Chapter 159-34 of the North Carolina General Statutes. The County prepares an Annual
Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) that meets the standards set by the Government
Finance Officers Association (GFOA). The ACFR is submitted to the GFOA to be awarded the
Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. The financial report for the
Orange County Sportsplex, as required under the management contract, is included in the
County's ACFR.
The County received an unmodified (clean) audit opinion on the financial statements received
from the audit. The financial audit results indicate compliance with County financial policies. The
Chief Financial Officer and representatives of Mauldin and Jenkins, LLC will cover highlights of
the report and answer any questions.
While completing the FY 2024 audit, Mauldin and Jenkins incurred $15,000 in additional cost
resulting from time spent on statement reconciliations due to a financial software error. This
issue has now been resolved. Under North Carolina General Statute 143-129(e)(2), certain
professional services including audit, legal and consulting are not subject to the same
competitive bidding requirements as goods and construction contracts. The governmental audit
4
industry has experienced a significant decrease in audit firms with the capacity to provide audit
services of the quality required by the County.
The attached Audit Services Contract Amendment increases the FY 2024 cost from $120,000 to
$135,000. The FY 2025, 2026 and 2027 audit budgets are expected to be $135,000, $140,000,
and $145,000 respectively. The County will be required to submit annual Local Government
Commission audit contracts for Board approval through the amended audit engagement period.
Gary Donaldson, Chief Finance Officer, reviewed the background information for this
item. He introduced LeAnn Bagasala of Mauldin and Jenkins, and she made the following
presentation:
Slide #1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
AA Presentation of Audit Results
June 30,2024
Slide #2
5
�' Orange County,North Carolina
Agenda
Engagement Team
Overview of:
o Audit Opinion
o Financial Trends
o Compliance Report
Required Communications
Accounting Recommendations and Related Matters
Answer Questions
Auditors Discussion&Analysts(AD&A)
June 30,2024
6
Slide#3
Orange County,North Carolina
1Still►,: # jj i 300+
EN
o • SINGLE AUDITS PERFORMED LAST
RM) y*!■ ��.TTT T (D YEAR COVERING OVER$5.3
rl BILLION OF FEDERALGRANTS 1
CONSISTENTLY RANKED AS A TOP
ACCOUNTING FIRM IN THE U.S. TEAM MEMBERS DEDICATED
I
"140+ TO SERVING THE 156,000
111 GOVERNMENTAL INDUSTRY 1 +
100+year _ 1 HOU RS ANNUALLY
HISTORY PROVIDED TO
OF QUALITY SERVICE GOVERNMENTAL CLIENTS
- - I]{I'f •f'' CURRENT CLIENTS AWARDED
Serve 700+ 1MAULDIN&&r]ENKINI. : : 175+ THE GFOA CERTIFICATE OF
GOVERNMENTCLIENTS EXCELLENCE
zi
GOVERNMENTAL 4 •"•" M 14 4MOW
PARTNERS 18 ,.,t,o� STATES OFFICES
Engagement Team Leaders
Tim Lyons,Engagement Partner I Grant Davis,Quality Review Partner I Chad Jackson,Manager
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
LeAnn Bagasala reviewed the accomplishments of Mauldin and Jenkins and described
the work of each member of the audit team.
Slide #4
TX A T
Orange County,North Carolina
Audit Opinion
• Our Responsibility Under Auditing Standards Generally Accepted in the United States of
America(GAAS)
We considered the internal control structure for the purpose of expressing our opinion on Orange County,North Carolina's
(the"Coul 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 of the Countys management.
Wedid not audit the financial state menu of the Orange County ABC Board. Thefinancial statementsofthe 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 other auditors who performed the audit of the ABC
Board.The financial statements ofthe 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&Anaysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
LeAnn Bagasala read the information on slide #4 and said, in short, this slide indicates
that Orange County received a "clean" audit.
7
Slide#5
4 1 Orange County,North Carolina
Compliance Reports
Government Auditing Standards("Yellow Book")Report
The financial report package contains a report on our tests of the Countys 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 Countys compliance with applicable laws and regulations.
This report and the procedures performed are required by Government Auditing Standards.
Compliance Reports
We were requiredto perform Single Audit procedures on six(6)major programs(3 Federal and 3 State of
North Carolina programs).
We issued a report on the County's federal programs in accordance with the Uniform Guidance.That report
contained an unmodified opinion on compliance.
We issued a report on the County's state programs in accordance with the State of North Carolina Single
Audit Implementation Act.That report contained an unmodified opinion on compliance.
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
LeAnn Bagasala the programs that were audited include the Medicaid Program, ARPA
Program, and Section 8 Housing. She said three state programs were also audited. She said in
total, the County received four unmodified, or clean, audit opinions.
Slide #6
Orange County,North Carolina
Financial Trends-Composition of Fund Balance
Trends from 2023 to 2024
Fund Balance Categories -General Fund ❑ 2023 Fund Balance:$90.4M
50,000,000
45,000,000 0 2024 Fund Balance:$82.3M
40,000,000 ❑ 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
2010001000 calculation required by the
15,000,000 State of North Carolina.
10,000,000 o Unassigned fund balanceas
5,000,000 , �, of June 30,2024,is 16.2%of
General Fund expenditures
2022 2023 2024 which is compliant with
County policy disclosed in
■Nonspendable ■Restricted ■Committed ■Assigned ■Unassigned Note Ito the F/S.
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
8
Slide#7
Orange Coun ,North Carolina
Financial Trends-General Fund Revenue
Other,27%
Charges far services,4 6%
Intergwarnmemal,71%
Sales Taxes.
15 4%
Properly Taxes.
70.3%
2024 2023 jiff
Property Taxes 104,357,055 188.249,567 6,107,488
Sales Taxes 42,643,725 43,396.780 (753,055)
Intergovernmental 19,564,355 19,363,115 201,240
Charges for seruoes 12.504,920 14,036,772 (1,530,652)
Other 7,444,289 4,195,050 3.249,239
276,514,344 269,240,264 7,274,060
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
Slide#8
A/rT
Orange County,North Carolina
Financial Trends-General Fund Revenue
Orange County,North Carolina
General Fund Revenues
Significant Fluctuations
FY2023 FY2024
Sales Tax Revenues:
Article 39 $ 18,430,626 $17,030,801
Article 40 11,795,331 11,946,792
Article42 6,240,839 3,532,316
Article44 284,938 307,662
Medicaid Hold Harmless 6,655,046 4,82Q 152
Total $43,396,780 $42,643,725
FY2023 FY2024
Miscellaneous Revenues:
Investment Income $ 1,809,873 $ 2,362,680
Other 2,385,177 5,081,609
$ 4,195,050 $ 7.444,289
Auditors Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
LeAnn Bagasala explained that the amount for Medicaid Hold Harmless fluctuates every
year.
9
Slide#9
1T
Orange County,North Carolina
Financial Trends-General Fund Expenditures
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%
Public 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 97,969,758 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%
$ 282,708,375 $ 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 GASB 87196.
**Debt service expenditures includes approximately$21.2 million of principal and interest payments on
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$128.8 million or 46%of total
General Fund+Debt Service Fund expenditures.
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
Slide #10
NAT
Orange County,North Carolina
Financial Trends-Proprietary Funds
Solid Waste Enterprise Fund
2024 2023 Change
Operating revenues $ 11,093,956 $ 11,001,798 $ 92,158
Operating expenses 11,903,792 9,430,416 2,473,376
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 467,457 (502,536) 969,993
SportsPlex Enterprise Fund
2024 2023 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)
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
LeAnn Bagasala said purchasing vehicles and an adjustment for the post-closure landfill
led to increased expenditures for the Solid Waste Enterprise Fund.
10
Slide#11
A/fTT�
1 Orange County,North Carolina
Required Communications
Significant Accounting Policies
Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies.
