Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 04-14-2026-Work Session 1 APPROVED 5/5/26 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WORK SESSION April 14, 2026 7:00 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Work Session on Tuesday,April 14, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, NC. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Jean Hamilton,Vice-Chair Amy Fowler, and Commissioners Jamezetta Bedford, Marilyn Carter, Earl McKee, and Phyllis Portie-Ascott COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioner Sally Greene COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Travis Myren, Deputy County Manager Caitlin Fenhagen, and Clerk to the Board Laura Jensen. (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) Chair Hamilton called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. All commissioners were present, except for Commissioner Greene. A motion was made by Vice-Chair Fowler,seconded by Commissioner Carter,to suspend the Rules of Procedure to consider approval of a resolution opposing modifications to county property tax authority. VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Commissioner Portie-Ascott, seconded by Commissioner McKee, to opposing modifications to county property tax authority and authorize the Chair to sign. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 1. Durham Tech Presentation The Board received a presentation on various topics related to Durham Technical Community College. BACKGROUND: Durham Technical Community College President JB Buxton will provide a presentation to the Board on various topics including some College goals, the outlook for the future, the Orange County K-12 Partnerships, County-supported Workforce initiatives, and the Orange County Campus addition/renovation project. JB Buxton made the following presentation: 2 Slide#1 DURHAM TECH ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BRIEFING April 2026 JB Buxton introduced the presentation and Durham Tech staff in attendance at the work session: Jackie Krohn, Executive Director of Orange County operations;Andy Kleitsch, Chief Finance Officer; Susan Bowen, Head of Campus Operations; and Jerry Jones, Executive Director of the Center for Workforce Engagement. Slide#2 FA4, DURHAM 2021-2026 COLLEGE GOALS 0Enrollment Goal: 10% increase over pre-COVID Actual: 10% increase in degree-seeking students; 3% increase in continuing education students Completion Goal: 60% completion and transfer rate Actual: 60% Wage Goal: 80% employment rate w/ livable wages Actual: Goal met in applied (CTE) programs; no state data for other program graduates durhamtech.edu -� JB Buxton described Durham Tech's goals from 2021 to 2026. Their enrollment goal was a 10% increase in student population. He said they have achieved that, along with a 3% increase in continuing education students. He said that they've met their 60% completion and transfer rate. He said they met 3 their goal of an 80% employment rate with livable wages in the applied programs, but had no state data for other program graduates. Slide#3 DURHAM TECH OUTLOOK 1. The College is in growth mode: students, facilities, partnerships 2. Completion rates are up significantly: faster growth with traditionally low-performing groups, work still to do 3. Key areas of focus: Health and Life Sciences, Technicians and Transfer 4. Disruptions abound: artificial intelligence, federal cuts to R&D, local workforce shifts 5. Community impact: College looking to identify a local problem where we can marshal our assets to help improve durhamtech.edu - 4 Slide#4 ORANGE COUNTY K-12 PARTNERSHIPS Orange County Schools Chapel-Hill Carrboro County • Current efforts: Schools • Orange High School:increased Current efforts: the number of students pursuing • Enrollment of AVID dual enrollment courses with the (Advancement via Individual goal of earning a degree or Determination)students certificate prior to graduation • Automotive courses at Chapel • Current priority:Teacher Cadet Hill High to Associates in Teacher Prep • Software Development at East Chapel Hill High School ■ Goal: By 2030, 35% of Orange . Community Spanish Interpreting County Schools (OCS) at Carrboro High School graduates will have obtained a Goal: By 2030, 25% of CHCCS postsecondary credential graduates will have obtained a postsecondary credential durhamtech.edu - 4 Slide#S NCCU, UNC-CH & DUKE PARTNERSHIPS CONTINUING NEW ✓ NCCU Eagle Connect Transfer. ✓ NCCU Skilled Trades internships. Improving the Eagle Connect Durham Tech skilled trades students partnership. working as interns with NCCU ✓ UNC-Durham Tech Workforce Facilities Development Working Group. ✓ NCCU Social Work partnerships. Identifying opportunities for NCCU social work students doing internships and partnership in area clinical rotation to support students like clinical trials,medicine,data and Durham Tech counseling office. science. ✓ NCCU life sciences transfer ✓ Duke Nursing and Teaching initiative.Clear and broadened partnerships.Duke provides pathways into NCCU majors that academic supports and co-teaching align with life sciences. in select pathways. ✓ Duke Transfer initiative. First ✓ Durham Early College of Health phase with Pratt School of Sciences.Duke is providing major Engineering slated for Fall 2026, in-kind supports and committing to hire 50-60%of graduates. durhamtech.edu WFAF"q Slide#6 COUNTY-SUPPORTED WORKFORCE INITIATIVES ■ Back to Work Scholarships ■ Orange:248 scholarships awarded to date($90,000 out of$100,000) ■ Small Business Center • Ramped up services for Spanish speakers and shifted focus from start-ups to employee retention and growth • Reached over 1,000 attendees in regional small business events ■ Apprenticeships ■ 13 companies with 129 apprentices in areas like health care, advanced manufacturing, life sciences and early childhood ■ Working at present to bring on 10 additional registered apprenticeship employer sponsors ■ Exploring College Sponsor model as way to increase numbers durhamtech.edu W. 5 Slide#7 Durham Tech Affordable Housing Project 902 5 Briggs Avenue,Durham 1`12 acres I.25 miles from campus • 124 Affordable Housing Units • 30%,60%,70%AM • 1-,2-,and 3-bedroom units • Amenities-Community Building:library,computer lab,kitchen,exercise room Outdoor-Picnic shelter,benches,playground,forest,open green space,natural creek • Transportation Access(existing)-Bus stop(Rt-8),bike lanes,sidewalk r =. D U R H A M TECH durhamtech.edu JB Buxton shared a picture of an affordable housing project Durham Tech is building in Durham. Susan Bowen continued the presentation: Slide#8 ORANGE COUNTY CAMPUS ADDITION/RENOVATION flSAfAEP r n� F4 N•me qi iozceaasano33 0 oTCC dew�.v°b° Atldh. D U R H A M TECH durhamtech.edu Susan Bowen shared a picture of the Orange County campus addition and renovation project. She said they plan to open in January 2027. 6 Slide#9 ORANGE COUNTY CAMPUS ADDITION/RENOVATION RENDERINGS rr a durhamtech.edu - Susan Bowen shared a picture of how the addition and renovation will look once it is completed. Slide#10 MAIN CAMPUS HEALTH & LIFE SCIENCES BUILDINGS C nc�:�riFc S!i�C rn�P�,t Pl,in ------------------------------ ,ram =' D U R H A M durhamtech.edu Susan Bowen shared a site concept plan for the main campus health and life sciences building in Durham. 7 Slide#11 MAIN CAMPUS HEALTH & LIFE SCIENCES BUILDING RENDERINGS w r r j =. D U R H A M Y L v H durhamtech.edu Slide#12 2026 LONG SESSION PRIORITIES Propel NC:Legislative Agenda for a New Community College 2. Employee Recruitment and Business Model NC COMMUNITY Retention 2025-2027 COLLEGES • Salary increase to keep up with inflation and reduce impact of potential health plan increases 1. Propel NC Funding Formula Maintain existing faculty • Better positions us in the Greater recruitment and retention funding Triangle region labor market Allow use across faculty and staff • Supports challenge of faculty recruitment/retention 3. Enrollment growth and other • Increase of—$2.5M compared to priorities existing funding formula Enrollment Growth funding • Overall$100M request for the system Apprenticeships supports • Short-term workforce training financial assistance • Board Appointments durhamtech.edu �. 