HomeMy Public PortalAbout09-08-2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 1 of 25
ASSEMBLY OF GOVERNMENTS MEETING
MINUTES
September 18, 2008, 7:30 PM
Southern Human Services Center
Chapel Hill, NC
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
Commissioner Barry Jacobs, Commissioners
Valerie P. Foushee, and Alice M. Gordon.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
Commissioner Moses Carey, Jr. and Mike Nelson.
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT:
County Manager Laura Blackmon, and Deputy Clerk/
Information Specialist David Hunt.
CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mayor Kevin C. Foy, Council
Members Mark Kleinschmidt, Ed Harrison, and Matt Czajkowski.
CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT:
Council Members Sally Greene,
Laurin Easthom, Jim Ward, Bill Strom, and Bill Thorpe.
CARRBORO BOARD OF ALDERMEN MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mayor Mark Chilton,
Aldermen Joal Hall Broun, Dan Coleman, Randee Haven-O?Donnell, Lydia Lavelle, and
Jacquelyn Gist.
CARRBORO BOARD OF ALDERMAN MEMBER ABSENT:
Alderman John Herrera.
HILLSBOROUGH TOWN COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
Mayor Tom Stevens,
Commissioners Mike Gering, L. Eric Hallman, Frances Dancy, and Brian Lowen.
HILLSBOROUGH TOWN COMMISSIONER ABSENT:
Commissioner Evelyn Lloyd.
HILLSBOROUGH STAFF PRESENT:
Assistant Town Manager/Public Works Director
Nicole Ard, Town Clerk/Director of Administration and Human Resources Donna F. Armbrister,
and Town Engineer/Utilities Director Kenny Keel.
OWASA REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT:
Executive Director Ed Kerwin.
NOTE: All other participants are listed in the text as appropriate.
1)CALL TO ORDER / INTRODUCTIONS / OPENING COMMENTS
COMMISSIONER JACOBS / MAYORS
7:35:57 PM Commissioner Barry Jacobs called the meeting to order and welcomed those
present. He indicated that Hillsborough was hosting tonight?s meeting and Hillsborough Mayor
Tom Stevens would act as Commissioner.
1
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 2 of 25
Mayor Tom Stevens commented that Hillsborough?s staff had put the meeting together, and that
Town Clerk Donna Armbrister would be taking the minutes. He asked that when speaking that
people identify themselves for the record. Mayor Stevens stated in the past these meetings had
been underachieving and they were jointly accountable for that. He asked that they all use their
time together wisely and be responsible for getting the most out of that time by discussing issues
of importance.
Mayor Stevens stated the agenda had been designed to talk about those subjects of interest to all,
as well as to talk about the themes of tonight?s meeting, which was water and affordable housing.
He stated they would begin with some brief reports, each under five minutes, and then have some
significant discussion time on water and affordable housing.
Commissioner Jacobs recognized Commissioner Mike Cross from Chatham County, and invited
him to sit at the table with the other elected officials.
2) QUICK REPORTS
INFORMATIONAL
a.Orange County Organizing Committee
7:41:06 PM Mark Davidson, Pastor of the Church of Reconciliation in Chapel Hill, stated he
was speaking on behalf of the OCOC. He explained that the OCOC was a broad-based, grass
roots organization working for change in the community, and represented the concerns of
thousands of Orange County citizens. Mr. Davidson stated they were interfaith, multi-racial, and
non-partisan and took no government or corporate money, and were therefore self-sustaining
through dues. He stated that social justice, the common good, care of the earth, and loving their
neighbors were their key principles, and all of their work derived from a bedrock commitment to
human flourishing and the realization of each person?s God given potential.
Mr. Davidson stated over the last year they had held numerous meetings and focus groups to
determine the issues that affected people directly and impacted their lives. He said from those
meetings six issues arose as priorities: affordable housing, health care, living wage, education,
environmental justice, and the treatment of immigrant families. Mr. Davidson stated those
priorities were currently guiding their work, and they would partner with community
organizations and coalitions already working on those issues.
Mr. Davidson said the OCOC strongly supported the Rogers Road neighborhood in their demand
that Site 669 be removed from the list of potential sites for a waste transfer station. He stated
they were also partnering with Glen Lenox residents to support the issue of affordable housing.
Mr. Davidson stated the OCOC wanted to lay the groundwork for a good working relationship
with each government within Orange County as they cooperated on issues of concern to them all.
He stated the elected officials would soon be receiving an invitation to attend their next delegates
th
assembly scheduled for October 29 at St. Thomas More Catholic Church in Chapel Hill, to be
2
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 3 of 25
attended by Representative David Price as well as several key regional religious leaders to
discuss a range of issues including Homeland Security and the treatment of immigrant families.