The significant accounting policies used by the County are described in Note 1 to the basic financial statements.
During the current year,the County was required to implement the provisions of GASB Statement No.100,
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 consideringthe qualitative aspects of its policies,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 managementand are based on
management's knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future events.
The County uses various estimates as part of its financial reporting process-including actuarial assumptions.
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
Slide#12
Orange County,North Carolina
Required Communications(Continued)
Relationship with Management
We received full cooperation from the County's management and staff.
There were no disagreements with 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 misstatementof the financial statements.
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
11
Slide#13
_N/FT
Orange County,North Carolina
Required Communications(Continued)
Audit Adjustments
Several adjustments 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
County s 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 financial statements and make reference to our firm,we must be provided with printers'
proof for our review and approval before printing. You must also provide us with a copy of the final reproduced
material for our approval before it is distributed.
Auditor Independence
In accordance with AICPA professional standards,M&J is independent with regard to the County,its component
unit,and its respective financial reporting processes.
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
Slide #14
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.
Internal controls were not sufficientto detect material misstatements in the reporting of cash balances.
Cause/Context: 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
sufficientto identify and correct these errors in a timely manner.
County Response: Finance met with the Enterprise Resource Planning 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
Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked what was happening with the reconciliation issue.
LeAnn Bagasala said there was a system issue resulting in one-sided entries and county
staff was unable to tell that the entries were not being recorded. She said this issue has been
corrected and steps have been taken to ensure it does not happen again in the future.
12
Slide#15
AAT
Orange County,North Carolina
Audit Findings(Continued)
• 2024-002 General Ledger Maintenance and Accounting for Fund Balance Using the
County's ERP System
Issue: Failure to ensure the County's 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 funds to not properly roll-forward and reconcile with the prior yearACFR.
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 adjust fund
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 newAccou ntants.
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
Commissioner McKee said he recalls a similar issue in the past. He asked what efforts
are being made to ensure accurate oversight.
Travis Myren asked Gary Donaldson to address Commissioner McKee's question.
Gary Donaldson said staff looked at gaps from the audit and have implemented
additional controls and process improvements as well as additional oversight from outside of the
accounting office to prevent these issues from happening again.
Commissioner McKee said he appreciates that effort because the money the county
must spend comes from residents directly.
Chair Bedford noted that the full Corrective Action Plan is in the Board's packet.
13
Slide#16
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 County's 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,debt premiums and interest expenditures/expenses.
Audit adjustments totaling approximately$1,100,000 were required to correct the reporting of the Counts
capital assets.The County incorrectly expensed construction costs that were capital in nature and should have
been reported as capital assets.
Across several of the County'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 finalizing financial statements,requiring additional reviewand adjustments.
County Response:The County acknowledges the audit f nding and is committed to improving its financial 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 misstatements and ensure accurate financial reporting.
Auditors Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
Commissioner McKee emphasized that the issues here are not missing money, but mis-
entries into ledgers.
Slide #17
/FTT�
1 Orange County,North Carolina
Audit Findings(Continued)
• 2024-004 Reporting Requirements for Section 8 Housing Program
Public Housing Agencies(PHAs)are required to submit timely a Financial Assessment Sub-system(FASS-PH)GAAP-
based unaudited and audited financial information electronically to HUD. In the course of performing our Single
Audit testing,we noted the County had not submitted the 2023 PASS-PH report due to turnover in key positions.
No questioned costs noted.
The County completed the FASS-PH report and it has been submitted to HUD for 2023;additionally,the County has
added this reportto its annual year-end checklistgoing forward.
Management Point(Recommendation)
• Accounting for Special Revenue Funds
During our review of the Counts 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
GASB Statement No,84,FiducioryActivities,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 activity 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
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles(GAAP).
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
14
Slide#18
/_N A TT�
� J Orange County,North Carolina
New Accounting Pronouncements
• New GASB Pronouncementsfor Future Years
Statement No.101,Compensated Absences was issued in June 2022 and is effective for fiscal years beginning after
December 15,2023,which means the County's 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 Couni fiscal year ended June 30,2026.This new standard will change
a few things in the County's ACFR(Management's Discussion and Analysis;presentation of budgetary comparison
schedules;and the statement of revenues,expenses and changes in net position for the Countys enterprise funds).
• Current/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
disclosures regarding going concern uncertainties and severe financial stress.This technical topic is being examined by the
GASB due to a wide diversity in practice regarding required presentation on the face of the financial statements,
disclosures,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(GASH 87,94 and 96), The exposure draft proposes new guidance
regarding the disclosure of certain items related to capital assets.
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
Slide #19
Orange County,North Carolina
Govt.Clients-Free Quarterly Continuing Education
Since March of 2009- For Over 12 Years!!
,. Mauldin&Jenkins provides free quarterly continuing education for all of our governmental clients- Topics are tailored to be
of interest to governmental entities. In an effort to accommodate our entire governmental client 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 Capital Management
• Best Budgeting Practices,Policies and Processes Grant Accounting Processes and Controls
• Budget Preparation Internal Controls Over Accounts Payable,Payroll and
• ACFR Preparation(two(2)day hands-on course) Cash Disbursements
• Capital Asset Accounting Processes and Controls Internal Controls Over Receivables&the Revenue Cycle
• Collateral ization of Deposits and Investments IRS Issues,Primarily Payroll Matters
• Component Units Legal Considerations 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 Govt.Stand? Single Audits for Auditees
• Financial Reporting Model Improvements Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax(SPLOST)
• GASB Nos.74&75,OPEB Standards Accounting,Reporting&Compliance
• GASB No.77,Tax Abatement Disclosures Uniform Grant Reporting Requirements and the New
• GASB No.84,Fiduciary Activities Single Audit
Auditor's Discussion&Analysis(AD&A)
June 30,2024
15
Slide #20
Questions & Comments
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Thank You for the Opportunity to Serve
Commissioner Carter asked what the process is for the Board to receive updates on the
progress of the corrective actions in the audit.
Gary Donaldson said he can provide regular updates to the Board.
Commissioner Portie-Ascott said asked for the reason behind the contract amendment.
LeAnn Bagasala said it is a combination of several things, but ultimately the audit team
had to dedicate additional time above and beyond the initial contract.
Chair Bedford said for the 24'h consecutive year, Orange County was awarded the
Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for the for fiscal year 2023, as
well as the Distinguished Budget Presentation for the 32nd year in a row for the 2024 Budget
Document. She congratulated the Finance and Budget offices for those accomplishments. She
said there is a nice list of all the federal dollars Orange County receives as well as a list of funds
that are directly provided to residents in the packet. She asked for clarification on what the
money in the Library Development Fund can go toward.
Gary Donaldson said the permissible use for that money is general and would cover
most capital and operating expenses for the library.
A motion was made by Commissioner Carter, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to
approve the Audit Services Contract Amendment for the Fiscal Year 2024 audit services.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
5. Public Hearings
None.
6. Regular Agenda
a. Project Management Options for School Construction
The Board continued discussion on how to approach project management for school projects
and provided direction to staff.
BACKGROUND: Over the past two years, the County has developed a plan to fund the
construction of new and renovated school facilities through the passage of the bond
referendum. During this planning period, the School Capital Needs Workgroup and Board
members have identified the importance of project management in successfully completing
16
these projects. However, the exact model of project management for the upcoming bond
construction period has yet to be decided by the County and the Districts.
At the January 21, 2025, Business Meeting, the Board began a discussion on Project
Management, but adjourned early due to inclement weather. At the meeting, Board members
requested additional information from experts to help inform the Board. County staff reached out
to Jessica Killian, Director of Program Management at Turner & Townsend Heery. In that role,
Ms. Killian has managed components of project and program management in major capital
programs for Guilford County Schools, as well as Beaufort County Schools in South Carolina,
Douglas County Schools District in Colorado, and Mapleton Public Schools in Colorado. In
those four projects, Ms. Killian has provided management for nearly $2.7 billion dollars in school
capital investment.