8 Slide#13 DISCUSSION: • •A What issue or challenge could Durham Tech help . . . region?move the needle for the county and development,In addition to education and workforce improve community vitality and . JB Buxton asked for the Board's feedback on areas they'd like Durham Tech to focus on. Vice-Chair Fowler said she would like to see programs for people with IDDs in Orange and Durham counties. JB Buxton said there is a program starting this summer for students with IDDs. Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked what the rental criteria are for the affordable housing project. JB Buxton said it is based on low-income housing tax credit eligibility. He said they have certain thresholds, but he did not have the information with him. He said he would send it to the Board. Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she participated in a meeting of the local chapter of the oldest black real estate trade organization. She said there are folks that are blocked from buying or renting homes because they don't understand credit and savings. She asked if Durham Tech could emphasize basic credit, budgeting, and savings information into their programs. JB Buxton said they have some financial education electives, but the classes are not a requirement. He said they've worked with banks who gave classes to students and employees. He said he would be happy to work with other resources and organizations. Commissioner Carter said the programs and initiatives described in the presentation sounded very interesting. She asked if the affordable housing project will house students. She asked if there is an opportunity for something like this in Orange County. JB Buxton said they would welcome a discussion about affordable housing in Orange County. He asked for clarification on the student resident question. Commissioner Carter asked if there is a residency requirement for students to live in the housing project. JB Buxton said students will not be required to live in the housing units that Durham Tech is building. He said that they cannot restrict it to students, but they can market first to students. He said they believe about 25%will be occupied by students. Chair Hamilton said Durham Tech provides core services to the community through education. She said housing is the priority issue in the region, and that some of the suggestions that have come up are good. She commented that sometimes there are redundant programs with many groups working on 9 an issue like housing. She said Durham Tech's workforce and education programs are core for the community. She asked about other types of community wide classes the college could offer, like Commissioner Portie-Ascott suggested, around credit and financial literacy. She said that would be an extension of the college's work in education and getting people ready for the work force. JB Buxton appreciated Chair Hamilton's comments. Vice-Chair Fowler asked if Durham Tech markets courses to schools. JB Buxton said there is a college liaison that works with every school. He said in Durham they have an applied credentials program for programs in 911 and criminal justice. He said they haven't done as much in Orange County for applied credentials. Vice-Chair Fowler expressed appreciation for Durham Tech's education and teaching programs. JB Buxton said they need partners to help them market these opportunities to students. 2. Discussion on 2026 Longtime Homeowner Assistance Program The Board discussed potential program changes for the 2026 cycle of the Longtime Homeowner Assistance (LHA) program, which assists low-income Orange County homeowners with a discount or rebate on their property tax bill. BACKGROUND: The LHA program has completed its 5th year of assistance for Orange County homeowners. In its first year the program assisted 91 households with the difference between their 2020 and 2021 tax bills,for a total of$16,364 allocated by Orange County.This past year,the program assisted 806 households with a formula-calculated amount based on over $500,000 in funding from Orange County, Chapel Hill and Carrboro. Over time,the program has not only grown but also changed in its emphasis,consistently looking for ways to tweak the funding formula so that the most vulnerable households are prioritized. Staff recommends the Board further refine the program policy to ensure that limited resources get to the households who most need it. To that end, staff is recommending that the Board discuss and consider raising the eligibility threshold of the program from five (5) years of homeownership to ten (10) years, with exceptions allowed for family transfers (which would be automatically granted eligibility regardless of period owning the home as long as the new family member demonstrates income eligibility).. This policy change, if it had been in effect, would have impacted 137 households in the 2025 cycle, lowering the amount of assisted households from 806 to 669,and would have allowed the program to distribute almost$62,000 more dollars to households that bought their homes prior to 2016. It should also be noted that Commissioner Earl McKee suggested at the Board's April 7, 2026 Business meeting that the Board consider a "hold harmless" provision for Orange County taxes on properties owned by residents aged 70 or older who have been in their homes for at least 20 years and earn less than 30% area median income (AMI). Based on the 2025 LHA recipients, this would impact approximately 100 households. This change could be accomplished by ensuring that these households are awarded enough LHA assistance each year to equal the total amount paid in the prior year (totalling tax paid minus LHA received), in perpetuity. Staff would have to identify new households that meet these criteria for each successive year, and establish a baseline tax payment for each of those households. It is difficult to estimate how many more households would become eligible for this status in coming years, as there will be attrition in addition to new homeowners that "age in"to the status. 10 As a supplement to this discussion, Board members asked staff various questions during the presentation of the annual LHA report at the February 17, 2026 Business meeting. Those questions with answers are presented here as follows: • What accounts for the 225 "No Data" on the age demographics table, compared to last year's zero? o Last year two (2) staff members met with every applicant who had not fully completed their application in order to assure they were complete. This year, with the increased volume of applicants, this was not possible. That number serves as an indicator of the percentage of applications that are submitted incomplete and required intensive follow- up from staff. • Income/Home Values o 2025 Income Limits are below(full AMIs can be found at this link). Persons In Family 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Low (80%) Income 64,750 74,000 83,250 92,500 99,900 107,300 114,700 122,100 Limits ($) o 2024 Home Value Limits are below (full limits can be found at this link). House Size 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom Home Value Limit $403,000 $515,000 $624,000 $773,000 • Does the application reference the exception listed on the website for elderly and disabled households? o No. Because staff does not request home value on the application (that information is accessed directly from tax records based on the Parcel ID number provide), possible exceptions to the home value limit are not listed. • Average/Median tax bill, as compared to 2024: 2024 2025 Increase Percentage Average Orange County $1,883.28 $1,967.86 4.5% Tax Bill Median Orange County $1,740.47 $1,855.22 6.6% Tax Bill • Request to track home valuation by number of years owned: Years Owned Number of Median Home Average Home (Purchased Year) Households Value Value 11 5-9 137 $305,350 $315,462 (2016-2020) 10-14 101 $314,350 $339,097 (2011-2015) 15-19 79 $315,300 $336,839 (2006-2010) 20-24 81 $363,550 $365,834 (2001-2005) 25-29 102 $322,800 $362,644 (1996-2000) 30+ 285 $317,950 $342,019 (before 1995) • Breakdown of the amount of assistance and number of recipients of LHA by municipality and in the unincorporated parts of the County: Chapel Hill Carrboro Hillsborough Mebane Orange County Number of 149 84 224 107 242 Households Amount of $ 241,215.41 $86,606.50 $105,257.13 $39,748 $67,441.61 Assistance Blake Rosser, Housing Director, introduced the item. He