Neloa Jones, Co-Commissioner of Rogers Road Collation and Environmental Racism (written
statement attached and hereby incorporated as part of the official Minutes), and a resident of the
Rogers Road-Eubanks community, made the following specific requests: eliminate Eubanks
Road, identified as site 669, from the list of sites to be considered for the waste transfer station;
half all solid waste activities in the Rogers-Eubanks community no later than November 2009;
honor the promises made to the Rogers-Eubanks Road community over the past 35 years for
having endured the negative impacts of solid waste activities; and coordinate efforts to identify
and apply for public financing to connect residents of the historic Rogers-Eubanks neighborhood
to safe and clean water and sewer services.
b. Ann Arbor Report
7:53:28 PM Council Member Kleinschmidt remarked that Ann Arbor was a more urban
community, with the city being half again the size of Chapel Hill and Carrboro together.
Mayor Foy stated an ongoing debate in Ann Arbor regarded their height limits being raised from
10 stories to 20 stories, and noted Chapel Hill was debating on moving to 10 stories. He said
they had developed a north campus a significant distance from the main campus which was now
incorporated into the fabric of the city. Mayor Foy said the north campus was distant, isolated,
suburban, and basically dead. So, he said, it was a cautionary tale for them as to what they did
not want UNC to do with its new campus.
Commissioner Jacobs stated he was struck by how well organized they were, noting they had an
energy office within their local government, and they were attempting to incorporate energy
efficiency and sustainability into every government decision made. He said an anomaly was that
they had two bus systems, one run by the city and one by the university, with buses sometimes
passing each other on the road. Commissioner Jacobs said it was also striking that the
Chancellor had accompanied them on the trip, and he continued to be refreshingly engaged in
being a part of the community and to bring the university relationship with the community to a
higher level.
Commissioner Dancy said she had learned that Ann Arbor was involving their citizens in
development projects much as Hillsborough did, in that they required developers to meet with
citizens prior to coming to the Town with a project so that many issues were worked out
beforehand.
c. Introduction of new Orange County Economic Development Directors
(Bradley Broadwell, Orange County & Dwight Bassett. Town of Chapel Hill)
8:00:33 PM Brad Broadwell, Orange County?s new Economic Development Director,
introuduced himself and provided some brief information regarding his background and interests.
Dwight Bassett, Chapel Hill?s new Economic Development Director, introuduced himself and
provided some brief information regarding his interests, backgrounds, and current work.
3
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 4 of 25
WRITTEN
a) Schools in Orange County (impact fees).
3) LONG TERM WATER SUPPLY AND PROTECTION
a)Update of OWASA?s Long-Term Water Supply Plan, Including an Assessment of
Jordan Lake Options
8:01:58 PM Ed Kerwin, Executive Director, OWASA (written statement attached and hereby
incorporated as part of the official Minutes), stated that they were now facing an opportunity and
responsibility to make sure that they provided a safe, secure, and sustainable water supply for
their future. He said to that end, they had begun a process to update their 50-year water supply
plan, looking out to the year 2060. Mr. Kerwin said key questions that needed to be answered
during that update were how their service area would grow, what that development would look
like and what its density would be, and how much water and sewer service would be expected of
OWASA. He stated they would then evaluate what combination of conservation, demand
management, traditional supply or alternative supply options would best meet those needs in a
sustainable fashion.
Mr. Kerwin stated OWASA?s guiding principal was the objective that they would maximize the
use of their local resources to either eliminate or minimize the need for resources outside of their
area. He said most of the technical work should be completed by the spring of 2009, and they
would then provide that information to all stakeholders so they could provide OWASA feedback
to allow them to begin making decisions about the future. He said even though they were now
out of the recent drought, they needed to plan for future droughts.
David Hughes, Chatham County Public Works Director, provided an update on Chatham
County?s water plant expansion. He said after some study, they had determined it made sense to
do the expansion on the western side of Jordan Lake and to partner with other jurisdictions to
meet short-term needs. Mr. Hughes stated they had put year-round conservation measures in
place, and had actually seen their peak demand levels decrease.
Ted Voorhees, Deputy City Manager, City of Durham (attachment hereby incorporated as part of
the official Minutes), provided an overview of Jordan Lake collaboration and Durham
conservation efforts. He stated that regional cooperation had to be built upon a philosophy of
conservation and sustainable practices. Mr. Voorhees stated they had been focused on two
significant projects for expansion capacity in the northern part of their jurisdiction: Nello Teer
Quarry, which the State DWQ had now said could only be used for limited purposes; and, to
raise the dam and expand the capacity of Lake Michie. He said that downstream of Lake Michie
was Falls Lake which had not weathered the drought very well, making it clear to them and to
DWQ that that was not a preferred option. Mr. Voorhees stated that put them back at looking at
Jordan Lake as the preferred water source.
4
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 5 of 25
Mr. Voorhees said they had made it clear that the only way to do that was to work with the
regional partners for shared planning and to explore cooperative and multi-jurisdictional capital
investments and operations, and to develop consistent year-round conservation and water
shortage response stages.