Ms. Killian will discuss some of the complexities and considerations around project
management that the County should consider in its decision. Ms. Killian will also differentiate the
concept of"program management", which includes all the oversight and coordination of multiple
projects, from the broader concept of "project management". The County or Districts can utilize
firms such as Turner & Towsend Heery or Woolpert to provide this overarching program
management of the multiple projects to ensure consistency of projects, alignment of Board
principles, and realize some efficiencies. Individual projects would still require project
management to ensure the projects are completed on time and in budget. Ms. Killian previously
presented to the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City School District Finance, Facilities and Operations
Board Subcommittee on the pros and cons of different delivery methods.
Under State Statute, the school districts are responsible for school construction, and as such
are responsible for management, design, and construction oversight. Under the current model,
the districts hire either staff or a firm to provide program or project management, both for the
annual maintenance of existing facilities and for new construction. The school districts make all
contracts, decisions and payments regarding school construction and then bill the County for
reimbursement. The districts do not construct new facilities very frequently. The most recent
new school was the major renovation of Chapel Hill High School from the 2016 bond. In
addition, both districts had issues spending down their maintenance funding during the Covid-19
Pandemic. The County encouraged both districts to expand their project management staff and
fund them through the Supplemental Deferred Maintenance funds. The County has identified
these existing balances as resources to implement the Woolpert recommendations and will
work with the Districts to create a plan that is consistent with the principles of the Woolpert
recommendations using those existing balances.
Unspent Capital Funds New Funding Availabie 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
Either district can also agree to allow the County to assume project management, contracting,
and oversight responsibilities through an Interlocal Agreement (ILA). That could allow the
County to provide additional control over the selection of the architect, project delivery method,
processing change orders and ultimate project delivery. The County could not compel the
17
districts to enter into these agreements, other than withholding bond funding. Therefore, the
County would likely need to work collaboratively with the districts to codify any responsibility
sharing and reporting tasks.
The Board can discuss how it wishes to proceed on these options and direct staff on how to
engage with the school districts on this conversation. There are no decision points for this
meeting for the Board. However, funds for design on school construction are planned to be
authorized on July 1, 2025 as part of the Capital Investment Plan.
Kirk Vaughn, Budget Director, introduced the item and began the following presentation:
Slide #1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
School Construction Project
Management Discussion
February 20, 2025
BOCC Business Meeting
Slide #2
PROJECT MANAGEMENT CURRENT STATE
• Under State Statute, School Districts 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
Districts make all decisions on management,
design and construction.
• School Districts file for reimbursement for all
expenses. County uses expenses to borrow in
Spring Financing
�1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROUNA
18
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
NORTH CAROLINA
Kirk Vaughn said the ILAs can be specific and there are several ways it can be
designed.
Slide #4
PROJECT MANAGEMENT MODELS
Use of Pay-Go
PM 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
construction.Most would be indirect.Districts additional FTE to review
Process} 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.
19
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 CAROLINA
Kirk Vaughn introduced Jessica Killian, Program Management Director for Turner
Townsend Heery.
Jessica Killian made the following presentation:
Slide#1
a Orange County- Bond
_ Program Management
Industry Perspective and Discussion
February zo,—5
:LSD
We transform together.
Jessica Killian said she has talked to both school districts ahead of this meeting to
ensure they are aware as well. She said that she reviewed the market and the industry. She
said that it is important to have the support of the districts before speaking with the Board
tonight. She said that she has been in the building industry her entire career and has a master's
degree in construction management and is an engineer.
20
21
Slide #2
objectiveThe
3
Review of Project and Program Discuss how Orange County Discuss the impacts to !
Management can utilize Program County Schools and Chapel
Management $• . City Schools
Slide #3
Introduction "
Jessica Killian,PE,PMP
Director—Program Management
B.S.Arch Eng,M.Eng.Construction Management
d'
BEAUFORT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT,2023 BOND PROGRAM I BEAUFORT, $r y5,
SC I$439M �kl ly
PROGRAM EXECUTIVE.Following the success of the 2019 bond,voters approved a 1 11� ll"l
gl
new referendum in 2023 to continue making Improvements to Distridtfacilitles.Heery - µ
is providing Owner's Represe.tatiuhand Canstrocb-Management-Agent5ervices in a staff augmentation role and working closely with the existing fad!Ities department
emWovees.
GUILFORD COUNTY SCHOOLS-OWNER'S REPRESENTATION I GUILFORO
COUNTY,NC I$1-7B •tj;� Iv_ Pr�pP
PROGRAM EXECUTIVE.Owner's representativeserv—for the program scape
tlevelopment and Initiation,site dcquisiVar,pre-constructlon,cant—tIOn,and post- t rl
occupancy phases of projects up tc$1.7 bllllon in capital improvements under GC5' -
2022 bend program.Services also include cest estimating and rnntmis services.
1
DOVGLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT BOND PROGRAM I CASTLE ROCK,COI '
PROGRAM MANAGER.Program Manager It,Douglas County School District,She )-
third they ptschool district In Colorado,running ant tim in million bond program
after they gassed a scevel funding band far the o tra"a in ten years.This
experience required developing new processes to track projects,as0blishIngand irkIn al '� •
reporting to communicate to internal staff and the external$1mml.-.and working `•. 1
with many different p ject teams as we implemented ever$1 millien a day in
projectsdurinB the summe+of 2021,in adAliion to multiple other summer wontler'
ea.,as well asp jests at occupied educational and administrative dulldings durirry y- l
the school year. / loll 1
MAPLETON PUBLIC SCHOOLS$200M BOND PROGRAM I DENVER,CO I$200M tii M
PROGRAM MANAGER.Program Manager for a nearly$200 millien K-12 bend
program for Mapleton Pubpc Schools,which consisted of aver 10 new-build and 1 + IlF
addition elemenda and high school projectson multiple occupied campuses.At any
given paint during this four yeerpragrem,Jessica was managing 3�9
school projects in varloas stages of deslgn and construction,in addition to the master
budget,cash fiow,and schedule for the entire program.These projects consisted
p Hmarfly of Design/Build del very.
22
Slide#4
Program Vs Project Management
Program Management Project Management
(ED�� A_�
What Happens at the Program Level? What Happens at the Project Level?
❑Establish Program Goals ❑Procurement of Design and Construction Teams
❑Develop/Validate Budget Magnitude ❑Project-Level Budgeting and Scheduling
❑Includes cash flow ❑Cost estimates
❑Develop/Validate Schedule Adequacy ❑Critical path schedules
❑Develop Project Management Plan ❑Design Specifications and Standards
❑Consistent strategies ❑Bid evaluations
❑Consistent reporting ❑Design Phase Coordination and Oversight
❑Define Roles and Responsibilities ❑Construction Phase Coordination and Oversight
❑Levels of authority and key checkpoints ❑Other Vendor Coordination(FF&E,Materials Testing,
❑Public Relations/Communications Strategy Commissioning)
ESTABLISH COMPREHENSIVE AND CONSISTENT APPROACH FACILITATING PROJECT PROGRESS AND COMPLETION
rurner a rowns —, I i
Jessica Killian said at the program level, program goals are established. She said that a
lot of this was done in pre-bond planning. She said the project level is about the construction
process and project management is specific to each project. She said they will lay out a plan at
the very beginning for the ten-year schedule of projects.
Commissioner McKee asked who specifically will be outlining the ten-year schedule of
projects.
Jessica Killian said first is the county and the school districts and the second group is the
program management office that will be contracted to run this. She said that it is a dual purpose
we.
Commissioner Fowler asked how the Woolpert Report fits into this because it was very
expensive and detailed the needs.
Jessica Killian said program management is about implementing those decisions.
Commissioner Fowler asked who will be making sure that the projects align with the
report.