said that he had updated figures for the Board and shared a handout. He made the following presentation: Slide#1 ORANGE COUNTY HOUSING DEPARTMENT Discussion of CY26 Longtime Homeowner Assistance (LHA) Program April 14, 2026 12 Slide#2 LHA Completed 5" year • From 2021 to 2025, number of assisted households grew from 91 to 806 • Total program funds: $16,364 —> $509,805 • 2021 assistance based on simply the difference between 2021 and 2020 tax bill, no minimum/maximum • 2025 assistance based on need-based formula with minimum of $200 and target cost-burden reduction of 25% nORANGECOUNTY 0 HOUSING DEPARTMENT Blake Rosser reviewed the assistance provided by the program over the last 5 years. He said they served 806 families in 2025, compared to 91 in 2021. Slide#3 Potential increase to eligibility threshold • Staff recommends increasing eligibility threshold from 5 years to 10 years • In 2025, 137 households would have been ineligible (i.e. owned home between 5 and 10 years) • Approximately$62,000 in assistance • Change would prioritize longest-tenured residents with higher assistance amounts • Exceptions for family transfers that have taken place more recently • Residents that bought homes since 2016, when home prices were high, may not have been originally intended program demographic nORANGECOUNTY 0 HOUSING DEPARTMENT Blake Rosser said staff recommends increasing the eligibility threshold from 5 to 10 years. He said staff wants to prioritize the longest-tenured residents with higher assistance amounts. He said they want to give exceptions for family property transfers. 13 Slide#4 Potential "hold harmless" for most vulnerable residents • Commissioner suggestion to hold harmless effective tax increases for certain households: • At least 70 years of age • Owned home for at least 20 years • 30%Area Median Income (AMI) or less • In 2025, 100 households would have been eligible under these terms • Policy mechanism: LHA amount each year could be calculated for these households so that total amount paid (Tax minus LHA) = baseline amount set in CY26. nORANGECOUNTY 0 HOUSING DEPARTMENT Blake Rosser reviewed the parameters for a potential "hold harmless" provision for the most vulnerable residents as petitioned by the Board. He said for certain households would be held harmless for future property tax increases. He said they recommend holding harmless households that are at least 70 years of age, owned the home for at least 20 years, and are at 30%Area Median Income (AMI) or less. Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if the property taxes would be held at the same amount until the family has passed away or the homeowner. Blake Rosser said the homeowner, or until the homeowner is no longer 70 years old. Commissioner McKee added that it is until the home passes or transfers. Vice-Chair Fowler said the exception is if the property passes to a family member, but that family member would have to meet the eligibility criteria. Blake Rosser said that was referring to the staff proposal. Commissioner Carter asked if there is a regular check-in for eligibility. Blake Rosser said they could create a verification program. Commissioner Carter it would be just verifying income eligibility. Vice-Chair Fowler noted that income is different than wealth. Blake Rosser said they could consider a wealth eligibility checker, but it would be more difficult to determine. Chair Hamilton asked clarifying questions to make sure the staff proposal and commissioner proposal were being considered separately. She asked if the home is inherited by someone else,the hold harmless would not apply. Blake Rosser said that was correct. He said they would lose the 20 years of ownership by that point and would likely not be 70 years old. Chair Hamilton said income could come from investments and that might not be captured. Blake Rosser said without the backing of a federal program, they could only request that applicants divulge all bank accounts and investment accounts. 14 Commissioner Portie-Ascott said in the scenario where a homeowner passes away and then the home is inherited, could that person qualify. Blake Rosser said under that scenario they would not qualify under the commissioner hold harmless proposal. He said under the staff proposal,they could be considered for an exemption. Commissioner Portie-Ascott asked if it is still possible if they don't live there. Blake Rosser said they must live there. Commissioner Carter asked the County Attorney to review the legality of the hold harmless proposal. John Roberts said the county doesn't have the authority to impact taxes that are imposed. He said the county has the authority to provide programs for people based on their income. He said as long as the program focuses on low and moderate income as the primary determining factor, it should be ok. Commissioner McKee said he thought the program would be best run under the current grant program structure. He said he wants to provide relief to the people who need it the most. He encouraged the Board to keep the structure of the program simple. Vice-Chair Fowler asked if there would be a maximum amount of assistance. She asked if the current program had a maximum of$1,000 in assistance. Blake Rosser said that is correct. Commissioner McKee said he is open to discussion about the proposal. He noted that a 1 cent tax increase on a $1 million home is$100. Vice-Chair Fowler asked if an applicant could use both programs. Commissioner McKee said it would be simpler to run it as a separate component to the Longtime Homeowner's Assistance program. Commissioner Carter suggested finding a way using the existing structure by refining it and providing a higher award for someone who meets the extra criteria, of 20 years of ownership, and 30% AMI. She said that would keep the county in the existing legal structure but also give an additional benefit to those who need it most. Commissioner McKee said he was open to any ideas. He explained his reasons for wanting to create a program that helps vulnerable residents. Commissioner Bedford supported the idea. She said it only applies to Orange County taxes. She said this would be for people's primary residence. She gave an example of a household situation where two elderly sisters live in a home, but only one owns it. She asked staff to keep an eye on potential unforeseen circumstances. She said this is a good idea and if it needs to be tweaked after the first round the Board could revisit. Chair Hamilton said she liked keeping this within the existing Longtime Homeowner's Assistance program, provided it meets legal requirements. She cautioned that there may be a time where the "held harmless"group receives more in benefits than other groups. She requested more data on the proposal. Commissioner McKee said the Board or future Boards can make adjustments as necessary. Chair Hamilton cautioned against adjusting each year as it makes it difficult for people to plan. Vice-Chair Fowler asked for more information on how the program would be administered. She asked for clarification on if people could qualify for the Longtime Homeowners Assistance as well as a hold harmless provision. Commissioner McKee said the hold harmless would only apply to future tax increases. Commissioner Bedford agreed with that interpretation and there would be no $1,000 maximum for those folks. Blake Rosser said assistance would increase each year if their taxes increased. Vice-Chair Fowler asked if the Longtime Homeowners part would apply first, and then the county would consider what ever they paid this year including that. 15 Commissioner Bedford said no. She said the new hold harmless program would be applied first. She said there would not be any double dipping. Commissioner Carter said they need to review what they can legally do and suggested the Board and staff do more work on developing the project. She said she supported a tiered approach within the Longtime Homeowner's Assistance program. Commissioner McKee said this will take more work by the Board and staff to develop a program to help homeowners from being taxed out. Commissioner Bedford asked Vice-Chair Fowler she meant applicants would come through the program for Chapel Hill or Carrboro funds. Vice-Chair Fowler said she was trying to figure out how Longtime Homeowners Assistance and hold harmless