Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 20081118 APPROVED 12/11/2008 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING November 18, 2008 7:30 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 7:30 p.m. in the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Barry Jacobs and Commissioners Moses Carey, Jr., Valerie P. Foushee, Alice M. Gordon, and Mike Nelson COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Laura Blackmon Assistant County Managers Willie Best and Gwen Harvey and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker. NOTE: ALL DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE PERMANENT AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE. 1. Additions or Changes to the Agenda Chair Jacobs went through the items at the County Commissioners' places. The pink sheet relates to item 5-a, the Capital Investment Plan. There were also materials in reference to the critical equipment required to control and measure water releases from Lake Orange. PUBLIC CHARGE The Chair dispensed with the reading of the public charge. 2. Public Comments a. Matters not on the Printed Agenda Glenn Wallace is a local business owner and he spoke about the scenic byways of N.C. He said that there are 97 miles of byways in Orange County and there are 61 general aviation airports in N.C. He has done a study, and at no time has a general aviation airport been sited next to a scenic byway. He asked the County Commissioners to act quickly and diligently to protect the scenic byways and to have the ordinance changes to protect this land from an airport. From a conservation viewpoint, he does not want his local government to leave the window open for UNC, the General Assembly, and other powerful people to ruin the scenic byways in Orange County. Pam Hemminger said that she has an idea about using the rest of the Super Soccer Fund money, which is $650,000, to earmark it for artificial turfing one field at Cedar Falls Park. There is a desperate need in Chapel Hill for soccer fields. This artificial turf field could be used by all County citizens all year long. She asked the County Commissioners to look into this. Mike Strand is a longstanding board member for Rainbow Soccer and the Executive Director of Triangle United Soccer. He was here two years ago to speak about this same process for soccer fields at Smith Middle School, but it went nowhere. He spoke in support of using the Soccer Super Fund for Cedar Falls Park. He said that his group is willing to put in some money up front in exchange for rental fees. Rob Smith is with the Rainbow Soccer Board. He gave some background on Rainbow Soccer. There are about 1,500 participants per season and they provide scholarships. Rainbow Soccer serves kids from age 3 to adults. There is now a new league for high school students, and it is a non-competitive league. Most of the fields are closed in the winter, but if there was an artificial turf field, it could be open in February when Rainbow Soccer starts and could also be used year round. He said that Rainbow Soccer supports the idea of having an artificial turf field at Cedar Falls Park. b. Matters on the Printed Agenda (These matters were considered when the Board addressed that item on the agenda below.) 3. Proclamations/ Resolutions/ Special Presentations a. 2009 Revaluation The Board received information concerning the 2009 Revaluation. Tax Assessor John Smith made this PowerPoint presentation. 2009 Revaluation Presentation •Orange County's previous revaluation became effective January 1, 2005 and values do not change between revaluations. •Orange County's next revaluation is scheduled to take effect January 1, 2009. •The majority of Orange County properties values have increased over the four years that have passed since January 1, 2005. •Based on local sales, Orange County values have increased. However over the last two years the media has been reporting that values are declining. Why have local values increased and how will the media reports impact the 2009 revaluation? *Orange County is a great place to live •Many advantages and amenities *Values have increased gradually over past 23 years •Economic impacts/foreclosures not as great here •Local reports positive *Value increases over four years not just one year •Perception of many seems to be that values have declined What are the benefits of revaluation? •Revaluation team has equalized values based on local sales data •Importance of equalization •Ratio is below 80% •Tax break to utilities If Orange County revalues now and values drop in 2009 how will four years of inflated values impact the local economy, real estate, and people residing in Orange County? •Larger economic impact if county unable to deliver services •Impact to people •Track values and take needed steps to keep tax value levels below market levels What are the challenges associated with this revaluation? •Recognize this revaluation may be very different *Clear in explaining four year change *Open Approach •Responsiveness Commissioner Gordon asked John Smith to clarify his statement that this would be very different this year and John Smith said that people believe the tax values are going to be low because of the economy. He said that the Board may see more appeals this year. 4. Consent Agenda A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner Nelson to approve the remaining items on the consent agenda. a. Minutes This item was removed and placed at the end of the consent agenda for separate consideration. b. Appointments (1) Orange Unified Transportation Board — Reappointments The Board reappointed the following to the Orange unified Transportation Board: Position Number Special Representation Expiration Date 3 Sam Lasris Cedar Grove Township 09/30/2011 6 Eric Tillman Hillsborough Township 09/30/2011 11 Al Terry O. C. Transportation 09/30/2010 Services Board 12 Jan Grossman Bicycle Transportation 09/30/2011 Advocate c. Motor Vehicle Property Tax Release/Refunds The Board adopted a refund resolution, which is incorporated by reference, related to 53 requests for motor vehicle property tax releases or refunds in accordance with North Carolina General Statutes. d. Orange County Preparedness Agreement with Person County Health Department This item was removed and placed at the end of the consent agenda for separate consideration. e. Agreement Renewal for Adopt a Child Care Dental Screening Project Coordinator The Board renewed the agreement for a Project Coordinator for the Adopt a Child Care Dental Screening Project. f. RFP Award: Graphic Design, Cartography and Production of a Map of Bicycle Routes in Orange County This item was removed and placed at the end of the consent agenda for separate consideration. Bid Award: Fiber and Telephone Cable Project, Orange County Solid Waste and Animal Shelter The Board awarded bid number 1558 to Integrated Communications Services of Raleigh, North Carolina at a total cost of $56,200 to construct a fiber connection between the new Solid Waste Operations Center (SWOC) and new Animal Shelter Facility and connect the SWOC with other buildings at the Landfill and authorized the Purchasing Director to execute the necessary paperwork. h. Bid Award: Truck Lease for Solid Waste The Board awarded bid number 1557 to TranSource, Inc. at a delivered cost of $2,135 per month for the lease of one (1) truck for use by the Recycling Division of the Department of Solid Waste Management; and authorized the Purchasing Director to execute the necessary paperwork subject to final review by staff and the County Attorney. i. Contract Renewal for Summit Consulting, PLLC The Board renewed an agreement between the Solid Waste Department and Summit consulting, PLLC, for surveying and consulting services at the Orange County Landfill through December 31, 2011 and authorized the Chair to sign, subject to final review by staff and the County Attorney. L Resolution Endorsing