HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 10-07-2025; 8-a - Minutes for September 4, 2025 Business Meeting and September 9, 2025 Work Session 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: October 7, 2025
Action Agenda
Item No. 8-a
SUBJECT: Minutes for September 4, 2025 Business Meeting and September 9, 2025 Work
Session
DEPARTMENT: Board of County
Commissioners
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Draft Minutes (under separate cover) Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board, 919-
245-2130
PURPOSE: To correct and/or approve the draft minutes as submitted by the Clerk to the Board
as listed below.
BACKGROUND: In accordance with 153A-42 of the General Statutes, the Governing Board
has the legal duty to approve all minutes that are entered into the official journal of the Board's
proceedings.
Attachment 1: September 4, 2025 Business Meeting
Attachment 2: September 9, 2025 Work Session
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with this item.
ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PLAN: This item supports:
• GUIDING PRINCIPLE — COMMUNICATION AND AWARENESS
We provide information and opportunities for engagement in a transparent manner so that
all in our community have knowledge, understanding, and a voice.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board approve minutes as
presented or as amended.
Attachment 1
1
1 DRAFT MINUTES
2 ORANGE COUNTY
3 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
4 BUSINESS MEETING
5 September 4, 2025
6 7:00 p.m.
7
8 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Business Meeting on Thursday,
9 September 4, 2025, at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Human Services Center in Hillsborough, NC.
10
11 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jamezetta Bedford, Vice-Chair Jean Hamilton
12 and Commissioners Marilyn Carter, Amy Fowler, Sally Greene, Earl McKee, and Phyllis Portie-
13 Ascott
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None.
15 COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts
16 COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Travis Myren, Deputy County Manager Caitlin
17 Fenhagen, and Clerk to the Board Laura Jensen. (All other staff members will be identified
18 appropriately below)
19
20 Chair Bedford called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. All commissioners were present,
21 except Commissioner McKee.
22
23 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
24 Chair Bedford made a motion to postpone item 6-a to a future meeting. Commissioner
25 Greene seconded the motion.
26
27 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
28
29 Commissioner McKee arrived at 7:01 p.m.
30
31 Chair Bedford read the public charge.
32
33 2. Public Comments (Limited to One Hour)
34 a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda
35 Rebecca Gallegly spoke about her concerns regarding a proposed rezoning issue for a
36 78-acre development on Highway 86 that would affect her small neighborhood of 14 homes and
37 Eno River Academy. She expressed worry about the potential for sewage from over 50 septic
38 fields contaminating Strouds Creek, which is a major tributary to the Eno River and protected
39 watershed. She noted that Eno River Academy students use the creek daily as a significant
40 learning tool for creek studies and hiking. She asked the commissioners to consider not rezoning
41 the agricultural land for a development.
42 Cathy Owens shared a handout with the Board regarding the agricultural features of the
43 proposed development on Highway 86. She has lived at 158 Blackman Lane (also 1501 NC
44 Highway 86 North) in Hillsborough for 24 years. She emphasized the importance of agricultural
45 use and the rural buffer to their lifestyle and how they raise their children. She noted that the
46 developer consistently calls their pasture "vacant land," which she characterized as "smoke and
47 mirrors." She detailed the wildlife on the property including deer that neighbors rely on for food,
48 bears, wild turkeys, and mollusks in Strouds Creek. She mentioned that their barn is one of the
49 20 oldest dairy barns in North Carolina and that Daniel Boone has walked through their front yard.
50 She strongly advocated for maintaining the rural buffer.
2
1 Christine Preddy said she is a teacher at Eno River Academy. She had just returned from
2 taking kindergartners into the woods on the property when she learned about the meeting. She
3 shared how the land is integral to their educational program, with eighth graders helping build
4 trails and the school conducting stream studies with the Eno River Association. She quoted a
5 kindergartner who said "I just never knew this could be school"during their hike.The school hopes
6 to eventually acquire and protect the land to slightly expand their campus while maintaining it as
7 a buffer for student learning and exploration.
8 Edward Mann said he was frustrated by the delay of item 6-a, regarding the Lumos
9 contract. He asked the Board to make the reasons public for delaying the item. He said that he
10 is a lifelong resident of Orange County and was originally slated to receive internet access through
11 Lumos in summer 2024. He said he has asked for updates repeatedly and received excuses. He
12 said the main goal is to get it done and get service. He asked the Board to be more transparent
13 with the public.
14
15 b. Matters on the Printed Agenda
16 (These matters will be considered when the Board addresses that item on the agenda below.)
17
18 3. Announcements, Petitions and Comments by Board Members
19 Commissioner Fowler said she attended a Board of Health where they learned about
20 Medicaid cuts to hospitals and providers. She explained that even though the reduction in
21 payments is concerning, the health department receives a yearly Medicaid cost settlement
22 payment that helps make up the difference between Medicaid payments and actual service costs,
23 which provides some relief for the Health Department. She said it is concerning for providers,
24 and patients may be pushed towards Health departments as a result. She said they also received
25 an update on communicable diseases and the confusion over access to the COVID-19 vaccine.
26 She said earlier in the day she attended the Community Care Coalition, and they learned how
27 providers help homeless individuals apply for SSI and SSDI. She said that individuals must be
28 involved with healthcare for a year before they can qualify, and they still must prove that they have
29 disabilities despite having healthcare. She said Boomerang is expanding service beyond school
30 suspensions and doing training for ISS, community resiliency, and wellness skills.
31 Commissioner Carter said she attended the annual NACo conference in July, where
32 Orange County was recognized for achievements in social engagement for older adults,
33 community care and diversion response, and the public art festival, Uproar. She described some
34 of the sessions she attended, including disaster response and risk management. She said she
35 attended a session with Google, where they discussed the massive infrastructure needed to
36 support data centers as well as the economic development impacts. She said she is excited to
37 work with the Tax Assessment Work Group. She said she is attending a four-day work shop on
38 reappraisals at the School of Government. She said she met with US Representative Valerie
39 Foushee to tour damage from Tropical Storm Chantal. She noted the previous improvements
40 made to the Lake Orange dam which meant that the dam held during the storm and protected
41 this critical water supply for Orange County. She expressed appreciation to the staff for their
42 ongoing work helping survivors of Tropical Storm Chantal.
43 Commissioner Greene said she saw a presentation on CAPER at the Affordable Housing
44 Collaborative, and that information will be shared at an upcoming public hearing. She
45 remembered Frayda Bluestein, a longtime, beloved faculty member of the School of Government
46 who recently passed away.
47 Chair Bedford said the Shred-A-Thon will be held at the Eubanks Park and Ride lot on
48 Saturday. She encouraged people to attend and described the requirements for bringing
49 materials to shred.
50 Vice-Chair Hamilton shared a conversation she had with a friend regarding the term
51 "revenue neutral tax rate." She said that the friend thought that it would be revenue neutral for an
3
1 individual property owner, but it is revenue neutral for the county. She said that revaluation is
2 mandated by the state, and it redistributes the tax burden across the county and properties. She
3 said she received a question about why the Board was focusing on a Tax Assessment Work
4 Group. She gave an example of how the revaluation and a revenue neutral tax rate would affect
5 a property owner, and demonstrated how an individual's increase in property taxes might be more
6 impacted by the revaluation rather than the property tax rate. She followed up on Commissioner
7 Fowler' comments and said mental health providers will also see the impact of Medicaid rate
8 reductions.
9 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said there was interest in renewing House Bill 118, which
10 would increase the Homestead Exemption for disabled veterans from $45,000 to $61,000. She
11 said that in Orange County, it would affect 209 accounts. She said she reached out to NCACC
12 with that information so they could indicate support for the bill. She said she attended the Orange
13 County Partnership for Drug Free Youth. She said she will attend the final session of fifth cohort
14 of the Hunt Institute,where they will focus on support for high school to post-secondary education.
15 Commissioner McKee spoke about the Lumos contract and his desire to ensure that the
16 original terms of the contract are met. He emphasized his commitment to Orange County
17 residents and in keeping promises.
18
19 4. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations
20 a. Orange County Preparedness Month Proclamation
21 The Board approved a proclamation declaring September 2025 as"Orange County Preparedness
22 Month."
23
24 BACKGROUND: National Preparedness Month is recognized each September to promote family
25 and community disaster planning now and throughout the year. North Carolina continues to
26 experience a high volume of disasters, to include the severe weather, flooding events, and
27 extreme temperatures. So far this year, Orange County has experienced multiple watches and
28 warnings issued by the National Weather Service for severe weather and flooding.
29
30 The most devastating disaster this year so far is Tropical Storm Chantal. On July 6th, Tropical
31 Storm Chantal brought over ten (10) inches of rain in a short period of time to the Orange County
32 community. This caused widespread flooding that resulted in over 70 water rescues, nearly 8,000
33 calls to 9-1-1, and the tragic death of one (1) person as she was travelling to work. Initial damage
34 estimates of the storm include 448 homes with damage, an estimated $26 million in commercial
35 damages, and over $24 million in damages to public infrastructure.
36
37 It is critical that everyone works together as a community to ensure that people are connected
38 and prepared to remain resilient in the face of future disasters.All residents of Orange County are
39 encouraged to take the month of September to build a disaster kit for their families, make an
40 emergency plan, and get connected with OC Alerts (Orange County's emergency
41 notification/information system) to stay informed during emergencies.
42
43 Sarah Pickhardt, Emergency Management Division Chief, introduced the item.
44 Commissioners read the following proclamation in turn:
45
46
4
1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
2
3 PROCLAMATION
4
5 September 2025 - "Orange County Preparedness Month"
6
7 WHEREAS, it is critical for every community, business, family, and individual in Orange County
8 to be prepared for natural and man-made disasters, including tornadoes, flooding, and hurricanes,
9 as well as disease outbreaks like COVID-19; and
10
11 WHEREAS, in 2018, Hurricane Florence brought significant rainfall in September causing
12 widespread power outages and flooding resulting in more than $26 million in damages; and
13
14 WHEREAS, the National Weather Service has confirmed four separate tornadoes that have
15 impacted Orange County since 2019; and
16
17 WHEREAS, this year Tropical Storm Chantal brought significant rainfall and an EF-1 tornado that
18 caused widespread flooding and destruction resulting in the tragic death of one person and over
19 $75 million in residential, commercial, and public infrastructure damages; and
20
21 WHEREAS, year to date, Orange County has already experienced significant severe weather
22 activity to include four tornado warnings, twenty-two Severe Thunderstorm Warnings, and
23 fourteen Flash Flood or Flood Warnings; and
24
25 WHEREAS, community members can take a few simple steps — creating an emergency supply
26 kit, making a family disaster plan, and staying informed —to help make preparedness a personal
27 priority and improved health a goal in our community; and
28
29 NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Orange County Board of Commissioners, recognize Orange County
30 Emergency Services - Emergency Management Division along with emergency managers
31 throughout the nation, who have collaborated to recognize September as National Preparedness
32 Month, and the Board joins them in encouraging Orange County residents to stay informed and
33 prepared;
34
35 FURTHERMORE, the Orange County Board of County Commissioners hereby declares
36 September 2025 as "Orange County Preparedness Month".
37
38 This the 41h Day of September, 2025.
39
40
41 Jamezetta Bedford, Chair
42 Orange County Board of
43 Commissioners
44
45
46 A motion was made by Vice-Chair Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to
47 approve and authorize the Chair to sign the proclamation.
48
49 VOTE: UNANIMOUS
50
5
1 Chair Bedford asked how Emergency Management coordinates with the Department on
2 Aging on emergency plans.
3 Sarah Pickhardt said every skilled nursing facility and licensed care facility is required to
4 have an emergency preparedness plan as part of accreditation. She said they partner with the
5 Department on Aging for outreach events. She said that at an upcoming event, they will assist
6 attendees with building a physical emergency preparedness kit.
7 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked how Emergency Management assists the unhoused
8 population during events.
9 Sarah Pickhardt said they coordinate with SORAD and the Housing Department for
10 outreach. She said with events they know are coming, it's a little easier, but with Tropical Storm
11 Chantal they did not have lead time to let people know.
12 Chair Bedford said getting people signed up for alerts is important.
13
14 5. Public Hearings
15 a. Zoning Atlas Amendment—4809 Friends School Road, Durham, Chapel Hill Township
16 The Board held a public hearing, received the Planning Board and staff recommendations, and
17 public comment, closed the public hearing, and approved a Zoning Atlas Amendment to rezone
18 +/- 110.456 acres (PINs: 9892-31-0306, 9892-22-7326, 9892-20-2052) located at 4809 Friends
19 School Road, Durham, within the Chapel Hill Township of Orange County.
20
21 The proposed rezoning is:
22
23 FROM: PDHRB (Planned Development Housing - Rural Buffer); RB (Rural Buffer)
24
25 TO: NR-CD (Non-Residential Conditional District)
26
27 BACKGROUND: A Conditional Zoning Atlas Amendment application (Attachment 1) was
28 received proposing to rezone approximately 110.456 acres of property at 4809 Friends School
29 Road, Durham, to 1) bring the existing school into compliance with the current Unified
30 Development Ordinance (UDO); and 2) allow for future expansion as enrollment increases.
31
32 The parcels' current zoning is Rural Buffer(RB)and Planned Development Housing - Rural Buffer
33 (PDHRB). Planned Development (PD)was a zoning technique prior to 2011 when it was replaced
34 with Conditional Use Districts (CUD). CUDs were replaced with Conditional Districts in 2020, as
35 a result of the North Carolina General Statute (NCGS) 160D amendments which removed CUDs
36 as a possible technique. The "H" in PDH-RB stands for Housing; the RB stands for Rural Buffer.
