Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout09-22-2008 Monthly Workshop September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 1 of 30 MINUTES Board of Commissioners Monthly Workshop Monday, September 22, 2008 ? 7:00 p.m. Town Barn PRESENT: Mayor Tom Stevens, Commissioners Evelyn Lloyd, Frances Dancy, Brian Lowen, and Michael Gering. ABSENT: Commissioner L. Eric Hallman, absence excused. STAFF PRESENT : Town Manager Eric Peterson, Assistant Town Manager Nicole Ard, Budget Analyst Emily Bradford, Safety & Risk Management Officer David Moore, and Town Attorney Bob Hornik. PUBLIC CHARGE Mayor Stevens did not read the Public Charge, but noted it would be followed. 1.OPEN THE WORKSHOP 7:01:16 PM Mayor Stevens called the Workshop to order. 2.PUBLIC HEARING A.Receive evidence about a Code Enforcement Concern at 133 East King Street 7:01:40 PM Planning Director Margaret Hauth provided background information of how the Town had come to this point. She stated that the Town had issued a stop work order on this site on April 7 due to grading work that was not shown on the approved plans. Ms. Hauth stated that due to personal issues the applicants had not responded to notices of violation. She said the public hearing was called to enable the Town to take corrective action if the Town Board found that the conditions were dangerous to the public health. Ms. Hauth stated that the grading work had made a sharp cut in the dirt bank along the east property line, and had not been stabilized with any retaining structure and could impact the neighbor?s property. As well, she said, the stormwater concerns to the west had not been corrected. Ms. Hauth stated the property owner was present as well as some of the neighbors. 1 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 2 of 30 7:04:20 PM Commissioner Gering asked for a brief summary of how the Town had provided notification of violations and any response from the property owners. Ms. Hauth responded they had cited the property with a stop work order in April, and then had periodically contacted them to discover their plans. She said the stop work order did not allow them to go forward with the exterior of the project, which was where the Town had concerns. Ms. Hauth said they had never received a response in terms of what the property owners? plans were to correct those actions. She said they did have contact with a number of engineers who potentially would have been contracted with who were studying the situation to see what could be done to repair the grade on the property. Ms. Hauth said a consultant was brought in but because they did not know what work needed to be done, and the consultant?s job was made more difficult because no detailed topographic survey had ever been done. So, she said, it had been difficult for the property owners to find someone qualified and willing to do the work so that they could bring plans to the Town. Ms. Hauth stated the Town?s primary contact had been with people who were trying to prepare a price or a plan for the owners and not the owners themselves. 7:06:39 PM Mayor Stevens said this was not the type of public hearing the Board usually conducted, and asked Mr. Hornik if he had any specific instructions that might be of help. Town Attorney Bob Hornik stated they should try to stick to the development issues and not stray too far to extraneous circumstances. He said the property owners should be allowed to explain the circumstances, and then the Board had to determine if there was a health or public safety threat sufficient to warrant more action by the Town. 7:07:42 PM Doris Dwyer, one of the property owners, noted she and her husband had both been ill since November of last year, and her husband had passed away in June. She said that was the reason so little had been done. Ms. Dwyer stated she had contacted a grader last week who would be determining what could be done to correct the situation on the property. Ms. Dwyer stated as far as the wall, they had never removed any of the stone. She said anything removed was dirt and brush and that was only done so that a garage truck would have access. But, she said, she had contacted someone to repair the wall as well. Ms. Dwyer stated as soon as a plan was in place to get the work done, then it would be done. 7:08:47 PM Mayor Stevens offered condolences to Ms. Dwyer on the loss of her husband. He asked for questions from the Board. Ms. Dwyer stated she had also contacted someone regarding the building, so she, too, wanted to move along with the project. 7:09:04 PM Commissioner Gering said just to be clear, at this time Ms. Dwyer did not have a timeframe in place. Ms. Dwyer stated she expected to know something this week, so that was in process. 7:09:52 PM Commissioner Lowen asked what she expected she would do with the lower portion below the actual retaining wall. Ms. Dwyer stated the contractor had suggested putting in concrete and then covering that with something decorative, and perhaps even bring it out somewhat with gravel behind it with some holes to make sure it drained properly. She said when the berm was taken care of the water would run down the driveway. Ms. Dwyer stated the hole in the backyard that was planned for a grease trap would now be filled in. She said the grading that was done was done to specifications, noting that nothing was changed in the grading and 2 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 3 of 30 they had only put down gravel. Commissioner Lowen said then the grading was not dropped down? Ms. Dwyer said it was just as it was suppose to be, that is, to allow water to run down the driveway. Mr. Hornik stated they must have cut the slope and incline to slope the curve. Ms. Dwyer stated she was speaking of where the parking spaces were supposed to be. Mr. Hornik stated that part of the concern was that there was earth excavated on the property between the retaining wall and the building, which changed it from a gradual slope to a sheer angle. Ms. Dwyer stated that was to allow a garbage truck to pass. Mr. Hornik said that was what had caused the concerns. Ms. Dwyer stated the problem for the water was the building next door, from her left. She said the water ran down the berm into the gulley to the door. 7:12:29 PM Mayor Stevens said it appeared that Ms. Dwyer was moving forward with getting contractors to correct the concerns on the property. He asked could the Board table this hearing to a later date to see how the work proceeded. Mr. Hornik stated the Board could do that. Commissioner Gering said he would like to discuss this. Mayor Stevens said he was not proposing that, but only clarifying that it was a possibility. 7:13:36 PM Jack Troxel stated he was the property owner on the opposite side of the wall in question. He stated he was not aware of the issue with the County building with the drainage, but had seen the notice for the meeting and had wanted to let the Board know that the discussion so far regarding the integrity of the wall was his biggest concern. Mr. Troxel stated the way it had been described was correct, in that some earth had been removed to level the driveway and in effect widened it. He said it was eroding underneath the wall already in the several months it had been like that, and his concern was that the wall did not have a real foundation likely filled with gravel and that it would eventually topple over. Mr. Troxel said that would make his property at 141 then a part of 133, and it would block the driveway as well. He said he would like to see something done to shore up the base of the wall where the material had been removed to prevent any further erosion. 7:15:46 PM Commissioner Gering asked if the wall did erode to any significant degree, would that pose a hazard to his foundation. Mr. Troxel replied no, that it was some distance from his house and posed no danger to any of his structures. 7:16:41 PM Commissioner Lowen said he would like to have a timeframe for the work required, noting obviously Ms. Dwyer had been in contact with contractors to get the concerns addressed. He said if the Board decided to table the issue it should be tabled to a time when some progress would have been accomplished on the property. 7:17:11 PM Commissioner Gering agreed, noting it was difficult for him to believe in certain progress given that he did not believe the property owner understood even now the nature of the problem the Board was concerned about. Also, he said, in the past the property owners had approached this Board on multiple occasions and had simply failed to appear with no response. Commissioner Gering said that gave him real concerns about seeing progress. 