Jessica Killian said the report is a couple of years old and there may be tweaks needed.
Travis Myren said decisions about projects will be made during the annual CIP process
and if projects are inconsistent with the Woolpert Report, he assumed that the Board will not
approve those for funding.
Vice-Chair Hamilton asked how project management works with the CIP, changes in the
environment, such as the cost of materials, and coordinating projects for cost-savings.
Jessica Killian said program management looks at all of that, while project management
focuses on one individual project. She said program management also involves planning ahead
and taking construction changes into account so there is money for projects at the beginning,
middle, and end.
Commissioner McKee asked how to avoid blindly following the Woolpert report and the
ever-evolving reality faced by the school districts.
Travis Myren said that is why they will do an annual review of projects and make
decisions based on the current needs.
23
Commissioner McKee asked how those differences will be discerned.
Travis Myren said there would be a ten-year plan.
Commissioner McKee said that his concern that in today's environment, a ten-year plan
is very difficult to determine.
Travis Myren said that he would rather have a plan that not have a plan.
Commissioner McKee said that he agrees with a plan but wants to make sure that once
they get to phase 3, there is money available to do those. He said he wants to be very careful to
have management, staff, and Boards on the same page going from day one. He said this will be
a very complicated thing.
Commissioner Fowler asked if the school districts have the responsibility to design and
program, how does program management work if they do not want to do what the Board says.
Travis Myren said if the Board does not agree with a request from the schools, they do
not have to approve it.
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 lowest 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
❑ Efficiency of Approach
❑ One team working together to achieve results at all levels
T.,arow dHeery s
24
Slide#6
Multi-Tiered Approach In One Team
Program Management Project Management
(ED�� A_�
County-Level Program Management District-Level Project Management
❑Master Budget for all Bond Projects ❑Detailed Project Budget based on Project-Specific Scope
❑Aligned cash flow ❑Variances in site,scope,use addressed
❑Consistently defined budget for each project ❑Detailed Project Scheduled based on Project-Specific Scope
❑Master Schedule for all Bond Projects ❑Adjustments based on project and capacity of the District
❑Aligned cash flow ❑Incorporates coordination with the County
❑Transparency of expectations ❑Project-specific contact to focus responsibility
❑Single Point of Contact ❑Expertise and accountability at the project level
❑Consistent reporting ❑Dedicated professional with experience in the project
❑Consistent decision making U Accountability to OCBOC Major Project Planning Policy
❑Prioritization of OCBOC Major Project Planning Policy ❑Project-specific design standards aligned to District
LOOKING AT THE WHOLE PROGRAM FOR SOLUTIONS ALIGNING THE SOLUTION WITH DISTRICT NEEDS
Commissioner McKee said he would appreciate having all stakeholders at the table and
that both districts are able to provide input.
Slide #7
Orange County Program Management
❑ As the Funding Authority,Orange County's cash flow must align
with bond cash flow model and construction cash flow
❑ 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 be 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
❑ Knowledgeable and dedicated team provides expertise and
efficiency
❑ An equitable implementation of approach reduces questions and
confusion
Turner&T--d H.ery ConFldendal 1
25
Slide#8
Impacts to School District
ff
Equitable Decision Defined Project Collaborative Process Defined Plan
Making Authority
❑ With consistent Program ❑ Authorization for project- ❑ Program Manager and ❑ 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 cleanly executed moving
applied to the School Program collaboratively for a solution forward
Districts by knowing needs of the
❑ Funding,Design,and ❑ Adjustments to the plan are
❑ There is a clear line of Planning roles and County and the District(s) made in agreement with the
communication between the responsibilities should be ❑ Project status can be quickly ILA and the stakeholders
County and the Districts established by an ILA and clearly communicated ❑ A Program Manager
because of the Program because no team is working
❑ Places decision making at 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
rurnerarewnune Heery connaennai I s
Slide#9
DISCUSSION
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
HAPEL HILL- I Oran e
ARRBORO Count
y
CITY SCHOOLS Schools
NORTH CAROLINA
.ner a mwsen neew _ _
Commissioner Greene said the Board knows what the Woolpert principles are, and she
thinks the Board can achieve common ground with both school districts as this goes forward.
Commissioner Carter said she is a big fan of program management and thinks it is vitally
important. She said the piece about clarifying roles is critical. She said she appreciates the
county manager's mention of annual reviews as an opportunity to ensure they are adjusting as
26
needed consistent with the principles they have agreed to. She said she is interested in the
financial aspects of the ILAs and allows for an effective and timely management.
Vice-Chair Hamilton asked to return to the last slide. She asked if the program manager
hires the project managers.
Jessica Killian said it is all part of the big team. She said that the recommendation is that
it is one company. She said they would report through the program management office and that
would ensure consistency in the reports. She said other contractual relationships can get messy
and it is almost always better to have everything under the same umbrella. She sees this
moving forward as a PMO, but everyone must be involved on the decisions.
Vice-Chair Hamilton asked how program managers will be accountable to the county.
Jessica Killian said monthly reports on projects, reporting on milestones in the master
plan, and perhaps a dashboard for voters to see.
Travis Myren said there will be a collaborative solicitation process to choose a program
management firm.
Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she's in favor of an approach that gives them improved
communication and more consistency. She said that voters have been concerned about the
bonds and overspending and she is grateful that they will do all they can do to deliver what they
promised. She said that she supports program management.
Commissioner Fowler said she is in favor of a program manager. She asked if the school
districts are in favor of having this setup.
Jessica Killian said they want to make sure they are not left out of the project. She said
that program management is a specific skill and project management is a separate set of skills.
She said the decisions must be made by those making the decisions. She said it is about trust
and relationships and that is why it is important to get everyone in the room.
Commissioner Fowler asked if the RFQ is for program management and if they must be
the same company and if it is more efficient when it is.
Chair Bedford asked if they must use the same project manager for the different builds.
Jessica Killian said the project holders are the decision makers. She said that the
recommendation is one firm that does program management (director) with multiple project
managers.
Commissioner McKee said he does not have an issue with program management. He
said that he wants the Board and both school systems to be kept informed and to be involved
and updated along the way. He said that he wants to make sure there is nothing missing.
Chair Bedford asked the difference between a construction manager at risk vs. project
manager.
Jessica Killian said they are different. She said the construction manager at risk is the
constructor and they are taking a risk by being involved in the design phase. She said that they
are construction related. She said that the project manager is involved from the beginning and
managing the process. She said they are not involved with the actual construction.
Chair Bedford asked Commissioner Fowler how management of construction of Chapel
Hill High School was done. She said when she was on the schoolboard, there was someone on
staff that had a background in construction that managed the project.
Commissioner Fowler said they hired a construction manager at-risk but there was an
act of God clause that was triggered, and they ended up having to pay more than the not to
exceed price due to this. She said they had just hired a new principal and the former principal
stayed on to assume the project manager role and she said that she is not sure that this is the
most effective way for the management to be done.
Jessica Killian said there are a couple of different things that happen in school districts.
She said there are deferred projects and there are project managers that handle this type of
thing. She said a feature of hiring a program manager is that they are not staff, and they can
scale as needed. She said in ten-years when it is over, there is not a need to continue to employ
27
them. She said that it is their job to make sure that the bond funds are implemented as they
were designed to do, and this allows the school staff to continue to do the work they were
already doing.
Chair Bedford asked if the school districts are still hiring their own architects and
construction companies.
Jessica Killian said the schools would still be approving the contracts, but the program
manager would assist in running the RFQs and being part of that process.
Chair Bedford asked how design-build fits into this.
Jessica Killian said that design-build is a delivery method. She said that a single entity is
hired to design and build the project.
Chair Bedford asked if the schools would then still be a decision maker.