37 The nomenclature followed the requirements of the regulations at the time. There are a number
38 of Planned Developments in Orange County and they may continue to operate under the
39 approvals they received.
40
41 All application materials can be found on the Permit Portal. The Staff Report at Attachment 2
42 contains additional information, maps, and analysis with regard to the application's consistency
43 with County adopted plans. Approval of a site-specific plan is part of the conditional district
44 rezoning process, and the site plan and any agreed-upon conditions are binding to the
45 development permitted for the zoning district.
46
47 Basic Review Process: A conditional district rezoning application requires submission of a site
48 plan and other documents, in accordance with Section 2.9.1(C) of the UDO. Sections 2.8 and
49 2.9 of the Orange County UDO require the following review:
50
6
1 FIRST ACTION —Application is sent for courtesy review.
2 STAFF COMMENT. This property is located within the Joint Land Use Planning
3 Area (JPA)as defined by the Orange County-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Joint Planning
4 Land Use Plan. County staff provided application materials to Town of Chapel
5 Hill Planning staff on March 12, 2025. Town staff reviewed the materials and had
6 no comments.
7 • SECOND ACTION —Applicant holds a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM).
8 STAFF COMMENT: The NIM was held on May 7, 2025, at 7 p.m. at the Lower
9 Library of Carolina Friends School.
10 • THIRD ACTION — The Planning Board reviews the application at a regular meeting
11 and makes a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC).
12 STAFF COMMENT. The Planning Board reviewed this application at its regular
13 meeting on June 4, 2025, and unanimously recommended approval of the zoning
14 application, as presented.
15 FOURTH ACTION — The BOCC receives the Planning Board and staff
16 recommendations at an advertised public hearing and makes a decision on the
17 application.
18 STAFF COMMENT. The public hearing is scheduled for September 4, 2025.
19
20 Proposed Site Plan and Conditions
21 Per Section 2.9.1 (F) (3) of the UDO, mutually agreed upon conditions can be imposed as part of
22 this process if they address:
23 a. The compatibility of the proposed development with surrounding property,
24 b. Proposed support facilities (i.e. roadways, and access points, screening and buffer areas,
25 the timing of development, etc.), and/or
26 c. All other matters the County may find reasonable and appropriate or the petitioner may
27 propose.
28
29 Orange County Development Advisory Committee staff has recommended the imposition of
30 conditions, as included in the Ordinance in Attachment 9.
31
32 A formal site plan is required as part of a conditional rezoning application and has been submitted
33 (Attachment 1). The Zoning Atlas Amendment with a site-specific plan was initiated by Civil
34 Consultants, Inc., on behalf of Carolina Friends School and the Peter and Martha Klopfer Life
35 Estate, in order to bring the existing school site into compliance with the Orange County UDO and
36 to allow for future development as displayed within the submitted site-specific plan. The existing
37 school has approval for operation by a Special Use Permit, but to continue providing education
38 facilities for all ages of students, future development to expand the campus necessitates the
39 approval of a zoning atlas amendment to both bring the school use into compliance with the
40 current UDO and allow for the increased intensity of the use. The proposal will not change the
41 existing use of the parcels and will allow the school to expand as proposed in response to
42 population growth in the County. The proposal will not require the use of public utilities, as the
43 site is served through private onsite wells and a private onsite treatment plant and irrigation
44 system. Additional background information related to this request is contained in the Staff Report
45 (Attachment 2).
46
47 Public Notification: In accordance with Section 2.8.7 of the UDO, notices of the Public Hearing
48 meeting were mailed via first class mail to property owners within 1,000 ft. of the subject parcel.
49 These notices were mailed on August 22, 2025, 13 days before the meeting. Staff also posted
1 the subject parcel with a sign on August 22, 2025, 13 days before the meeting. See Attachment
2 3 for the notification materials.
3
4 Planning Board Recommendation: The Planning Board reviewed the Zoning Atlas Amendment at
5 its June 4, 2025 regular meeting. At this meeting the Board voted unanimously to recommend
6 approval of the Statement of Consistency (Attachment 7) and the proposed Zoning Atlas
7 Amendment (Attachment 9).
8
9 The minutes from the meeting, as well as the Board's signed statement of consistency, are
10 included in Attachment 6. Agenda materials from the meeting can be viewed at:
11 https://www.orangecountync.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/ 06042025-2275
12
13 Planning Director's Recommendation:
14 The Planning Director recommends that the Board of County Commissioners:
15 1) Consider the matter for action;
16 2) Acknowledge that legally-sufficient public notice was given for the application and this
17 meeting, in accordance with State law and the Orange County UDO;
18 3) Review the staff report (Attachment 2), featuring analyses of UDO compliance, impact
19 of the use to the surrounding area, safety and efficiency of land use, and consistency
20 of the application with the Orange County's adopted plans;
21 4) Allow for the applicant's presentation of materials;
22 5) Conduct the public hearing, receive public comments, and consider the Planning
23 Board recommendation;
24 6) Close the public hearing; and
25 7) Vote to Approve the Statement of Consistency (Attachment 7) and Zoning Atlas
26 Amendment Ordinance (Attachment 9).
27 OR
28 Vote to Deny the Zoning Atlas Amendments, including a statement as to why the
29 application is not reasonable and/or not in the public interest, as detailed in the
30 Statement of Inconsistency (Attachment 8).
31
32 Lauren Honeycutt, Planner II, made the following presentation:
33
34 Slide #1
OMNGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Board of County Commissioners
Meeting
September 4, 2025
7:00 p.m.
35
8
1 Slide #2
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Item : Zoning Atlas Amendment
(Conditional District)
PHRB and RB Zoning to NR-CD Zoning
Location:4809 Friends School Road
PINs: 9892-31-0306, 9892-22-7326, 9892-20-2052
Applicant: Carolina Friends School and
Peter and Martha Klopfer Life Estate
Case#: MA25-0009.
z
3
4 Slide #3
Conditional District Overview
Conventional District Zoning Conditional District
_j A
Standards must be uniformly Request is use-specific with
applied throughout the County individualized development
conditions and standards
No site-specific.individualized Site-specific development plan
conditions may be imposed. is part of review and approval
process
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
9
1 Slide #4
Zoning Atlas Amendment -• MA25-0001(Carolina Friends School)
4809 Friends School Road
Overview:
4809 Friends School Vfrinity Map for Rezoning -Applkatlnn PINS 9892202052.989222732b.
.a a and itatI loG
Road J• µ
9892-31 0306 " t
9892-22-7926 1
9$92-20-2052
Township
s r'.
Chapel Hill `s
`>
Jordan Lake "'
Unprotected
Carolina Friends School ^W+
Applicantand Peter and Martha ��
Klopfer Life Estate X
2
3
4 Slide #5
Zoning Atlas Amendment- MA25-0001(Carolina Friends School)
4809 Friends School Road
• '■
K—ning Application to NR CR for AIN'9ay22 52,989221)j2b,
CurrentZonink and 9891.iojo5
• PDHRB(Planned Development
Housing-Rural Buffer)
■ R8(Rural Buffer)
Requested Zoning
■ Non-Residential Conditional District
(NR-CD)
• Use:Schools.Preparatory
SurroundingZoning
• Rural Buffer(RB)
5
6 Lauren Honeycutt said that the purpose of the request is to bring the existing school into
7 compliance with the LIDO and allow future expansion as enrollment increases.
8
9
10
1 Slide #6
Zoning Atlas Amendment- MA25-0001(Carolina Friends School)
4809 Friends School Road
Overview (continued):
A&pted FULUM Land Ul Map with Parcels 989IM2052,
9892277326,,and!98923,o3o6 Depicted
Future Land Use Map Designation i
4t
Rural Buffer
• Land adjacentto an Urban or
Transition area which is rural in
character and which should remain
rural,contain very low-density +
residential uses and not require
urban services during the plan
period.
• No proposed amendment '"�"° �••�
2
3
4 Slide #7
Zoning Atlas Amendment- MA25-0001(Carolina Friends School)
4809 Friends School Road
• '■
Joint Planning Area(JPA)Future Land Use ageet.MyCh.,pOHalGnrij—,I enl anningA—
Classification
Rural Buffer
• Land which,although adjacent to an Urban or —
Transition Area,is rural in characterand which will
remain rural and notrequire urban services. J
f
• Expected to contain density residential uses,
agricultural uses exempt from zoning regulations,and
low intensity agricultural support uses.
• TheJPA Land Use Plan categorywithin the Rural Buffer 7 T
is Rural Residential,defined as low-density areas
consistingof single-family homes situated on large
lots.
• Rural Residential Areas are identical to the definition
of the Rural Buffer.The area includes property ,
supporting farming operations,including forestry o„ w . •:: ■
activities.
5
6
7
11
1 Slide #8
Zoning Atlas Amendment- MA25-0001(Carolina Friends School)
4809 Friends Schoof Road
Overview (continued):
Conditional District Application Requirements texnnin&MVikat.n to NR40for c€r a g8g;aa]dS2.gBqxl5732b,
and gigs}n3o5
• Site Specific Plan
i
• Environmental Assessment �t✓
f
• Biological Inventory
• Additional Information as Identified by
Reviewing Agencies
A 7
2
3
4 Slide #9
Site-Specific Plan
5
6
7
12
1 Slide #10
Review Process
■ Staff
,Plannin
• Determine application completeness and analyze proposed Zoning Atlas Amendment
with Comprehensive Plan
Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM)
• Coordinated by applicant
• Held on May 7,2025
a :._ .
'Plannin
• Hear from the applicant, staff,and the public
• Review and discuss analysis and staff recommendation
• Recommend approval or denial to Board of County Commissioners
:•. • of Countya •
• Schedule and hold public hearing to receive application
• Hear from the applicant, staff,and the public
• Review and discuss analysis and recommendations from staff and Planning Board
• Close public hearing
2
3
4 Slide #11
Applicant presentation
ORANGECOUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
13
1 At this point John Sharon of Carolina Friends School, representing the applicant, made
2 the following presentation:
3
4 Slide #1
rV
Owner and Applicant: Carolina Friends Schaal and Peter and Marlha Klopfer Life Estate
CAROLINA. oa
FRIENDS Oa
SCHOOL •i.i ..
5
6
7 Slide #2
Carolina Friends school
About Us
`XRCJ 1W
FRIENDS
SCHOOL
8
9 John Sharon described the values of the school.
10
14
1 Slide #3
60+ Years - Quaker School in the Woods
per.+ ..._.; �.r :';- •. � � � !:
CAROLINA4 1„,nm muni,
FRIENDS Zo __-..
SCHOOL wl1kl,lr<h iro'•-nln•
2
3
4 Slide #4
Sustainability
RADIANT HEAT
/e■`/{R^..j//try\ .Um —we.a.rq
Y Z
COMPOST
EFFICIENCY GEOTHERMAL tpw sna a vin
•LEDhu —psinYda �Q�..._.Hdln •cwnplfPOpwxwsd
•tArrMp ti>�t COnfW5�K15 =,! �_ q yo�pq,e'yalt/tl In 3U.3
/� 1Yatelisnnp taueets
��\{ parypumrp anf Csfan
SOLAR PANELS PLANT SALE
COMPOST �a er s�nnw wvm w
I,Arary BuaOi j4 Arnwtyala of p[rtfars and
•In{Hr;reS•rifup vnrlM1 [aATLi nun�mty MgC[abtes DrpnTl In W r
(pf- y,MVn� 1ppypr 5[fpN Meeelrg HMI giaan fwrufo
OnfSr¢,{7D0[5Y5¢y pI CMn STear fj.¢pp raf W fW aGD
compost cree4ed In 1027 Duman Early Yhod MYEMroA 9ranL a,K25
CAROLINA 4,,,tl Euuhunla
FRIENDS ►
SCHOOL withArrhltmtttrr,
5
7
15
1 Slide #5
Our Quaker Identity
• Belief that the truth is continually revealed
• Belief in seeking peace with oneself and others
• Belief in accepting and respecting each individual's
uniqueness
• Belief in the spirituality of life
• Belief in the value of simplicity
• Belief in the power of silence
CAROLINAwnsult nls
FRIENDS U`.----
SCHOOL withA rCh!ICC 1 u I'r
2
3 John Sharon said that the two beliefs bolded in slide #5 were key tenets of their identity
4 as a school.
5
6 Slide #6
Measured Growth
��1 1
r m� -
� t
CAROLINA iv.Icn�ullants
FRIENDS
SCHOOL wflhArchiterturC
7
8
9
16
1 Slide #7
Today
• Campus now
• Environmental Studies
• Nature Play
e
CAROLINA
2 SCHOOL
3
4 Slide #8
Future Possibilities
• Maintain the creek, woods, and natural habitat
• Expand sustainability features
• Continue with same use and spirit
• Enhance learning environment
• Sere additional families
• Campus enrollment 455 : 500 over next ten years
CAROLINA a ,,,masulmuts
FRIENDS
SCHOOL wAh.A-h1wtu-
5
6
7
17
1 Ellen Weinstein, an architect at withArchitecture, continued the presentation:
2
3 Slide #9
Carolina Friends School
CAMPUS on Friends School Rd
CAROLINA Qo c n++,haorfw
4 FRIENDS
5
6 Slide #10
�e -
�
Carolina Friends School a
Oo
CAMPUS TODAY
a
Q4 013
o,
C kROI IN;,
ppQ.i,,,ItunsuElnnls
FR'ENr'S
SCHOOL wi[h�'rl'itreiecre
7
18
1 Ellen Weinstein described the features of the property.
2
3 Slide #11
Carolina Friends School
CAMPUSTODAY •
Lower School +rte• -•-• -- - ;, R
Middle school ....... - -
UPPer School •- u•------•
€arly School - �
CAROLINA oo
FRIENDS a .......