3 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 4 of 30 7:18:00 PM Commissioner Dancy stated she would like to know a timeframe as well. She said she understood Ms. Dwyer?s difficulties, and would like to show her some consideration and compassion and give her an opportunity to see what she could do. 7:18:40 PM Commissioner Lloyd agreed, adding that she also had concerns about the open part of the building and what damage that might be causing. She asked for clarification of the affect on the County building. Ms. Hauth stated the concern was the way the dirt had been cut and that the dirt was still piled up on the property. She said rainwater had caused that to be somewhat compacted and allowed water to run off, and since that lot sat higher than the County property the water ran down into the side door of the County building. Ms. Hauth said there were three issues at hand: the grading and the stormwater, the hole dug for a grease trap needed when it was planned to be a deli, and then securing the building. She said those were the items of concern to the Town, and the one most likely to be prejudicial to the public health or dangerous was the grading and stormwater. 7:20:46 PM Mayor Stevens said one of the questions before the Board was does this pose a danger to public health and safety, so that was what needed to be determined. Commissioner Dancy agreed the pressing issue was the grading and drainage, and she would like to see something done as soon as possible. Commissioner Gering agreed, noting that public safety and health was the pressing need, so the grading and stormwater needed to be quickly addressed. 7:21:34 PM Commissioner Lowen agreed, but said he also thought that when the contractor got back to Ms. Dwyer, the work was such that it could be accomplished in one day. He recommended that they table this until the Board?s next meeting in two weeks, and allow the property owner to come back at that time for another update on what had been done in that time to correct the issues of concern. He said if those issues were not corrected, then the property owner should provide a timeframe for when they would be corrected. Commissioner Lowen said the Board then could take action at that time if necessary. 7:22:32 PM Mayor Stevens stated tabling this was an option, but asked did the Board also have the option of having a finding and giving a period of time for the work to be completed. Mr. Hornik stated yes, and frankly he believed that was a more preferable course of action. He suggested giving the owner 30 days to correct the problem, and if not completed then the Town could take other action, such as the Town doing the work and assessing the property owner for the cost. Mr. Hornik said it was his experience that if you did not put a deadline in place, then the issues tended to drag out, which was in no one?s interest. 7:23:23 PM Mayor Stevens asked Ms. Hauth what she believed would be a reasonable deadline based on where they were now. Ms. Hauth replied she believed 30 days was reasonable, noting that 30 days would mean the issue would come back at the Board?s workshop if there was some reason for further action. She said the Board could word the motion so that if 4 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 5 of 30 the work was completed there would be no need for further action. Ms. Hauth said she did not see making that deadline less than 30 days as a positive. 7:24:57 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Gering, seconded by Commissioner Dancy, the Board moved to close the Public Hearing by a vote of 4-0. The motion was declared passed. 7:25:16 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Gering, seconded by Commissioner Lowen, the Board moved to find as fact that the situation at 133 East King Street was a danger to the public health and safety, and that the property owner would be allowed 30 days to fully correct the problems noted before the Town took action to correct the problems and place a lien on the property by a vote of 4-0. The motion was declared passed. 3.AGENDA CHANGES & AGENDA APPROVAL 7:26:21 PM Commissioner Gering added an item to discuss the Waste Transfer Station proposal by the County as Item 6.F. Town Manager Eric Peterson said with regard to the Closed Session, he would like to change Personnel Matter to Personnel Matters. 7:27:07 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Lowen, seconded by Commissioner Dancy, the Board moved to approve the Agenda as amended by a vote of 4-0. The motion was declared passed. 4.COMMITTEE UPDATES AND REPORTS 7:27:52 PM Mr. Peterson stated at the last meeting the Board had mentioned having a joint meeting with School Board, at either the October or November workshops. He said the School th Board had said attending the October 27 workshop would work well for them. Mr. Peterson th said if the Board agreed, he would finalize that joint meeting for the October 27 workshop. There was no objection from the Board. 7:28:37 PM Commissioner Lowen said he had attended the Orange Community Housing and Land Trust meeting, noting at the Assembly of Governments meeting they had indicated they were leaning more towards payments-in-lieu, which had led to more discussion regarding maintenance and upkeep of existing properties. He said he had also met in Chapel Hill with the Solid Waste Advisory Committee and had discussed curbside collection of cardboard in Hillsborough. He said the plan was to implement that program in late October or early November. 7:30:00 PM Commissioner Dancy said she had made the trip to Ann Arbor and visited their historical area. She said they had discussed tourism, and they had put into their codes, as had Hillsborough, stipulations to require developers to meet with citizens before they came to the board. Commissioner Dancy stated she had also attended a session on food gatherers and heard about a food bank that had been very successful with over 2,000 volunteers. 5 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 6 of 30 7:32:04 PM Mayor Stevens stated that UNRBA was working on the nutrient management strategies and continuing to receive public input. He said that would continue monthly throughout the fall, and Town staff would be attending those meetings. 5.RECEIVE WRITTEN REPORTS A.Implementation of Energy Audit Recommendations B.July Fuel Usage Report 7:33:05 PM Mr. Peterson stated that the energy audit recommendations by facility and planned implementation date were attached to the agenda materials. He said that fuel usage reports were also included, as well as a credit card sized information card regarding key information about the budget so that the Board would have that information at hand. Mr. Peterson noted that fuel consumption was down 6%, short of their 10% target. 7:34:07 PM Mayor Stevens sent his compliments to Mr. Peterson and Emily Bradford on their work, as well as other involved staff. 6.ITEMS FOR DECISION ? REGULAR AGENDA 7:34:52 PM Ms. Hauth stated that the presenters were not yet present, and suggested the Board move to Item C since there were people present for that item. There was no objection from the Board. C. Approval of a Resolution Denying Consent, Without Prejudice, to the Proposed Change in Control of Ownership of the Cable Television Franchise for the Town of Hillsborough 7:35:31 PM Assistant Town Manager Nicole Ard stated the Board had a draft resolution for consideration as well as a report from the consultant through TJCOG, Action Audits, and materials from Time Warner. She noted that Bob Sepe with Action Audits was present, noting that company provided advisory services and monitored legislative activities and situations such as this when franchise agreements were entered into or changed. 7:36:33 PM Mayor Stevens stated that a representative of Time Warner was also present who wanted to speak, as well as other individuals. 7:36:43 PM Robert Sepe, with Action Audits, stated that essentially what was happening was that the Time Warner corporate company was spinning off the cable television division to become a separate, wholly owned entity. He said the local franchising authority had 120 days in which to review the transaction, and as part of that review process they had submitted questions to Time Warner and response had been provided. Mr. Sepe said a number of the responses were rather vague. 