Jessica Killian said yes and that the Board is the funding authority. She said that the way
that the schools contract to have projects completed should not interfere with the funding. She
said they may be more comfortable with different methods and maybe there are reasons for one
delivery over another one, but this goes under their authority, and this could be something
included in the ILA.
Travis Myren said the program manager would help choose a delivery method that fits
best with any set of circumstances.
Chair Bedford said she doesn't see three new schools happening with the financial
outlook. She said that she wants to manage expectations. She said that the school boards and
county commissioners should work on managing expectations. She said that besides major
projects and high priority needs, there are other schools that need to be kept running. She
asked if the program manager has any influence in the schools that continue to operate during
the projects.
Jessica Killian said the discussions so far have been about bond program management.
She said the industry could also support doing bond and deferred maintenance. She said it
really depends and that would depend on how the school districts feel.
Chair Bedford said pay-go is also involved. She said they had previously said they may
need to add a support person in-house, and the manager will have to determine if it is more
efficient to do an RFP for a consultant, or if the county could support an in-house position.
Commissioner Fowler asked how much program management costs and what it
includes.
Jessica Killian said she cannot fully answer that without knowing all they need. She said
that all of what Commissioner Fowler mentioned would be part of program management
agreement, but she can't give a figure until she has an idea of what the county is looking for
service-wise.
Chair Bedford invited Anne Purcell, OCS Board of Education Chair, to speak on behalf of
OCS Board of Education. Anne Purcell said when she was principal they requested funds for a
new auditorium. She said that she was heavily involved in the program management and had to
go to all the meetings. She said that she knows that Mr. Davis is in favor of having a project
manager and he has experience building several schools in other districts. She said she thinks
he and CHCCS staff have had conversations and are in favor. She said they all want to be
transparent with constituents about the money and where it's going.
Jessica Killian said that it will be different having program management at the county, but
it is because there are two school districts, and it is a unique situation.
Chair Bedford also invited Al Ciarochi to speak.
Al Ciarochi said CHCCS is in support of program-project management. He said they
made very strong commitments to the citizens, and they are ready to make the next step. He
said that it is important for transparency and delivering on what was promised. He said they are
in favor of higher-level program management as long as they are at the table for the design
process.
28
Commissioner McKee said he looks forward to continuing these conversations with the
school districts. He said that this is $400 million and that is a hard number for him to get his
head around. He said that without the interest added, it is right at $2,500 per Orange County
resident over the next 10 years. He said for a family of four, the impact is $10,000 per family
over the next ten years, and they really need to make sure that they get this right.
Chair Bedford said she agrees with moving forward with a program manager and wants
more information and detail from school districts.
Travis Myren said the next step would be to authorize the Manager to move forward with
ILA discussions with the school districts.
Vice-Chair Hamilton said she agrees with starting the ILA process and that it will be an
iterative process. She said there will be discussions and feedback. She said they can see if this
works but they have to get started because time is money.
Chair Bedford asked Travis Myren to check with surrounding districts and communities
for references and what feedback they might have.
Travis Myren said they have already started that.
b. Orange County's Proposed 2025 Priority Legislative Issues
The Board reviewed and discussed the proposed Orange County 2025 Priority Legislative
Issues as developed by the Legislative Issues Work Group (LIWG) and any other potential
items for inclusion in Orange County's legislative agenda package for the 2025 North Carolina
General Assembly Session and approved the Orange County 2025 Priority Legislative Issues
document for submittal to Orange County's legislative delegation.
BACKGROUND: Orange County's Legislative Breakfast with Orange County's legislative
delegation, in conjunction with the 2025 North Carolina General Assembly session, is scheduled
for February 27, 2025. The Board of Commissioners has historically approved a set of
legislative issues each year for presentation to/discussion with the delegation.
The Board historically has appointed two members to work with staff on a Legislative Issues
Work Group (LIWG) to develop a proposed legislative document. Based on the work of the
LIWG, the BOCC has then reviewed and approved a package of legislative items to present to
Orange County's legislative delegation. Commissioners Amy Fowler and Jean Hamilton are
serving on the 2025 LIWG and have worked with staff on the attached 2025 legislative package.
As the LIWG considered its approach for this year, the Group (similar to recent years)
decided to identify a short list of Legislative Priority Issues. The Group ultimately developed
twelve (12) Priority Issues, acknowledging that the full Board of Commissioners may consider
modifying the list, exchanging one item for another item, other potential revisions, etc.
The LIWG also acknowledged Board members' previous comments on organizing the issues by
topic area similar to the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners (NCACC) and
listing the topics in priority order:
The Board will need to discuss the materials as provided by the LIWG.
The work of the Legislative Issues Work Group to this point is based on the current information
available for the 2025 General Assembly Session. The issues addressed by the Group may
evolve and change over the session and require additional attention by the Group and Board of
Commissioners. New issues may also arise necessitating additional review.
29
Commissioner Fowler told the Board that there were no major changes from last year's
priorities.
Commissioner Greene said she supports this list of priorities and would like to also
discuss an issue for Habitat homeowners that results in their tax bill being disproportionate to
what they pay for their home. She said this issue can only be addressed through legislation.
The Board agreed by consensus.
Commissioner Carter said she appreciated that the legislative goals are aligned with the
NCACC's goals.
Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked to add a goal to seek legislation to provide recurring
funding to State affordable housing programs such as the Workforce Housing Loan Program to
enhance opportunities for local government employees to reside in the jurisdictions they serve.
The Board agreed by consensus.
A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Commissioner Greene to
approve the Orange County 2025 Priority Legislative Issues document, with Commissioner
Portie-Ascott's addition, for submittal to Orange County's legislative delegation.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
7. Reports
a. 2025 Orange County Revaluation Presentation
The Board received an overview of findings and plans of the 2025 countywide revaluation.
BACKGROUND: The Tax Office is nearing completion of the 2025 revaluation of real property
to reflect market value as of the appraisal date of January 1, 2025. Revaluations are mandated
by the North Carolina General Statutes and needed to realign the values of real property
throughout the County to maintain equitable and uniform property values among property
owners. Market values are shaped by property sales, and the Tax Office's responsibility is to
look at those sales, interpret the market data, and estimate market values for all properties
within Orange County.
The Assessment Team compiles sales, data from property owners, and information from
professionals for a full understanding of the Orange County real estate market. As has occurred
in the past, the Tax Office contracted with an outside vendor to provide data on commercial
properties in the County.
Conducting a countywide revaluation takes significant effort and staff dedication. Assessment
staff began working on the 2025 revaluation in 2023. Orange County has approximately 58,700
real property parcels, and each of those parcels has been reviewed to reflect a current estimate
of market value. Notices providing the newly updated values will be mailed early to mid-March.
An Appeal Form and a list of Revaluation Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) will be included
with each notice. A copy of the FAQs is also attached to this abstract.
Nancy Freeman, Orange County Tax Administrator, introduced the item and made the
following presentation:
30
Slide#1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
2025 Revaluation
Presentation
February 20, 2025
Presenter:
Nancy T Freeman
Orange County Tax Administrator
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
ORANGE COUNTY
2 NORTH CAROLINA
31
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. �1
s ORANGE COUNATY
CAROLIN
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
32
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.
�1
s ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH Commissioner McKee said a resident asked how homes in Orange County are
appraised because he responded to a resident's question and said that they do not come to
each property individually.
Nancy Freeman said that is correct and Orange County does a mass appraisal process.
She said this means the appeals process is very important for making any corrections.
Slide #6
Comparison to Other Counties
❑Orange County estimates 49.5% increase countywide
❑Survey of counties conducting a revaluation in 2025 show
average county-wide growth of 61%, and median of
55.5%.
❑Range from 25% to 88%
❑Twenty-one counties in the survey
6 ORANGE COUNTY
33
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.
�1
7 ORARN HE COUNTY
She said the county's final sales ratio were 64.5% and this is well within the range.