4 SCHOOL
5 Ellen Weinstein described the current layout of the school.
6 Slide #12
t
Carolina Friends School
CAMPUS TODAY •
Perlorming Arts Genler ............'j 1 "
1
Gym&Soccer Fields I •-
Track,Cross Country and Tennis • _ - �'
4
A
CAROLINA 0o y'
7 FRIENDS T - o
SCHOOL MhAr.,InNr Harr
19
1 Slide #13
Carolina Friends School
CAMPUS in3to5yaars
cr'
Now Upper School,Drop-off&Parking
f
I
II
p L !
o E
Mt Sinai Rd Entrance--------•-
!4 G
FRIENDS ac
SCHOOL
2
3 Ellen Weinstein described some of the of additional features the school would like to add
4 in the future.
5
6 Slide #14
�.T
Carolina Friends School
pa
CAMPUS m,otQ,syear5
4
a
0
R
CAROLINA cnrlrorkwllam.,
FRIENDS �� r
7 SCHOOL mthArThllecture
8
20
1 Slide #15
� v
0
�o
Campus in 2025 Campus in 2040
CAROLINA toonsultanLs
FRIENDS
SCHOOL withAmfi tectntrn
2
3
4 Michael Fieldgo with Civil Consultants continued the presentation:
5
6 Slide #16
Carolina Friends School
REZONING
CAROLINA rnusu4uau
FRIENDS
SCHOOL vithArchkmtuiv
7
21
1 Michael Fieldgo said that when the school began discussing their long-term plans, it was
2 recognized they would need to apply for conditional zoning. He said they have a commitment to
3 report back to staff on progress at least every 5 years or sooner if they make additional
4 applications for development.
5
6 Lauren Honeycutt resumed the staff presentation:
7
8 Slide #12
Public Notification
• Notices were mailed via first class mail to property owners within
1,000 ft. of the subject parcel on August 22, 2025.
■ Signs posted the subject parcel on August 22,2025.
■ Legal Ad published on August 20, 2025 and August 27, 2025.
■ Application information has also been posted on the Planning
Department's"Active Development"webpage.
9
10
11 Slide #13
Proposed Conditions
Per NCGS 160D-703,imposed conditions and site-specific standards
are limited to those that address conformance of the development and
use of the site to local government ordinances and adopted plans or the
impacts reasonably expected to be generated by the development or use
of the site.
Per Section 2.9.1(F)(3)of the UK,mutually agreed upon conditions
can be imposed as part of this process if they address:
a. The compatibility of the proposed development with surrounding property,
b. Proposed support facilities(i.e.roadways,and access points,screening
and buffer areas,the timing of development,etc.),and/or
c. All other matters the County may find reasonable and appropriate or the
petitioner may propose.
12
22
1 Slide #14
Proposed Conditions
Per Section 2.9.1{F)(3)of the UDO,the following conditions are being proposed
1. Normal hours of operation for the School Facility are typically weekdays from 7:30 am to 6:30 pm,plus
occasional evening activities which may occur outside of normal hours,such as board of committee
meetings,performances,special lectures,seasonal indoor sports practices or events,etc.Seasonally,
outdoor sports practices and events may occur only until dark,since no outdoor athletic lighting will be
provided.Occasional seasonal evening and weekend activities include campus market for on-campus
grown agricultural items such as vegetables and flowers.Occasional seasonal weekend activities
include very limited work by staff,facility cleaning and maintenance,scheduled rental use of the soccer
fields by community-based sports organization,and limited community use of the walking trails and
track or activities such as"pick up"basketball or soccer,as allowed by the school.
2. No lighting will be provided on existing or proposed athletic fields or courts.Site lighting for
Improvements on campus requiring Site Plan approval shall be provided in accordance with Orange
County lighting standards at the time of Site Plan approval.
3. No burning of land clearing waste shall occur.
4. Landscape and buffer requirements shall conform to the Orange County UDO at the time of approval
with the following modifications orexceptions:
a) Existing conditionsand facilities within the bufferarea,above or belowground,may remain intact,remain
in service,and be maintained as needed,but not unduly expanded,
b) Buffer areas that do not currently meetvegetation standards for required bufferswill notrequire new
plantings or other screening;and
c) Byapproval of detailed Landscape Protection and Re-vegetation Plan,selected Individual treeswithin
buffer areas may be removed and replaced.
2
3
4 Slide #15
Proposed Conditions
5.Site Improvements shown hereon and/or referenced as future Site Improvements hereon or In the
Conceptual Construction Projection of this Conditional Zoning application establish local buiiding
footprints and shall not be construed to specify exact locations or size of buildings or other
improvements or otherwise restrict the limits of disturbance.The application Site Improvements are
conceptual and shall allow for relocation of buildings and other improvements provided that the
selected location is in accordance with the Orange County UDO at the time of Site Plan approval
and/or Construction Permits from Orange County and/or other Authorities Having Jurisdiction.The
locations included with those future applications shall be required to meet applicable standards at the
time of application except as modified herein or by proper Project Entitlement and/or Permitting
Processes.
6.Applicant shall include internal and driveway improvements consistent with the November 21,
2024,Traffic Impact Analysis Review letter issued by C.N.Edwards,Jr„P.E.,upon submittal of
construction drawings fora driveway permit an Mt Sinai Road associated with construction of the New
Upper School.
7.Parcels 1,2 and 3 will be combined into a single parcel within 24 months of expiration of the Klopfer
Life Estate.
8.Approval of this zoning application is intended to include the existing uses and features allowed in
the original Special Use Permit as modified.Upon approval of this zoning application,the Special Use
Permit as modified is no longer necessary and shall be extinguished. a
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
7
23
1 Slide #16
Staff Analysis
1. The application is complete in accordance with the requirements of the UDO.
Staff review determined that the application is complete,and all submitted
materials are in compliance with the following applicable sections of the UDO:
• Section 2.8,Zoning Atlas and Unified Development Ordinance
Amendments
• Section 2.9,Conditional Districts
• Section 5.8.4,School Preparatory
2. Staff review of the application included considerations for how the request
relates to the Orange County 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
3. The requested zoning district,NR-CD(Non-Residential Conditional District),is
consistent with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan,Appendix F,Relationships
Between Land Use Classifications and Zoning Districts.
4. The applicant has provided a basic environmental assessment as part of this
submittal.Staff has reviewed and determined no significant environmental
impact is expected from this project based on existing conditions.
2
3
4 Slide #17
Zoning and Land Use Review
ppendix F., Land Use and Zoning Matrix
tuwf�r 1nsrRlen
1.nM ure rin,.eeeminn.s e c —
overlms x Y 5 z J -- @Y Y T_
Chwpel 1101 tmn.iiinn Ptntul:tdminL+trllionM♦lnniefpalitirs fdtt lot Ifrnli lusts u![M lohet l'IanninR:\4RtnYu['
['.r .'r'rvnsitinn ('n \lu i I't di h ,1
10-Year'1'ransitinn
211-1 t nr'I'rnnsitivn ♦ ♦ • •.
(.'nmmercial-I mn.vitiun
nct'r'ty Node
ot
i'nmmerrinl-Indus[ria6
'1'rensi[inn\tliv it ♦ •
E.. r Dt e1,pm t
Rural Duller i
Nurnl Nesidrn[inl • � •.
\Crindmml RrsWanlial •
R-1(— v Acciv'n,
Rural N6gh1mrhvnd.
Rund 1n11ua[rinf A101 i[V
\ndr
- rnnhe Inferrer arta
Orange County 2030 Comprehensive Plan,Appendix F
ORANGE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
5
6
24
Slide #18 1
2
3
Slide #19 4
5
6
25
Slide #20 1
2
3
Slide #21 4
5 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she had a family member that attended the Carolina 6
Friends School. 7
Chair Bedford indicated that they disclose this type of information in case the County 8
Attorney determines the Board has a conflict of interest. 9
26
Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked why the hours of operation were listed in the 1
conditions. 2
Lauren Honeycutt said these were the hours listed by the applicant and are self-imposed 3
constraints. 4
Chair Bedford asked about condition seven. She asked who enforces conditions. 5
Cy Stober, Planning Director, said the zoning will be recorded the Register of Deeds. He 6
said that it is Planning Department’s responsibility to maintain that information. He said in two 7
years it made sense for recombination to occur. 8
Chair Bedford said it would likely be shared with the estate planning attorney. 9
Vice-Chair Hamilton asked what the projected number of students is for the school in 10 10
or 15 years, and how that would affect water usage. 11
Michael Fieldgo said the existing permits limits water usage and effluent discharge to 500 12
students. He said if they exceed 500 students, they will have to update the state and increase 13
the system capacity. He said that NCDOT was guaranteed 500 students with the access 14
proposed by the school. 15
Vice-Chair Hamilton asked how future updates would affect the decision the Board was 16
making that evening. 17
Michael Fieldgo said the application being considered by the Board says they will not 18
exceed 500 students. He said if there was a modification to that, the school would have to come 19
back before the county. 20
Commissioner Carter asked if there is a condition that states a capacity of 500 students. 21
22
Lauren Honeycutt said the 500 students is not specifically in the conditions, but they are 23
constrained to the site-specific plan which does note a maximum footprint that they cannot 24
exceed. She said if they needed additional space for more students, it would require a 25
modification of the conditional district. 26
Cy Stober said condition six regarding the traffic impact analysis was for 500 students. 27
John Sharon said there is no plan to grow beyond 500 students. 28
A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to 29
open the public hearing. 30
31
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 32
33
PUBLIC COMMENTS: 34
There were no comments. 35
36
A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to 37
close the public hearing. 38
39
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 40
41
Chair Bedford said she was in support of the application and that it seemed to be a nice 42
fit for the neighborhood. She said there are some children who need a smaller school, and this 43
fits the needs of some families. 44
Commissioner Carter said the school has an amazing reputation in the community and 45
that she appreciated the applicant’s thoroughness and preparation. 46
47
A motion was made by Vice-Chair Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to 48
approve the Statement of Consistency (updated Attachment 7) and Zoning Atlas Amendments 49
(Attachment 9). 50
51
27
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 1
2
b. Public Hearing on Transit for FY 2027 – 5311 Rural Area Formula Grant, 5310 Enhanced 3
Mobility of Seniors & Individuals with Disabilities Formula Grant, and 5339 Combined 4
Capital Formula Grant Applications 5
The Board: 6
1) Conducted a public hearing on the 5311 Administrative, 5310 Operating, and 5339 7
Combined Capital grant applications for FY 2027; 8
2) Approved the 5311 Administrative, 5310 Operating, and 5339 Combined Capital grant 9
applications for FY 2027; and 10
3) Approved the FY 2027 Program Resolution (Attachment 1), and FY 2027 Local Share 11
Certification (Attachment 2). 12
13
BACKGROUND: Each year, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) 14
Integrated Mobility Division (IMD) accepts requests for capital, operations, and administrative 15
needs for county-operated transit programs. Additionally, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) 16
awards operating and capital funding directly to eligible recipients to assist with eligible operating 17
expenses, replace, rehabilitate, and purchase buses and related equipment, as well as construct 18
bus-related facilities. This funding also supports technological changes or innovations to modify 19
low- or no-emission vehicles or facilities. 20
21
Orange County Transportation Services (OCTS) is eligible to apply for funding for administrative, 22
operating, and capital projects and seeks a total of $576,321 in combined federal and state transit 23
project grant funding for FY 2027. 24
25
A Detailed breakdown is outlined in the table below: 26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
The 5311 Administrative, 5310 Operating, 5339 Combined Capital, and 5307 Operating grants 36
provide financial support for public transit system services that promote economic and mobility 37
self-sufficiency to the general public, the elderly, and individuals with disabilities. Additionally, the 38
funds support a transit system that enhances access for residents in both urban and non-39
urbanized (rural) areas to healthcare, shopping, education, employment, public services, and 40
recreation. 41
42
Jamael Wiley, Transit Planning and Operations Manager, introduced the item and 43
reviewed the information in the abstract and described how the proposal aligns with the county’s 44
strategic plan. 45
46
A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to 47
open the public hearing. 48
49
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 50
51
Grant 5311
Administrative
5310
Operating
5339 Combined
Capital Totals
Total $ 219,202 $ 500,000 $ 155,500 $ 874,702
Federal $ 175,361 $ 250,000 $ 124,500 $ 549,861
State $ 10,960 $ 0 $ 15,500 $ 26,460
Local $ 32,881 $ 250,000 $ 15,500 $ 298,381
28
PUBLIC COMMENTS: 1
There were no public comments. 2
3
A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler, seconded by Commissioner Carter, to close 4
the public hearing. 5
6
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 7
8
Vice-Chair Hamilton asked if the county match is already funded. 9
Jamael Wiley said the funds and the match will be budgeted in FY27. 10
Vice-Chair Hamilton clarified that the budget would have to be approved. 11
Jamael Wiley said yes. 12
13
A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler, seconded by Vice-Chair Hamilton, to 14
approve the 5311 Administrative grant application for $219,202 with a local match total of $32,881, 15
the 5310 Operating grant application for $500,000 with a local match total of $250,000, the 16
5339/5311 Combined Capital grant application for $155,500 with a local match total of $15,500; 17
and approved and authorized the Chair and staff to sign the FY 2027 Program Resolution 18
(Attachment 1) and FY 2027 Local Share Certification (Attachment 2) and give the Chair Bedford 19
the authority to sign the resolution on behalf of the Board. 20
21
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 22
23
6. Regular Agenda 24
a. Amendment to the Network Development Agreement for Broadband Deployment with 25
Lumos to Extend the Project Deadlines and Revise Passings 26
This item was removed from the agenda. 27
28
b. Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 – Board Request for Additional Information 29
The Board received an updated draft presentation schedule for the Board to receive additional 30
background information requested for the drafting of the Land Use Plan 2050 and made a decision 31
on potential costs associated with guest presenters, Clarion’s attendance during presentations, 32