would work together. She said she preferred Chair Hamilton's and Commissioner Carter's suggestion to prioritize. Commissioner Bedford said $1,000 might not be enough, but it's a target. Chair Hamilton asked staff for more information on how the proposal would work, including an example case study, and the cost of the proposal. Blake Rosser said he could extrapolate the 100 households to determine the cost. the staff proposal would free up funds that could be used for the hold harmless proposal. Vice-Chair Fowler said she is supportive of increasing the eligibility requirement to 10 years. She recalled that the reason the program was originally changed because in the first year the county had only used $16,000 and they thought they should open it up to more people. She said it was probably because a lot of people didn't know about it. She said it was fine to go back to that. Chair Hamilton said she remembered differently. She recalled that representatives from the Jackson Center requested changes to support homeownership among young people, and that was the reason they went to 5 years. Blake Rosser said he would check on it. Commissioner Carter thanked staff for their work on the proposals and administering the programs. She emphasized the importance of municipal partnership conversations about the need and how they can grow their contributions to the program. She said these conversations could help make the program more robust. Chair Hamilton asked if the other commissioners are interested in having those conversations with the towns. The Board indicated their agreement. Blake Rosser said Chapel Hill increased their financial support and Carrboro participated for the first time. Commissioner Bedford asked if the eligibility requirements are on the application. Blake Rosser said the requirements are all included in the formula. He said they can weigh that formula however is preferred and introduce new criteria. He said it will be difficult to compare that to the two-tier setup that was originally considered. He said at some point they will have to decide and try it out. Commissioner McKee thanked Blake Rosser for his efforts in helping him develop the proposal. 3. Draft Orange County Trails Plan The Board reviewed the draft Orange County Trails Plan and provided direction to the consultant and staff on next steps. BACKGROUND: BACKGROUND: Based on trail planning discussions held with the Triangle Trails Initiative and County Manager and Board members,the Board instructed staff in 2024 to develop a strategy for an Orange County Trails Plan. While trails planning has occurred over the years on a case-by- case basis in 16 documents like the 2030 Parks and Recreation Master Plan and the Mountains to Sea Trail route adoption (2018), a formal trails plan for the County has not existed. A Request for Proposals was developed in the summer of 2024 and issued in September of that year. Gensler was selected as the consultant to prepare the plan, and the contract was awarded at the Board's Business meeting on December 10, 2024.As shown in the attached draft plan, project work got underway with a project kickoff in January 2025 including the consultant,staff and the Parks and Recreation Council, which serves as the steering committee for the Plan. In March 2025, GIS mapping and data analysis began, including review of prior plan efforts and on-site field visits to a number of potential trail locations based on preliminary assessments(summarized on page 14 of the draft plan and this process is also discussed in more detail in Sections 1-3 of the attached draft Plan.) Project goals were created from opportunities and challenges discussions held by the Parks and Recreation Council in early 2025. Five (5) project goals were identified: 1. Spark enthusiasm for county trail connectivity with an equitable, inclusive and engaging outreach process. 2. Develop a Trails Plan that reflects the community's vision and aligns with other County and municipality efforts, such as the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (currently underway). 3. Create a comprehensive network of connectivity between key points of interest including work, home, school, commerce and public transit. 4. Expand access to excellent parks and recreation opportunities for a broader population, especially in the rural areas of the county. 5. Identify new and existing connections to complete the Mountains to Sea Trail (MST) segment in Orange County. A process for public outreach and engagement is outlined in Section 3 of the draft Plan. This included a project webpage, e-newsletters, social media campaigns, digital display graphics and flyers at parks, among other efforts. Two (2) rounds of public engagement workshops were held in May and September of 2025, with accompanying online surveys that allowed participants to take in the workshop experience and provide feedback. Pop-up events were also held to try and reach out to other members of the public. Respondents and attendees provided information about current use of trails and parks, points of interest to be connected, and aspirational design vision. Individuals were also asked to prioritize different trail possibilities and react to an initial prioritization created from the workshops, surveys,on-site analysis and prior plans. Note: Coordination with the staff and consultant for the ongoing Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan was built into the Trails Plan effort as well. Staff and consultants participated in a joint workshop and both were present at a community outreach event.The Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan is continuing and will be coming to the Board later this year, and efforts to ensure consistency will be included. From the work done throughout 2025, a set of six (6) guiding principles were determined reflecting recurring themes from public engagement, meetings with the steering committee and alignment with guiding plans.These are (as shown on page 38 of the Plan): 17 • Reflect Local Character • Advance Access and Equity • Prioritize User Safety • Expand Travel Options • Cultivate Community Wellness, and • Design for Longevity. All of the above work yielded a draft Plan that identifies nine (9) possible trails (three (3) of which have alternative routes): • Trail 1—UNC Campus to University Station (aka the J Branch Rail Trail) • Trail 2 — Chapel Hill to Hillsborough (branching from Trail 1 along NC 86 to Waterstone and the Town of Hillsborough trails system) • Trail 3—Carrboro to Hillsborough (a road route along Old NC 86 to the Town of Hillsborough trail system in Waterstone) • Trail 4— Mountains to Sea Trail (MST/West-Two (2) alternatives connecting from the Alamance County line to Seven Mile Creek Natural Area) • Trail 5—Seven Mile Creek to Riverwalk(via Occoneechee Mountain State Natural Area) • Trail 6 — Mebane to Hillsborough (three (3) alternatives different points in Mebane to Panther Branch Natural Area or Hillsborough Riverwalk) • Trail 7—Cedar Grove Park to Kings Highway Park(nature trail via the Eno River to Hillsborough) • Trail 8—Little River Park to Cedar Grove Park(Two (2) alternatives via Northeast Park and Breeze Farm) • Trail 9—Mountains to Sea Trail (MST/East— Eno River State Park to Durham) The draft Plan includes pages that provide a brief overview summary of the potential trail, key connections, length, and possible trail type, community needs addressed, required structures and crossings,and potential construction challenges. (Note—feasibility assessments and cost estimates would be created for each of these trails if approved as a part of the implementation process. The process for creating a prioritization of the trail options is on pages 68-69 of the Plan.) Based on the analysis in the plan, the highest priority trail is Trail 9 — MST via Eno River State Park to Durham,followed by Trail 2—the Chapel Hill to Hillsborough route.The lowest prioritytrail identified is Trail 813—Little River Parkto Cedar Grove Park.