6 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 7 of 30 Mr. Sepe said the process was basically to learn about the transaction, look at the legal and technical qualifications of the new company, and to clear up any issues outstanding under the old franchise. He said under federal law, when a cable contract transferred from one entity to another the new entity was not responsible for the transgressions of the predecessor. Mr. Sepe said on the financial side, Time Warner was picking up an additional $10.9 billion worth of debt that would bring the total indebtedness to around $25 billion, and thus increasing the per customer indebtedness from roughly $912 dollars to $1,658. He said that Time Warner was saying it expected to meet the debt service by increasing costs through higher prices and perhaps the sale of new services. Mr. Sepe stated he had articulated compliance issues in the cover memo provided to the Board. Mr. Sepe stated Time Warner had submitted boiler plate responses to a number of the questions they had put to them, but the most noteworthy was Time Warner?s frank acknowledgement that they had no plan to improve or upgrade the system. He said they did inquire as to how those decisions were made and who the individual was that was responsible for making capital decisions, and it appeared that those decisions tended to be made ?on the fly? and there was no one individual responsible. Mr. Sepe said because the clock was running and there was still more to be done, the only thing they could do in order to complete the process and perform due diligence was to stop the 120 day clock from ticking. He said if the Board did not act to stop the clock, then failure to act meant automatic approval. Mr. Sepe said the transfer resolution, section 1, page 3, articulated all of those reasons, with section 2 stating the action was taken without prejudice. He said that meant that once the Town had assurances and binding written agreements that certain things would be done, then the Board could approve the franchise transfer. Mr. Sepe said it was his recommendation that the Town take action to stop the clock in order to provide the opportunity to work out the issues with Time Warner, and then once that was done then the Board could approve the franchise transfer. 7:41:37 PM Commissioner Gering asked if Mr. Sepe had said he had difficulty in getting customer service statistics from Time Warner. Mr. Sepe stated that was correct, noting the Town had asked for that information, as well as electronic maps, which Time Warner had indicated it did not want to provide because they perceived that information to be proprietary and confidential. But, he said, under the franchise agreement there was a provision for providing that kind of information. Mr. Sepe said they had wanted the information to determine if there were portions of the community not yet served. Mr. Sepe said if you sorted through all the information, there was a surprising statistic. He said there were roughly 2,329 housing units in Hillsborough according to the Census, and according to Time Warner roughly 746 had service which was a penetration rate of about 40%. He said that 40% seemed oddly low and peculiar to him. Mr. Sepe said most cable companies had a penetration rate that was somewhat higher, and he believed they should try to identify why that low penetration rate was occurring. He said the other side of that question was that perhaps that number was accurate, which might point to the fact that people were seeking other choices because of rates or other issues. Mr. Sepe said that brought them back to the total indebtedness 7 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 8 of 30 of $1,658 to be recovered through increased fees and possibly the sale of more services. He said that was of concern. 7:44:39 PM Mayor Stevens asked could Mr. Sepe speak to how other communities were responding to this. Mr. Sepe stated that Hillsborough was among the first to go through this, noting he only knew of only two others. He said that Spring Hope and Dortches had voted to deny the transfer. 7:46:26 PM Commissioner Lloyd said she did not understand why the wastewater treatment plant and the water plant could not be served. Mr. Sepe said he agreed, but obviously there was some issue there that needed to be resolved. 7:48:01 PM Assistant Town Manager Nicole Ard clarified that the customer service materials that had been provided by Time Warner was basic information in terms of calls coming in, the types of calls, and outage information. 7:48:25 PM Commissioner Gering said he understood that providing the information was part of the franchise agreement. Ms. Ard stated the Town was told by Time Warner that it was not a requirement of the franchise agreement. Mr. Hornik said that Time Warner?s position was that they were not required to furnish that information, but the Town?s position was that they were required to provide that information. Mr. Sepe stated that the franchise agreement required that they meet customer service standards, and the only way to assess that was by asking for a report. 7:49:11 PM Jack Stanley, Regional Vice-President of Time Warner, stated that he did not recognize the company that Mr. Sepe had described. He said he had worked for Time Warner for 20 years, and he did not think the company described was the Town?s experience, either. Mr. Stanley said they had treated everyone in the community with as much respect as they could provide, and had given the most advance service that Time Warner was capable of offering. Mr. Stanley said he did not believe that anyone could argue that had it not been for Time Warner, there would not have been a robust broadband network brought to the community as soon as it was. He said he did not believe anyone could say that had it not been for Time Warner, there would be no competitive phone service. So, he said, they had done many things that were not required by the franchise agreement, and there may be some things in the agreement that they had a different of opinion about. Mr. Stanley said the agreement was formed some years ago, and technology had changed. He said when you talk about the debt service of the company, they were a capital intensive business. Mr. Stanley stated that Mr. Sepe had mischaracterized the way the relationship between the parent company and the franchise holder worked. He said the franchise holder here was not being sold or spun off or transferred; it would still be owned by Time Warner, Inc. Mr. Stanley said he had a vested interest to make sure that whatever happened was beneficial to not only the investors but to the customers they served. 8 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 9 of 30 Mr. Stanley stated he had spent some time during his career overseeing customer service at the local level, so he was very familiar with how it worked and what it took to make it work. He said Mr. Sepe had mentioned an issue with mapping, noting that you had to realize that maps were a critical asset and highly proprietary because they were now in a competitive market. Mr. Stanley stated that mapping information would give any competitor an advantage and a head start and because it showed them where equipment was located so that they knew where to start their own equipment. He said Mr. Sepe had said the Town needed the maps to make sure that people who did not have service had the opportunity to have it. Mr. Stanley stated that if the Town could provide him tonight with addresses of people inside the Town that service was not available to, then he would guarantee that by the end of the month they would have service. Mr. Stanley said many of the things that had been pointed out as reasons to deny the resolution were not valid. He also said that under the rules of the FCC, the Town was not obligated to act. He said the 120 day period was an opportunity to talk and become comfortable that what was happening was not going to be detrimental to the community. Mr. Stanley said he could say first hand that it absolutely would not be detrimental. He said they had 4,500 hundred franchises in the United States, and he was aware of only four, all outside of North Carolina, who had served up a request for information at the level and the volume that Mr. Sepe?s company had served on them. So, he said, they were not talking about an examination of an issue that was on a large scale, noting that the response they had provided was almost 60 pages. He said it was unthinkable that that much information had to be known for one to understand that the consequence of what they were doing here happened every day. Mr. Stanley said they were simply taking one shareholder who owned 84% of that company and selling those shares. He said nothing else would change; it was business as usual. Mr. Stanley stated that there was no cable operator in the United States that did not carry debt. He said that Comcast carried a much higher debt ratio that Time Warner, and given their robust growth and the growth they anticipated as well as the nature of their business they would have that debt reduced by the end of 2009. Mr. Stanley said from the company?s point of view, they believed this split was a good thing because they would not be competing with other divisions of Time Warner, Inc. for budget resources. He said they would be able to secure they own capital and make their own plans, and be free of all other encumbrances that that media presence had brought