Mayor Chilton asked whether Durham saw land use planning as being one of the tools that
would be brought to bear on water supply. Mr. Voorhees stated he would say that Durham?s
Board believed that there was an appropriate balance that growth management and growth
planning must play in sustainability. He said when you looked at Durham?s planning regulations
and zoning ordinance, they contained smart growth principles and transit-oriented development
components, and they continued to have an urban growth boundary that prevented utilities from
being extended outside of that area. Mr. Voorhees said they understood fundamentally that all of
the partners around Jordan Lake had its own philosophy and right to self-determination, so the
challenge would be where to set thresholds to see a commitment to stewardship and
sustainability that could also recognize all the jurisdictions? right to self-determination of land
use policies.
b)Update from UNRBA
8:20:33 PM Sydney Miller, TJCOG Water Resources Program Manager (attachment hereby
incorporated as part of the official Minutes), stated there were three major water resources issues
facing the Triangle region that were interrelated and related to growth and development: the
Jordan Lake Nutrient Management Strategy, the Falls Lake Nutrient Management Strategy, and
water supply. He stated that the series of droughts over the past 10 years had caused them to
question the reliability of their existing water supplies and had spurred them to evaluate their
rates of growth and their needs for future water supply. Mr. Miller stated that the same growth
and development that was threatening the region?s water quality was increasing their reliance on
those same sources of water. He stated the answer to that challenge of development, water
quality degradation, and water supply needs in the Triangle region was in a combination of better
land use planning, low intensity development design, water reuse, water conservation, and a
second intake facility on Jordan Lake.
Commissioner Jacobs pointed out that all of the local governments represented tonight were
contributing to TJCOG?s development and infrastructure initiative, and Commissioner Cross and
Council Member Harrison had attended a meeting that Mr. Miller had helped facilitate that
involved many other entities where the two main priorities to work on over the next few years
were transportation and water. He stated that group had discussed how much water did they
have and how would they accommodate expected growth. Mr. Miller stated that group had
identified the importance of a 50-year plan for the region, and similarly such a plan had already
been a part of their process.
Proposed Chatham/Orange Task Forces
c)
8:28:19 PM Laura Blackmon, Orange County Manager (attachment hereby incorporated as
part of the official Minutes), provided an update of the discussion at the last Assembly of
Governments meeting, noting that the Working Group had been asked at that time to set up a
5
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 6 of 25
group that would have a charge and a stable representation that could look at the issues and
develop a plan that could then be brought back to this group. Ms. Blackmon stated the proposal
was for three task forces, and a membership for those task forces had also been proposed. She
said the first task force handled joint planning issues, the second dealt with transportation issues,
and the third dealt with water supply and watershed protection issues.
Ms. Blackmon stated there had been two recommendations made by staff when the Orange
County Commissioners held their discussion: to take the third task force on water supply and
watershed protection issues and move the watershed issues into the planning issues; and, the idea
that regionally they should move forward with looking at such things as water supply, allocation
from Jordan Lake, a new intake facility, conservation issues, or, basically a strategic planning
approach to make sure that not only was the water supply there and available but that they had a
determined approach to conservation in the way the area was developing and the one million
plus people expected in the Triangle region.
Ms. Blackmon stated the County Commissioners had thought that perhaps the Joint Planning
Task Force in conjunction with the watershed and transportation issues might be better
approached through a Work Group. She said part of the charge of the Work Group would be to
discuss and strategize on possible opportunities and structure for participating jurisdictions to
jointly develop and pursue regional initiatives. Ms. Blackmon said there was some discussion on
how large the Work Group should be, and the proposed representation was listed on the
attachment.
d)Discussion
8:37:43 PM Commissioner Jacobs stated the Durham-Chapel Hill-Orange Work Group met
quarterly, and they had discussed whether meeting that seldom would be an effective way to
ramp up land use planning and transportation planning. So, he said, there had been some
discussion about having two elected officials from each jurisdiction on the Group, then have the
Group break into two groups to allow the work to move at a faster pace than the group that just
met quarterly. Commissioner Jacobs said spreading out the work load would make it more likely
that they would accomplish their goals.
Commissioner Gordon stated she was supportive of the work group approach, adding she also
supported having two elected officials from each jurisdiction on that work group. She stated
meetings could take place more frequently, and suggeted that they have targeted priorities and
that the focus be broadened somewhat outside of Orange and Chatham Counties. She also
suggested that the Triangle Transit Authority be included in the membership.
Alderman Coleman asked had there been less salient issues already identified for each of those
nine areas. Ms. Blackmon said no, that the discussions were broad based. Alderman Coleman
asked had there been discussion of a work plan, and what issues that would contain. Ms.
Blackmon stated the plan was to prioritize them, noting they could not move forward until that
was done. Alderman Coleman said his concern was that this Committee was trying to do too
much, and the result of that would be that the Committee?s membership would not be effective.