(These priorities are subject to future Board and staff discussion and evaluation and are provided as a "first cut" of a priority scheme.) Finally,the Implementation section of the Plan (page 70) looks at the trails and attempts to classify them into three (3) levels of phasing — Near-Term Opportunities, Mid-Term Opportunities and Long-Term Opportunities. The text box on page 73 outlines a possible course of action for the first 12 months of implementation,subject to further discussion. Possible phasing categorization is offered as a starting point for future discussion. The Plan concludes with sections on partnerships,funding potential, and an outline of an implementation plan. 18 Upon receiving initial direction and feedback from the Board, it is proposed that the draft Plan be conveyed to relevant advisory boards for review and comment,to be returned to the Parks and Recreation Council for formal comment and recommendation before Board of Commissioners consideration. David Stancil, DEAPR Director, introduced the item and reviewed the goals of the draft trails plan. He introduced Mikayla Hernandez from Gensler who drafted the plan for Orange County. Slide#1 Draft Orange• Trails r Board of County Commissioners Worksession April 14,2026 Slide#2 CoverWhat We'll 01 Where we are in the process 02 What we heard from the commun�ty 03 • principles 04 Overview ofthe proposed trail network 05 How segments were prioritized i . Next steps 07questions 19 Slide#3 Trails Plan Overview The Orange County Trails Plan provides a coordinated approach for connecting residents to the daily destinations that matter most-from parks and natural areas,to schools and libraries,to towns and transit. • Combines physical network concept and policy guidance • Consolidates years of planning work and community input • Clarifies the types of trails that fit best across the county • Built on evaluation of existing conditions and feasibility O �rak Orange CoumyTraBs Plen Board of County Commbsieners YJorksesslon ApId IA.io26 3 Slide#4 Orange County will be a place where a safe, inclusive network of trails connects people - abilities A Vision for to each other,to nature,and to the Trail Connectivity places they love. The co-created vision served as the These trails will make it easy to project's"north star,"guiding the travel ike rather than proposed network,principles,and by foot ` ` implementation direction. car,encouragemovement, strengthen our . . foster equitable access to the natural beauty that defines the Piedmont regi Project Goals Five Trails Plan project goals were identified by the Orange County Parks&Recreation Council and highlighted by the community during the visioning process. Ol 02 03 04 05 Spark enthusiasm Develop a Trails Create a Expand access to Identify new for a connected Plan that reflects comprehensive excellent parks and existing county trail network the community's network of and recreation trail segments with an equitable, vision and aligns connectivity opportunities fora to complete the inclusive,and with other county between key points broader population, Mountains to Sea engaging outreach and municipality of interest including especially in rural Trail(MST}section process. efforts,such as work,home,school, areas of the county. in Orange County. the Bicycle and commerce,and Pedestrian Plan. public transit. 20 Slide#5 .j, processSlide#6 Process at a Glance The Trails Plan i 2025 2026 JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC. JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. TASK 2 :• I I :• TASK 3 �b lost I Estimate TASKS &L AIL Dralt 0sange County Trails Plan I Board ofCountyCommIsslo—Worksession I ApriII4,2026 1 6 21 Slide#7 How We Got Here The draft Trails Plan reflects what we learned through community visioning,draft network engagement,previous plans,and on-the-ground fieldwork across the county. i Community Input Previous& Ongoing Plans shaped the vision, r guiding principles, (MST,Bike/Ped,greenway and proposed plans,Land Use Plan, etc.)set expectations for - network structure. connectivity. Fieldwork& Steering Committee •,, GIS Analysis guidance helped confirmed where trails refine engagement, are feasible and where priorities,and draft constraints exist. recommendations. ❑raft Orange Coumyllml0h, 6 rd of County Commrsstoners—ksesslon Aprdu., .26 j 7 Slide#8 Who We Reached Public engagement reached residents across all seven townships,using both in-person and digital tools. 62 Vision Workshop 10 O Draft Network 76 Pop-Up Event Attendees Workshop Attendees V Participants Two hands-on sessions Two open-house style sessions Two tabling events at the County with interactive activities for residents to review and Roadshow and Soccer.com Center to define the community's provide feedback on the to take workshop content out aspirational vision and proposed trail network and into the community and reach shared priorities preliminary prioritization additional residents 7 Vision Survey L C Draft Network Outreach methods included: L2 Respondents 65 Survey Respondents . Project webpage Online version of the Online version of the draft • E-Newsletters(123 sign-ups) visioning activities for network workshops to provide a Social media campaigns community members who a virtual alternative to in- a Printed flyers could not attend in person person engagement • Digital advertisements/graphics Draft Orange County Trails Plan I Board of County Commissl Worksession Apr1114,2026 a Mikayla Hernandez reviewed the public engagement process, which included workshops, pop up events, and surveys. She said they reached residents in all seven townships. She said they engaged community members in visioning as well as a review of the draft network. zz Slide#9 Q What We Heard: Visioning Process ` Residents emphasized the importance of safe,connected trails that support daily movement and recreation across the county. Key Themes Priority Destinations • Network of connectivity • Hillsborough Riverwalk Qp Q • Connection to nature • Occoneechee Mountain • Safety • Blackwood Farm Park 0 • Healthy movement • Brumley Nature Preserve • Inclusive design • Eno River State Park - Q Q Priority Connections Q.o Q • Town-to-town connectivity between Chapel Hill,Carrboro, QQ� ''� Hillsborough,and Mebane 6V,� • Quiet,nature-based corridors where feasible 0 Regional connectivity,especially the Mountains to Sea Trail (MST) segment in Orange County Drab Orange C—y Trails Wan Board of C.my Co mm l sslaness -114,:076 9 Mikayla Hernandez reviewed feedback from the visioning process. She said they also asked residents to draw their personal priorities for connectivity across the county, which is shown on the left side of slide#9. Slide#10 What We Heard: Network Feedback After reviewing the proposed draft network,guiding principles, and preliminary prioritization,community feedback focused on how the trail segments would function on the ground. What people responded Questions&concerns positively to raised by the community • Completing gaps in the • Separation and safety on Mountains to Sea Trail road-adjacent routes • Longer,continuous • Potential impacts to nature-based routes creeks and natural areas • Clear town-to-town • Privacy near certain rural connections segments • Long-term maintenance expectations Drab Orange C-My hails Plan Board MCo ly Commissioners W,kse is Ap.114,1026 10 Slide#11 23 Inputs Inputs Inputs Inputs What we heard What we heard What we heard What we heard How Public Input Shaped the Plan Insights Insights What it means&why it matters What it means why it matters Community visioning and draft network engagement shaped the goals,guiding principles,proposed network, Guiding Principles and the pr�oritization approach, How it connects ensuring the draft Orange County Trails Plan is grounded Travis flan in community values. What it looks like Guiding Principles REFLECT LOCAL CHARACTER PRIORITIZE USER SAFETY CULTIVATECOMMUNETYWELLNESS Trails should seamlessly integrate into Safety is essential for encouraging The trail network should help build the surrounding landscape and reflect trail use.Thoughtful trail design a fiappier,healthier community by the unique identity of each community with universal a[[ess,adequate supporting physical activity,mental they pass through-from rural to urban visibility,Blear wayfinding,and health,and sottal well-beingthrough and everything in between-to foster safe crossings should be at the opportunities for recreation,relaxation, a stronger sense of identity and place forefront to keep pedestrians and and connection with nature. across Orange County. cyclists safe and comfortable. ADVANCE ACCESS&EQUITY EXPANDTRAVELOPTIONS DESIGN FOR LONGEVITY