to them. Mr. Stanley said with respect to the locations Commissioner Lloyd had mentioned, they had just recently been made aware of those. He said they had indicated to the Town Manager that that issue would be resolved, as well as any other issue the Town Board brought up. He said they wanted the Town?s confidence, and believed they had earned it. 8:00:05 PM Commissioner Lloyd asked was Mr. Stanley saying that after the spin off, that Time Warner would stay exactly the same in Hillsborough. Mr. Stanley stated that was exactly what he was saying. He said the only thing that was happening was that after the spin off public shareholders would own the stock, and those shareholders would be who they answered to as opposed to Time Warner, Inc. 9 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 10 of 30 8:01:09 PM Mr. Hornik said then instead of Time Warner, Inc. owning 84% of Time Warner Cable, that 84% would be sold as shares to the public. He said there would still be the Time Warner entity that controlled the franchise, but that Time Warner, Inc. would no longer be the shareholder in Time Warner Cable. Mr. Stanley said that was exactly right, so there was no change to the operation in Hillsborough. He said of the 4,500 franchises, less than 20 had had questions, so he believed it had been made to be a much bigger issue here than was warranted. Mr. Stanley said for example, the city of Greensboro would take no action on this because their consultant had assured them after his examination that there would be no affect on the day-to- day operation of the business. He said he found it interesting that they had all this activity going on through Action Audits, when everything would stay the same in Hillsborough. 8:03:04 PM Commissioner Lloyd asked if they would provide service to the wastewater treatment plant and the water plant. Mr. Stanley reiterated that they would be taking care of that issue, and would also be looking into the access channel request. He said the franchise provided them 90 days to deal with that, and they needed to look closely at that because some programming would need to be moved to accommodate putting it on the basic tier. 8:04:30 PM Mr. Peterson said if he understood Mr. Sepe correctly, one of the reasons for his recommendation was that with the change of ownership he contended that if the Town had any loose ends and if the Town let the deadline pass, then the Town would no longer have any leverage to have them addressed because they would now be dealing with a new company. Mr. Sepe stated that was correct. He said the Board had discussed several years ago how Time Warner had overcharged customers in Town to the tune of $631,000, and when the Board had gotten to the point of ordering Time Warner to issue a refund, Time Warner went to the FCC and had the Town?s rate regulatory authority revoked so that the Town could not order that company to provide those refunds. Mr. Sepe said that was his concern, and he believed everything needed to be in writing to provide enforcement ability as they moved forward. Mr. Sepe said there was good reason for many of those 4,500 franchise holders to ignore this because in many of the states in which Time Warner had systems, state franchising had taken effect as local governments had lost their regulatory ability. He said North Carolina was still a state that had regulatory authority until the franchise expired. Mr. Sepe said one of the questions they had asked Time Warner was about lawsuits they may have been involved in. He said they had mentioned that Time Warner had been involved in lawsuits where franchise authority had been brought up but it was resolved. He said there was a case in Los Angeles, California that involved a major upgrade done by Time Warner, and that lawsuit was not recorded. 8:08:23 PM Mr. Peterson said Mr. Sepe had asked what was the harm to Time Warner for the elected body to deny the request, respecting that Time Warner had provided good service and coverage, and saying that they wanted to make sure that everything was in place that needed to be. He asked what the downside was of that. Mr. Stanley replied they would very likely go forward with the spin off whether they had approval or not, because the business dynamics in play were so far down the road that it would be difficult to back up. He said there would be no harm to the community and no change to the community. 10 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 11 of 30 Mr. Stanley stated that Mr. Sepe was very clever at distorting the facts, as he had done a number of times in the documents presented. He said the California case was completely irrelevant to what was going on here today, stating it involved Time Warner?s purchase of a company in bankruptcy. Mr. Stanley said he could not answer the question as to what any harm might be, adding that they had always been responsive whether it was in writing or not. 8:11:48 PM Margaret Cannell, Director of the Hillsborough-Orange County Chamber of Commerce, said that she wanted to speak on behalf of Time Warner Cable. She said they had been excellent corporate citizens, and in the past three years had become Foundation Club Members which meant they supported all of the Chamber?s activities with financial contributions as well as support of educational committees. Ms. Cannell stated there were a number of organizations in Orange County that received the benefits of Time Warner Cable?s charitable contributions. Ms. Cannell stated Time Warner had also been responsive in living up to the promises they had made, citing as an example extending service to areas when citizens had shown an interest, including her neighborhood. She said that Time Warner Cable had a commitment to the Town, and in her experience as a customer they provided good, quality service. 8:15:29 PM Commissioner Gering said he believed that Time Warner was probably living up to its commitment as far as customer commitments, but he was concerned that they had no way to verify that. He said he would like to believe that it would not be a problem for them to provide that type of information. Commissioner Gering said he understood that maps were proprietary, but perhaps there was some other way to convey to the Board that they were meeting customer expectations and service requirements. He said the commitments for the PEG channel needed to be resolved while the Town had the leverage to do so, and also believed that everything needed to be spelled out in writing. Commissioner Gering said those were all good reasons for the Board to approve the resolution to deny their consent, or as Mr. Sepe had characterized it, to stop the clock to give the Board additional time to work out some of these details with Time Warner. He said that was a benefit to the Town and was not a detriment to Time Warner. 8:17:07 PM Commissioner Dancy agreed, noting she believed in having things in writing. She said she wanted to make sure they had all the necessary information, and delaying would not harm any relationships. She said the Town had nothing against Time Warner. 8:17:37 PM Commissioner Lowen said if he understood correctly, even if the Town Board were to deny this, Time Warner was in a position where they still had to move forward and could do so legally even with the Town Board?s denial. But, he said, the questions still had to be answered. Mr. Stanley stated that Mr. Sepe had made it appear to the Board that they could make the spin off a condition to get other things. He said had those same questions been raised before, they would have addressed them directly, because that was how they did business. Mr. Stanley stated he did not want to say that they would do something that ignored the interests and wishes of Hillsborough. He said they wanted to go forward with the Town?s approval and support with the understanding tonight that all of the things that had been identified in the last 11 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 12 of 30 couple of weeks would be addressed whether the Board voted to deny or did nothing. Mr. Stanley stated his request was that the Board do nothing, and that Time Warner would still deal with the issues he had identified in his letter, which was that the Town support Time Warner in its effort to try to move forward as a viable telecommunications provider. He said if there was a problem with customer service, the Town would already know it. 8:19:49 PM Commissioner Gering stated no, they wouldn?t. Mr. Stanley replied yes, they would, because they would be receiving complaint calls. Commissioner Gering disagreed. 