and any meeting facilitation services. 33
34
BACKGROUND: This item was presented at the August 26, 2025 BOCC meeting and continued 35
to this meeting. 36
37
At its April 8, 2025 Work Session, the Board reviewed a draft schedule for receiving presentations 38
from County staff and guest presenters. In response, the calendar preference was for staff to 39
schedule agenda items through November and possibly beyond, to receive the information. 40
41
Subsequently, Planning staff has coordinated with the Clerk’s and Manager’s Offices to schedule 42
items on BOCC work session agendas and add two half-day retreats to the Board’s meeting 43
calendar. Attachment 1 is an updated schedule for the Board to receive the information 44
requested. Presentations are proposed for work sessions on September 9, October 14, and 45
November 11, 2025; and at half-day retreats scheduled for November 14 and November 21, 2025. 46
The subject matter to be addressed at each meeting may be modified based on the time required 47
to execute the contracts associated with independent expert presenters, lead time required for 48
preparation, and availability to attend on scheduled meeting dates. 49
50
29
Staff is requesting feedback from the Board on the draft presentation schedule (Attachment 1) 1
and use of County funds for subject matter experts and professional services. Following is a 2
summary with some additional details and associated potential costs: 3
4
Independent Subject Matter Experts – Subject matter experts are needed to address the topics 5
of groundwater hydrology, market analysis of rural activity nodes, and the economics of housing 6
supply/demand. Planning staff has identified the following organizations and experts for the 7
Board’s consideration: 8
9
Applied Resource Management (ARM) – For groundwater hydrology and community well 10
expertise. To include meeting preparation, attendance, and presentation. 11
$2,250 12
13
UNC School of Government, Development Finance Initiative (DFI) – For market analysis of rural 14
activity nodes, countywide housing needs, and countywide residential supply/demand. Services 15
include a written final report. 16
$45,100 17
18
Randall Arendt – For additional expertise on conservation subdivisions. Includes two days on-19
site to meet with staff, tour the County’s landscape, and present. How conservation 20
subdivisions could be designed to accommodate workforce housing is to be a focus. 21
($8,500 plus travel est.) $12,000 22
Sub-Total $59,350 23
24
Clarion Associates: 25
For continuity purposes, it would be helpful to have a staff person from Clarion Associates attend 26
the meetings for hearing presentations, Board discussions, and for note taking of items that will 27
require changes to the draft Land Use Plan 2050 prior to its release for public review and comment 28
during Community Engagement Window (CEW) #3. 29
(4 work sessions and 2 retreats) $4,020 30
31
Meeting Facilitator: 32
True North Performance Group (TNPG) – It may be helpful for a professional meeting facilitator, 33
with practical experience with governing boards and planning, to work with the BOCC at two key 34
stages of draft Plan development. First, to help the Board identify any changes to the draft Plan 35
prior to scheduling CEW #3 and second, after CEW#3 to inform the public hearing version of the 36
draft Plan. The deliverables would include customized agendas and facilitations plans, facilitation 37
of two retreats, and summary reports. 38
$17,500 39
40
Total $80,870 41
42
Staff can provide additional information about the services associated with each quote above at 43
the meeting. 44
45
Why does Orange County Need to Update its Land Use Plan? - In North Carolina, local 46
governments that apply “…zoning regulations… shall adopt and reasonably maintain a 47
comprehensive plan or land-use plan (North Carolina General Statute 160D-501(a)). This statute 48
requires that zoning regulations are “in accordance with a comprehensive plan” and requires that 49
local governments make statements of consistency when making rezoning decisions on a 50
30
development application. The existing Orange County Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1
November 2008. 2
3
Additional information about the project, including e-mail sign-up for project updates, is available 4
on the project website: https://www.orangecountylanduseplan.com. 5
6
Completed project deliverables, including Fact Book; outreach summaries; and more, are also 7
available on the project website: 8
https://www.orangecountylanduseplan.com/resources 9
10
Next Steps with the BOCC – Planning staff proposes to present an agenda item covering aspects 11
of County demographics, the planning process, plan implementation, watershed regulations, and 12
planning agreements at the September 9, 2025 BOCC Work Session. 13
14
Cy Stober introduced the item and described the 2050 comprehensive land use plan 15
process to date. He reviewed the proposed CLUP discussion calendar and the potential costs 16
for outside facilitators and experts, which was included the agenda packet. He asked for the 17
Board’s direction on these items. 18
Chair Bedford proposed looking at the calendar first, then reviewing potential costs. 19
Vice-Chair Hamilton asked if they had approved the calendar previously. 20
Chair Bedford said while the Board had generally agreed on a calendar in a past meeting, 21
they had not officially approved the schedule. 22
Chair Bedford said that as they learn new things, they will have to be flexible and update 23
if necessary. 24
Cy Stober said that state law requires that land use plans be maintained, and the 25
professional rule of thumb is to review ever 10 years. He said Orange County is at year 18. 26
27
PUBLIC COMMENTS: 28
Peter Childers expressed concern about for-profit companies providing expert opinion and 29
analysis. He said he was concerned about conflicts of interest. He said that UNC could provide 30
expert testimony on these issues and would also be independent. 31
Sadie Rapp said she would like to see the Board make use of the expertise that exists in 32
the state’s colleges and universities as well as non-profit organizations. She asked the Board to 33
take advantage of resources to address issues that face the county. She said she is opposed to 34
for-profit companies to examine issues relating specifically to rural activity nodes as they are not 35
invested in the wellbeing of our communities. She said hiring these consultants is irresponsible 36
when the expertise already exists in schools and non-profits. She asked the Board to avoid costly 37
for-profit consultants and uplift the wisdom in universities and non-profits, in general and 38
specifically relating to the comprehensive land use plan. 39
40
A motion was made by Commissioner Greene, seconded by Commissioner Carter, to 41
approve the calendar. 42
43
Commissioner Portie-Ascott expressed concern for meeting on Veterans Day, but was 44
willing to meet if that was the desire of the Board. 45
Chair Bedford said Commissioner Portie-Ascott could make a motion to amend the 46
calendar if she wanted. 47
Commissioner Carter asked if the closed session discussion on utility constraints could be 48
moved to October 14. 49
Chair Bedford noted that it depends on their availability and that a utility discussion would 50
have sensitive information. 51
31
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 1
2
Commissioner Greene requested that Roger Waldon, Kevin Foy, and Barry Jacobs be 3
asked to attend the work session on September 9 since they were part of the original plan. 4
Cy Stober said they would reach out. 5
The Board began considering the budget as proposed in the agenda materials. 6
7
Applied Resource Management (ARM) – For groundwater hydrology and community well 8
expertise. To include meeting preparation, attendance, and presentation - $2,250 9
Chair Bedford asked what a civil engineer does. She noted related to the budget item, 10
that Tony Whitaker from Civil Consultants offered to provide information pro-bono. 11
Cy Stober said a civil engineering is a discipline that integrates mathematics, physics, and 12
in this case, chemistry. He said civil engineers build the world around us and the infrastructure 13
we rely on in daily life. He said they are governed by administrative code that determines their 14
ethics and professional standards. He said the septic systems in question are for 3,000 gallons 15
per day of wastewater, or more community septic systems. He said they felt they needed 16
someone with experience designing, managing, and permitting those systems. He said Mr. 17
Whitaker had that experience and has served on the Board of Health. He said Mr. Cornett with 18
Applied Resource Management has worked with Mr. Whitaker on other projects. He said a 19
professional geologist can speak to the hydrology and the complex needs of Piedmont bedrock. 20
He said Mr. Cornett comes highly recommended. 21
Chair Bedford said those two presenters sound good to her. She asked if they should vote 22
on each budget item separately. 23
Commissioner McKee said he would prefer one at a time. 24
Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked for clarification on who would be paid to speak to the 25
Board. 26
Chair Bedford said Tony Whitaker would not charge a fee. 27
Commissioner Fowler said two people will provide information, one who will be paid and 28
one who will not. 29
30
Commissioner McKee made a motion to approve a budget of $2,250 for Applied Research 31
Systems to provide a presentation to the Board. Commissioner Greene seconded the motion. 32
33
Vice-Chair Hamilton said she shares concerns that Applied Resource Management is a 34
provider that installs these systems, and it may affect how they look at these things. She said 35
she had concerns that they would not get an independent opinion. She said even with the best 36
intentions, that perspective can skew things. She said that she would prefer someone completely 37
independent. 38
Commissioner Fowler said it would be difficult to find that person. She said it would have 39
to be from a university, and no one is going to be trained in this and not working in it. She said 40
that she trusts Tony Whittaker, but it sounds like he feels limited on what he could provide. She 41
said they have different expertise. 42
Cy Stober said Tony Whitaker’s expertise is wastewater, and it’s very different. 43
Commissioner Carter asked if getting the experience from the Briar Chapel community 44
septic system in Chatham County would be helpful. She noted they’d had some issues. 45
Cy Stober said he had spoken with the Chatham Planning Director regarding this issue. 46
He said that Briar Chapel’s situation was called a package plant, which is different from a 47
community septic system. He said based on previous feedback they removed package plants as 48
a solution for wastewater treatment. 49
32
Commissioner Carter said if it is not on the table to be considered, then it might not be 1
necessary. She asked if it would be helpful to understand. She asked if Briar Chapel moved to 2
a community system. 3
Cy Stober said no. He said the situation was resolved in Briar Chapel. 4
5
VOTE: Ayes, 6 (Commissioner Carter, Chair Bedford, Commissioner Fowler, 6
Commissioner Greene, Commissioner McKee, Commissioner Portie-Ascott); Nays, 1 7
(Vice-Chair Hamilton) 8
9
MOTION PASSES 10
11
UNC School of Government, Development Finance Initiative (DFI) – For market analysis of rural 12
activity nodes, countywide housing needs, and countywide residential supply/demand. Services 13
include a written final report. -$45,100 14
15
Commissioner Greene reviewed the proposed market analysis to be provided by the 16
Development Finance Initiative at the School of Government. She said after reflecting on the idea 17
she was not sold on it. She said that perhaps they need to let the market decide on what is 18
needed in the rural activity nodes. She said a housing study should be included with 19
transportation needs. She said Chapel Hill conducted a housing study. 20
Cy Stober said they will refine the scope with DFI if that’s what the Board wishes. He said 21
he’s been in contact with the Home Builders Association, and they are interested in Chapel Hill 22
housing study and how it may apply more widely. He said the scope of the proposal was 23
responding to items 7 and 8 on page 8 of the agenda materials. 24
Commissioner McKee said the market will determine what happens in rural activity nodes. 25
He said he’s concerned about spending $45,000 and not knowing exactly what they are going to 26
get. He said he’s having a hard time spending large amounts of money when they have more 27
immediate needs. 28
Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she has concerns about spending $45,000, but she 29
wants to understand the county’s housing needs. She said there are a lot of different opinions on 30
what’s happening. She hoped that they could get an approach to ensuring that all forms of housing 31
can be built. 32
Cy Stober said that would be the purpose and scope of the proposal. He said it would 33
provide a regional profile of the county relative to our neighbors, employment opportunities, and 34
transportation network as it relates what is missing from Orange County and what could be 35
realized. 36
Chair Bedford asked if the Board could see a proposed contract. 37
Cy Stober said they have a proposal, and they will send it to the Board. 38
Vice-Chair Hamilton said there have been many talks and studies on housing in the 39
county. She said to spend $45,000 would be a waste of money. She said they already know a 40
lot; the problem is where they will balance out on their desire to maintain ruralness and the need 41
for land for more housing. She said that is a central tension in the land use plan. She said given 42
the dynamic nature of housing, any study would not stay current. She said in an environment of 43
less resources, they will not be able to do much as a county. 44
Commissioner Fowler said they will never have enough to meet the needs. She recalled 45
that Commissioner Portie-Ascott said the county needed 4,000 additional homes based on a 46
study. She said that would be difficult to attain and they would always be behind the ball. She 47
said it’s going to be hard to get affordable housing; not subsidized, but affordable. She said with 48
all of the apartments that have been built, they haven’t lowered rents. She asked if a market 49
analysis determines that there is no market for a gas station or grocery store, but they are already 50
33
in the node, what would the Board do? She asked what the purpose of the market analysis would 1
be. 2
Commissioner Greene said it would be for new stores and gas stations at rural nodes. 3
She said they have heard that was a need in the community. 4
Commissioner Carter said they are setting the stage for what will define how Orange 5
County will look through 2050. She said she puts the cost in the context of what they are trying 6
to accomplish. She said she is looking for information on the county-wide housing needs and 7
what are the connections to transit, and the transition connections. She said she wanted to know 8
how those are connected with rural activity nodes. She said they should make an investment in 9
that kind of analysis. 10
Chair Bedford said that she was supportive of the proposal. She said that sometimes it 11
takes an independent analysis to develop a long-term plan. She said questions of expansion for 12
water and sewer are intertwined, and they need a framework. She said that the School of 13