All Orange County residents-regardless of To Slide#12 Naeffective,the I[[ 24 Slide#13 Draft Trails Plan: Proposed Network The proposed network combines nature trails,rail-to-trail l segments,and road routes to create a connected county system linking major destinations and advancing MST continuity. Dl UNC Campus to University Station(Ra[Ito Tra[I via NCRR CoGen Line) 2O Chapel Hill to Hillsborough(Road route via NC 86&Waterstone Dr to Cates Creek Park} © Carrboroto Hillsborough(Road route via Old NC 86) mMST-Alamance County to Seven Mile Creek Natural Area(Road route) ae MST-All County to Seven Mile Creek Natural Area(Nature trail) ` 1` o oZ OS MST-Seven Mile Creek Natural Area to Hillsborough Riverwalk(Nature tra il) OMebane to Hillsborough(Road route via US-70) \(f 5B Mebane to Kings Highway Park(Nature trail via Duke Energy transmission easement) ;� • -- { Lake Michael Park to Panther Branch Natural Area(Road route via Lebanon Rd) • 1-�7r•' r D Cedar Grove Park to Kings Highway Park(Nature Trail via Eno River) ` .. MLittle River Park to Cedar Grove Park(Nature trail via Northeast Park&Breeze Farm) m LAI . Little River Park to Cedar Grove Park(Road route via Northeast Park&Breeze Farm) j OMST-Eno River State Park to Durham(Nature trail) Drah orange County 7rasls Plan -9...d of County Commiscioners Worksession Aynl 14.2025 1a Slide#14 What the Network Accomplishes The proposed trail network translates community priorities and ti _ guiding principles into a system that... OIL Expands access to parks,preserves,and natural areas for = residents around the county • -= 02 Strengthens town-to-town and rural connectivity,linking ---� ------ municipalities and surrounding communities i 03 Creates clearer,more intentional multi-modal connections0 across the county ' 04 Supports daily movement and recreation,making it easier to walk,bike,and spend time outdoors close to home 05 Advances Completion of the Mountains to Sea Trail(MST) and strengthens Orange County's role in regional and statewide trail systems Drah orange County Trash Plan 1 9oard of Cmnty Cwnmrssionvs Wo_ C1ion April 14.2026 14 25 Slide#15 Segment Prioritization Prioritizing trail segments helps Orange County strategically focus time and resources,advance projects that deliver the greatest benefit first,and provide a transparent,repeatable framework for future decision-making. How Priorities Were Set:A Four-Step Process 01 02 03 04 Analyst Scoring Public Input Comparison& Combined Priority Initial scoring of Community feedback Weighting Order each segment on the draft priority Inputs were Weighted results using a consistent order through normalized and were combined to set of evaluation workshops and an weighted to balance produce the draft criteria(local need, online survey,using technical feasibility priority order that cost efficiency, a dot voting exercise and community will be evolved as connectivity,guiding and ranking activity perspective, segments are refined. principle alignment, respectively. community support) rah Onnge Caunry Ni Is Plan Board ar County C—liabners Work—wis A;,6114,2026 15 Slide#16 Priority Order of Segments The draft priority order reflects a combination of community preferences and feasibility considerations. Highest-ranking segments generally share the following Q MST•Eno River State Park to Durham(Nature trail) characteristics: rc a ❑ Chapel Hill Hillsborough(Road route via NC 86&Waterston Dr to Cates Creek Park) Strong community support MST-Seven Mile Creek Natural Area to Hillsborough Riverwalk(Nature trail) Nature-based or separated MST-Alamance County to Seven Mile Creek Natural Area(Nature tra I) trail experiences •❑1 UNC Campus to University Station(Rail to Trail via NCRR CoGen Line) Clear connections to parks, © Carrbory to Hillsborough(Road route via Old NC 86) towns,and the MST 7❑ Cedar Grove Park to Kings Highway Park(Nature Trail via Eno River) Reminder: 6B Mebane to Kings Highway Park(Nature trail via Duke Energy transmissioneasement) This priority order represents a Mebane to Hillsborough(Road route via US-70 to West Hill AvelOcconeechee Mtn) planning-level snapshot and will continue to evolve as segments MST-Alamance County to Seven Mile Creek Natural Area(Road route) are refined. 0 M Little River Park to Cedar Grove Park(Nature trail via Northeast Park&Breeze Farm) a vi Lake Michael Pa rk to Panther Bra rich Natural Area(Road route via Leba non Rd) 3 O 0 Little River Park to Cedar Grove Park(Road route via Northeast Park&Breeze Farm) rah Orange Caunry Trails Plan Board or County Commiul—s Worksnsion ApOI14.2026 16 Mikayla Hernandez said the priority order of segments in slide #16 is not a construction or build schedule. 26 Slide#17 What's Next 03L Convey the draft advisory boards . and comment 02 Return the draft plan to the Parks and Recreation •uncil for formal / recommendation 03 Refire the plan based on advisory input, :•. • direction, • continued coordination 04 Prepare an adoption-ready Trails Plan Additional Elements Included in the Plan for future Board of Commissioners In addition to what we covered tonight,the following consideration aref'f in the draft Trails Plan and will be refined as more information becomes available: • Trail Segment ' ■ (Section04 • Project Phasing Framework(Section 05,pp,72-74) • Implementation Framework(Section05, /• ■ David Stancil continued the presentation. He noted the staff in DEAPR, the interdepartmental staff, and the community groups who also assisted in the development of the draft trails plan. He noted community comments regarding a proposed segment of the Mountains to Sea Trail. He said as the plan was prepared, they felt it was important to respect the integrity of the planning process. He said while it may look different going forward,they didn't feel they could take it out of the draft because it is something the Board adopted in 2018. He said the segment connections to Saxapahaw and Hillsborough, two trail towns that have invested into being on the Mountains to Sea Trail. He said Alamance County acquired a large park on the county line near Saxapahaw. He said this segment is the best natural surface trail corridor you can use to get from Saxapahaw to Hillsborough. He said that this may be reevaluated now that there is a draft set of priorities. He said the next steps are to get feedback from the Board, as well as advisory boards. He said the plan would return to the Parks and Recreation Council for formal comment and consideration. He said the plan would be refined based on feedback from those groups and Board direction. He said cost is a consideration, but it will be difficult to estimate until they are prioritizing trails and doing feasibility studies. He said the trails plan relies heavily on working with NCDOT on shared use paths. He shared that NCDOT issued trail encroachment guidelines in 2024, which is a positive sign for future cooperation. 27 Slide#18 Discussion Questions The Board began discussing the presentation and asking questions from staff and Mikayla Hernandez. Vice-Chair Fowler said she was pleased to hear the coordination of bicycle and pedestrian plans for the county. She thanked staff for their work. David Stancil said they were excited about the possibility of working with NCDOT. He said there are some projects that are"low-hanging fruit,"and some that might take a really long time, but they have a vision of what people want to see. Commissioner Carter thanked staff for their work. She praised the community engagement and the comprehensive perspective on the plan. She said they will continue to hear community input, and she supports taking it through the process because it builds in different perspectives. She said one of the great things about Orange County is the support for recreational opportunities. Commissioner Portie-Ascott thanked staff for their work and engagement with the community. She asked if they heard requests for additional recreational opportunities beyond trails. David Stancil said there were people in the workshops and on the survey who would like to see spin-off opportunities for the trail connections. He said Cedar Grove Community Center is at the end of one of those trail segments, and this might be a way to bring people to the center. He heard a desire to maximize existing facilities. He said there is interest in seeing what other things