8:20:04 PM Ms. Ard clarified that Mr. Sepe was doing what he was suppose to do, and it was customary to have an information exchange. She said it was a lot of documents to have to review, but she believed at this point that the Board was getting a very unfortunate perspective of what Mr. Sepe had been doing. Ms. Ard disclosed that she lived in a large apartment complex, and the cable bills went to the complex and not to the residents. She said that was an instance where they would like to know about the complaints. Ms. Ard said this was Mr. Sepe?s business, which was to protect the citizens. She said receiving the information requested would be very helpful so that they did not have issues in the future for the staff or the Town Board. 8:21:23 PM Mayor Stevens summarized by saying that Mr. Sepe was their consultant and their agent and they had a recommendation from him, but the Board certainly needed to make up its own minds. He said it seemed to him that it was prudent to proceed with the resolution as proposed, and believed they could do that in the spirit that they wanted to make this work. Mayor Stevens acknowledged that Time Warner had been a very good corporate citizen, and he appreciated Mr. Stanley coming tonight and for his enthusiasm for the company, which did carry some weight. He stated that because this had happened it did give them time to reassess, and while he appreciated Mr. Stanley?s promise to take care of the issues noted part of what the Town was asking was who was not getting service. He said whether or not the Town was provided maps, that was a question that needed to be answered. 8:23:46 PM Mr. Stanley clarified that the apartment complex Ms. Ard had mentioned was Patriot?s Point, and the only way they could provide service was to do so through the apartment complex since it controlled how they went in and the terms under which they could provide service. So, he said, it was not something they preferred since they would much rather have a direct relationship with each customer. But, he said, the owner of the apartment complex would not permit Time Warner that right, so they did business the only way they could. Ms. Ard said her point was that normally people knew who their franchising authority was, and if they had issues that could not be resolved they knew who to take their concerns to. Mr. Stanley pointed out that Time Warner was being painted as the ?bad party? in this. He said if you lived in an apartment complex in North Carolina, you were disenfranchised from the benefits of cable service because the apartment owner dictated the terms, except and until the owner permitted it. Ms. Ard said her point was that customer complaints would not necessarily come directly to the company or to the Town. 8:26:19 PM Mayor Stevens stated he had not heard anything negative about the company. Mr. Stanley stated he had, but the complaints in Ms. Ard?s case had to go to the apartment owner 12 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 13 of 30 because Time Warner was treated as a wholesaler. Mayor Stevens stated he believed Ms. Ard had made a statement of fact, and had not offered any judgment. 8:26:47 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Gering, seconded by Commissioner Dancy, the Board moved to approve the resolution denying consent without prejudice to the proposed change in control of ownership of the cable television franchise for the Town. 8:27:05 PM Commissioner Lloyd asked had they hired Mr. Sepe because Mr. Peterson did not feel he knew enough about the cable franchise. Mr. Peterson stated Hillsborough was a part of the TJCOG cable consortium, and the telecommunications industry was a highly technical area that the average staff could not handle. He stated on the rare occasions that the Town received a complaint about Time Warner, their representative, Cindy King, had always given them an outstanding response. 8:29:07 PM The vote was 4-0. The motion was declared passed. 8:29:20 PM Ms. Cannell stated that many people called the Chamber with various complaints, and they had never received any complaints regarding Time Warner. 8:29:41 PM Mr. Stanley stated he appreciated the opportunity to speak tonight, although he was disappointed with the outcome. 8:30:06 PM Commissioner Gering said he hoped he did not cause any ill feeling, because he did not hold Time Warner in any ill regard at all. Mr. Stanley replied he understood that the Town had to make its own decision. A. Presentation and discussion regarding the Long Range Transportation Plan for the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization 8:30:56 PM Ms. Hauth stated that they were working on a new regional plan, and in an effort to do that they were taking a scientific approach to working on a number of scenarios in terms of do they build a lot of roads or do they build a lot of transit, and then because that was related to land use then land use scenarios had to be developed as well. She said on page 4-3, it laid out the varieties of land use scenarios and transportation scenarios. Ms. Hauth said the LRTP was the document they currently had, and the Comprehensive Transportation Plan had been described as the ?kitchen sink? method, in that in contained every idea ever put forth and was not fiscally constrained. Ms. Hauth stated the alternatives they were looking at with the 2035 plan were intensive highway, intense fixed guideway, which was light rail, intense bus, and multi-model, which picked and chose among all of those things to yield the best result. She said in Section 2 they had said if they were going to have all those alternatives, they needed to identify which ones were better and which ones were not. So, she said, there were color-coded tables in Section 2 where the TAC looked at all the different targets and performance measures for the different alternatives to see whether or not they were doing what they wanted, such as reducing congestion, reducing vehicle miles traveled, or improving air quality. Ms. Hauth said then they 13 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 14 of 30 had set targets where they would say ?good, better, best? so that they would have a matrix and a metric by which to look at all the alternatives to see which ones were performing the best for the region. Ms. Hauth said in the tables that followed in Section 2.10 and beyond you began to see how the different alternatives measured out. She said this was the point where the Planning Board had said at its last meeting that they needed to know what the Committee needed to know. Ms. Hauth said what the Committee needed to know was if there were particular projects that were of particular importance to the Town of Hillsborough. She said there were already some recommendations that came out of the Special Transit Advisory Board, on page 4-26, that included some discussion of passenger rail service in Hillsborough. Ms. Hauth said one of the things they would like to know was if there were particular projects that the Board wanted to see or was there something on the list they did not want to see. Referring to Section 3, Ms. Hauth noted that the 2035 Plan had to be fiscally constrained, in that they had to be able to document how they were actually going to be able to produce on the ground all of those improvements. She said they all knew there was not as much money as there used to be or that they needed, and since the projects had taken so long the costs had skyrocketed. Ms. Hauth said if there were suggestions or recommendations from this Board about the different types of ways to produce more funding, whether it was sales tax, motor fuels tax, vehicle registration fees or others, then the Committee would like to know. She said on a more regional level, was there a particular land use alternative or a particular road/transit alternative that this Board preferred. Ms. Hauth said, in summary that there were three areas for comment that the TAC was looking for: were there specific projects that the Board absolutely wanted to see or absolutely did not want to see; were there any comments on the funding options to raise additional funds to actually implement the plan; and, were there particular land use alternatives or a particular road/transit alternative that this Board preferred. 