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
e ORANGE
34
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
�1
s ORANGE COUNTY
Nancy Freeman clarified that 800 sq. ft. should read 1800 sq. ft.
Slide #10
Northside Neighborhood Conservation 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
— 1
10 ORANGE COUNTY
35
Slide #11
*Current Revaluation Results
2025 All Properties-'—Estimated AssesseI
Percentage
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.
�1
10 ORANGE COUNTY
Slide #12
Current Revaluation Results (continued)
• Countywide (values notfinal)
Improved Residential Sales: Sales Ratio 99.4 COD: 8.6
Improved Commercial Sales: Sales Ratio 100 COD: 7.4
Vacant Land Sales: Sales Ratio 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
36
Slide #13
Current Revaluation Results (continued)
Median Sales
Jurisdiction Ratio
Countywide .90- 1.10 99.8 5.0- 15.0 9.4
Chapel Hill .90- 1.10 99.7 5.0- 15.0 8.1
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- 1.10 101 5.0- 15.0 I' 4.9
13 ORANGE COUNATY
NORT CAROLIN
Slide #14
Current Revaluation Results (continued)
2025 Estimated Median Home Values
MedianMedian Assessed
I Value Price
• $490,400 $480,000
• • $539,600 $612,500
Chapel Hill $636,000 j $660,000
Hillsborough $415,400 $423,000
• . - $349,502ML $385,500
ORANGE COUNTY
14 NORTH CAROLINA
Vice-Chair Hamilton said for everyone except the county, the assessed value is a little
less than the median sale price. She asked why the county's ratio is higher than actual.
Nancy Freeman said she will look into the reason for that and report back to the Board.
37
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
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
--)RAN'-' 1' N Fr
16 NOR I I I(AR()[IN
Commissioner McKee said he received a call from a church that wants to host an event
and will touch base with staff.
38
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
�1
n ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH 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
18 NOR I I CAKOI.INr%
39
Slide #19
Appeal Assistance
Review property characteristics at Real Property Search
Webpage: https:/,/property.spatialest.com/nc/orancle/#Z
Compare property to nearby property sales at Comper
Webpage:
https:-/./nc-orange-citizen.comper.info-/template.aspx
Submit appeal form included with revaluation notice, or
complete appeal process online:
https:,Z.ZappeaIs.spatialest.com/nc-orange#/
�1
is ORARN HE COUrNTY
Slide #20
For More Information
Contact the Orange County Tax Office:
919-245-2100, option 2
reval(cDorangecountync.gov
Live chat by visiting:
www.orangecountync.aov/departments/tax/
18 ORANGERTH COOLINA Y
Commissioner Carter asked about the designated rental single-unit residents and asked
if that designation is being applied in other areas of the county.
Roger Gunn, Real Property Appraiser Manager said yes where they are aware of it. He
said it is primarily near UNC.
40
b. Longtime Homeowner Assistance (LHA) Program Report— 2024 Results
The Board received a report on the results of the Calendar Year 2024 Longtime Homeowner
Assistance (LHA) program, which provides assistance to longtime low-income Orange County
homeowners on their property tax bill.
BACKGROUND: For 2024, Housing staff again utilized the Orange County Board of
Commissioners 2023 authorized updates to the program design for the Longtime Homeowner
Assistance (LHA) program to:
• Increase the baseline minimum award amount: a minimum award amount of$200
• Introduce a baseline maximum award amount: $1,500
• And use the HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) and Housing Trust Fund
(HTF) Homeownership Value Limits ("95% limits") as the maximum home value eligible
for the Longtime Homeowner Assistance program.
County staff worked with community partners on a five-month media campaign to increase
awareness about program eligibility and how to apply, with the goal of increasing the number of
program applicants from 2023. LHA media campaign efforts in 2024 included:
• The Tax Office sent the LHA program information flyer alongside the 2024 Tax Bills that
were mailed in August 2024.
• County staff worked with community partners at the Jackson Center, Homeowners
United, and Justice United to promote the LHA program.
• Organized visits to local churches and the Rogers Road and Cedar Grove Community
Centers to complete LHA applications and distribute LHA flyers.
• Partnered with church congregations in Orange County, including in northern Orange, to
share information.
Unlike previous years, advertisements were not placed in area newspapers. This saved the
County more than $10,000 in administrative costs and did not appear to impact the accessibility
of the program (the number of applications increased from this year from 2023 by 11%).
Staff calculated award amounts using the following guidelines:
• All applicants were arranged in priority order
o FIRST. Tax Burden, largest to smallest
o SECOND: Length in Home, longest to shortest
o THIRD: Age, oldest to youngest
• Full awards were allocated to as many participants as possible using $75,000 of the
$250,000 available funding.
• Staff determined a multiplying factor for the remaining $175,000 in available funding and
used this to reduce all other awards by the same percentage.
• All eligible homeowners received a minimum award amount of $200 or up to the full
amount of the County portion of their tax bill if it was less than $200.
• Award amounts were the County portion of the tax bill less 2% of the applicant's
household income.
Between August 1 and December 15, 2024, the County received 604 applications and awarded
$323,824 (including $73,824 in Town of Chapel Hill supplemental funding) to 484 households for
property tax assistance. The minimum award amount was $200. The average award amount for
recipients was $498.01, and the median award amount was $369.77.
41
LHA Applications Submitted
2023 2024
1
Number Percentage Number Percentage
Eligible
Applications 484 90% 502 83%
Ineligible
Applications 57 10% 102 17%
TOTAL 542 604
LHA Award Amounts
2023 2024
Number Percentage Number Percentage
$101-$200 123 25% 129 26%
$201-$300 67 14% 54 11%
$301-$500 127 26% 102 20%
$501-$999 97 20% 112 22%
$1,000+ 70 14% 105 21%
TOTAL 484 502
The County received the highest number of LHA applications during August. 83% of all received
applications were approved. The most common reason for application denial was applicants not
including the property tax form in their final application, which indicates the specific property for
which the applicant is requesting assistance. The demographics of LHA awardees is as follows:
Racial Demographics of LHA Awardees
2023 2024
Number Percentage Number Percentage
White 273 56% 282 56%
Black 99 20% 101 20%
Asian 40 8% 39 8%
Other 12 2% 25 5%
Undisclosed 60 12% 55 11%
TOTAL 484 502
Age Demographics of LHA Awardees
42
2023 2024
Number Percent Number Percent
:555 86 18% 86 17%
56-60 38 12% 37 7%
61-65 58 12% 63 13%
A "Last Chance" award round of $20,000 was
66-70 81 17% 82 16% developed to address the number of
applications that either: 1) Failed to submit a
71-75 78 16% 91 18% copy of their property tax; 2) Demonstrated
difficulty in navigating the application process;
76-80 56 12% 69 14% or 3) Exhibited other extenuating
circumstances. This ensured that the
81-85 40 8% 36 7% administrative burden did not prevent
applicants from receiving needed funds. Cost
86+ 42 9% 38 8% savings from office supplies, administrative
savings during the LHA process, and other
No data 5 1% 0 0% pre-existing Housing budget savings were
used to fund this award round. The award
TOTAL 484 502 amounts are as follows:
"Last Chance"Award Amounts
Number Percentage
$200 67 75%
$201- 18 20%
$300
$301- 2 2%
$500
$501- 1 1%
$999
$1,000+ 1 1% As a result of the Last Chance fund, a total of 591
people received support through the Longtime
Homeowner Assistance program. This represents a
TOTAL 89 100% 22% increase in recipients compared with the
previous year. This data suggests that the program
continues to address a critical need within the Orange County community, a conclusion
substantiated by anecdotal evidence from community members who benefitted from the
program.