Taste of Hope Program This item was removed and placed at the end of the consent agenda for separate consideration. k. Classification and Pay Plan Amendment—Add/Revise Various Classes The Board amended the Classification and Pay Plan, as outlined in the tables in the "Background" section of this abstract, to add 2 new classifications: Public Health Education Program manager and Athletics Program & Facilities Director to be funded from current departmental budgets. I. Fiscal Year 2008-09 Budget Amendment #3 The Board approved budget ordinance amendments for fiscal year 2008-09 for Department of Social Services, Health Department, Board of Elections, and Visitor's Bureau Fund. m. Establish the Criminal Justice Partnership Program (CJPP) & Juvenile Crime Prevention Council (JCPC) The Board established the Criminal Justice Partnership Program Advisory Board and the Juvenile Crime Prevention Council as a separate entity of the Orange-Chatham Justice Partnership and appointed the list of recommended individuals for the indicated positions and terms. n. Change in BOCC Regular Meeting Schedule for 2008 The Board amended its regular meeting calendar for 2008 by adding a BOCC Mini-Retreat on Thursday, December 4, 2008 from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill. o. Board of Commissioners Meeting Calendar for Year 2009 This item was removed and placed at the end of the consent agenda for separate consideration. County Attorney Transition and Legal Services Contract Approval The Board approved a contract with the law firm of Coleman, Gledhill, Hargrave & Peek for legal services to the County; and authorized the Chair to sign. Approval of Financing Arrangement for Orange Grove Volunteer Fire Company, Inc. to Purchase a Fire Truck The Board approved Orange Grove Volunteer Fire Company, Inc. entering into a financing arrangement to purchase a fire truck; appropriated $20,000 from the department's County-held unappropriated fund balance; and authorized the Board of Commissioner Chair to sign the appropriate documents related to the financing arrangement. VOTE ON CONSENT AGENDA: UNANIMOUS ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA: a. Minutes The Board considered correcting and/or approving the minutes from October 7, 14 (5:30 and 7:30 meetings), 21 and 28, 2008 as submitted by the Clerk to the Board. Commissioner Gordon submitted a correction sheet for three of the meetings (October 7th, 21st and 28th). A motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Nelson to approve the remaining minutes, 5:30 and 7:30 meetings on October 14th, and bring back the corrected minutes on December 1st. VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Carey to also approve the October 21st minutes since these are the transfer station siting minutes and have to be timely. VOTE: UNANIMOUS d. Orange County Preparedness Agreement with Person County Health Department The Board considered an agreement with Person County Health Department for the provision of public health preparedness services for Orange County and authorizing the Chair to sign. Commissioner Gordon asked for an explanation of the vacant FTE and asked for a written proposal for this and what this is going to be used for. Laura Blackmon said that this is not creating another FTE, but it is a contract with Person County to do work with grant funds. Chair Jacobs said that the point of Commissioner Gordon's question is that the Board did speak about defining this position, and the Board should approve a redefined position. Health Director Rosemary Summers said that she did turn in a proposal about this FTE to Human Resources and to the County Manager and the new FTE would be a lower classification. Discussion ensued about this issue. Chair Jacobs entertained a motion to have Rosemary Summers submit the new job description that was submitted to Human Resources and the County Manager to the Board of County Commissioners. A motion was made by Commissioner Carey, seconded by Commissioner Foushee to have the Health Director submit the prepared job description to the Board of County Commissioners. VOTE: UNANIMOUS f. RFP Award: Graphic Design, Cartography and Production of a Map of Bicycle Routes in Orange County The Board considered awarding RFP's for Graphic Design and cartography to develop a map of designated bicycle routes in Orange County to R+M, Inc. of Cary, North Carolina (Graphic Design) at a total cost of $42,000 for 20,000 maps and Simpson Maps of Concord, North Carolina (Cartography) for a total of $8,000; and authorizing the Purchasing Director to execute the necessary paperwork. Commissioner Gordon said that she sent an email on this to Karen Lincoln to say that this map was drawn up in 2002 and it is not the same as the regional bike plan. She would like to see an updated map but staff cannot get a copy of the map for various reasons. Chair Jacobs agreed about seeing the map before voting on it. Transportation Planner Karen Lincoln said that the basic work on the map was done in 2002, and since then staff has worked with DOT. There is a working map for the committee. A copy of the working map will be provided to each Commissioner at the next agenda. All agreed. L Resolution Endorsing Taste of Hope Program The Board considered a resolution endorsing and encouraging participation in the Taste of Hope customer assistance program sponsored by the Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA) and the Inter-Faith Council for Social Service. Chair Jacobs recognized the two OWASA representatives. Fred Battle from OWASA said that this program is administered by the Inter-Faith Council. This program helps people that cannot afford to pay for water and sewer to cover their costs by donors. Interested donors can call or email the OWASA office. Interested donors can also go to the Inter-Faith Council to sign up. He asked the County Commissioners to consider endorsing this program. Joy Pressler said that this is a difficult time for Orange County residents who live from check to check. Only 5% of the customers participate in the Taste of Home program. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Foushee to approve a resolution, which is incorporated by reference, endorsing and encouraging participation in the Taste of Hope customer assistance program sponsored by the Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA) and the Inter-Faith Council for Social Service. VOTE: UNANIMOUS o. Board of Commissioners Meeting Calendar for Year 2009 The Board considered final approval of the regular meeting schedule for the Board of County Commissioners for calendar year 2009. Commissioner Gordon said that last year there were three budget work sessions after the budget public hearing and she thinks that there should be four. Laura Blackmon said that she would be giving the County's Operating Budget on May 12th and the full budget on May 191h. There will be four work sessions where the Board will have the full budget. She said that another work session could be added later. Chair Jacobs suggested keeping the regular work session on June 11th and make it a budget work session if needed. Commissioner Gordon wants to approve the budget before the last meeting in June. A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner Carey to give final approval of the regular meeting schedule for the Board of County Commissioners for calendar year 2009, with the addition of the June 11th work session. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 5. Public Hearings a. 2009-2019 Capital Investment Plan (CIP) Public Hearing The Board received public comments regarding the County Manager's Recommended 2009-2019 County CIP and the Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools and Orange County Schools Board of Education approved 2009-2019 CIP. Chair Jacobs asked Budget Director Donna Coffey to address how and who makes decisions about school capital funding priorities. Donna Coffey explained the process of funding schools. School systems receive 60% of the revenue and County projects receive 40%. She made a PowerPoint presentation. 