8:39:49 PM Commissioner Lowen asked when the comments needed to be forwarded to the TAC. Ms. Hauth stated the TAC would like those comments by October 1 in order to discuss them at their October meeting. She said the Planning Board?s comments were that they liked transit, they liked walkability, they wanted to make sure road projects required bike and pedestrian improvements, and they liked the train stop. Ms. Hauth said this was a long range plan that was done every five years, and the TAC wanted to make sure that planning boards, transportation boards, and elected boards had the opportunity to look at it in more detail and offer comments. She said if the Board did not offer comments it was not critical or a lost opportunity, but if they did want to offer comments now was the time to do so. 8:41:58 PM Mayor Stevens stated he believed there would be differences between a comment that any one of them would make and ones all of them would make. Ms. Hauth agreed. Mayor Stevens said it was disappointing that they did not have more time to formulate their comments and discover any similarities or differences the Board might have and to articulate that. 14 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 15 of 30 8:42:33 PM Commissioner Gering stated he believed they all shared interest in shared transit options and multi-model options, as well as the desire for walkability. He said if you looked at their priority list, it was reflected there with bicycle lanes, a pedestrian walkway over the bridge to the high school, improvements on South Churton, and the like. Commissioner Gering said to a large extent the priority list reflected all of those values. He asked if Ms. Hauth wanted them to discuss their priority list again. Ms. Hauth stated that was something she had wanted them to take another look at, noting she had included the comments from the Planning Board?s last meeting regarding that which was a different list than the one in front of the Board. Ms. Hauth said the Planning Board had not recommended that anything come off the list, but did not think that list carried any surprises, either. She said there might be one or two missing, and they needed to make sure that some of the items that had been added as new projects were included on the list. 8:45:07 PM Commissioner Lloyd said if they took the Brady bypass off the list, could those funds be used for small projects. Ms. Hauth replied that they did not yet have that commitment, and she would hesitate to recommend that to the Board. Commissioner Lloyd said if that bypass was their first priority and all the others came after, and the higher priorities had the best chance at funding, did that mean that the others had no chance. Ms. Hauth said the alternatives she was referring to now were different than the alternatives being set for Brady Road. 8:46:30 PM Mayor Stevens said from the comments made he believed they had some agreement about land use and development preferences and walkability, and asked should that be reflected in formal comments. Ms. Hauth said she would be happy to formulate a draft letter for the Mayor?s signature and circulated it electronically to the Board prior to mailing. Mayor Stevens agreed. Mayor Stevens said regarding the comments about funding options, were those comments for regional funding or State-wide funding, noting he did not believe they were local options. Ms. Hauth replied they were not local options. Mayor Stevens asked if there were any comments on those. And, he said, he believed the Board was silent on specific projects. 8:47:36 PM Commissioner Gering asked if there were any of the options for land use scenarios that would enhance the possibility of I-85 being widened. Ms. Hauth responded the highway intensive option or travel corridor could address that. Commissioner Gering stated that was a prerequisite for all that they wanted to do with Churton Street. 8:48:18 PM Mayor Stevens wondered if that was something they could add to their comments, in that those were the kinds of developments they wanted but they realized there was an infrastructure problem. Commissioner Gering stated the widening was not the problem; the problem was the bridge span. Ms. Hauth agreed, noting this Board had been very specific to couch its support of the widening of I-85 in terms of supporting reconfiguration of the two interchanges. Mayor Stevens asked that Ms. Hauth include that in the draft letter. 15 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 16 of 30 The Board then entered into brief discussions about certain aspects of the priority lists, and any comments that should be included in the draft letter. Ms. Hauth noted she would prepare the draft letter with the Board?s comments prior to the deadline. B. Discussion and endorsement of Local Priority List for the 2011-2017 TIP 8:50:46 PM Ms. Hauth stated the Planning Board at its last meeting had decided to individually rank the list the Board had in its agenda packet, and the list she had provided was now in the order that the Planning Board had voted on. She said two projects had been added: the first priority was the train station/multi-model center, and the fourth priority was the connection from Orange Grove Road to US 70A. 8:51:45 PM Commissioner Gering asked had that connection to US 70A been on the Board?s list. Ms. Hauth responded no. Commissioner Gering asked had it been on the County?s list. Ms. Hauth replied she did not think so, and that was the one they really needed to check on to make sure it was in the plan. Ms. Hauth said the Board could now see how the priorities had shifted. She said they had checked with staff to see if #7, the Nash Street sidewalk, needed to remain on the list since they were all operating on the assumption that it was funded. Ms. Hauth said they had recommended that it remain on the list just in case the project somehow required additional funding. She said regarding Elizabeth Brady Road, Commissioner Lloyd had asked if it could be dropped from the list and the funds used elsewhere, and there were a number of issues with that. Ms. Hauth said the only people they could make an agreement with regarding a funding swap was the Board of Transportation, and not as they moved through the TIP process with the TAC. She said the Board of Transportation was appointed by the Governor, and a new Governor would be elected to take office in January. Ms. Hauth said their current representative had been on the Board for some time and was also the Chair, and conventional wisdom was that the current representative would not seek another appointment. So, she said, they would go from being represented by a very senior member to a junior member. Ms. Hauth said for that reason, this was not the best time to try to make such a deal regarding a funding swap. She said they needed to wait until the new members of the Board of Transportation were known and were in place. Ms. Hauth said she was somewhat sure that the actual TIP for 2011 through 2017 would not get to the Board of Transportation while the current Board was still sitting. And, she said, she would imagine that one Board?s rules could not tie another Board?s hands, so if they cut a deal with the current Board the new Board could well overrule that. Ms. Hauth stated she would be adding some additional language regarding the train station, but did not know if there was enough information now to pinpoint where the best location was for such a station. She said she wanted to be very non-location specific in the way she wrote that item on the transportation list, because there were different schools of thought as to the possible location. 16 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 17 of 30 8:56:02 PM Commissioner Dancy asked if she believed that Elizabeth Brady Road being #9 on the list would be looked at as no longer being a higher priority and the funds would be taken back. Ms. Hauth said she did not believe they would take the funding back, but it would not encourage them to move forward with it. She said she had talked with DOT today and they had asked what direction the Board had given. Ms. Hauth said her reply was that the Board was very interested in looking at other things, but only if there could be some sort of understanding. She said she had explained that the Board understood that if they changed a project there was still a process that needed to be followed; that there would still be a time delay. 8:57:33 PM Mayor Stevens asked would having that project as #9 cause major damage. Ms. Hauth said she believed having it as #9 was problematic. She said she did not believe it should be #1, but it likely needed to be higher on the list. Mayor Stevens said if the Nash Street project was lowered on that list, because as far as they knew it was already funded, would that do any damage. Ms. Hauth said she did not think it would do any damage. Mayor Stevens suggested they move it to #10 because they believed it was taken care, and that would move Elizabeth Brady Road up. 8:59:20 PM Commissioner Gering suggested they get general agreement on the three bigger priorities, and then address the smaller ones. He said he would count the Churton Street widening, the train stop, and Elizabeth Brady as the three big priorities in that order. Commissioner Lowen stated he was fine with those projects and in that order. 9:00:02 PM Commissioner Gering said that was not to say those three projects would be 1, 2, and 3 on their list; only that those were the three biggest projects. 