Government is independent and reliable. 14
Commissioner Fowler said she would like to know where housing is needed in the county. 15
She said as they have grown, the question is if they need to make changes to WASMBPA or 16
increase density in the rural buffer. She asked if a market analysis could be done by November 17
11. 18
Cy Stober said he thought the housing analysis would be done looking at the needs in the 19
northern and southern halves of the county. 20
Commissioner Greene said she had talked herself out of the market analysis. She said 21
Vice-Chair Hamilton made some good points. She said she would want to have a strategic plan 22
for housing with municipal partners rather than a supply and demand study. 23
Commissioner McKee said they are talking 25 years out, and market conditions change. 24
He said in five years, 25 years from now, the conditions will be different. He said he is interested 25
in a general overview, but not for $45,000. 26
27
Commissioner McKee made a motion to eliminate the study, which was seconded by Vice-28
Chair Hamilton. 29
30
VOTE: Ayes, 4 (Commissioner Fowler, Commissioner Greene, Vice-Chair Hamilton, 31
Commissioner McKee); Nays, 3 (Commissioner Carter, Chair Bedford, Commissioner 32
Portie-Ascott) 33
34
MOTION PASSES 35
36
Randall Arendt – For additional expertise on conservation subdivisions. Includes two days on-site 37
to meet with staff, tour the County’s landscape, and present. How conservation subdivisions 38
could be designed to accommodate workforce housing is to be a focus. -($8,500 plus travel est.) 39
$12,000 40
41
Commissioner McKee said he supported this item, because it will give the county an 42
immediate idea of things they can do as proposals come up. 43
44
Commissioner McKee made a motion to approve a budget of $12,000 for Randall Arendt 45
to provide additional expertise to the county. Commissioner Greene seconded the motion. 46
47
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 48
49
Clarion Associates – For continuity purposes, it would be helpful to have a staff person from 50
Clarion Associates attend the meetings for hearing presentations, Board discussions, and for note 51
34
taking of items that will require changes to the draft Land Use Plan 2050 prior to its release for 1
public review and comment during Community Engagement Window (CEW) #3. (4 work sessions 2
and 2 retreats) -$4,020 3
4
Chair Bedford made a motion to approve a budget of $4,020 for a representative from 5
Clarion to participate in further land use plan presentations and discussions. Commissioner 6
McKee seconded the motion. 7
8
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 9
10
Meeting Facilitator – True North Performance Group (TNPG) – It may be helpful for a professional 11
meeting facilitator, with practical experience with governing boards and planning, to work with the 12
BOCC at two key stages of draft Plan development. First, to help the Board identify any changes 13
to the draft Plan prior to scheduling CEW #3 and second, after CEW#3 to inform the public hearing 14
version of the draft Plan. The deliverables would include customized agendas and facilitations 15
plans, facilitation of two retreats, and summary reports. -$17,500 16
17
Cy Stober described the contract with True North Performance Group and the background 18
and expertise of the facilitator. He said that Rebecca Jackson is adjunct faculty at the School of 19
Government and operates both in the private sector and academic. 20
Commissioner Greene asked how the facilitator came to the budget of $17,500. 21
Cy Stober said it includes two reports and facilitation services for the entirety of the project, 22
including one retreat and possible public hearings for the draft plan. 23
Commissioner McKee said he thought the proposal was excessive. 24
Commissioner Fowler asked how this facilitator would affect Clarion’s service contract. 25
Cy Stober said Clarion’s job is to receive input from the Board, public, Planning Board, 26
and staff. He said they are not to solve disagreements or reach consensus among the Board. 27
He said the facilitator would work directly with the Board to reach consensus. 28
Vice-Chair Hamilton said she thought the Board could reach consensus without a 29
facilitator. 30
Chair Bedford asked how much the county has paid in the past for facilitators, like for the 31
school safety task force. 32
Vice-Chair Hamilton said that task force included community members. 33
Travis Myren said they could not remember how much was spent on that task force. He 34
said that the cost of a facilitator of each school collaboration meeting is $2,000-$3,000. 35
Chair Bedford said this proposal doesn’t seem out of scope for the services being offered. 36
She said they have spent years on some items that they weren’t able to agree on. She said she 37
thinks the Board is very split on issues, and that they need a facilitator, otherwise the Chair must 38
facilitate. 39
John Roberts said the county spent $20,000 on the elections committee facilitator. 40
41
Commissioner McKee made a motion to eliminate the facilitator contract. Vice-Chair 42
Hamilton seconded the motion. 43
44
VOTE: Ayes, 4 (Commissioner McKee, Commissioner Portie-Ascott, Vice-Chair 45
Hamilton, Commissioner Fowler); Nays, 3 (Commissioner Carter, Commissioner Greene, 46
Chair Bedford). 47
48
MOTION PASSES 49
50
Commissioner McKee said he didn’t feel they needed a facilitator. 51
35
Commissioner Greene said she felt that they needed a facilitator so that the Chair could 1
fully participate in the meetings. She asked if there is someone in-house who could do it. 2
Chair Bedford said these are four-hour retreats, so for the settlement center it would be 3
$6,000. 4
Commissioner McKee asked if they could engage a facilitator just for the meetings to 5
ensure they run smoothly. 6
Chair Bedford asked if they could go back to the facilitator to ask if they could just do one 7
meeting. 8
Cy Stober said yes. He described how the county requested a proposal from the School 9
of Government for facilitation services. 10
Vice-Chair Hamilton said there are planners with Central Pines Regional Council who 11
might be interested. 12
Cy Stober said they would ask. 13
Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked when the Board would get answers to some of the 14
questions they posed highlighted in blue in the agenda materials. 15
Cy Stober said that information will be presented over the next 3 months. 16
Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she was specifically interested in input from developers. 17
Cy Stober said they’ve met with the Chamber of Commerce and the Home Builders 18
Association. He said that staff would like the Board to have all the fundamentals of development 19
down before they meet with developers. He said they will present all that material to the Board 20
between now and December. He said they will schedule a conversation with the Chamber and 21
Home Builders Association in early 2026. 22
23
7. Reports 24
a. 2024 Climate Action Plan Annual Report 25
The Board received a report on the first year of implementation of the Orange County Climate 26
Action Plan, highlighting progress made toward the County’s greenhouse gas reduction and 27
climate resilience goals. 28
29
BACKGROUND: In November 2023, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Orange 30
County’s first comprehensive Climate Action Plan, committing to reduce greenhouse gas 31
emissions 50% by 2030 and 100% by 2050. The plan outlines 70 strategies across five (5) key 32
focus areas: Transportation, Built Environment & Energy, Resource Conservation, Green 33
Community, and Resilient Community. 34
This annual report highlights significant accomplishments during the first year of implementation. 35
Staff will also provide a preview of upcoming initiatives. 36
37
Amy Eckberg, Sustainability Manager, made the following presentation: 38
39
40
36
Slide #1 1
2
3
Slide #2 4
5 6
7
37
Slide #3 1
2
3
Slide #4 4
5 Amy Eckberg said they recently launched an application portal to make it easier for 6
organizations and residents apply for grants. 7
8
9
38
Slide #5 1
2
Commissioner Fowler asked if there are fewer grants available for solar and climate 3
mitigation due changes at the federal level. 4
Amy Eckberg said there are fewer grants, and they must be more creative when seeking 5
funding. She said there are local, state, and private grant opportunities that they are pursuing. 6
Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if anti-idling programs are also available to residents. 7
Amy Eckberg said yes, and that they are hoping to partner with the schools as well as 8
reaching out to other members of the community. 9
Commissioner Greene asked about agro-voltaic grants. 10
Amy Eckberg said they recently applied for a Golden Leaf grant for agro-voltaic. 11
Chair Bedford asked which buildings are going LED next. 12
Amy Eckberg said the Whitted Building. 13
Commissioner Carter expressed congratulations on the division’s Clean Tech Innovation 14
Award. 15
Chair Bedford said electrifying residences to be more energy efficient can be expensive, 16
and there should be a plan to provide financial support. 17
Amy Eckberg said they will be able to see where rebates are, so that will also help 18
with electrification. 19
20
8. Consent Agenda 21
22
Removal of Any Items from Consent Agenda 23
Approval of Remaining Consent Agenda 24
Discussion and Approval of the Items Removed from the Consent Agenda 25
26
A motion was made by Vice-Chair Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to 27
approve the consent agenda. 28
29
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 30
39
a. Minutes 1
The Board approved the draft minutes for the July 8, 2025 BOCC Meeting as submitted by the 2
Clerk to the Board. 3
b. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds 4
The Board adopted a resolution to release motor vehicle property tax values for fourteen 5
taxpayers with a total of fifteen bills that will result in a reduction of revenue. 6
c. Property Tax Releases/Refunds 7
The Board adopted a resolution to release property tax values for twenty-nine taxpayers with a 8
total of thirty-six bills that will result in a reduction of revenue. 9
d. Late Applications for Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion 10
The Board considered twenty untimely applications for exemption/exclusion from ad valorem 11
taxation for twenty bills for the 2025 tax year. 12
e. Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget Amendment #2 & Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget Amendment 13
#12 14
The Board approved budget, grant, and capital project ordinance amendments for Fiscal Year 15
2025-26 and FY 2024-25. 16
f. Approval of Health Department Fee Change 17
The Board approved a new fee adjustment to the Environmental Health fee schedule as 18
recommended/approved by the Orange County Board of Health, and amend the FY 2025-26 19
County Fee Schedule. 20
g. Lease Renewal for Senior Care of Orange County, Inc. (Soltys Place) 21
The Board approved a resolution authorizing a five-year renewal of the lease agreement between 22
Orange County and Senior Care of Orange County, Inc. for Soltys Place at the Central Orange 23
Senior Center campus. 24
h. Amendments to the Emergency Management Ordinance – First Consideration 25
The Board approved on first consideration amendments to Chapter 14, Emergency Management 26
Ordinance, of the Orange County Code of Ordinances. 27
i. Amendments to the Noise Ordinance – First Consideration 28
The Board approved on first consideration amendments to Chapter 16, Article III, Noise 29
Ordinance, of the Orange County Code of Ordinances. 30
j. Approval of Revisions to the Orange County Code of Ordinances Section 28 – 31
Personnel 32
The Board approved recommended revisions to the Orange County Code of Ordinances Chapter 33
28 – Personnel. 34
k. Resolutions of Approval for the HOME 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (AAP) 35
The Board: 36
1) Adopted a resolution authorizing submission of the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan; 37
2) Adopted a resolution approving the proposed HOME Program Activities for FY 2025-38
2026; and 39
3) Authorized the County Manager to implement the HOME Program as approved by the 40
Board of Commissioners, including the ability to execute agreements with partnering 41
nonprofit organizations after consultation with the County Attorney and based on the 42
allocation received from the US Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD). 43
44
9. County Manager’s Report 45
Travis Myren said there will be an outreach event at the Comfort Inn for TS Chantal 46
survivors who are still housed there and reminded the Board about the work session on 47
September 9 at Southern Human Services Center. 48
49
10. County Attorney’s Report 50
John Roberts said the Sportsplex issues he mentioned previously were resolved. 51
40
11. *Appointments 1
None. 2
3
12. Information Items 4
August 26, 2025 BOCC Meeting Follow-up Actions List 5
Tax Collector’s Report – Numerical Analysis 6
Tax Collector’s Report – Measure of Enforced Collections 7
Tax Collector’s Report – Foreclosure Chart 8
Tax Assessor's Report – Releases/Refunds under $100 9
Memorandum - Settlement Report – MDL 2804 10
Memorandum - Commercial Property Assessed Capital Expenditure (C-PACE) Program 11
Overview and Potential Adoption in Orange County 12
13
13. Closed Session 14
None. 15
16
Adjournment 17
18
A motion was made by Commissioner McKee, seconded by Chair Bedford, to adjourn the 19
meeting at 9:38 p.m. 20
21
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 22
23
Jamezetta Bedford, Chair 24
25
26
Recorded by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board 27
28
Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board 29
Attachment 2
1
DRAFT MINUTES 1
ORANGE COUNTY 2
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 3
WORK SESSION 4
September 9, 2025 5
7:00 p.m. 6
7
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Work Session on Tuesday, September 8
9, 2025, at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, NC. 9
10
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jamezetta Bedford, Vice-Chair Jean Hamilton, 11
and Commissioners Marilyn Carter, Amy Fowler, Sally Greene, Earl McKee, and Phyllis Portie-12
Ascott 13
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None 14
COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts 15
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Travis Myren, Deputy County Manager Caitlin 16
Fenhagen, and Clerk to the Board Laura Jensen. (All other staff members will be identified 17
appropriately below) 18
19
Chair Bedford called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. All commissioners were present. 20
21
By a show of hands, the Board agreed to limit the discussion on the first item to two hours. 22
The Board also agreed to reorganize the agenda to discuss appointments after the Land Use 23
Plan 2050 discussion, then discuss the timing of Closed Sessions, and discuss next steps for the 24
Strategic Communications Work Group last, if time permitted. 25
26
Orange County Land Use Plan 2050 – Board Request for Additional Information 27
The Board received the first presentation in a series in response to the Board’s request for 28
additional background information for the Land Use Plan 2050 process. 29
30
BACKGROUND: At its April 8, 2025 work session, the Board reviewed a tentative schedule for 31