He stated it would be unlikely that the Committee would make progress on more than a few of
6
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 7 of 25
the issues, so there needed to be some organization. Alderman Coleman questioned if it made
sense to have an open-ended committee that worked on all the different areas. He stated one of
the problems he saw was that because the Committee was trying to do so much, that if a priority
was not of interest to a Committee member or if it was not their area of expertise, then it would
be wasting that member?s time. He said by prioritizing the objectives, that would get them the
right membership on the Committee to achieve the quickest results.
Alderman Gist said she did not want her remarks to be seen as cynical. She said she had served
many years on committees and task forces, and it was beleived that many of those had had
meaningful, productive outcomes that just ?sat on a shelf.? Alderman Gist said the reason was
that the people involved in creating the reports were focused on what they were doing, but there
was no loop back to the entitities being represented. She said if this task force were to be
formed, she believed the charge should include that the members of the task force representing
the diferent entities must report back on a regular basis to that entity and receive feedback.
Alderman Gist stated that if that did not happen, then the task force members would not be
speaking for their entities. She said that must be built into the process, or a lot of good work
would be lost.
8:49:15 PM Council Member Kleinschmidt stated he was curious about how Chatham County
felt about this proposal, noting that one of that County?s frustrations over the years was how the
decisions being made outside their boundaries affected them. He said one of the obstacles to the
ultimate success of this committee was true and real participation by all affected parties, and was
concerned as well that the ratio of membership of the committee garner the optimal cooperation
for the most successful outcome.
Ms. Blackmon, referring to the packet materials, said they had outlined the proposed
membership of the committee which included an at-large member from Chatham County in
order to balance the committee. She said there may be other members this group may want to
propose.
Mike Cross, Chatham County Commissioner, stated that they had just approved their Long
Range Transportation Plan, and were working with DOT to try to avoid 13 stoplights planned
between Pittsboro and Chapel Hill on 15-501. He stated they were very interested in bus
transportation routes to Pittsboro, Siler City and ultimately to Sanford, as well as bikelanes and
sidewalks. Commissioner Cross stated perhaps the Committee did need to be split into groups
for optimal success. He thanked Durham for providing water when it was needed because it had
allowed the County not to spend the funds for an additional water line to Jordan Lake, adding he
beleived the water issues needed to be addressed regionally as well.
Commissioner Cross stated that the Western Wake Partnership had been promised 38 million
gallons a day in wastewater discharge, and Chatham County had been authorized to request up to
19 million gallons a day. He said they needed to know what was available in their area for
surface water availability and what they would do with it after it was used. Commissioner Cross
stated by forming such a partnerhsip it would likely make more State and federal dollars
available, but meeting every three to six months would not get the work done.
7
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 8 of 25
Council Member Kleinschmidt said in a political sense he believed Orange County elected
officials were good at coming up with great ideas in all of these issues, noting they were so
confident of the quality of their ideas because of their great evidence and experience to support
them. But, he said, he worried about their often ?bullying posture? with their neighbors, and that
being an obstacle to success. So, he added, as they created this task force that was something to
be conscious of.
Alderman Broun stated communication was key, because they all knew as they moved five and
ten years into the future that there would be less resources that they could singularly use as
opposed as to those of the region. She said while this region in some places was economically
strong and in some places was environmentally strong, no particular county, city or town was
perfect. Alderman Broun stated they could learn from Chatham and from Durham if they would
only listen and not believe that they always had the right answer. She stated in this type or
economic climate, that would require thinking about what was best for the entire region.
Alderman Broun stated they would not succeed separate and apart.
8:59:02 PM Mayor Stevens stated that was nicely said, and there were many ideas on the
table. He said he believed they all wanted full engagement and equitable membership and could
agree on the topics they wanted to approach.
Commissioner Gordon stated she believed that any group relevant to the topic should be brought
into the discussion, adding she agreed the task force should prioritize the issues for discussion.
She recommended doing that, but added she could not see how you could make progress on, for
instance, transportation, without making progress on land use as well. Commissioner Gordon
stated if the task force was targeted, then informed decisions could be made on issues such as
transportation. She said she knew how Orange and Chatham wanted to work together, noting the
proposed bus route betweeen Pittsboro and Chapel Hill as an example. Commissioner Gordon
recommended putting the task force together with 12 individuals, with Chatham having two at-
large members, and allowing that group to come up with the priorities and to make sure they
were targeted.
Commissioner Gordon stated another issue to be considered was if Chatham was given the
Jordan Lake western intake, noting that would be a separate issues which was urgent and needed
to be supported. She urged that the task force be formed with the twelve members, with the
appropriate people brought in depending on the topic, and that the group agree on the
prioritization of issues so that the group did not get too general.
Mayor Chilton stated as well, the elected officials could identify issues of concern for that group.