9:00:20 PM Commissioner Dancy said Mr. Peterson?s email had indicated that possible additions to the list were bike and pedestrian projects, and that those got funded from different sources from the highway projects and they might see some action on those in the next few years. Ms. Hauth said the same was true with the train station, in that it would be funded from a different source of funding. Mayor Stevens said then it would not hurt for that project to be listed as somewhat lower on the list. 9:01:03 PM Commissioner Dancy stated the email had also mentioned Mayo Street alignments. Ms. Hauth stated that was #8 on the revised list. Commissioner Dancy stated another was the shuttle bus service on Churton Street. Ms. Hauth said that was one not on the list, and one the Planning Board had not added was the funding for establishing the circulator route and the park and ride route at Durham Tech. She said that could be added as a transit project to the list that would not directly compete with bike and pedestrian or road projects. Commissioner Gering said they should absolutely add that project, and asked how it would be labeled. Ms. Hauth said she would call it an in-town circulator. 17 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 18 of 30 9:02:36 PM Commissioner Lloyd asked had they heard anything regarding the 420 bus route and the changes planned to be made to the existing bus route that ran between Hillsborough and Chapel Hill. Ms. Hauth said she had not heard anything as yet, noting comments were cut off on th the 19. 9:02:50 PM Commissioner Gering stated with the inclusion of the in-town circulator, his list now had four projects. He suggested putting the train station above the in-town circulator and below the Churton Street and Elizabeth Brady projects, and asked if that was acceptable. He said the new order would be Churton Street, Elizabeth Brady, the train station, and the in-town circulator. Commissioner Lloyd said if the in-town circulator came before the train station, they were more likely to get it. 9:03:26 PM Commissioner Gering said that would be his suggestion. Ms. Hauth confirmed that the order would be Churton, Elizabeth Brady, the in-town circulator, and the train station. 9:03:47 PM Mayor Stevens stated they had talked about smaller projects in advance of Elizabeth Brady, and asked would they put the Eno Mountain Road/Mayo Street project higher on the list. Commissioner Gering said possibly. Ms. Hauth stated that #4 and #8 were two of the things that would be a substitution package for Elizabeth Brady, because they both directly impacted Churton Street. 9:04:48 PM Commissioner Gering asked was Ms. Hauth suggesting putting those as #1 and #2. Mayor Stevens said he would suggest putting those above Elizabeth Brady. Commissioner Gering agreed. Ms. Hauth stated that would mean the order would be Churton Street, Orange Grove Extension, Eno Mountain Road, then Elizabeth Brady, the in-town circulator, then the train station. 9:05:41 PM Commissioner Lloyd asked for clarification. Ms. Hauth stated that the Orange Grove Road extension to US 70 Business would become #2. 9:06:07 PM Mayor Stevens asked Ms. Hauth read the list out in order, so everyone would understand. Ms. Hauth stated as follows: 1.Churton Street 2.Orange Grove extension to US 70 Business 3.Eno Mountain Road/Mayo Street alignment 4.Elizabeth Brady Road 5.In-town circulator/bus 6.Train station 7.NC 86 bikelanes 8.Pedestrian walkway over I-40 18 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 19 of 30 9.70 Bypass widening 10.Nash Street 11.Western bypass 9:06:55 PM Mayor Stevens said they could switch the order of #10 and #11. Ms. Hauth stated that nothing really showed that the Western Bypass would show relief anywhere. Mayor Stevens asked if the list as Ms. Hauth had noted was acceptable. There was no objection from the Board. Ms. Hauth stated she would like to have the Board make a motion to that affect. 9:07:27 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Gering, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd, the Board moved to adopt the priority list as stated by Ms. Hauth by a vote of 4-0. The motion was declared passed. D.Schedule possible dates for a workshop with the Economic Development Commission to seek assistance on work tasks from the Churton Street and Cornelius Street plans 9:08:11 PM Ms. Hauth noted that there was a list of tasks that the Board had wanted to assign to the EDC, but the Board had not met with the EDC to share that assignment with them and the EDC was therefore not aware of that assignment. She said she had provided the Board with the list so that they could determine if that list was still applicable and in what timeframe the Board wanted to schedule a meeting with them. 9:09:37 PM Mayor Stevens stated they had a tight schedule, but getting that meeting scheduled sooner rather than later would be best. He suggested perhaps scheduling it for the November workshop. Ms. Hauth stated sometimes the Board did not hold a November workshop, but the October workshop was now booked for the School Board. 9:10:05 PM Commissioner Lowen stated the November workshop would fall on November th 24, the week of Thanksgiving. Ms. Hauth stated she had not wanted to suggest that the Board meet at the EDC?s regular meeting time, which was at 5:30 on the third Thursday. 9:10:33 PM Mayor Stevens suggested they schedule the EDC to meet with the Board at its th November 24 workshop. There was no objection from the Board. E.Request to approve a Letter of Credit in lieu of Bond and Reduce Amount from 25% to 10% for Road-Related Infrastructure under Conditional Acceptance 9:10:59 PM Ms. Ard said the packet included an email from The Stratford Company regarding the Waterstone infrastructure maintenance bond, requesting that the Town change the original bond approved in the spring to a Letter of Credit and reduce the amount from 25% to 10% for road-related infrastructure. She said if the Board voted in favor of this, she asked that the staff 19 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 20 of 30 be provided some discretion to continue to work with the attorney and work with the developer to make sure the administrative items were in place. Mr. Hornik stated they had provided a Letter of Credit to the Town and security with respect to the access drive. He said conceptually he had no problem with the Letter of Credit, because in some respects it was easier to deal with than a bond. Mr. Hornik said in terms of substituting one form of security for the other, he had no problem with that. 9:13:06 PM Mayor Stevens said he was seeing a nodding of heads that the Letter of Credit was not an issue. He asked about the percentage reduction. 9:13:17 PM Commissioner Lowen asked if the reduction in the percentage was acceptable. Ms. Ard stated that the initial reason for asking for that 25% was because it was a multi-phase project, and because construction would continue to take place during the time that those roads were open and being used. She said that 25% was to protect the Town and to make sure there were funds available during the warranty period. Mr. Hornik stated as each pod was developed, the developer of that pod would have to post credit for their infrastructure. He said he believed that was the justification for proposing that the 25% be reduced to 10% Ms. Ard stated the developers had committed to the Town to go back and require those contractors to do the work, but again the Town needed to be sure they could go back and repair the roads if something did happen while those individual pods were being built out. 9:15:04 PM Mayor Stevens said if he understood correctly, reducing the percentage just saved the company money, but that percentage seemed to reflect what the Town had thought was necessary to avert risk. Mr. Hornik stated the question for the Town was if the $300,000 financial commitment via the Letter of Credit seemed to be enough to cover any perceived risk. He said the Town could draw on that Letter of Credit if the developer did not perform any necessary work. Ms. Ard said the developer obviously had a stake in that development as well as the Town, and they wanted to make sure that their business partners would have a viable opportunity with that development. 9:16:31 PM Commissioner Gering said it sounded like the Town?s liability or exposure was minimal. 9:16:48 PM Jim Ciao stated that the amount of infrastructure already put in was the largest percentage of what was needed, and there was a one-year warranty. But, he said, that warranty would not cover damage by another contractor. Mr. Ciao said as they built out each pod that was the time to alert those contractors that they would be held accountable. He said they did have a vested interest in the wellbeing of the project, so until they were done they would be overseeing the project. Mr. Ciao stated it was a matter of whether or not the Board believed their risk was covered. 