The Housing staff is developing administrative changes to the program to prevent the need for
this type of Last Chance fund in the future. The demographics of the Last Chance recipients are
as follows:
43
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%
Blake Rosser, Housing Director, introduced the item and made the following
presentation:
Slide #1
44
nORANGE COUNTY
0 HOUSING DEPARTMENT
Results of CY24 Longtime Homeowner
Assistance (LHA) Program
February 20, 2025
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
n ORANGECOUNTY
0 HOUSING DEPARTMENT
Blake Rosser said staff has figured out a workaround for people who were initially
denied due to not submitting their property tax bill with the application.
Slide #3
45
Side-by-side comparison, 2023-24
LHAApplications Submitted
2023 2024
Number Percentage Number Percentage
484 90% 502 83%
Ineligible
Applications 57 10% 102 17%
'® 542 604
LHAAward Amounts
- 2023 2024
- Number Percentage Number Percentage
+ ++ 123 25% 129 26%
NOTT97,+ 67 14% 54 11%
WORM= 127 26% 102 20%
3] 97 20% 112 22%
++i 70 14% 105 21%
'® 484 502
n ORANGE COUNTY
0 HOUSING DEPARTMENT
46
Slide #4
Racial, Age demographics remain similar
across years
Age Demographics of LHA Awardees Racial 2023 2024 Demographics2023 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%
68 12% 63 13%
40 8% 39 8%
81 17% 82 76% 12 2% 25 5%
® 78 16% 91 18%
60 12% 55 11%
®i 56 12% 69 14% 464 502
40 8% 36 7%
42 9% 38 8%
5 1% 0 0%
484 502
ORANGE COUNTY
a HOUSING DEPARTMENT
Slide #5
For any questions:
Blake Rosser
• brosser@orangecountync.gov
• 919-245-2492
n ORANGE COUNTY
0 HOUSING DEPARTMENT
47
Chair Bedford asked if there are recommended changes for the program.
Blake Rosser said he does not have any changes at this time. He said that more funding
would always be better.
c. Draft Orange County Fiscal Year 2026 Annual Work Program for Transit
The Board received a report on the draft Orange County Fiscal Year 2026 Annual Work
Program for transit and provide comments on the Work Program.
BACKGROUND: In June 2024, the Orange County Staff Work Group (SWG) officially endorsed
the process and timeline for developing the Fiscal Year 2026 (FY26) Annual Work Program
(AWP). Recognizing the importance of efficiency and alignment with key stakeholders, the SWG
revisited the initial schedule during its September 2024 meeting, making strategic refinements to
further streamline the approval process. These adjustments were designed to enhance
coordination among participating agencies and ensure a more structured approach to meeting
critical deadlines.
Following these refinements, member jurisdictions, in close collaboration with Orange County
and GoTriangle, undertook a comprehensive effort to compile and submit all necessary
materials. This collaborative approach facilitated smooth and timely preparation of the draft
AWP, enabling its completion ahead of the holiday season. By proactively addressing potential
bottlenecks and ensuring thorough documentation, stakeholders successfully laid the
groundwork for a well-organized and effective annual transit tax budget for FY26.
The Draft FY26 AWP (Attachment 1) has been carefully prepared by Orange County, in its role
as SWG administrator, through a thorough and collaborative process over the past several
months. The draft has been publicly reviewed and deliberated during the December 2024 and
January 2025 SWG meetings, ensuring transparency and alignment with the priorities of all
stakeholders. Every project request has been thoughtfully considered and incorporated, and the
financial model remains stable and sustainable, fully adhering to approved governing
documents, including global agreements.
After two (2) months of dedicated effort and extensive coordination, County staff is confident
that the Draft FY26 AWP is comprehensive, fiscally responsible, and ready for public review.
Next steps per the approved schedule:
• Finalize Annual Work Program - February 28, 2025
• SWG — Recommend Approval - March 19, 2025
• BOCC — Public Hearing and Approval - April 16, 2025
• GoTriangle—Approval - June 17, 2025
The FY26 Annual Work Program will come back to Board of County Commissioners for a public
hearing and action at the April 16, 2025, Business meeting per the approved schedule.
Nishith Trivedi, Transportation Director, introduced the item and made the following
presentation:
48
Slide#1
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
FY26Annual Work Program
Slide #2
Outline
1. Background
2. Planning Process
1. Process
3. AWP
1. Highlights
2. Recommendations
4. Action
z
49
Slide #3
FY25 Work Program Overview
tn-1-in
orange county a.n•s.c• ty
transit plan update lransir Plan FY256nnuni Woh Pmgram
o1 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: o`rGE G04
COUNTY Triangle
Slide #4
FY26 Work Program — Process
Orange County » Annual Work »
ProgramTransit Plan Agreements
Long Range Vision Annual Budget Detail Project
Programed Projects Project Sheets Sheets
Legal Commitment
Results/ReportsProject
. -
Reimbursement
Quarterly reports by sponsor Quarterly
Q2 and Q4 reports by SWG reimbursement
Admin and Go Triangle Of local funds
Durham County
Transit Tracker
50
Slide #5
FY26 Work Program - Process
Feb • Draft Presented to
2025 BOCC
March • SWG revise and
2025 recommend AWP
April • BOCC Public
' Hearing and
25 Action
• Go Triangle
2025 Action
Slide #6
FY26 AWP - O erations/Administration
47category 10 era Ad.0.and Opting"-q R ests equ FY26 Roeat eg
GoTria Tax District Administration 21GOTADOI Tax District Administration-Financial Oversi ht Staff $ 201,720
GoTriangle Tax District Administration 21GOTADII Tax District Administration-Financial Oversl ht-Su rt Services O $ 81,305
GoTrian le Tax District Administration 21GOTAD21 Tax District Adminisrration-Financial Se rvices $ 45,876
Gpirian le Tax District Administration 2160TA022 Tax District Acirtrnislraticn-Audit Services $ %615
GOTrian le Transit Plan Administration 19WT0002 Transit Customer So s $ 12A92
GoTriangle Transit Plan Administration 21GOTAD02 TPA-P ram Management Staff $ 26,922
GoTriangle Transit Plan Administration 22GOTAD03 TPA-Project l mplementation Staff $ 182,318
Goirian le Transit Plan Administration 21GOTAD04 TPA•Legal and Real Estate•Support Staff $ 126,807
GOTriart le Transit Plan Administration 21GOTA005 TPA Marketing,Communication and Pt-$upporl Staff $ 56,214
GoTriangle Transit Plan Administration 22GOTADOG TPA�Regional Technology and Administration-Support Staff $ 82,274
Go n le Transit Plan Administration 21GOTAD12 TPA-Marketin Communication and PE-Support Services $ 34,030
GeTrfan le Transit Plan Administration 21GOTAD13 TPA-Transit Planning-Su rtS—ices $ 47,057
GoTriangle Transit0 rations 19GOTFSM Paratransit Services $ 25,178
GoT" le Transit Operations 20GOTTS03 Route 4001mprovements $ 1,560,547
GoTrian M Transit 0 rations 2000TTSOS Route 00%Im ro —nt, $ 231A"
MGordan le Transit 0 on ratis 20GOTTSOG Route CB%Im r—rnems $ 79,676
n. le TransitOperations 21GOT0001 Youth GoPass $ 19,1161
GoTria le TransitD rations 2160TD002 Fare Collection Technol $ 2OA61
GaTrian le Transit Operations 24GOTTP21 TAP Low Wealth GoPass $ 92,500
GoTriangle Transit Operations NEW GoTriangle Bus Stop and Property operations and maintenance $ 18,5W
DCHC MPO Transit Plan Administration 24MPOADDI Orange Coun Staff working Group Participation $ 41,821
Chapel Hill/CHT I Transit Plan Administration I 24CHTTSI3 I Transit Planner 1 $ 90,000
Chapel HiIIJCHT Transit Plan Administration 24CIMS14 Bus Stop Amenities Technician $ 6010W
Chapel HSRJCHT Transit Operations New Onboard TechnologyOA/QC Technician $ 90,000
Chapel HiIIJCHT Transit Operations 19CHTT502 Increased Cast of Existing Services $ 794,719
Route
Oran eCoun /OPT Transit Operations 290PTTSOI continuation of Transit Services Fixed Route $ 182,0W.