2009-19 Capital Investment Plan Orange County, Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools, Orange County Schools Public Hearing Orange County, NC November 18, 2008 Summary Total Identified Capital Needs 2009 Through 2019 Dollar amounts shown in millions of dollars Funded Unfunded Total Identified Needs Orange County $181.8 $18.7 $200.5 Chapel Hill-Carrboro $78.7 $147.2 $225.9 City Schools Orange County $29.1 $35.9 $65.0 Schools Total Identified $289.6 $201.8 $491.4 Capital Needs 2009 through 2019 County Capital Plan Highlights •Funds clinical and office space for Human Service agencies to better serve our clients .$24.9 million to purchase and develop Hillsborough Commons into Human Services campus for Department of Social Services, Health and other departments .$6 million to construct addition at Southern Human Services Center .Will allow for relocation of dental clinic from leased space and provide additional clinical space for Health Department •Begins to address County-wide library needs .Construction of new library located in downtown Hillsborough anticipated to open in 2009 .Provides additional $3 million to address future library facilities identified by the Library Services Task Force •Offers future expanded recreational opportunities for residents throughout the County by continuing to develop parks and preserve lands •Preserves structural integrity and mechanical systems in current County facilities •Invests in technology that will enable our workforce to be more efficient and provide services in a more streamlined manner Orange County Capital Plan Highlights Orange County Unfunded Projects 2009 Through 2019 Dollar Amounts Shown in Millions of Dollars Seymour Senior Center—Wellness Center $0.4 Expansion (need identified for FY 2009-10) Parks Base (need identified for FY 2010-11) $4.1 Recreation and Parks Administrative $4.0 Headquarters (need identified for FY 2010-11) Orange Public Transportation Facility (need $0.4 identified for FY 2011-12) Seymour Senior Center—Adult Day Health $2.2 Center (need identified for FY 2013-14) Seymour Senior Center— General Purpose $4.7 Space (need identified for FY 2017-18) Central Orange Senior Center— General $2.9 Purpose Space (need identified for FY 2017- 18) Future Courts and Detention Facility Unknown Northern Human Services Center (Future) Unknown Total Orange County Unfunded Projects $18.7 Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools Capital Plan Highlights Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Funded Projects 2009-2019 Dollar Amounts Shown in Millions of Dollars Construction of Elementary#11 $32.0 Lincoln Center Improvements $1.6 Technology $27.1 Major Repairs and Renovations to Existing $18.0 Schools Total CHCCS Funded Projects $78.7 Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Unfunded Projects 2009-2019 Dollar Amounts Shown in Millions of Dollars Carrboro High Auditorium, Music Rooms, $29.9 Black Box Theater, Auxiliary Gym, Wrestling Room, Classroom Additions (need identified for FY 2012-13) Lincoln Center Addition (need identified for FY $6.2 2013-14) Middle School #5 (need identified for FY $50.7 2013-14) Culbreth Middle School Science Labs (need $4.0 identified for FY 2015-16) McDougle Elementary School Auditorium $6.6 Elementary#12 (need identified for FY 2017- $44.0 18) Major Maintenance Projects (on-going needs) $5.8 Total CHCCS Unfunded Projects $147.2 Orange County Schools Capital Plan Highlights Orange County Schools Funded Projects 2009 through 2019 Dollar Amounts Shown in Millions of Dollars Technology $8.0 Energy/GREEN Building Enhancements $3.7 Middle School Science Labs $1.0 Major Repairs and Renovations to Existing $16.4 Schools Total OCS Funded Projects $29.1 Orange County Schools Unfunded Projects 2009 Through 2019 Dollar Amounts Shown in Millions of Dollars CW Stanford Middle School Auditorium (Need $3.8 identified for FY 2011-12) Cedar Ridge Auxiliary Gym (need identified $10.2 for FY 2012-13) Cedar Ridge High Athletic Field House (need $2.2 identified for FY 2013-14 Cedar Ridge High Classroom Addition (need $13.9 identified for FY 2014-15) Major Repairs and Renovations to Existing $5.8 Schools (ongoing needs) Total OCS Unfunded Projects $35.9 Next Steps •December 1, 2008 Regular Meeting .Opportunity for Commissioners to provide further direction that may follow the public hearing scheduled for November 18, 2008. •December 11, 2008 Regular Meeting .Commissioners adopt School and County 2009-19 CIP Document Availability •County Budget Office ■208 South Cameron Street, Hillsborough •County Website .www.co.orange.nc.us/budget •Local Libraries Commissioner Nelson said that he thinks that the full local impact of recession has not sunk in with the community yet and he asked the Manager to give an assessment of the $10 million budget shortfall and the $5 million that is missing or deferred. Laura Blackmon said that the expected costs next year will cause a shortfall of $10 million. These costs include a reduction of revenue from sales tax, reduction in growth, increased debt costs for facilities, new student costs for next year, increased costs of opening new facilities, estimate of implementing pay and classification plan, and property tax increases are going to be small. These are budget drivers. The other issue is the $5 million. Prior to the County moving to the MUNIS software program, there were some conversions and projects that had never been taken off the books because the budgeted revenue did not match the expenditures of the projects. There were also some expected grants that were not received and the transfers from the general fund did not take place. The estimate is $5 million for balancing the accounts. Commissioner Gordon pointed out the big-ticket item that the County will be leasing the old Wal-Mart facility for Human Services and in 2012 the County will have the option to purchase the facility. Chair Jacobs suggested that staff point out how much one penny on the tax dollar means. It was answered that one penny on the tax rate equals $1.3 million. He reiterated that the respective Boards of Education decide on the projects for the school systems. The County only provides a certain amount of money. Public Comment: Marty Mandell said that Lands Legacy and conservation easements used to be a separate line item and it is not in the CIP anymore. She asked what happened. She said that this is one of the most successful programs in the County. She said that the most recent project includes the value-added processing center. She said that the future for this program is unlimited and she asked the County Commissioners to please return the Lands Legacy and conservation easements to a separate line item. She said that, under no circumstances should ERCD be included in the reorganization plan proposed by the County Manager. Ken Terlep provided a prepared statement to the County Commissioners: Comments to the Orange County Commission on November 18, 2008 in support of the funding of equipment to be installed at Lake Orange to Control / Measure Lake Orange Water Releases Hello. I'm Ken Terlep. I live in Cedar Grove and I'm speaking on behalf of the Friends of Lake Orange in support of the funding of equipment for Lake Orange to control and measurement equipment for water releases The Friends of Lake Orange is a newly formed civic association that currently represents well over 100 Orange County property owners who have common interests related to the water management, the ecology, recreation rights, and other issues associated with Lake Orange and its adjacent properties. Our members have become increasingly concerned with repeated and extreme 'drawdowns' of Lake Orange — in part due to outdated water management