He pointed out it would be possible to structure the work group in such a way that they mapped
out who would come from various entities and leave it to Chatham County to decide what its
delegation would look like. Mayor Chilton did agree that they should focus on particular topics,
but did notice that the water supply issue was not on the list.
Commissioner Gordon said she believed that was because it was urgent and needed to be
addressed soon.
8
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 9 of 25
Ms. Blackmon stated there was a collaborative work group that had worked over the summer and
would begin bringing various discussion topics back to the various boards, such as how to fund
that group to continue to move forward. She said the consultant for that particular project was
paid for by Durham, noting that group was mostly staff-based. She said they were moving
forward rapidly, and had identified the issues which were centered on allocation from Jordan
Lake as well as the western intake.
9:05:39 PM Commissioner Cross stated one issue he believed they needed to work on quickly
as a group was the 2009 legislative session coming up, noting now was the time to take
advantage of that opportunity and come together on some proposals to put before the legislators
for that 2009 session to request funds for the bus transportation partnership, as well as for a water
partnership. He stated those issues needed to be pushed, and that those issues should also be
included on TJCOG?s list of legislative goals as well.
Mayor Chilton suggested that they form the type of work group outlined in the materials, but
restrict it initially to discussion of transportation issues between Orange and Chatham Counties
and see where that discussion led them. He said they could then see what other opportunties
might arise to discuss other issues.
Commissioner Cross suggested that the best place to start would be to have their managers and
staff begin that process, and then have the elected officials involved.
Mayor Chilton asked was it contemplated that some action would be taken on this work group
proposal tonight.
Commissioner Jacobs suggested that representatives of Hillsborough think about whether they
wanted to participate in that discussion and whether the rest of the group would welcome it,
because Hillsborough did have a water allocation reserved from Jordan Lake but the Board had
decided it was not worth paying the annual rent for the privilege of perhaps getting water some
day. He said Hillsborough was a part of the community, and he would be interested in knowing
whether they wanted to be involved in those discussions. He said as well, transportation issues
went north just as they did south, and that regional land use had an interlocking effect.
Alderman Coleman stated they already had a transportation partners group in southern Orange,
which was an oversight group for Chapel Hill transit which had representatives from Carrboro,
Chapel Hill, and the University, and it included development planning. He suggested they could
schedule a meeting of that group and include Pittsboro and Chatham representatives, as well as
the Town of Hillsborough. He stated he believed that would provide a framework to at least
begin an initial discussion.
Commissioner Gordon stated that group did not include Orange County government. Mr.
Coleman responded his point was that most of the players were already in that group, and they
could bring that group together for a special meeting to include the rest, including Orange
County, to craft a framework to begin work on transportation issues. Commissioner Gordon
stated it seemed like a reasonable suggestion, but was not sure it should be limited to Chapel Hill
9
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 10 of 25
Transit, She said perhaps they would want to broaden that to include Orange Public
Transportaiton and Triangle Transit.
Alderman Gist wondered if there was a way for the different boards to resolve that individually
so that the discussion could be brought to a close. She said she did not want to run short of time
to discuss the last issue on the agenda, which was Affordable Housing.
Commissioner Gordon stated she believed the issue should be sent back to the boards for further
discussion, noting that although tonight?s discussion had been important a lot of issues had been
raised that likely could not be resolved tonight.
Council Member Kleinschmidt stated he was concerned that only one member from each of the
entities would be deciding how a task force would be created to deal with issues of all the
jurisdictions. Ms. Blackmon stated when looking at what had been discussed over the past year
as well as tonight?s discussion, perhaps the suggestion would be that each jurisdiction appoint
two representatives to identify priorities or come to some conclusion that could then come back
to the individual boards so that it was a coordinated effort among the entities.
9:13:44 PM Commissioner Gordon stated if they decided to take Ms. Blackmon?s suggestion,
then she would suggest making sure representation from Chatham and Orange was balanced, and
to include Hillsborough if they so choose. She said then, charge that group to begin with
transportation and identify other issues that would then be included in the charge to be approved
by the entities.
Mayor Stevens stated transportation was an issue he believed they all agreed should be tackled
first, and believed they could move forward with that and make some progress.
Alderman Haven-O?Donnell cautioned that they look at duplication of efforts in terms of
transportation, noting that Alderman Coleman?s suggestion to start with the transportation
partners group was a good one but perhaps another group needed to be created around
transportation. She said it may be that expanding that group could be explored while this work
group began its initiatives.
Alderman Broun stated she did not believe they could come to quick agreements on the land use
plans but could determine what the existing land uses were, which would allow them to take
advantage of any limited funds to at least have additional transportation options for everyone in
the region. She said it appeared that transportation was the only consensus issue, and that there
needed to be some agreement prior to 2015 about what to do about buses.