receiving presentations from County staff and in some cases, guest presenters, to provide 32
additional background information for better informing its direction on the Land Use Plan 2050 33
process. The Board’s calendar preference was for staff to schedule agenda items through mid-34
November to receive the information. 35
36
Attachment A is Part A of the BOCC request for additional information grouped into six (6) topic 37
areas by subject. To cover all topic areas, presentations to the Board are scheduled for work 38
sessions on September 9, October 14, and November 11, 2025; and at half-day retreats, 39
scheduled for November 14 and November 21, 2025. The half-day retreats are needed to cover 40
Part B (Attachment B) of the Board’s request for information and will include several guest 41
presenters. 42
43
The PowerPoint presentation (Attachment C) addresses the first three topic areas and related 44
Board questions, as follows: 45
46
1. Fact Book, Planning Process, and Implementation 47
a) The statistics supporting the “Need for a New Plan” can be misleading if taken out of 48
context. A brief analysis with appropriate statistics would be more informative and provide 49
a rationale for the updated Plan. e.g. Yes growing 8th or whatever in aging, but need to 50
know how fast all of NC is growing. 51
2
b) Please explain how a land use plan is drafted to reflect changes that may be far in the 1
future and how it can be amended to be a living document. Please include examples from 2
the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the proposed 2050 Land Use Plan. 3
c) Should we change the policy document (Land Use Plan 2050) (Comprehensive Plan) to 4
include proposed changes that could take years to work out? Or do not do that; make sure 5
the Plan is current policy? 6
d) Do not tie our hands in the Plan. 7
e) Could we amend the Plan? After working through a change with the towns? 8
9
2. Watersheds and Their Impact on Development 10
a) Show us map view of watersheds and boundaries. 11
b) Include any known/potential changes due to regulations. 12
c) Review the differences between watersheds and how that impacts what can be built or 13
operated within them. 14
15
3. Joint Planning Agreements (Including WASMPBA) and Rural Buffer 16
a) Remind us about the rural buffer/Joint planning and distinguish that from the WASMPBA 17
(Water and Sewer Management, Planning, and Boundary Agreement). 18
b) What is the rationale for each? 19
c) Where does the WASMPBA interact? 20
d) Who are the Agreement partners? 21
e) Which includes policies and practices that would be implemented if there were failing wells 22
and septic systems and/or a water/sewer emergency? 23
f) If appropriate, please reference other joint agreements with the towns and utility providers. 24
g) What can be built and/or operated in the rural buffer? 25
h) What are the processes to make changes to the agreements? 26
i) If the Board does wish to have an action item say to explore expanding water/sewer at 27
some location on the map where it is not currently allowed, then is that in the Land Use 28
Plan 2050? Or is that a separate work as petitioned by the Board? What is the order of 29
doing things? Seems like it matters? What would that process look like? 30
j) On that map of Carrboro Transition and/or ETJ area, is that blue dot in the rural buffer? 31
32
Community Engagement Window #3, to unveil a draft Land Use Plan 2050, is anticipated to occur 33
early next year. Additional information, including robust public notification, will be forthcoming 34
closer to the opening of engagement. 35
36
Additional information about the project, including e-mail sign-up for project updates, are available 37
on the project website: https://www.orangecountylanduseplan.com. 38
39
Completed project deliverables, including Fact Book; outreach summaries; and more, are also 40
available on the project website: 41
https://www.orangecountylanduseplan.com/resources 42
43
Tom Altieri, Orange County Senior Planner, made the following presentation: 44
45
46
3
Slide #1 1
2
Tom Altieri explained this presentation would be divided into three parts: data and 3
statistics, watershed information by County Engineer Christopher Sandt, and joint planning 4
agreements by Perdita Holtz. 5
6
Slide #2 7
8
4
Slide #3 1
2
3
Slide #4 4
5 Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked for clarification on what the Fact Book is. 6
5
Tom Altieri said one of the early deliverables from Clarion Associates was the Fact Book, 1
which includes the information that has been presented so far. The Fact Book is available on the 2
following website: https://www.orangecountylanduseplan.com 3
Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked about the data source, specifically mentioning updated 4
information from the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners. 5
Cy Stober, Planning and Inspections Director, said he’s happy to look at the data from 6
NCACC to compare. He said the Fact Book is a living document and is intended to be updated 7
as needed. 8
Chair Bedford requested clarification on the requirements for annexation. 9
Tom Altieri said that the practice of forced annexation, which allowed municipalities to 10
annex areas meeting specific development criteria, ended 10-11 years ago. This previous process 11
permitted municipalities to forcibly annex areas if they demonstrated certain developmental 12
thresholds, like certain densities of commercial or residential development. The change in the law 13
means that now annexation predominantly operates on a petition-based system. He explained 14
that under this system, developers must request connections to municipal utilities to initiate the 15
process of annexation. If such a utility request is absent, moving forward with annexation 16
becomes challenging, requiring the consent of 60% of the area's property owners. 17
Cy Stober said annexation necessitates agreement from 80% of every voting-age member 18
residing in the area in question, not just 60% of property owners. 19
Commissioner Carter asked if the Fact Book incorporated household data. 20
Tom Altieri confirmed limited household data in the Fact Book but noted staff 21
supplemented tonight's presentation with additional sources. 22
23
Slide #5 24
25 26
27
28
6
Slide #6 1
2
Vice-Chair Hamilton asked for the actual numbers for this demographic. She said the 3
percentage is going to change if there is more diversity in the community, but it does not indicate 4
that the absolute number has changed. 5
6
Slide #7 7
8 Tom Altieri said he will get the actual numbers to the commissioners for this statistic, in 9
addition to Race/Ethnicity. 10
7
1
Slide #8 2
3 4
Slide #9 5
6
7
8
8
Slide #10 1
2
Tom Altieri said Orange County is expected to grow less than neighboring counties and is 3
expected to grow the least between 2024-2029. 4
Commissioner McKee asked for the rationale for this projection. He said he would expect 5
growth to be higher because of the proximity to Wake County. 6
Vice-Chair Hamilton stressed the importance of understanding the data's underlying 7
assumptions, as the projected figures directly impact strategic planning and resource allocation. 8
She said these projections are crucial for informing future decision-making processes and 9
developmental policies within the county. 10
Chair Bedford said staff can follow up with some information about the assumptions 11
behind the data. 12
Commissioner Carter said she read up on Mr. Bowen, whose company is the author of 13
this report. For context of where the data is coming from, she read a couple of sentences from 14
the beginning of the report: “The housing supply gap analysis includes housing supply gaps for a 15
five-year period, 2024 to 2029, for each of North Carolina's 100 counties. These estimates rely 16
heavily on a variety of published secondary sources, including the US Census, American 17
Community Survey, National Demographer, ESRI, and Realtor.com. This analysis also involves 18
an inventory of surveyed multifamily rental alternatives, a detailed accounting of homes available 19
to purchase, and an evaluation of residential building permit activity.” 20
Chair Bedford said that information provides helpful context for the data. 21
22
23
9
Slide #11 1
2 3
Slide #12 4
5
10
Slide #13 1
2 Tom Altieri said this slide includes some of the key issues that point to the need to update 3
the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. 4
Chair Bedford added that the county attorney also advised that “timely reviews” of the plan 5
are required. 6
7
Slide #14 8
9
11
Slide #15 1
2
Tom Altieri said this is a screenshot of the midsection of Orange County and is the 3
currently adopted Future Land Use Map (FLUM). It expresses a community vision, which is largely 4
a continuation of land use classifications included in the 1981 land use plan, which was the 5
county's original land use plan. He said classifications like rural residential, 10 and 20-year 6
transition areas, and activity nodes were established in the original 1981 plan and were 7
reconfirmed through the development of the 2030 plan and have been achieved to various 8
degrees. He explained that the economic development districts were added to the future land use 9
map in the mid-1990s. 10
Chair Bedford asked how the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), FLUM, and 11
Comprehensive Land Use Plan interact. 12
Tom Altieri explained that the FLUM has land use categories and rather short and general 13
descriptions of each of those categories, and is part of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. He said 14
in the appendices of the Comprehensive Plan, there is what is commonly referred to as the matrix. 15
He explained that the matrix is a table and provides the direct linkage between the classifications 16
that are shown on the FLUM in all the county zoning districts. He further explained that staff 17
consults the matrix when there is a development proposal to see if an area is zoned appropriately 18
for a particular use. He said if it is consistent with the matrix and classifications, then it is consistent 19
with the FLUM. He explained that zoning is part of the UDO, where all the development standards 20
are detailed. 21
Commissioner McKee pointed out that the previous slide says the Land Use Plan will not 22
“tie hands”. He questioned how the requirements in the rural buffer don’t tie the hands of people 23
who own land there. 24
Chair Bedford explained that the question was asked in the context of how not to tie the 25
hands of the Board of County Commissioners. 26
Cy Stober said Perdita Holtz will speak more in detail during her portion of the 27
presentation, but if there is to be any modification to the Rural Buffer, it must happen in the Joint 28
Planning Agreement (JPA) and the Land Use Plan. He added more to Tom Altieri’s earlier answer 29
about zoning and the FLUM. He explained that state law speaks to all actions by a community, 30
12
including zoning actions. He said if a community wants to have zoning, it must have an adopted 1
land use plan, and to make any land use decision, it must refer to the adopted plan. Cy Stober 2
explained that the Board can make a decision that does not follow the plan, but by consequence, 3
that would change the plan. 4
Commissioner McKee said, technically, the rural buffer doesn’t prevent building, but it 5
prevents dense development. He stated the side effect of that is that to build there, you must have 6
a larger lot, which means larger homes, which means very few people can afford them. He said 7
this goes back to the question of housing affordability and the question of how Orange County 8
will grow compared to neighboring counties. 9
Commissioner Fowler said she did the math regarding Commissioner Hamilton’s earlier 10
comment about absolute population numbers vs. the percentage. The number of African 11
Americans in Orange County remained stable from 2010-2022 at 16,000, while the white 12
population increased from 95,000 to about 105,000. 13
Cy Stober said staff will update the Fact Book to show the actual numbers in addition to 14
percentages. 15
Tom Altieri continued his presentation of the current slide. He said the map on the bottom 16
is a screenshot of the preliminary draft FLUM for the 2050 Land Use Plan. While there are 17
similarities to the existing FLUM, there are also some differences. He pointed out that economic 18
development areas were retained, and some were expanded around the Mebane area. He said 19
the rural buffer was also retained, as well as the concept of activity nodes. A key difference he 20
mentioned is the introduction of rural conservation neighborhoods, shown on the map in brown. 21
He said those types of neighborhoods can only be implemented through changes to the UDO to 22
accommodate those types of subdivisions. He said staff is working with Randall Arndt to present 23
to the Board on this type of conservation subdivision. 24
Commissioner Fowler asked if rural conservation neighborhoods would be allowed in the 25
Rural Buffer as it currently stands. 26
Perdita Holtz said she will get to that during her presentation. 27
28
Slide #16 29
30
13
Tom Altieri said in short, the answer to the question on this slide is that by virtue of the 1
agreement with Chapel Hill and Carrboro, it requires all parties to work together on potential 2
changes to the joint land use map. 3
Commissioner Carter asked if the county had historically articulated the Land Use Plan 4
before negotiating the other agreements. 5
Tom Altieri said typically yes, but there have also been cases when agreements and the 6
Land Use Plan have been completed concurrently. 7
Chair Bedford asked if the county has any agreements with the City of Mebane. 8
Tom Altieri said there used to be a utility service agreement at one time, and there is no 9
joint land use plan with Mebane. 10
Commissioner Carter asked if the same is true for Durham. 11
Tom Altieri said yes. 12
13
Slide #17 14
15
Commissioner Carter said she wants to be clear on the nuance between how the Board 16
goes through the process of articulating the vision of the Land Use Plan. She asked how the 17
Board could do that and then work with partners in a way that doesn’t get the county into any legal 18
or logistical challenges. 19
Tom Altieri said the Board has the statutory powers to guide the Land Use Plan and the 20
FLUM for the areas that are in Orange County’s planning jurisdiction. He said these areas are 21
different from the JPA areas. For those areas, there are recommendations in the draft plan. 22
Commissioner Carter asked for a visual. 23
Tom Altieri displayed the following map: 24
14
1
Tom Altieri said the six items that have been identified in the recommendations section of 2
the preliminary draft 2050 Land Use Plan are listed here. He said limited feedback has been 3
obtained from the public on these items, and they would require discussions and potentially 4
amendments to the Joint Land Use Plan. 5
Commissioner Carter said she has questions about the coordinated review of 6
intergovernmental planning agreements on a 10-year cycle as included in the draft plan, but that 7
doesn’t need to be answered now. 8
Cy Stober said when looking at other rural buffers throughout the country, like Lexington, 9
Kentucky, and Portland, Oregon, they have a readoption cycle of 5-10 years. He said those 10
jurisdictions revisit whether they've been successful at achieving infill development within the 11
boundaries of those buffers, and if not, why, and what could be done to strengthen density within 12