practices. Excessive and UNMETERED releases from Lake Orange are wasteful and contribute to significant loss of water level as was dramatically visible in 2002, 2005 and 2007. Current management practices for water releases from Lake Orange must be updated immediately to add modern equipment to prevent the significant risk of loss of potential drinking water and loss of lake level. The Friends of Lake Orange requests that the Commission immediately approve the needed $55,000 capital funds so that the equipment to remotely control and measure water releases can be installed prior to June of 2009. This will allow use of the equipment in the summer/fall timeframe which is the time period when retention of water for future use is most critical and when important discharge data can be obtained to permit use in the Model Calibration for Lake Orange as part of the Neuse River Basin Model Development effort. The Town of Hillsborough recognizes the critical nature of this requirement and has committed $25,000 toward the purchase of the equipment which will cost $80,000 total. As further evidence of the recognition of the importance of this equipment, we have previously submitted a Petition to the Commission on 10/21/08 signed by 265 Orange County citizens who are concerned with the current lack of control of water releases and who support the request to install the equipment. 1. Currently, the method to attempt to obtain targeted releases of water is for an operator to physically drive to Lake Orange and to manually turn a valve at the release tower. There is no way to directly measure the actual discharge amount from the reservoir since a previously installed measurement device (weir) has been broken for several years. There is a strong likelihood of releasing millions of gallons of water each month in excess of the targeted amount. By comparison, the WFER is equipped with an electrically and remotely controlled valve system and a remotely readable measurement gage to observe the actual discharge flow. Similar equipment must be installed to control and measure the actual flow from Lake Orange so the operators can know what is happening with their actions and not guess what will happen. Careful management of precious water resources requires understanding and control. This equipment is required to get that control. 2. Recent activities to define and validate the Upper Eno portion of the Neuse River Basin Computer Model have shown that the Model's ability to replicate the WFER's actual results for the period of 2002 to 2007 is extremely good. This result is directly related to the fact that the actual discharge data for the WFER has been measured. The fact that the detailed discharge data is provided to the Model permits excellent results. Thus the Model is validated for the WFER as a specific reservoir within the Upper Eno region. In contrast to the Model's good results for the WFER, early attempts to develop and calibrate the Model for Lake Orange have yielded poor results. Although work is underway to estimate and "back calculate" the withdrawal amounts for Lake Orange, the ability of the Model to replicate actual results can be significantly enhanced if the actual discharge data were available for Lake Orange and used in the Model directly. The needed measurement equipment will allow collection of that critical data. The Model must be validated for Lake Orange to allow its use in consideration of the overall performance of the Upper Eno. It is noted that Mr. Tom Fransen, Water Allocation Section Chief of the NC DWR, stated on 11/12/08 that the Model is to be an important and required tool for municipalities and other significant users of water in the Neuse River Basin. If the required equipment can be installed before June of 2009, we will have an opportunity to get updated data into the Model during the operating phase of the Consultants, who have been contracted for the Model development and validation, AND likely get much more accurate results. Until that time, we will have to estimate the performance of Lake Orange via refinement of the Model to attempt to obtain an acceptable validation. Actual data for the summer/fall timeframe is important because the Model cannot be calibrated during times of highest lake capacity or spilling as often is observed during the springtime; high temperatures coupled with low rainfall and highest water demand will more likely result in large drawdown of the lake level which is important to observe the model's prediction versus the actual lake level — and thus permit Calibration of the Model. Ken Terlep for Friends of Lake Orange 919-732-9744 Laura Blackmon said that the funds for this would not be available until July 2009. Chloe Riley is also a resident of Lake Orange. She said that last year they watched Lake Orange reduced from 150 acres to 50 acres. The residents had concerns and in the spring the rains came and the lake filled up. However, in June, the lake was reduced by 8-10 inches in several days. She said that this is when many citizens started researching this. In doing the research they found that, because the equipment on the lake is outdated, water is being wasted. She asked the County to fund the proposed equipment to regulate the water flow. John Tolar is with Lake Orange, Inc. He said that, rather than spending the money, when the lake gets down that it will not go over the spillway, then the water could be turned on until the stream is restored. He said that when the West Fork can no longer serve the need, then Lake Orange can be used. Bob Lee also lives at Lake Orange. He said that there is not much recreational opportunity when there is a mud flat and water should be conserved as much as possible. Serena Fenton spoke in support of funding for an arts wing at Carrboro High School. She was surprised that the auditorium had been pushed back to 2012. She said that there are students who rely on the arts program heavily. Suzanna Dancy encouraged the County Commissioners to provide funding for the arts wing at Carrboro High School. She said that this wing was necessary for arts education. Paige McClelland attends Carrboro High School and spoke in support of an arts wing for Carrboro High School. She is a band student and said that the weight room is used as the band room. Karen Gil also spoke in support of an arts wing at Carrboro High School. She is a parent of a future band student and a theater student. Holly Rio also spoke in support of an arts wing at Carrboro High School. She said that a group of parents are working on forming an arts organization for Carrboro High School. She said that this is affecting a huge number of students. Elizabeth Walters is Chair of the Agricultural Preservation Board and asked the County Commissioners to fund conservation easements in the CIP. The State and Federal governments have the monies for these easements and Orange County needs matching funds for these grants. Conservation easements allow some farmers to stay in business. Sonia Rovner spoke in support of funding for an arts wing at Carrboro High School. She said that her 8th grader is not looking forward to going to Carrboro High School because of the inequities at the other high schools. Jamezetta Bedford is a member of the CHCCS Board of Education. She said that the school board has not yet approved the CIP and there will be a great deal of discussion. The SAPFO numbers are due out any day now. She said that she was the only board member who had a child at East Chapel Hill High when it did not have an arts wing and it does make a significant difference. She said that the board of education argued about the auditorium versus athletic fields at Carrboro High when it was being built, and the board needs to take responsibility for the arts wing. She said that if the school board eliminated everything in the CIP except for health and safety issues, then there could be an additional $1.8 million