Mayor Chilton stated that buses were not necessarily the only transportation issue that would be
on the table, noting that topic would include roadway issues, bicycle connections, and others. He
suggested that they ask County staff to redraft the proposal with a much more limited focus on
transportation issues, and then send it back to each jurisdiction to be considered for adoption.
Mayor Chilton stated he would like to give Carrboro Town staff an opportunity to provide his
Board with feedback on the proposal put forth tonight. He said assuming all the entities adopted
the idea, they could then begin talking about the issues later this year.
10
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 11 of 25
Alderman Broun asked was the expectation that before the end of this year, that the individual
boards would consider adoption of a resolution, and then the work group would begin meeting.
Mayor Chilton stated that would be his preference. He said the discussion among each board did
not needed to be complex, noting he believed the Carrboro Board could discuss it in October and
come to a conclusion. Mayor Chilton said that would also allow each jurisdiction to give this
some more thought and have more discussion outside of this room.
Alderman Lavelle stated there were already groups that met on a regular basis that focused on
transit, and it may be more logical that the first members of this work group be members that
were on some of those transit groups. She said as they addressed different issues, then other
members could step in as warranted.
Mayor Stevens commented that he was seeing a lot of ?nodding of heads,? and asked if that was
the way this group wanted to move forward. There were no objections from those present.
Alderman Gist suggested that senior members of each jurisdictions? staff be given the
opportunity to provide its board with feedback before it was considered for adoption.
Mayor Stevens thanked those who had come tonight to help the various boards discuss these
issues. Mayor Chilton added he particularly wanted to thank Commissioner Cross for attending
and representing Chatham County?s interests.
4) AFFORDABLE HOUSING
a)Recommendation from the Land Trust
9:20:14 PM Mary Bratsch, Commissioner of the Land Trust Affordable Housing Maintenance
Task Force, provided a presentation on behalf of the Land Trust. She stated that at the
September 2007 Assembly of Governments meeting it was decided to form a task force to
review the long-term maintenance of land trust properties and the capital needs of the Orange
County Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness. She said that the Task Force had met five times,
and then described the recommendations being put forward.
For Maintenance Needs:
1.Establishing a revolving loan fund for maintenance/repair costs with zero percent interest
for buyers. This would require a dedicated source of revenue, possibly from
governments, and should be available to all buyers of properties sponsored by local non-
profit housing organizations. Federal and State sources are not viable sources due to
spending timeframes.
2.Place all Land Trust homes on a maintenance schedule similar to those of condominium
associations to include such items as house painting and replacing big-ticket items.
3.Provide an incentive for owners of Land Trust homes purchased under the old model to
contribute to a maintenance fund by the Land Trust matching their contributions.
4.Work more closely with homeowners. For example, refer experienced housing
contractors and subcontractors for maintenance needs during ownership.
11
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 12 of 25
For Affordability:
1.Offer subsidies in order to increase the pool of applicants.
2.Raise 80% median income cap (to include people who make 100%+ of median income.
(There are, however, problems with this idea; mainly, maintaining 5-01(c)(3) status.)
For the Partnership to End Homelessness:
1.In addition to developing new housing for the chronically homeless population in the
County, there may also be opportunities to utilize (lease or purchase) vacant units in
existing apartment complexes.
2.Consider a ?scattered site model? versus a ?concentrated? approach to housing
chronically homeless individuals.
Ms. Bratsch stated all of these recommendations would take funding as well as responsible and
consistent planning over time. To that end, she said the Task Force was putting forward the
following:
Funding Recommendations:
1. The Towns and the County should consider an Affordable Housing Bond Referendum.
The County voters have approved two referendums ? in 1997 ($1.8 million) and 2001 ($4
million) ? that have provided funding to local affordable housing initiatives.
2.Apply an Affordable Housing Transfer Fee: For future developments, a transfer fee
would be imposed by the developer on the sale/resale of market-rate properties. The
revenues generated from this fee would be dedicated to the affordable units within the
development.
3.A Payment-in-Lieu system (PILS) should be considered for all developers of new
housing units in all towns, including the County. This PILS would allow developers to
make a financial contribution to the work of affordable housing rather than provide
affordable dwelling units. Elements of this system would include the following:
a.Any money generated from this scenario could be deposited in a trust fund for use to
address the affordability/maintenance issues of the Land Trust as well as other
housing non-profit organizations including initiatives of the Partnership to End
Homelessness.
b.Jurisdictions could consider either making 15% of homes in a subdivision affordable
to those at 80% of median income or allow some combination of actual units and
payment-in-lieu payments.
c.The PILS should be administered in a responsible manner. This would involve an
assessment of the number of affordable units currently provided by required set-
asides and the associated maintenance costs to determine if the community would be
better served by additional units or the payment-in-lieu.
d.The specific details should be left to County and Town Managers and their attorneys.
b)Discussion
9:27:49 PM Alderman Broun wondered if the Task Force had thought about the different
categories of affordable housing. Alderman Gist responded she had served on the Task Force,
12
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 13 of 25
and the answer was yes, they had. She said after looking at several studies, they had decided to
focus on the chronic needs of the homeless and that group was pretty much already identified.