can develop at trail that's not just recreational, but other kinds of development. He said this came up in discussions to convert the rail line to a trail. Commissioner Bedford asked which segment is part of the Millhouse Road property. David Stancil said trail 1. He said a section of the Millhouse Road property would need to be reserved as a corridor. He said it is possible that trail and the one that connects to Hillsborough and Cates Creek Park might need to use the Millhouse Road corridor until the rail trail question is resolved. He said they might see a connection through the Millhouse property, through the town's operations base to the Greene Tract and connecting south into the town's network. Commissioner Bedford said having this plan is helpful as they consider other developments and projects. Chair Hamilton said by having a trails plan,they know to protect or ask for easements. She had a concern about the plan and referred to page 37 of the agenda packet. She said the text includes a reference to the Orange County Land Use Plan 20250, but it needs to be clear that the land use plan has not yet been approved. David Stancil said they've been using where they are to date as something to gauge against with the trails plan, but acknowledged that the land use plan isn't done. 28 Chair Hamilton said it's important because things might change, and they should consider how the documents are seen and interpreted by the public. She gave an example of the Cane Creek neighbors that are in opposition to their land being used for a segment of the Mountains to Sea Trail. David Stancil the priority order was developed based on feedback from community input. He said they understand that might change as other groups review the plan and the Board provides comments. Chair Hamilton said an asterisk might be included to explain that the current landowners do not plan to sell their land. David Stancil said now that the plan has been presented, staff can include those sorts of details. Commissioner Bedford asked which segments follow water. She noted that the county has been successful in obtaining easements with other conservancy groups and getting state funding. David Stancil reviewed the segments that follow stream corridors. Commissioner Bedford asked if any of those segments have grant funding as a criterion, such as for farm preservation. David Stancil said they haven't used that as a criterion yet, but the Cedar Grove to Little River segment connects to Breeze Farm. He said they could look at voluntary agricultural districts as a criterion. 4. Potential Removal of Boards and Commissions Members Due to 2025 Attendance The Board discussed the removal of appointees from several boards and commissions due to 2025 attendance. BACKGROUND: The Orange County Board of County Commissioners' Advisory Board Policy (as in effect during calendar year 2025) required members to attend at least 75% of scheduled meetings within a twelve-month period in order to maintain membership. The Advisory Board Policy (Attachment A) also states that members who miss three (3) consecutive meetings are subject to removal. After collecting and compiling the 2025 attendance records for all boards and commissions,members who violated the attendance requirements were identified by the Clerk's Office. Boards and commissions staff liaisons were informed which members were subject to removal, and the liaisons worked with the Chairs to either invite resignations or prepare memos to share with the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) to advocate for continued membership despite absences. Some members did not respond to communication attempts and are therefore presented for removal rather than continued participation. The following members from the following boards and commissions are subject to removal pending BOCC action: • Advisory Board on Aging NAME POSITION CURRENT CURRENT TERM %OF 2025 DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT EXPIRATION DATE MEETINGS TYPE ATTENDED Shahnaz "GiGi" At-Large First Full Term 06/30/2028 63.64% Rashdi Jerry Ann At-Large Second Full Term 06/30/2027 45.45% Gregory NOTE:A memo from the Advisory Board on Aging Chair is attached to the agenda. • Affordable Housing Advisory Board 29 NAME POSITION CURRENT CURRENT TERM %OF 2025 DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT EXPIRATION DATE MEETINGS TYPE ATTENDED Mariela At-Large Second Full Term 09/30/2028 33.33% Hernandez Andrew Robinson At-Large First Full Term 06/30/2026 11.11% NOTE: Both members were non-responsive to Housing staff's communication attempts. • Agricultural Preservation Board NAME POSITION CURRENT CURRENT TERM %OF 2025 DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT EXPIRATION DATE MEETINGS TYPE ATTENDED Anjail Taylor At-Large Second Full Term 06/30/2027 0% NOTE:This member has been non-responsive to Environment, Agriculture, Parks and Recreation (DEAPR) staff's communication attempts. • Arts Commission NAME POSITION CURRENT CURRENT TERM %OF 2025 DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT EXPIRATION DATE MEETINGS TYPE ATTENDED Josh Rosenstein At-Large Second Full Term 09/30/2028 54.55% NOTE: A memo from the Arts Commission Chair is attached to the agenda. • Economic Development Advisory Board NAME POSITION CURRENT CURRENT TERM %OF 2025 DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT EXPIRATION DATE MEETINGS TYPE ATTENDED John Kim Core Business First Full Term 06/30/2027 50% Community NOTE: A memo from the Economic Development Advisory Board Chair is attached to the agenda. • Orange Unified Transportation Board NAME POSITION CURRENT CURRENT TERM %OF 2025 DESCRIPTION APPOINTMENT EXPIRATION DATE MEETINGS TYPE ATTENDED 30 Michael Hughes At-Large Second Full Term 09/30/2027 55.56% (Chair) Kaji Rashad At-Large First Full Term 09/30/2027 28.57% Chloe Pankratz Non-voting Youth First Full Term 09/30/2027 66.67% Delegate NOTE: Memos from the Orange Unified Transportation Board Chair and Vice-Chair are attached to the agenda. Tara May introduced the item. Commissioner Bedford asked if applying the current rules retroactively would be more lenient for the members in question. Tara May said that she and Chair Hamilton decided to implement the new rules going forward rather than retroactively, but could do either approach. Chair Hamilton said that the Board could also give exceptions to the policy. Vice-Chair Fowler asked if one of the exceptions could be that their board wanted to keep them. Chair Hamilton said to her, that's not a reason. She gave an example of the Advisory Board on Aging with members who might have health issues, but are informing the work of the board. Commissioner Carter said applying the new rules to last year would be a form of an exception, if it meant someone would be eligible to stay on. She said she'd like consistency in how the rules are applied. The Board asked Tara May to consider how retroactively applying the new policy to the members under consideration in the agenda item. Tara May asked if the new rules should be applied just to the people up for removal, or applied to all advisory board members. Commissioner Carter said if the rules aren't consistently relaxed,that complicates the discussion. Tara May said it could be that the new rules result in fewer people up for removal, but she'd have to check. She said they can keep using the new rules as of January for everyone else, but retroactively apply it for the people up for removal. She said if it were applied for people who are not up for removal tonight, there could be many more people to be removed. Vice-Chair Fowler said some of the issues brought up were related to health and that other members had requested an excused absence due to known conflicts. She said there were excused absences in the policy in the past. Tara May said that was true, but it was removed because "excused" wasn't defined and left discretion up to the board chair. Vice-Chair Fowler said changing the percentage to 50%would have solved most of the issues. Commissioner Bedford said the question, can someone be present to serve or not. She said she thought all members should be removed to be consistent with others who resigned. She noted that people who are removed can reapply after a year. Chair Hamilton clarified Commissioner Bedford's wishes to hold applying the 2025 criteria to the members up for removal, and to apply the new policy going forward. Commissioner McKee said that would best, otherwise the Board loses credibility. Commissioner Portie-Ascott said she was initially considering allowing these members to stay on the boards, but after hearing the comments from other commissioners it is best to be consistent. Tara May clarified that the Board wanted to move forward with removal of the members at a future business meeting. Commissioner Bedford said she'd like for everyone to be encouraged to reapply in the future. Tara May said it's not in the policy, but they generally advise people to roll off the board for a year and then reapply. 