for the arts wing. Lewis Randell is a student at Carrboro High School and spoke in support of funding for an arts wing at Carrboro High School. He is in the band and said that the band room, which is the weight room, is smaller than the band room at Culbreth Middle School. Chair Jacobs said that if the CHCCS board is not ready to make a CIP decision by December 1st, then it should let the County Commissioners know. He said that the County Commissioners have never asked the CHCCS to change its funding priorities. He said that he is sympathetic, but the Board awaits the decision of the school board on how to fund its capital program. Commissioner Foushee thanked Ms. Bedford for bringing this to their attention so that parents do not think that the County Commissioners make the decisions for funding capital needs in the school district. A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner Carey to close the public hearing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 6. Regular Agenda a. Comprehensive Plan Update Phase II The Board considered adopting the draft Comprehensive Plan to include specific revisions. Comprehensive Planning Supervisor Tom Altieri summarized this item. This is for adoption of the May 6th draft Comprehensive Plan with revisions. He gave the background. The changes from the November 6th meeting are provided in italics. The changes do not change the meaning of the language of the draft plan. Attachment 3 is a summary of the significant revisions. County administration recommends approval of the resolution in the packet (Attachment 4). Assuming Board adoption tonight, staff will coordinate with a planning consultant to incorporate revisions to the comprehensive plan. PUBLIC COMMENT: Fred Black said that he has been following this process. He said that the next 12 months will be challenging because each advisory board will be developing a matrix for each element that it is responsible for. He said that, at a minimum, each advisory board should put together an ad hoc citizen committee to help put together the various things that it will be responsible for doing. He wants to get this right the first time. Dolly Hunter spoke as a member of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan Coalition. The Coalition encourages the Board to let the public know about the implementation process of two issues —when and how citizen input would be taken for the implementation process and how the Board would determine which objectives will be emphasized. The Coalition believes that high priority should be given to objectives that stimulate the economy. Chris Moran said that all of the local governments, non-profits, and citizens are going to have financial problems. He said that when the comprehensive plan references homeless people in any way, he asked the Board to please consider those at risk for being homeless and not just the chronic homeless and also to think about how services will be provided to these residents. He said that the non-profit community needs to have more dialogue with the Board of County Commissioners and the socioeconomic problems in the community. Commissioner Gordon went through her changes, as shown below: NOTES ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY COMMISSIONER GORDON - NOVEMBER 17, 2008 These notes pertain to the Table of BOCC Additional Revisions, so the item # is given first, followed by the page # and line #. Many of these changes are clarifications. Ch. 5 - Land Use Element Item 18, p. 5-2, I. 63-66 - These lines are to be edited as shown in the table, with the sentence referring to Map 5-1 being placed on line 56 (right after the paragraph about Orange County's Planning and Zoning Jurisdictions) and the sentence referring to Map 5-2 being placed on line 62 (right after the paragraph on the Orange County-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Joint Planning Agreement and Land Use Plan). Item 19, p. 5-2, 1.68 - Add: "A description of the Orange County-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Joint Planning Agreement and Land Use Plan can be found later in section 5.2 in a subsection entitled INTER-GOVERNMENTAL PLANNING HISTORY AND CONTEXT." Ch. 6 - Natural and Cultural Systems Element Item 45, p. 6-30, I. 8-10 - "Orange County 2004. In late 2007 the area was redesignated "attainment" and it is now in an attainment through 2017." Item 51, p. 6-58 to 6-65, Multiple: Re-arrange Sections to appear in the following order (the rest of this part is fine) Add section 6) CURRENT ESTIMATES OF PROTECTED LAND. This section was not shown in Attchment 6.4.4.1 because it remains at the end, with the original text, on pages 6-62 to 6- 65. Item 51, p. 6-58 to 6-65 - Attachment 6.4.4.1: There is one change in Attachment 6.4.4.1. The word "county" should not be deleted from the first sentence in the section on the Lands Legacy program. The first sentence should be the same as the original text, namely, "In 2000 Orange County accelerated the pace of conservation by establishing the Lands Legacy program -- the first comprehensive county land conservation program in North Carolina." Ch. 7 - Parks and Recreation Element Item 59, p. 7-7, Table 7-2: Under description of New Hope Park Preserve, do not add "linear park" and instead use the original language. Ch. 8 - Services and Facilities Element Item 73, p. 8-38, I. 45-46: Delete last part of the sentence which was recently added, and substitute the following language (based on the Oct. 14 minutes): "Although no formal recommendations were made in the report, actions taken since that time have included the production of the Grumet Report, an efficiency study, and the establishment of collaboration meetings among the boards." Ch. 9 - Transportation Element Item 103, p. 9-9, I. 23 - Last sentence should be: "Coordinating those plans transportation programs can help fund " Item 112, p. 9-21 to 9-24, Multiple - Attachment 9.6 Revise the wording in two objectives as follows: Obj. T-1.3 "Develop ....in a manner that has a positive impact or avoids negative impacts on the natural environment " Obj. T-1.4 "Develop ....in a manner that has a positive impact or avoids negative impacts on the community " NOTES ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY COMMISSIONER GORDON - NOVEMBER 18, 2008 The notes already completed for November 17 pertain to the Table of BOCC Additional Revisions. These November 18 notes pertain to everything else, including the Planning Board (PB) Table of Revisions. For the PB table, the page number of the table is given first, followed by the item #, page #, and line #. A. Overall document 1. Check for accuracy and completeness For example, in the Table of Contents, Chap. 9, 9.4 - Change to "Orange County Transportation Needs" instead of "Orange County Parks and Recreation Needs" since this is the Transportation Element. For another example, are all the appendices included and properly referenced? The text (p. 1- 6) refers to Appendix J concerning "where to look for related information" but App. J is actually the draft outline for the Comprehensive Transportation Plan. B. PB Table of Revisions 1. P. 13 of 32 - Item 27, p. 5-37, I. 36-37 - Obj. LU-2.2 should read as follows: "Continue to protect valuable resource land such as areas, natural areas, historic sites and properties, and " 2. P. 31 of 32 - Item 4, Multiple instances - Also add: Change "mobile home" to "manufactured housing" wherever the term occurs. This change has been made in several places but one example where this has not yet been changed is on p. 5-40, I. 5. 3. P. 31 of 32 - Item 5, Multiple instances - There is a statement that all references to Parks and Recreation should be changed to Recreation and Parks. However, "Parks and Recreation" is correct, and should not be changed. SUGGESTED ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RESOLUTION OF ADOPTION. Add language to the resolution as follows. Note that the proposed second "Be it resolved" incorporates some of the text in the agenda abstract that had not been included in the resolution. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Orange County Board of County Commissioners that the Board hereby adopts the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and "Table of BOCC Additional Revisions", respectively, and with additional revisions made by the Board of County Commissioners at the November 18, 2008 meeting and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County staff will work to ensure that the revisions, as adopted by the Board of County Commissioners, are accurately reflected in the Comprehensive Plan document prior to printing copies, and that any errors found in the future will be brought forward promptly to the Commissioners and corrected. A motion was made by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve Commissioner Gordon's revisions, as shown above, and to approve the resolution, as amended by Commissioner Gordon. Chair Jacobs made reference to page 3 of 32, item 11, and the sentence about people with above average incomes making below average demands on public services. He asked that this sentence be deleted. Also, on page 37 and the statement about sustainability, he read some of his own revisions: "Orange County must move toward becoming a sustainable community. We seek to develop a community that addresses the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of the future generation to meet their needs." He suggested deleting the next sentence about emerging consensus. Commissioner Nelson and Commissioner Carey agreed with these changes. A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners desires to update its Comprehensive Plan for the future development and preservation of Orange County; WHEREAS, the Board authorized a timetable and process for the development of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan; WHEREAS, the Commissioners established a team of County advisory boards, staff, and consultants to prepare the Plan, held public hearings and information meetings to hear citizen comments, and conducted work sessions on a draft Comprehensive Plan; WHEREAS, the Planning Board at its October 1, 2008 meeting unanimously recommended adoption of the draft Comprehensive Plan to include its proposed revisions that have been conveyed to the Board of County Commissioners; WHEREAS, the Board reviewed the draft Comprehensive Plan, public comments received during the public hearing process, and the Planning Board's proposed revisions; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Orange County Board of County Commissioners that the Board hereby adopts the 2030 Comprehensive Plan as contained in the May 6, 2008 draft, with revisions as reflected in Attachments 1 and 2, "Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions" and "Table of BOCC Additional Revisions", respectively, and with additional revisions made by the Board of County Commissioners at the November 18, 2008 meeting (revisions presented by Commissioner Gordon and Chair Jacobs); and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County staff will work to ensure that the revisions, as adopted by the Board of County Commissioners, are accurately reflected in the Comprehensive Plan document prior to printing copies, and that any errors found in the future will be brought forward promptly to the Commissioners and corrected. VOTE: UNANIMOUS b. Proposed Animal Ordinance Amendment Restricting the Tethering of Dogs — Second Reading The Board considered adopting on second reading the proposed amendment to the Orange County Animal Ordinance restricting the tethering of dogs. Animal Services Director Bob Marotto introduced this item. He summarized the ordinance. The timetable for the proposed ordinance is the same, with public outreach for one year and for the next six months only oral warnings would be issued. The staff will come back on December 11th with a more developed plan for public relations and a plan of evaluation. PUBLIC COMMENT: Amanda Stipe read a statement from the Durham Kennel Club. Orange County Commissioners; Comprised of over 250 members, more than 40 which live in Orange County, the Durham Kennel Club (DKC) has been promoting the care and welfare of North Carolina's dogs for over 39 years. Through owner education and community involvement, the DKC has striven for the betterment of all dogs, regardless of their background. The DKS officially opposes legislation limiting the rights of responsible dog owners to keep dogs in a humane manner, including anti-tether legislation. Where there are already laws in place dealing with neglect and animal cruelty, there is no need for further legislation to address the same issues. The Orange County Animal Cruelty ordinance currently in place states: All animals in Orange County are required to have the following: - Adequate food— animals should be fed with foodstuff that is nutritious and suitable for the species and age group. Such foodstuff shall be provided at least every 24 hours and served in a clean receptacle, dish, or container that is free of contaminants that may be injurious to the health of the animal. - Adequate water— animals must receive constant access to a supply of clean, fresh water provided in a sanitary manner. - Adequate shelter— non-aquatic animals shall be provided shelter which will keep them dry, out of the direct path of winds and the sun, and at a temperature level that is healthful for the animal. The animal containment area shall be free of accumulated waste and debris so that the animal can walk or lie down without coming in contact with any such waste or debris, and a suitable method of draining shall be provided to eliminate rapidly excess water or moisture. - Aquatic animals shall be an adequate amount of clean water in which to move. http://www.co.orange.nc.us/animalservices/occruelty.asp Considering that it is entirely possible, indeed easy, to tether a dog while meeting all of the stated requirements above, it is contradictory to define tethering in and of itself an act of cruelty punishable by law. Dogs tethered in a manner inconsistent with existing laws are already protected under said laws. We support the cruelty laws as they stand now and fully condone continued efforts to enforce them against those that choose not to comply. Those dog owners who keep their dogs responsibly on tethers, meeting all the requirements of the law, should not be penalized for the negligent actions of those who choose not to abide by the law. Every "issue" broached in the proposed anti-tether legislation is already addressed by the current animal cruelty laws: adequate shelter, veterinary care, food and water, waste removal, etc. Anti-tether bills, such as this one are couched in emotional appeals, and personal anecdotes, rather than being based on factual evidence. Pictures of starving puppies on logging chains are used to sell a horror story, one not representative of the norm, to sympathetic dog lovers, the majority of which keep their dogs strictly inside as house dogs. It is entirely possible to tether a dog responsibly in a manner consistent with, and even above and beyond, all existing levels of mandatory care. Whether an outdoor dog lives in a kennel or on a tether, the obligation exists to keep the dog responsibly, which is contingent upon a combination of love, and common sense — neither of which can be created through legislation. Regards, The 250+ members of the Durham Kennel Club 7318 Guess Road http://durhamkennelclub.com/ Brian Fee referred to at story in the Chapel Hill News where five people from Orange County were asked if they supported an anti-tethering ordinance. Four of the five said that the County should not have a role in this. There was no mention of abuse from the citizens. He said that Orange County citizens expect that the County