Alderman Gist stated that did not mean that those that were experiencing short-term
homelessness would be ignored. She stated the Task Force had looked at all the options to keep
affordable and livable units within the Land Trust, and at the economic and the demographics of
those in those units. Alderman Gist stated they could not continue to build one-bedroom, small
condominiums that would only meet a very small population of those needed to be served. She
said instead of having developers build such units, they could implement the PILS program and
keep people in existing units and have those units remain operational, as well as to help deal with
other homeless issues. Alderman Gist stated that was why they were asking their fellow elected
officials to give serious consideration to the PILS program.
Alderman Broun stated she wanted the elected officials to think holistically to include in the plan
not just how to provide housing for the chronically homeless but to match that housing with the
appropriate and necessary services. Alderman Gist stated those services were included in the
plan.
Commissioner Foushee stated it was important for all of them to understand that during this
economic climate, that the model could not be sustained primarily on government funding. She
said the PILS program would provide the opportunity for all of them to assess what their exact
needs were at any particular time, whether it be additional units or maintenance of existing units,
as well as to provide subsidy where it was needed. Commissioner Foushee stated it had been
mentioned during the Task Force meetings that there should be a possibility as it was in other
jurisdictions that they dedicate ad valorem funding for affordable housing. She said with their
tax climate at this point, that was not the way to go, so they had quickly placed that at the bottom
of the list of how to provide funding streams.
Commissioner Foushee stated that Robert Dowling had presented these recommendations to
Chapel Hill on September 8, and it appeared that they were in agreement that this was a time to
reconsider how the payment-in-lieu system worked. She said she would hope that having been
given the charge to bring forward these recommendations that they would be considered in a way
that would move them forward. She stated the recommendation regarding using scattered sites
was a way for providing somewhat more immediate housing to the chronically homeless,
because that would use existing housing in established apartment complexes. Commissioner
Foushee stated they were talking about $1.5 million over 25 years, and it was not something that
could continue to come from ad valorem funding only.
9:34:46 PM Alderman Coleman asked did they know if they had the authority to impose an
affordable housing transfer fee. Council Member Kleinschmidt sated they did that in Chapel Hill
using the Special Use Permit process.
Alderman Coleman stated Commissioner Foushee had mentioned the $1.5 million over 25 years,
and asked was that actually based on the assessment of programmatic recommendations.
Commissioner Foushee stated that was the figure that Robert Dowling had presented to them.
13
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 14 of 25
Robert Dowling, Orange Community Housing and Land Trust, stated that the figure of $1.5
million for affordability and the $1.5 million for maintenance was based upon their analysis of
the existing 125 units, looking out over 25 years. Alderman Coleman asked had that been
broken down into an annualized basis. Mr. Dowling stated they could do that.
Alderman Coleman stated he believed all the programmatic recommendations were excellent
based on what they were facing, but he believed there needed to be a very specific yearly cost
analysis which could then fold into an analysis of the potential for different funding. He said it
seemed that they needed to start by looking at costs that were broken down so that they could
judge their potential revenues over time.
Commissioner Jacobs said he would like to have the County attorney look at the proposal, noting
that if they looked at the information regarding school impact fees you would see that the activity
on new housing and the Chapel Hill-Carrboro school system had dropped precipitously. He said
that may affect how much revenue was generated in that part of the County versus Hillsborough
and the more rural part of the County. He said they needed to make sure that they could
implement all of the strategies that would be countered to what was actually happening on the
ground.
9:39:16 PM Council Member Kleinschmidt said his interest in affording housing was getting
units on the ground to provide people places to live, and with that being a primary goal it also
mattered that those people were local. He said his concern was their failure to provide other
revenue streams, because that prevented them from maximizing their achievement of that goal
when they accepted payments-in-lieu. Council Member Kleinschmidt said if they accepted such
payments instead of construction of units, they would be left with exclusive developments that
purchased their way out of participation in the affordable housing program. He said as these
recommendations were enacted by the jurisdictions, they must place the payment-in-lieu option
as the lowest priority, to be used only after an analysis proved that it was the only option.
Council Member Kleinschmidt stated they needed to provide options that did not take away from
the goal of creating units.
Alderman Broun stated she was reluctantly in favor of payments-in-lieu, and that program should
be looked at annually to see how well it was working. She said they also had to be very clear
about what the current economic situation was, noting they would be hard pressed to convince
people who were writing checks for their taxes to write another check to put someone in a home
no matter have egalitarian that was.