Ora a Chun /OPT Transit O rations 240P77501 Continuatlan of Transit Services Rural Route $ 455,000`
OrangeCoun /OPT Tran sit Operations 190PTT502 Increase Cost of Existin Services ICES $ 69,179
Ora eCovn /OPT Tran sit Operation s 2(IDPTT$p4 Hillsborou hCic Iat-2.0 $ 379,496•
Oran eOwn /OPT TsitOper.tions 20OPTT506 OPT Mobility on Demand $ 45510w,
Ora nge County/OPT Transit Plan Administration 24OPTTSOI SWG Administrator $ 64,193
Total Operating Requests $ 9,282,746
New Request 0 Revised Request g
51
Slide#7
FY26 AWP - Capital
Aleney Catenary ID Capital Project Requestr �w Yew FY26 Rpwrt
GoTrian Ie Vehicle Acquisition 21GOTVPOI Bus Purchases $ 766,166
601riangle Vehicle Acquisition 2ZC r4M1 Bus Purchases $ 216,667 $ 350,000
GoTriangle Vehicle Acquisition 25WTVP04 PHEVVehicles $ 25,000 $
GOTriar,le Transit Infrastructure 19GOTC001 ERP System $ 8,531
GoTrian le Capital Planning 21GOTC001 Origin Destination Survey 245,000
GoT,W,,Sle Capital Planning 21GOTC003 Transit Facilities Study $ 18,702
Goldangle Capital Planning25GOTCDIB Regional Technology Plan Update $ 25,000
Zrian le Capital Planning 22GOTC002 Short Ran a Transit Nan Update $ 35,000
GoTrian le Transit Infrastructure ISGOTCDI2 Bus Sto Im ra ments $ 177,074
GoTrian Ie Transit Infrastructure 2000TCDO3 While TcFetinv Validators $ 43,372
GoTH-gle Transit Infrastructure 22GOTCDOI Priority Transit Access Improvements $ 94,720
GoTrangle Transit Infrastructure 2SGOTCD01 HTllsborough Park and Ride $ SO0,000
GoTriar,le Transit Infrastructure 26GOTCDIS Forhdam Bfsd.Transit Access Improvements $ 5W.A00
GoTrian Ie Transit Infrastructure LRT LRT-Chapel Hill $ 1381046
orange County/OPT Capital Planning 24OPTAU06 NCUOT FAST 2 Study 105,000
Orange Cou /OPT Transit Infrastructure 24OPTTS12 Tra xe $ 200,000
Orange County/OPT Vehicle Acquisition 24OPTCD21 Mobility On Demand Vehicles $ 250,ODO
Oran a Cou /OPT Transit Infrastructure 260PFVP13 Expansion Bus Ac uisitions $
Town of Carr6oro Capital PlanningSSTOCCD02 Estes DrMe Transit Access Study[mmb C001] $ 106,296
Town of Carrboro Transit Infrastructure 26TOCCDI 203 ronnertor Sidewalk $ 120,2R3
Town of Carrboro Transit Infrastructure 26TOCCD2 West Main Street Sidewalk $ 110.919
Chapel Hill/CHT Capital Planning 24CHTCD14 Chapel Hill Transit Short Range Transit Plan $ 250,000
Chapel Hill/CHT Capital Plannin 24CHTCDIS Sale Streets For All(SSaA}Gran[ $ 50,000
Chapel Hill/CHT Transit Infrastructure 20CHTCDOI Bus Shelter lighting $ 53,148
Cha I Hill/CHT Transit Infrastructure 20CHTCD03 North South BRT $ S,OpO,g00
Chapel Hill/CHT Transitlnirastrucrure 25CHTVP15 Repower For Vehlles(combine with 26VP15) 5 20%684
Cha I Hill/CHT Transit Infrastructure NEW Commercial DC Fart Chargers for Battery Electric Buses I I $ 200,000
Total Capital Requ-b 1 $ 14,496,134 1 $ 5,319,446
Chair Bedford asked what the Fordham Blvd. project is addressing.
Nishith Trivedi said he will follow up with more specific information.
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
52
Slide #9
FY26 Work Program Capital
Prior Year Balance—Carry Forward
$1,040,616 $416,036
$555,000
oil
$3,923.650
$8,562,832
FY26 -Request
$719,897
$2,055,583
Chapel HHUCHT $918,966
Go Triangle 0
Maamlab
Carrbora $
- IV
Hillsborough
$1,625,000
1M
Orange County
Slide #10
520.000,000
$18,000,000
S16,000,000
S14.000,000
$12,030,000
S10,000.000
$8,000,000
66.000.000
s4.000.000
FY26 52,000,oaa
WorkCapital planning Vehicle Acquisition Transit Infrastructure
Program 512 001"
Capital $11r","
s8.00o,000
S6,000,000
$4,000,000
■ Prior Year Balance
(carry forward) sz 000,000
. FY26 Request S- ■ -
ChapelHillfCHT GoTriargle Gmnge CountylOPT Town of Gmboro T not Hllsbomugh
53
Slide #11
Action
The Manager recommends BOCC review the Orange County FY26 Annual Work
Program and provide comments.
Nishith Trivedi said this item will come back to the Board for a public hearing in April.
Commissioner Carter asked about the fund balance utilization note on page 86 of the
packet. She asked if that would show up on one of the previous charts.
Nishith Trivedi said he will provide more information to the Board on the fund balance
once he gets a specific figure from GoTriangle.
Chair Bedford thanked Nishith Trivedi for his work on this.
8. Consent Agenda
• Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda
• Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda
• Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda
A motion was made by Vice-Chair Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to
approve the consent agenda.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
a. Minutes
The Board approved the draft minutes for the January 17, 2025, and January 21, 2025 BOCC
Meetings as submitted by the Clerk to the Board.
b. Proclamation Declaring February 25, 2025, as Spay Neuter Day in Orange County
The Board approved a proclamation officially proclaiming February 25, 2025, as "Spay Neuter
Day" in Orange County.
c. Orange County Fiscal Year 2025 Q3 Annual Work Program Amendment for Transit
The Board approved a Fiscal Year 2025 Q3 Annual Work Program Amendment for transit.
d. Global Agreements for Operating and Capital Projects for Transit
The Board approved Global Agreements for operating and capital projects for transit between
GoTriangle and Orange County
54
e. Sunsetting of the School Capital Needs Work Group
The Board concluded the School Capital Needs Work Group's activities and formally sunseted
the Group.
f. Boards and Commissions —Appointments
The Board approved the Boards and Commissions appointments as reviewed and discussed
during the February 11, 2025, Work Session.
g. Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget Amendment #6
The Board approved budget, grant, and capital project ordinance amendments for Fiscal Year
2024-25.
9. County Manager's Report
Travis Myren had no report for the Board.
10. County Attorney's Report
John Roberts said he has some recent developments in the case he was going to
discuss with the Board in closed session that removes the urgency for discussion.
Laura Jensen said there is no urgency to approve the closed session minutes.
The Board decided not to hold a closed session.
11. Appointments
None.
12. Information Items
• Memorandum — FY 2025 Pension Spiking Review
• Memorandum — Financial Report - Second Quarter FY 2024-25
• Memorandum — NC Mountains to Sea Trail Progress Report
13. Closed Session
Based on the County Attorney's Report, the Board did not enter into closed session.
Adjournment
A motion was made by Commissioner Greene, seconded by Vice-Chair Hamilton, to
adjourn the meeting at 10:00 p.m.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Jamezetta Bedford, Chair
Recorded by Tara May, Deputy Clerk to the Board
Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board