the buffer. If they have achieved it, then they revisit where the boundaries of the buffer are, 13
understanding what the balance is in the unincorporated areas around those municipalities. 14
15
Slide #18 1
2 Christopher Sandt, County Engineer, continued the presentation. He indicated that 3
everything in the northeast corner of the county drains to Falls Lake. He pointed out the thick blue 4
line in the middle of the map as the break line between the Jordan Lake Basin and the Falls Lake 5
Basin. He said there is a small section in the northern part of the county that drains up to the 6
Roanoke Basin in Virginia. He said the light blue areas on the map are the protected watersheds, 7
and the darker blue areas are the critical watersheds. He explained that the darker blue 8
watersheds are adjacent to the water supply reservoirs. After reviewing the acronyms on the slide, 9
Christopher Sandt explained the difference between density and impervious surface. He said the 10
number of dwellings per unit of land is density, while impervious surface limits are the actual 11
percentage of impervious area on a particular parcel as it relates to the overall size of the parcel. 12
He said the lightest areas of the map do not specifically have lot density and impervious surface 13
area requirements, but the county does manage stormwater and erosion control for those areas. 14
He said there are also stormwater and erosion control requirements for every watershed in the 15
county. 16
16
1
2
17
Slide #19 1
2 Christopher Sandt said the county started integrating some limited water supply protection 3
programs in the late 1980s and was forward-thinking prior to these watersheds being refined. He 4
said University Lake was one of the first that was focused on from a water quality perspective and 5
a watershed protection perspective back in the 1970s and 1980s. He said the county also 6
implemented the Eno River Voluntary Water Management Plan, which limits raw water intakes 7
out of the Eno River in certain drought periods. 8
9
Slide #20 10
11
18
Christopher Sandt said staff work hard to stay apprised of what’s going on in the General 1
Assembly. In addition to the bills mentioned on this slide, he explained that there is a current bill 2
that proposes that any residential development that disturbs less than 1 acre of land cannot be 3
regulated for stormwater management. He said the Jordan Lake Basin requires stormwater 4
management for anything that disturbs more than an acre, and the Falls Lake Basin requires 5
stormwater management for any new development over a half-acre, so this would be a big 6
change. 7
Chair Bedford asked if any of these rules apply to agrotourism. 8
Cy Stober said not at present. However, there is a requirement for nontraditional farm 9
practices to be regulated for stormwater in the Tar-Pamlico rules, and there may be an effort to 10
transfer that language into the Falls Lakes and Jordan Lake rules when they’re revised. 11
Chair Bedford said she thought farms had to adhere to stormwater regulations. 12
Cy Stober said there are agricultural regulations for livestock exclusion, stream buffers, 13
crop tillage, etc., but they don’t address stormwater. 14
15
Slide #21 16
17 Christopher Sandt explained that the image in slide #21 is called the stormwater erosion 18
control matrix. He said if someone is planning to disturb a certain amount of land during 19
development, an erosion control plan and stormwater management plan must be submitted to 20
Planning and Inspections before a land disturbing permit is granted. He said this form is provided 21
as information to developers and residents who are planning to build. 22
19
1 2
3
20
Slide #22 1
2
Christopher Sandt reviewed the information on the slide. This map defines residential 3
density limits for each of the water supply watersheds. He explained that the vertical striping 4
indicates watersheds with lower density limits. For instance, University Lake is one dwelling unit 5
per five acres of land, and Cane Creek is one dwelling unit per two acres of land. After reviewing 6
the other slides, he said there are a lot of reasons why there are no density limits for non-7
residential developments. Generally, commercial projects are a single parcel, and there's typically 8
not a multi-building approach. He explained that floor area ratio is used for commercial 9
developments, which is essentially the footprint of the building divided by the footprint of the parcel 10
itself. 11
Commissioner Greene said she didn’t realize there were floor area ratios in the UDO. She 12
asked if those are just for commercial developments and how they are calculated. 13
Cy Stober said they can be found in Article 3. He said there is a table and page for every 14
one of the zoning districts, and, except for the conditional districts, they nearly all have floor area 15
ratios. He said generally, the governing regulations for most residential development are 16
impervious surface or density, so that usually comes before floor area ratios are consulted for a 17
residential project. 18
21
1 2
3
4
5
22
Slide #23 1
2
Christopher Sandt said this table is distributed to developers and residents to help explain 3
requirements for impervious surface limits. 4
5
6
23
Slide #24 1
2
Christopher Sandt said the darkest green color indicates the watersheds with the most 3
restrictive impervious area restrictions. He said only 6% of a parcel may be impervious there. 4
Next, the medium green areas are 12%. He noted that the state requires only a 12% limit. 5
Commissioner McKee said the 6% impervious surface restriction creates a hardship for 6
anyone who is stressed financially. On a one-acre lot, there are only 2,500 square feet that must 7
include the driveway, deck, and any other impervious area, including the rooftop. He said the limit 8
is 12000 feet on a two-acre lot, which may sound like a lot, but isn’t. 9
Christopher Sandt said it restricts denser multi-family development. He clarified that 10
people could get approved for up to a 3% bump on the 6% requirement if they install a stormwater 11
control measure that treats the 3% balance. However, he agreed with Commissioner McKee that 12
it is very tough to build a house with a long driveway and try to keep the impervious surfaces 13
under 6%. 14
Commissioner McKee said the difference in impervious surface requirements creates an 15
equity issue across the county. 16
Cy Stober said all the base level impervious allowances allow for a 3% additional footprint 17
with the installation of stormwater control measures. 18
Commissioner McKee asked Cy Stober to explain stormwater control measures. 19
Cy Stober said stormwater control measures are engineered devices designed to intercept 20
all runoff from any paved area on a property and treat it for volume and sediment, and now 21
nitrogen and phosphorus under the Falls Lakes rules. 22
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
25
Slide #25 1
2
Christopher Sandt said this is the overlay of specific residential development that shows 3
both the density limits and the impervious aerial limits. He reiterated that density is not the same 4
as impervious surface limits, but they go hand in hand. 5
6
Slide #26 7
8 Christopher Sandt said this is the same table as shown on a previous slide, but it’s now 9
highlighting that the existing development date also applies to non-residential developments. 10
26
Slide #27 1
2
3
Slide #28 4
5 6
7
27
Perdita Holtz, Deputy Director of Long-Range Planning & Administration, continued the 1
presentation: 2
3
Slide #29 4
5
6
Slide #30 7
8 9
10
28
Slide #31 1
2
Perdita Holtz said University Lake Watershed was Chapel Hill and Carrboro’s only source 3
of water at the time, as Cane Creek Reservoir wasn’t constructed until the late 1990s. She said, 4
at the Board’s request, she spoke with Kevin Foy and Roger Waldon, and Barry Jacobs is present 5
and will speak later. She said that when speaking with Kevin Foy, she shared the five purposes 6
identified here, and he agreed that they spoke to the pressures being addressed at the time. 7
During their conversation, Kevin Foy also shared that joint planning was very visionary at the time, 8
and there was an amazing lack of egos on the part of leaders and having everybody work together 9
on a common goal. She said in addition to protecting University Lake, Kevin Foy stated that there 10
was an appreciation that Orange County is the headwater of three river basins and that people 11
didn’t want sprawl, and there was an ethos of wanting to protect the water supplies, rivers, and 12
streams. Kevin Foy also emphasized that the urban growth boundary was a policy choice, not 13
intended to be anti-growth, but rather to be managed growth. She said Roger Waldon pointed out 14
that the joint planning effort became a model for other communities. 15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Slide #32 1
2
Perdita Holtz brought attention to the area north of Chapel Hill, the northern rural buffer. 3
She said this area is not within a water supply watershed and would not have impervious surface 4
limits if not for the Rural Buffer classification. 5
6
Slide #33 7
8 Perdita Holtz pointed out the quarry, Blackwood Station, and Duke Forest on the map. 9
10
30
Slide #34 1
2
Perdita Holtz said she believed that the threshold in Transition Area 1 (darkest orange) is 3
close to being met in order to have more intensive development in Transition Area 2 (lighter 4
orange). 5
6
Slide #35 7
8 Perdita Holtz said the circles on the map in slide #35 represent parcels or areas that are 9
zoned something other than Rural Buffer. 10
31
Slide #36 1
2
3
Slide #37 4
5 Perdita Holtz clarified that Special Use Permits are considered by the Board of 6
Adjustment. 7
Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked what the difference is between a family care facility 8
that’s permitted by right and the “care center in a residence”. 9
Perdita Holtz said a family care facility cares for five or fewer people, and the latter is like 10
a daycare or elder care day center. 11
12
32
Slide #38 1
2
Perdita Holtz said in the rural buffer, there is a clause that the tracked size needs to be a 3
minimum of 10 acres to be considered for flexible subdivisions, and flexible subdivisions are how 4
clustering is done in Orange County. She said there is also a requirement for flexible subdivisions 5
that each lot must be served with its own water and sanitary sewage connection, and land within 6
the University Lake watershed has more stringent requirements, generally one unit per five acres. 7
Commissioner Fowler said, based on that, it doesn’t sound like rural conservation 8
clustering could happen in the rural buffer unless changes are made to the water and sewer 9
requirements. 10
Perdita Holtz agreed that is probably true. 11
Commissioner Carter asked about water and sewer in a neighborhood on Highway 54, 12
west of Carrboro. 13
Perdita Holtz said she doesn’t recall the extension of water and sewer in the rural buffer 14
during her tenure. She said that the neighborhood is listed as an exception area in the Water and 15
Sewer Management Planning and Boundary Agreement (WASMPBA). She said she doesn’t know 16
if the neighborhood predates the rural buffer or not. 17
18
Slide #39 19
20
33
Slide #40 1
2
Perdita Holtz said that most development applications now come with an annexation 3
request. 4
5
Slide #41 6
7
8
9
10
34
Slide #42 1
2
Cy Stober said there will be a much deeper dive into septic systems, but generally, there 3
are six types regulated by the state and local health departments, and they’re based on size. 4
Chair Bedford invited former Commissioner Barry Jacobs to speak. 5
Barry Jacobs said in 1980, Orange County's population was 75,000, half of today's. He 6
said water crises in the 1960s and 1970s, when residents were encouraged to "shower with a 7
friend," made water supply protection paramount. He also said Orange County had sued DOT 8
over I-40's route and was the seventh fastest growing county in the state at the time joint planning 9
began. The joint planning effort aimed to prevent sprawl like North Raleigh and Cary, keeping 10
Orange County recognizable. The agreement focused on cost-effective water supply protection, 11
preventing sprawl's expensive infrastructure needs, and protecting open space and agriculture. 12
Barry Jacobs said immediate follow-up efforts included a low and moderate-income housing task 13
force, rural character study, and natural areas inventory. He emphasized how Orange County 14
remains recognizable today compared to dramatically changed neighboring counties like 15
Chatham. He explained that the Piney Mountain development's failing community septic system 16
led to the water and sewer boundary agreement. He also said cluster developments began 17
emerging as a viable option for balancing residential growth with environmental conservation. 18
These developments allowed for higher-density housing within attractive environments, 19
facilitating the preservation of open spaces and more efficient utility services. 20
Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked how many affordable housing units they were able to 21
create back then. 22
Barry Jacobs said the study only looked at the possibilities. The best option at that time 23
was mobile homes, and he noted that Orange County remains one of the most permissive 24
counties for mobile home siting in North Carolina. 25
The Board thanked Barry Jacobs for coming and sharing his perspective with them. 26
27
28
29
35
Adult Care Home and Nursing Home Community Advisory Committee – Appointments 1
Discussion 2
The Board discussed appointments to the Adult Care Home and Nursing Home Community 3
Advisory Committee. 4
5
BACKGROUND: Members of the Adult Care Home and Nursing Home Community Advisory 6
Committee function as representatives of the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman 7
and work to maintain the intent of the Adult Care Home and the Nursing Home Residents' Bills of 8
Rights within the licensed adult care homes and nursing homes in Orange County. The 9
Committee also promotes community involvement, education, and cooperation with adult care 10
homes and nursing homes to ensure quality care for older adults and adults with disabilities. 11
12
The Board of County Commissioners appoints all fourteen (14) members. 13
14
REMINDER: Legislation was adopted by the North Carolina General Assembly in 2017 regarding 15
the training period for pending members of the Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee 16
and Nursing Home Community Advisory Committee. Applicants will be selected from the 17
County's “Applicant Interest List” for a condensed training. If an applicant completes the training, 18
that individual will be recommended for appointment. Therefore, when an applicant is 19
recommended for appointment, it would initially be for a one-year preliminary term, and the 20
training will have already been completed. 21
22
The following individuals are recommended for Board consideration: 23
24
NAME POSITION
DESCRIPTION
TYPE OF
APPOINTMENT
TERM
EXPIRATION
DATE
Shade Little At-Large First Full Term
(reappointment)
09/30/2028
Kelly Kester At-Large First Full Term
(reappointment)
09/30/2028
Parkash Sista At-Large First Full Term
(reappointment)
09/30/2028
25
SPECIAL NOTATION: None of the other applicants have completed the mandatory pre-26
appointment training and are therefore not eligible for appointment at this time. 27
28
If the individuals listed above are appointed, the following vacancies remain: 29