Council Member Kleinschmidt agreed, and that was why he was advocating for a transfer fee for
new developments. He stated they needed to make sure there was room for such creative
solutions to continue to develop. Council Member Kleinschmidt stated that new units should
have sustainability built into them as well as affordability, and he wanted them to be careful in
using payments-in-lieu and keep their eye on the ultimate goal. He said it was important that the
housing not consist of one-bedroom condos that served no good purpose other than to achieve
some percentage for the developer, but that such units be measured in terms of square footage or
the number of bedrooms in order to achieve their ultimate affordability goal. Council Member
Kleinschmidt stated that would require some difficult work by the jurisdictions, because it would
14
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 15 of 25
entail looking at floor area restrictions and determining if they were reasonable, as well as other
regulations. He stated they would need to make those difficult decisions, and they should be
having these discussions in order to identify more creative ideas in order to prevent big-money
developers from coming in and providing payments-in-lieu rather than affordable units.
Alderman Broun stated that part of the problem was the limited streams of revenue, and perhaps
that segued into what they could discuss at the next Assembly of Governments meeting; that is,
some sort of sustainable economic development. She said as they moved into the future, the ad
valorem tax from the residential taxpayer would be more difficult to increase, and it would be
more difficult to justify raising those taxes for those issues.
9:47:16 PM Commissioner Foushee said she did not believe anyone would disagree with
Council Member Kleinschmidt, but what they were asking this body to consider were options
that would provide some flexibility for funding if they were going to continue to talk about
sustainable models that would continue to provide the necessary maintenance and affordability.
Mayor Foy pointed out that it was more than a theoretical question at this point, and there was a
practical reality today. He said Mr. Dowling had told him last week of an immediate issue at
Vineyard Square, and asked him to relate that issue. Mr. Dowling said that they looked at all
their properties and projected what they would sell for and what would be affordable. He said in
2004 four people in Vineyard Square had indicated they wanted to sell their homes, and those
two-bedroom, 1,100 square foot homes had been sold for $92,000. Mr. Dowling said those
homes were now being bought back at $100,000 because of the appraisals, but they could not
resell them for $100,000 because the income limits today were exactly the same as it was in 2004
when they had sold the units the first time. But, Mr. Dowling said, the tax rate was much higher.
He said because of those factors, persons in those homes were paying perhaps more than $100 a
month in non-mortgage costs but their limits were the same. Mr. Dowling said they were being
forced to resell those units at $88,000-$90,000 because costs were higher, meaning they had to
find an additional $10,000-$12,000 just to put them back on the market. He said that was part of
the $1.5 million affordability problem.
Mayor Foy said because of those four units that was $50,000 the Land Trust had to come up with
in order to make it work. He said that was a continuing problem, and those types of costs were
above and beyond the other kinds of subsidies being provided.
Council Member Czajkowski stated an underlying premise of the Task Force was that they have
affordable housing that worked, and in order to ensure that it worked they had to fund the
ancillary costs in advance, such as just described by Mr. Dowling. He said his notion was that
they had a problem and knew it, that they did not see any other sources of funding, and therefore
they should try to fix the problem now by emphasizing payments-in-lieu. He said once they had
the problem fixed, they could go back to adding actual units on the ground hopefully through a
mechanism that would allow funding. Council Member Czajkowski stated his view was that
these funds from payments-in-lieu should go into a trust. He said when you looked at a project
that was of the magnitude of 54 East, taking payments for the required affordable housing
component as a payment-in-lieu would possibly fund such a trust for up to ten years. He said he
was not saying that was what they should do, but was saying they should think about that issue.
15
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 16 of 25
9:53:26 PM Alderman Broun asked did they know with any great certainty they could raise
money from HUD. Mr. Dowling stated they usually were told each spring what that funding
would be, and it had been the same for the last five years. He said based on what he had been
told that funding would stay the same through 2012.
Commissioner Hallman stated the Task Force had approached this from a non-political
viewpoint, and the reality was that if they did not do something soon then they were facing a
collapse of the program.
Alderman Gist suggested that at the next Assembly of Governments meeting that the each
elected body report on the progress they had made in the interim, and if they were not approving
payment-in-lieu that they report on what they were doing.
Alderman Haven-O?Donnell asked that Affordable Housing be moved up on the agenda so that
the time for discussion was not constrained by it being taken up late in the evening.
Mayor Stevens stated for the next Assembly of Governments, he believed affordable housing and
economic development should be the two primary issues. There was no disagreement from those
present.
5) FUTURE AGENDA TOPIC/THEMES
Library Services
Transportation (long range plan, rail stop, airport, public transportation)
Fire and Emergency Services
Economic Development
Parks, Recreation
Fiscal Sustainability
6) ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Stevens adjourned the meeting at 9:56 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Donna F. Armbrister, MMC
Town Clerk
16
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 17 of 25
17
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 18 of 25
18
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 19 of 25
19
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 20 of 25
20
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 21 of 25
21
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 22 of 25
22
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 23 of 25
23
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 24 of 25
24
September 8, 2008 Assembly of Governments Meeting
Approved: November 10, 2008
Page 25 of 25
25