Commissioners see information from all sides. He thinks that the original goal of the committee was to reduce dog abuse and neglect. However, he believes that the County Commissioners have been influenced by the Coalition to Unchain Dogs. He said that not one person on the Tethering Committee was pro- tethering. He said that the whole process is stacked against citizens that chain their dogs. He does not think that the County Commissioners have listened to the Orange County citizens. He said that he wrote a Letter to the Editor about this issue. Ellen Whitaker is a member of the Coalition to Unchain Dogs. She said that there are certain things about tethering that are not covered in the anti-cruelty laws. She said that this ordinance will be enforced by complaints only, so people who responsibly tether their dogs do not need to worry. Chair Jacobs said that he hoped that the information about tethering restrictions would accompany license renewals for animals. Bob Marotto clarified that the ordinance would apply to the unincorporated areas of Orange County and the Town of Hillsborough and would not apply in Chapel Hill, Carrboro, or Mebane. Commissioner Foushee said that she will oppose this ordinance as amended because she feels that it will impose a hardship on a large number of law-abiding citizens who very responsibly and lovingly care for their dogs. A motion was made by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve adopting on second reading the proposed amendment to the Orange County Animal Ordinance restricting the tethering of dogs. VOTE: Ayes, 4; No, 1 (Commissioner Foushee) c. Third Party Presence in the Employee Disciplinary Process The Board considered a possible amendment to the Orange County Personnel Ordinance Article IX, Section 4d(1); third party presence or representation for eligible employees at a pre-disciplinary conference involving demotion, suspension or termination. Laura Blackmon said that the personnel ordinance states that third parties may not be at pre-disciplinary meetings and the Board of County Commissioners asked for information about this issue. There is a chart in the packet that addresses this issue in other counties, and none of the counties allow third party representation. The staff also provided some models and options for third party representation. Staff is not recommending that the ordinance be changed. The biggest concern is that having third parties would make a more adversarial situation. Commissioner Carey said that he is happy that staff has moved beyond the constitutional right issue. He appreciated the three options and he would like to change the ordinance. He would support the first option, which is, "The employee is permitted to select a person of their choice to accompany them to the Pre-disciplinary Conference. This person is considered a support person only and is not allowed to participate in any way in the conference." He also thinks that the employees should be surveyed on this. Commissioner Gordon said she is concerned about creating an inequity between the State and County employees. Staff Attorney Annette Moore said that currently the rules do not allow attorneys to represent a State employee disciplinary proceeding. There is no mention of other people, just attorneys. She will go back to the Office of State Personnel and get more clarification. Commissioner Foushee said that she does support the first option instead of the second option. She has a problem with a trained Human Resources professional. If an employee is allowed to have a presence, then the employee should choose the form of that presence. Chair Jacobs said that this survey of counties in an anti-Union state is useless to him. He said that this environment is anti-worker from the State level. He thinks that the best option would be some part of 1 or some part of 2, where a trained mediator that is not part of County government would go in with the employee. A motion was made by Chair Jacobs to approve a hybrid of one and two, but make the representative a person who can speak, who is not an attorney, and who is a trained mediator from outside of County government. Human Resources Director Michael McGinnis said that the person would need to know Orange County's Human Resources disciplinary process. Commissioner Foushee said that if an employee is allowed to bring a presence with them, they should be able to choose who they want to bring in. Chair Jacobs said that he was suggesting that staff should have a list available of trained mediators just in case. Geof Gledhill suggested model one and the first sentence could read as it is. For the second sentence, the representative could be a family member, trained mediator, or another employee, but not an attorney. The last sentence is being changed to read that the person is considered a support person and is allowed to participate. Chair Jacobs agreed with this language, seconded by Commissioner Carey. Commissioner Nelson said that the mediator should be trained in human resources. Commissioner Nelson wanted to make a friendly amendment to the motion to change the language that the representative would be a trained HR mediator only. Commissioner Gordon said she that she would prefer to have this vetted more. She is not sure that all of the consequences are understood. The friendly amendment was not accepted. VOTE: Ayes, 3; Nays, 2 (Commissioner Gordon and Commissioner Nelson) Geof Gledhill said that this needs to come back for a second reading. He suggested that there be another motion to encourage the Sheriff, the Register of Deeds, the Health Director, and the Social Services Director, to the extent permitted by law to follow this model in the conduct of pre-disciplinary conferences conducted for employees for which they are responsible. A motion as made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner Carey to accept this language as added by Geof Gledhill. VOTE: UNANIMOUS d. Budget Process FY09-10: Outside Agency Grant Funding The Board was to consider reviewing the Outside Agency Grant allocation process used in preparing the current fiscal year operating budget and approving changes proposed for the upcoming fiscal year DEFERRED e. Senate Bill 1925 and Letter to Dr. Holden Thorp The Board considered approving a letter in response to the October 5, 2008 letter from Dr. Holden Thorp, Chancellor of UNC at Chapel Hill in which the board would seek clarification on policy and operational issues as they pertain to the siting of an Orange County Airport and additional information on appointments to the Authority; and authorizing the Chair to sign. Public Comment: Nancy Holt presented a document for the record. She said that Preserve Rural Orange County is here tonight and she is representing them. She said that rural Orange County is being endangered by the proposed airport. She said that site 8 sits on 102 acres of her two grandchildren's land. Approximately 25 homeowners are in danger of being forced off their land, losing their homes, or losing farm land. The new airport authority has ten people — eight from the University and two from the legislature. The County only gets three representatives. She said that the landowners and neighbors have banded together because they feel like they are under assault. Bonnie Hauser said that the letter is a progressive statement of leadership from Orange County. She would also add that the County should make zoning with respect to airports a priority because it would offer real protection. The letter is as follows: November 19, 2008 Dr. Holden Thorp, Chancellor University of North Carolina 103 South Building Chapel Hill, NC 27599 Dear Holden: As you are aware, the Orange County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) had serious reservations about the manner in which the University procured from the General Assembly the power to create an independent airport authority, as well as