30
POSITION
DESCRIPTION
EXPIRATION
DATE
VACANCY INFORMATION
Adult Care Home
Administrator
Nominee
09/30/2025 Vacant since 11/02/2023
Adult Care Home
Administrator
Nominee
09/30/2026 Vacant since 11/02/2023
Nursing Home
Administrator
Nominee
09/30/2027 Vacant since 11/02/2023
36
Nursing Home
Administrator
Nominee
09/30/2025 Vacant since 11/02/2023
1
Tara May introduced the item. 2
The Board agreed by consensus to reappoint the recommended individuals. 3
4
Agricultural Preservation Board – Appointments Discussion 5
The Board discussed appointments to the Agricultural Preservation Board. 6
7
BACKGROUND: The Agricultural Preservation Board is charged with promoting the economic 8
and cultural importance of agriculture in the County and encouraging the voluntary preservation 9
and protection of farmland for future production. It administers the County’s Voluntary Farmland 10
Protection Program ordinance and advises the Board of County Commissioners on a wide range 11
of agricultural topics. 12
13
The Board of County Commissioners appoints all fifteen (15) members, including eight (8) At-14
Large members, and one (1) member from each of the seven (7) Agricultural Districts in the 15
County. 16
17
NOTE: Section 48-5. (b)(2) of the Orange County Code of Ordinances states that “Agricultural 18
District representatives may be appointed and re-appointed as necessary to ensure that each 19
Agricultural District is represented,” meaning there are no term limits for the positions. 20
21
The following individuals are recommended for Board consideration: 22
23
NAME POSITION
DESCRIPTION
TYPE OF
APPOINTMENT
TERM
EXPIRATION
DATE
Mary Beth Miller At-Large First Full Term
(reappointment)
06/30/2028
Michael Wagger At-Large Second Full Term 06/30/2028
Jeff Sykes Cane Creek/Buckhorn
Voluntary Agricultural
District (VAD)
Third Full Term (See
Note Above
Regarding VAD
Positions)
06/30/2028
Glenn Rose New
Hope/Hillsborough
Voluntary Agricultural
District
First Full Term 06/30/2028
Vera Fabian At-Large First Full Term 06/30/2027
Salem Neff At-Large First Full Term 06/30/2028
Joseph
Thompson
At-Large First Full Term 06/30/2028
24
If the individuals listed above are appointed, no vacancies remain. 25
26
Tara May introduced the item. 27
37
Tara May noted that Jeff Sykes is currently serving in an at-large position and is 1
recommended to move to a Voluntary Agricultural District position that he is eligible for. 2
The Board agreed by consensus to appoint the recommended applicants and approved 3
the recommended members for reappointment. 4
5
Animal Services Advisory Board – Appointment Discussion 6
The Board discussed an appointment to the Animal Services Advisory Board. 7
8
BACKGROUND: The Animal Services Advisory Board advises the Board of County 9
Commissioners on matters of concern regarding animal issues and animal services in Orange 10
County and works with the Animal Services Director on various policy concerns and issues 11
regarding County animal services. 12
13
The Board of County Commissioners appoints all thirteen (13) members with representation from 14
various related fields and municipalities. 15
16
The following individual is recommended for Board consideration: 17
18
NAME POSITION
DESCRIPTION
TYPE OF
APPOINTMENT
TERM
EXPIRATION
DATE
Rhonda
Patterson
At-Large First Full Term 06/30/2028
19
If the individual listed above is appointed, the following vacancy remains: 20
21
POSITION
DESIGNATION
EXPIRATION
DATE
VACANCY INFORMATION
Veterinarian 06/30/2028 Vacant since 06/30/2025
22
Tara May introduced the item. 23
Tara May noted that there is one applicant eligible for the vacant position. However, the 24
Animal Services Advisory Board has not had an opportunity to review her application due to the 25
timing of submission and their last meeting. 26
The Board agreed by consensus to appoint the recommended applicant. 27
Commissioner Fowler nominated Dr. Ashley Robinson to fill the remaining vacancy. 28
The Board agreed by consensus. 29
30
Arts Commission – Appointments Discussion 31
The Board discussed appointments to the Arts Commission. 32
33
BACKGROUND: The Arts Commission recommends strategies to promote the artistic and 34
cultural growth of Orange County, advises the Board of County Commissioners on matters 35
involving the arts, and acts as the granting panel for funding programs available to individual 36
artists and non-profit groups sponsoring arts projects in Orange County. 37
38
The Board of County Commissioners appoints fourteen (14) At-Large members and one (1) UNC 39
Student who serves a one-year term. 40
41
The following individuals are recommended for Board consideration: 42
38
1
NAME POSITION
DESCRIPTION
TYPE OF
APPOINTMENT
TERM
EXPIRATION
DATE
Ashley Nissler At-Large Partial Term 03/31/2027
Joshua
Rosenstein
At-Large Second Full Term 09/30/2028
2
If the individuals listed above are appointed, the following vacancy remains: 3
4
POSITION
DESIGNATION
EXPIRATION
DATE
VACANCY INFORMATION
At-Large 03/31/2028 Vacant since 03/31/2025
5
Tara May introduced the item. 6
The Board agreed by consensus to appoint the recommended applicant and reappoint the 7
recommended board member. 8
9
Commission for the Environment – Appointments Discussion 10
The Board discussed appointments to the Commission for the Environment. 11
12
BACKGROUND: The Commission for the Environment advises the Board of Commissioners on 13
matters affecting the environment with particular emphasis on protection. It educates the public 14
and local officials on environmental issues, performs special studies and projects, recommends 15
environmental initiatives, and studies changes in environmental science and local and federal 16
regulations. 17
18
The Board of County Commissioners appoints all fifteen (15) members, with representatives from 19
various fields. 20
21
The following individuals are recommended for Board consideration: 22
23
NAME POSITION
DESCRIPTION
TYPE OF
APPOINTMENT
TERM
EXPIRATION
DATE
Margot Lester At-Large First Full Term 12/31/2027
Jeffrey Ryan At-Large First Full Term 12/31/2027
24
If the individuals listed above are appointed, the following vacancy remains: 25
26
POSITION
DESIGNATION
EXPIRATION
DATE
VACANCY INFORMATION
At-Large 12/31/2025 Vacant since 05/12/2025.
27
Tara May introduced the item. 28
The Board agreed by consensus to appoint the recommended applicants. 29
Commissioner Portie-Ascott nominated Leto Copeley to fill the remaining At-Large 30
vacancy. 31
The Board agreed by consensus to appoint Leto Copeley. 32
33
39
Hillsborough Planning Board – Appointments Discussion 1
The Board discussed appointments to the Hillsborough Planning Board. 2
3
BACKGROUND: The Hillsborough Planning Board acquires and maintains information in order 4
to understand past trends, prepares and amends and amend the Comprehensive Plan for the 5
development of the area, and prepares and recommends ordinances promoting orderly 6
development. 7
8
Since this is not a County board, the Hillsborough Planning Board does not submit an Annual 9
Work Plan. 10
11
The Board of County Commissioners appoints two (2) members residing in the Extraterritorial 12
Jurisdiction (ETJ). 13
14
The following individual is recommended for Board consideration: 15
16
NAME POSITION
DESCRIPTION
TYPE OF
APPOINTMENT
TERM
EXPIRATION
DATE
Jeanette Benjey Hillsborough ETJ First Full Term
(reappointment)
10/31/2028
17
If the individual listed above is appointed, the following vacancy remains: 18
19
POSITION
DESIGNATION
EXPIRATION
DATE
VACANCY INFORMATION
Hillsborough ETJ 10/31/2027 Vacant since 10/31/2024.
20
Tara May introduced the item. 21
The Board agreed by consensus to reappoint the recommended individual. 22
23
Human Relations Commission – Appointments Discussion 24
The Board discussed appointments to the Human Relations Commission. 25
26
BACKGROUND: The Human Relations Commission studies and makes recommendations to the 27
Board of County Commissioners concerning problems in the field of human relationships. The 28
Commission seeks solutions to community issues that may create animosity and unrest, makes 29
recommendations designed to promote goodwill and harmony among groups in the county, and 30
addresses and attempts to remedy the violence, tensions, polarization, and other harm created 31
through discrimination, bias, hatred, and inequity. 32
33
The Board of County Commissioners appoints all twelve (12) members. 34
35
The following individuals are recommended for Board consideration: 36
37
NAME POSITION
DESCRIPTION
TYPE OF
APPOINTMENT
TERM
EXPIRATION
DATE
April Thompson At-Large Partial Term 06/30/2027
Benjamin King At-Large First Full Term 09/30/2028
40
Shane Lukas At-Large First Full Term
(reappointment)
09/30/2028
Rhian Carreker-
Ford
Town of Chapel Hill
(move from At-Large
position)
First Full Term 06/30/2028
Mary Lucas At-Large Partial Term 06/30/2026
1
If the individuals listed above are appointed, no vacancies remain. 2
3
Tara May introduced the item. She noted that Mary Lucas already serves on two advisory 4
boards, but since she was recommended, she brought forward her application for consideration. 5
The Board agreed by consensus to approve the recommendations as listed but did not 6
agree to appoint Mary Lucas. The Board directed Tara May to recruit additional applicants. 7
8
Orange Unified Transportation Board – Appointments Discussion 9
The Board discussed appointments to the Orange Unified Transportation Board. 10
11
BACKGROUND: The Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard) advises the Board of 12
County Commissioners and provides information and comments on major transportation issues. 13
Specifically, the OUTBoard provides the Board of County Commissioners with recommendations 14
regarding the overall planning and programming of transportation improvements in the County, 15
including identification and prioritization of the County's roadway and transit needs along with 16
associated costs and specific sources of funding; provision of recommendations to the Board 17
regarding Federal and State legislation affecting transportation in Orange County; and exploration 18
and suggestion of recommendations on innovative techniques and methods to improve the 19
efficiency and capacity of existing and future transportation systems. 20
21
The Board of County Commissioners appoints all twelve (12) members, with representation from 22
each of the County’s townships to the extent possible. There are also two (2) non-voting youth 23
members. 24
25
The OUTBoard does not make recommendations for appointments. 26
27
The following individuals are presented for Board consideration: 28
29
NAME POSITION
DESCRIPTION
TYPE OF
APPOINTMENT
TERM
EXPIRATION
DATE
Erik Legg At-Large Second Full Term 09/30/2028
Jamie Crandell Eno Township Second Full Term 09/30/2028
Gregory
Woloszczuk
At-Large Second Full Term 09/30/2028
Gene Owen At-Large First Full Term
(reappointment)
09/30/2028
30
If the individuals listed above are appointed, the following vacancy remains: 31
32
POSITION
DESIGNATION
EXPIRATION
DATE
VACANCY INFORMATION
41
Youth Member 09/30/2028 Vacant since the creation of the position
on 05/20/2025
1
Tara May introduced the item. 2
The Board agreed by consensus to reappoint the individuals listed above. 3
4
Discussion of Closed Session Timing/Location on Board Meeting Agendas 5
The Board discussed the timing/location of Closed Sessions on Board meeting agendas. 6
7
BACKGROUND: Members of the Board of Commissioners have expressed interest in where 8
Closed Sessions are scheduled on Board meeting agendas. This item provides the opportunity 9
for discussion by the Board. 10
11
Based on Board discussion, a potential revision to the Board’s Rules of Procedure could be 12
scheduled for consideration at a future Business meeting. 13
14
Chair Bedford invited Commissioner Portie-Ascott to introduce this item. 15
Commissioner Portie-Ascott said right now, closed sessions are scheduled for the end of 16
Board meetings, making it difficult for the Board to focus on the seriousness of the information 17
before them after a long meeting. She said she thinks it would be more conducive to have the 18
closed session first on the agenda rather than last. She said she heard from other jurisdictions 19
that schedule their closed sessions first while attending an NCACC conference, and it seems to 20
work for them. She proposed starting closed sessions at 6:00 pm before the regular meeting at 21
7:00 p.m. 22
Laura Jensen said the Rules of Procedure indicate that item 13 on the agenda is for closed 23
sessions and can be amended. She mentioned Orange County Schools has a permanent 24
placeholder for 6:00 p.m. closed sessions. 25
John Roberts said there could be a permanent placeholder for a closed session at 6:00 26
pm, though he would need to look into what to do if there is no need to hold a closed session if it 27
were a standing start time. 28
Chair Bedford said there are a couple of boards, like the Burlington-Graham MPO and 29
Central Pines Regional Council, that commissioners serve on that could pose a time conflict, so 30
those schedules would need to be considered before scheduling a closed session. 31
Commissioner McKee said he doesn’t have a preference on the timing of closed sessions 32
on agendas. 33
Commissioner Greene indicated she had no preference either. 34
Vice-Chair Hamilton said she remembers starting closed sessions at 6:00 p.m. and then 35
reconvening after the regular meeting if needed from her school board days. She said she doesn’t 36
think boards can make good decisions late at night, so she supported this change. 37
Chair Bedford said she is flexible and recalled the same from when she was on the school 38
board. 39
Commissioner Fowler said she appreciated starting at 6:00 p.m. when she was on the 40
school board as well. She said the only issue she has is the ability to remember when a closed 41
session is scheduled, and having good reminders in place would be helpful. 42
Commissioner Carter said she supports the change. 43
Chair Bedford reiterated that John Roberts will look into options for having a standing 44
closed session, and then this change would come back to the Board as an Amendment to the 45
Rules of Procedure at a business meeting soon. 46
47
42
Chair Bedford made a motion to postpone the Discussion Regarding the Work of the 1
Strategic Communications Work Group to a future meeting. The motion was seconded by Vice-2
Chair Hamilton. 3
4
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 5
6
Discussion Regarding the Work of the Strategic Communications Work Group 7
This item was postponed to a future meeting. 8
9
Closed Session 10
A motion was made by Vice-Chair Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to enter 11
into closed session at 9:24 p.m. for the purposes listed below: 12
13
“To consult with an attorney employed or retained by the Board in order to preserve the attorney-14
client privilege between the attorney and the Board” NCGS § 143-318.11(a)(3). 15
16
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 17
18
RECONVENE INTO REGULAR SESSION 19
20
A motion was made by Commissioner Fowler, seconded by Vice-Chair Hamilton, to 21
reconvene into regular session at 10:14 p.m. 22
23
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 24
25
Adjournment 26
27
A motion was made by Vice-Chair Hamilton, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to 28
adjourn the meeting at 10:15 p.m. 29
30
VOTE: UNANIMOUS 31
32
Jamezetta Bedford, Chair 33
34
35
Recorded by Tara May, Deputy Clerk to the Board 36
37
Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board. 38