31 Commissioner Bedford said whatever is reasonable and she would be happy to reappoint them. 5. Advisory Board on Aging—Appointments Discussion The Board discussed appointments to the Advisory Board on Aging. BACKGROUND: The Advisory Board on Aging suggests policy and makes recommendations to the Board of Commissioners and the Department on Aging. Board members act as the liaisons between the County's older adults and Orange County government, particularly concerning the needs for a comprehensive, integrated approach to the delivery of services in the fields of health, mental health, social services, recreation, employment, and other programs for older adults. The Board of County Commissioners appoints all twelve (12) members. The following individuals are recommended for Board consideration: NAME POSITION DESCRIPTION TYPE OF EXPIRATION APPOINTMENT TERM DATE Jacqulyn Podger At-Large Second Full Term 06/30/2029 Daniel Leonard Carrboro Town Limits Partial Term 06/30/2027 (move from At-Large) Rafael Velez At-Large Partial Term 06/30/2027 If the individuals listed above are appointed, no vacancies remain. Tara May introduced the item. The Board agreed by consensus to appoint the recommended candidates. 6. Animal Services Advisory Board—Appointment Discussion The Board discussed an appointment to the Animal Services Advisory Board. BACKGROUND: The Animal Services Advisory Board advises the Board of County Commissioners on matters of concern regarding animal issues and animal services in Orange County and works with the Animal Services Director on various policy concerns and issues regarding County animal services. The Board of County Commissioners appoints all thirteen (13) members with representation from various related fields and municipalities. The following individual is recommended for Board consideration: NAME POSITION DESCRIPTION TYPE OF EXPIRATION APPOINTMENT TERM DATE Dr. Ann Brady Veterinarian from the First Full Term 06/30/2029 Board of Health If the individual listed above is appointed,the following vacancy remains: POSITION EXPIRATION DATE VACANCY INFORMATION DESIGNATION Town of Chapel Hill 06/30/2027 Vacant since 03/11/2026 32 Tara May introduced the item. The Board agreed by consensus to appoint the recommended candidates. Commissioner Bedford said Ellen Pearsall is eligible for the Town of Chapel Hill position. The Board agreed by consensus to appoint Ellen Pearsall. 7. Board of Health—Appointments Discussion The Board discussed appointments to the Board of Health. BACKGROUND: The Board of Health is the primary policy-making and adjudicatory body for the Orange County Health Department. It is charged to protect and promote the public health of Orange County residents and is mandated by state law. The Board of County Commissioners appoints all eleven (11) members with representatives from specific health-related professions and the public. The following individuals are recommended for Board consideration: NAME POSITION DESCRIPTION TYPE OF EXPIRATION APPOINTMENT TERM DATE Dr. Rachel Royce Citizen/ Second Full Term 06/30/2029 Commissioner Appointment Dr. Shielda Nurse Third Full Term 06/30/2029 Rodgers Dr.Ann Brady Veterinarian First Full Term 06/30/2029 If the individuals listed above are appointed,the following vacancy remains: POSITION EXPIRATION DATE VACANCY INFORMATION DESIGNATION Optometrist 06/30/2027 Vacant since 01/13/2026 Tara May introduced the item. The Board agreed by consensus to appoint the recommended individuals. 8. Human Relations Commission—Appointments Discussion The Board discussed appointments to the Human Relations Commission. BACKGROUND:The Human Relations Commission studies and makes recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners concerning problems in the field of human relationships. The Commission seeks solutions to community issues that may create animosity and unrest, makes recommendations designed to promote goodwill and harmony among groups in the County, and addresses and attempts to remedy the violence, tensions, polarization, and other harm created through discrimination, bias, hatred, and inequity. The Board of County Commissioners appoints all twelve (12) members. 33 The following applicants are recommended for Board consideration: NAME POSITION DESCRIPTION TYPE OF EXPIRATION APPOINTMENT TERM DATE Andrew Drain At-Large Partial Term 06/30/2027 Brandon Loor At-Large First Full Term 09/30/2028 Intriago Cassie Rice At-Large First Full Term 06/30/2029 Tonya Jones At-Large Second Full Term 06/30/2029 Jenn Sykes Town of Hillsborough Second Full Term 06/30/2029 If the individuals listed above are appointed,the following vacancies remain: POSITION EXPIRATION DATE VACANCY INFORMATION DESIGNATION Town of Carrboro 06/30/2028 Vacant since 02/18/2026 At-Large 06/30/2028 Vacant since 11/6/2025 Tara May introduced the item. Chair Hamilton said that Jenn Sykes already serves on two other boards. Commissioner Carter asked if Jenn Sykes is due to roll off any of the other boards soon. Tara May said she would look into it. The Board agreed by consensus to appoint the recommended individuals, with the exception of Jenn Sykes. 9. Orange Water and Sewer Authority Board of Directors—Appointment Discussion The Board discussed an appointment to the Orange Water and Sewer Authority Board of Directors. BACKGROUND:The OWASA Board of Directors addresses a wide variety of issues, including infrastructure investment, employee compensation and benefits, finance and rate setting, customer service and affordability, environmental protection, forestry, public health, and community engagement, among others. Since this is not a county board, it does not submit an Annual Work Plan. The following individual is presented for Board consideration: NAME POSITION DESCRIPTION TYPE OF EXPIRATION APPOINTMENT TERM DATE Dr.Johnny Orange County First Full Term 06/30/2026 Randall Appointee (reappointment) If the individual listed above is appointed, no vacancies remain. Tara May introduced the item. The Board agreed by consensus to appoint the recommended individual. 34 10. Parks and Recreation Council—Appointments Discussion The Board discussed appointments to the Parks and Recreation Council. BACKGROUND: The Parks and Recreation Council consults with and advises the Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks, and Recreation and the Board of County Commissioners on matters affecting parks planning, development, and operation, recreation facilities, policies, and programs, and public trails and open space. The Board of County Commissioners appoints twelve (12) members, with representatives from each of the County's townships and municipalities, and two (2) non-voting youth delegates. The following individuals are recommended for Board consideration: NAME POSITION DESCRIPTION TYPE OF EXPIRATION APPOINTMENT TERM DATE Vladimir Colina Chapel Hill City Limits First Full Term 03/31/2029 Prof. Dr. Acharan Chapel Hill Township First Full Term 03/31/2029 Narula If the individuals listed above are appointed,the following vacancies remain: POSITION EXPIRATION DATE VACANCY INFORMATION DESIGNATION Carrboro City Limits 03/31/2027 Vacant since 08/14/2025 Little River 03/31/2026 Vacant since 10/20/2025 Township Tara May introduced the item. The Board agreed by consensus to appoint the recommended individuals. Adjournment A motion was made by Vice-Chair Fowler, seconded by Commissioner Carter, to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 p.m. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Jean Hamilton, Chair Recorded by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board Submitted for approval by Laura Jensen, Clerk to the Board