regarding the powers and board composition embodied in this entity charged with establishing a new facility to replace Horace Williams Airport. We retain concerns related to the process by which members of this authority would be appointed, and the expectations placed upon representatives serving on behalf of the residents of Orange County. We appreciated your letter of October 5, 2008, which indicated Kevin FitzGerald will work with our staff to "provide for informational briefings related to the needs, processes and anticipated impact of a new airport." As of this date the only information provided our staff is the promise to receive in December from the UNC Board of Governors an official Letter of Intent to establish the authority. We also understand the Board of Governors will appoint its representatives to the authority in early January and expects us to make our appointments by the end of January. The General Assembly appointments cannot be made until the General Assembly is in session. Presently, both the House and Senate are scheduled to convene for the 2009 Session on January 28, 2009. According to Mr. FitzGerald's conversations with a member of our staff, there are no predetermined criteria for selecting representatives to serve as members of this authority. Before we proceed to solicit applicants, and to choose the Orange County representatives for the board of the airport authority, we seek clarification on a number of key points: 1. Scope of Work: Who will determine the scope of work of the airport authority? Is this authority envisioned to primarily support the mission of the University of North Carolina or the mission of the UNC Health Care System? These appear to be overlapping, but far from identical. What are those missions in relation to an airport? Does adherence to that mission, or those missions, dictate a certain proximity to the University proper, as has previously and repeatedly been indicated, or do you anticipate considering all areas of Orange County? 2. Member Qualifications: Without a clear understanding of the mission it is difficult to determine the individual qualifications necessary to effectively serve on this authority. Although the terms of office have been established by the enabling legislation, some idea of the time commitment necessary to fulfill the obligations of this body will also be important in recruiting volunteers to serve as our representatives. 3. Fiscal Issues: How is the authority to be initially funded? The Board of Commissioners has a fiduciary obligation to the taxpayers of Orange County, and must be cautious in undertaking any additional expenditures or responsibilities, particularly in these difficult economic times. Until the airport is constructed and generating revenues, we would like to know how you anticipate funds will be derived in order for the authority to perform its work -- hiring consultants, paying for legal representation, performing necessary environmental and impact analyses, property procurement, developmental costs, etc. Also, assuming the airport accommodates uses and/or functions that fall in part or whole under the auspices of the University, are property tax payment-in-lieu arrangements contemplated for the facility as are envisioned for Carolina North to address local public safety and tax-revenue interests? 4. Public Concerns: The Orange County Board of Commissioners is committed to transparent decision making and robust public participation, particularly in this matter that could have a profound effect on our communities, the environment, and nearly 30 years of careful land-use planning. You mentioned in your October 5 letter a welcome wish to "strive to create a fair and transparent process for the consideration of all issues and perspectives concerning the work of this authority." Does that mean the decisions and operations of the authority will be susceptible to influence by concerned residents in public hearings and by other means, and that full, relevant information will be made available to the public in a timely manner? Has it been determined where the authority will be "housed," and is that location easily accessible to the public? 5. Concurrent Authority: The Board of Commissioners appreciated the efforts made to include respect for Orange County's land-use responsibility in the enabling legislation for the airport authority, as well as your commitment as Chancellor to solicit our participation. Will the authority undertake its work with clear direction from the University that County land-use plans and zoning regulations are to frame its decisions? Is it clear that the use of eminent domain is to be regarded as a measure of last resort? We respectfully request that these unknowns be addressed before the BOCC becomes a full participant in the creation and operation of the airport authority. Our process for board appointments includes a period of advertisement as well as formal appointment of representatives at a public meeting. Written clarification regarding the concerns outlined in this letter, as well as a presentation to the Board at one of our regularly scheduled meetings in the near future, would be appreciated prior to our making appointments. Thank you for your attention to these matters. Should you have any questions or need additional clarification you may contact the Board of County Commissioners or have your staff contact our County Manager, Laura Blackmon, at our offices in Hillsborough. Sincerely, Barry Jacobs, Chair Orange County Board of Commissioners CC: Orange County Commissioners Ms. Laura Blackmon, County Manager President Erskine Bowles Dr. Bill Roper Mr. Roger Perry Dr. Charles Sanders Mr. Kevin FitzGerald A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Carey to approve a letter in response to the October 5, 2008 letter from Dr. Holden Thorp, Chancellor of UNC at Chapel Hill, seeking clarification on policy and operational issues as they pertain to the siting of an Orange County Airport and additional information on appointments to the Authority; and authorize the Chair to sign. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Commissioner Nelson said that the Board should look at rezoning soon since it takes Orange County awhile. Chair Jacobs suggested having a presentation on the history of the siting of an airport in Orange County at the January 27th meeting. f. Reorganization Plans The Board was to consider approving the Manager's recommendation for reorganization of County departments whose functions encompass the care of County assets, including environmental assets. DEFERRED Lucas Farm at New Hope - Preliminary Plan The Board was to consider the Preliminary Plan for Lucas Farm at New Hope Application. DEFERRED 7. Reports a. Report on Options for the Preferred Option and Draft Durham-Chapel Hill- Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan The Board was to receive a verbal report from the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization Lead Planning Agency regarding the options being considered for the Draft 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan. DEFERRED 8. Board Comments 9. County Manager's Report 10. Appointments a. Affordable Housing Advisory Board — New Appointment The Board was to consider making a new appointment to the Affordable Housing Advisory Board. DEFERRED b. Chapel Hill/Orange County Visitors Bureau — New Appointment The Board was to consider making a new appointment to the Chapel Hill/Orange County Visitors Bureau. DEFERRED c. Orange County Planning Board — New Appointment The Board was to consider making a new appointment to the Orange County Planning Board. DEFERRED 11. Information Items-NONE 12. Closed Session-NONE 13. Adjournment A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner Carey to adjourn the meeting at 10:46 pm. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Barry Jacobs, Chair Donna S. Baker, CMC Clerk to the Board