20 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 21 of 30 9:17:53 PM Mr. Peterson said whether it was the utilities or the roads, they would be inspected to determine any problems. So, he said, that was a sort of reassurance that should mitigate the need to draft on the funds. Mr. Peterson asked Ms. Ard should they wait to grant acceptance until they knew the street lights had been installed. Ms. Ard stated that would be up to the Board. She said the Town did take over responsibility once the roads were accepted, and if there were street lights that had not been installed then the Town would need to work with both companies to coordinate installation and pay the higher monthly fee that would be required in terms of the upgraded lights. Mr. Peterson said if there was a problem and the developer went under, could the Town hold whoever took over the project to the agreement to install the street lights. Mr. Hornik replied yes. 9:20:38 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Gering, seconded by Commissioner Lowen, the Board moved to approve a Letter of Credit in lieu of Bond and Reduce the Amount from 25% to 10% for Road-Related Infrastructure under Conditional Acceptance by a vote of 4-0. The motion was declared passed. Added Item F. Waste Transfer Station 9:21:08 PM Commissioner Gering stated he had attended the County?s public hearing last Tuesday on the Waste Transfer Station where they received information from their consultant about the study. He said the County Commissioners had been presented with the same information the Town had received, which had some surprising things in it. Commissioner Gering said after the technical analysis and the exclusionary criteria were applied, the two top candidates for the Waste Transfer Station were in the Town?s Economic Development District. Commissioner Gering said he had voiced his concern to the County Commissioners about that, noting the Town had always viewed the EDD as strategic to their economic health and the overall health of the County, and he did not understand how the criteria the County had listed was scored by the consultants. He said in particular he had asked the County Commissioners if the Town could have direct access to their consultants so that they could further investigate how the conclusions were reached, and the County Commissioners had granted that request. Commissioner Gering said in thinking about this, he believed the Town should take a position on it and do so by consulting with various stakeholders including Waterstone, the Cornwallis Hills neighborhood, Beckett?s Ridge, and others. He said in addition, the Economic Development Commission should also have a voice. Commissioner Gering proposed that the Town Board authorize a short-term work group with these and other stakeholders to craft some sort of response to this stage of the County?s analysis and present that to the County Commissioners at st its next meeting, which was October 21. He said before doing that, he had wanted to bring it before the Town Board and perhaps consider holding a public hearing. Commissioner Gering said this was of such importance to the Town that he believed they really needed to hear the 21 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 22 of 30 public?s concerns and do due diligence to understand what went wrong, if anything, in the consultants? analysis as well as to express the Town Board?s objections. Commissioner Gering said another stakeholder he would like to include would be at least one representative from the residents near Davis Drive. He said Nathan Robinson spoke at the County public hearing, and he was a consultant whose job was to design landfills and therefore had some expertise that they should avail themselves of. Mayor Stevens stated there were others in Town who had similar expertise. 9:25:27 PM Commissioner Gering stated his initial thought was to have a work group, to have the staff do some advance work to get some details from the consultants as far as how they justified the scoring, and then have one or more work group meetings to formulate comments to bring back to the Town Board and the public in order to reach some resolution that could then be taken back to the County. 9:26:03 PM Commissioner Lowen added that he, Commissioner Hallman, and Commissioner Gering had spoken briefly before the Assembly of Governments meeting to County Commissioner Jacobs and asked him when he had received the consultants? report indicating the site locations. He said his response was they had received it at the same time the Town had received it. Commissioner Lowen said he agreed wholeheartedly that they should absolutely address this and make it clear that anything that did or did not happen in the Town?s EDD had an affect on the entire Town and its future. He said siting a solid waste transfer station at the backdoor of their EDD in their most prime development property, that being Waterstone, was not a good idea and was not acceptable to him. 9:27:19 PM Mayor Stevens said it would seem that it would not be a good idea for the entire County, in many ways, as critical as economic development places for commercial development were to the County. He said that was a huge issue. Ms. Hauth stated the Ashton Hall property was also on the list, but she had understood that one of the sites had been removed at the last minute because of some conservation easement issue. She said she did not want the Board to loose sight of the third site on the list that was in Hillsborough or its sphere. Mayor Stevens stated it was significantly lower on the list. Ms. Hauth agreed. 9:28:31 PM Commissioner Gering said one of the problems with the process was that the consultants took a list of more than 200 candidate sites based on GIS analysis, and carved them down to 10 which was an arbitrary cut-off point, which would be suitable according to some technical criteria. He said they had then arbitrary cut off four more, of which the remaining six included three that affected Hillsborough. Commissioner Gering stated the list included sites like Eubanks and Rogers Roads, and the County Commissioners explicitly told those residents not to worry about it because the next round of analysis would exclude them. He said so what did that leave? Commissioner Gering said if you followed that process, even though the site by 22 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 23 of 30 Ashton Hall was ranked much lower, when everything else was excluded there were only a few sites left, therefore moving Ashton Hall higher up on the list. 9:30:02 PM Commissioner Lloyd stated she had had contact with a woman who had indicated that the residents of Davis Road were considering hiring a consultant because they were opposed to both of the sites near that road. Mayor Stevens said he believed there was a group that was organizing which included residents of Cornwallis Hills, Beckett?s Ridge, and Davis Road, and they planned to have an information booth at the Last Friday. Commissioner Lloyd stated that group was also setting up a Web site, and they had planned a nd public information meeting for Thursday, October 2 at a location to be announced. 9:31:38 PM Mr. Ciao stated it was interesting the way County Commissioner Jacobs had started off the meeting, in that he seemed a little annoyed and had wanted to assure the crowd that he had been caught off guard by the fact that the consultant was going to present a list of ten sites that evening. He said Commissioner Jacobs had made a point of saying that was not the process they had in mind. Mr. Ciao stated Commissioner Jacobs had sought him out after the meeting and had assured him that in his opinion those ten sites meant very little at this time. Mr. Ciao stated he had spoken to the broker representing the property just across the street from Waterstone that was being considered who had asked what he thought. He said his response was he did not believe there was cause for worry at this point but that he needed to attend the hearing and speak up. Mr. Ciao said that property was 80+ acres, and the County would need 25 acres of it, and he had asked did he believe the property owner would sell the County that 25 acres, and the broker had indicated no, that the County would have to buy the entire parcel. Mr. Ciao stated his point was that the acquisition component would eventually become an issue, so there were layers of technical data, community impact, and then the practical side of acquiring the land and the obstacles that would produce, as well as the possibility of eminent domain and impacts on properties in the vicinity of a chosen site. Mr. Ciao stated they had been excited about acquiring the property for Waterstone and had invested a lot of money because it was an economic development zone. He said clearly, if they wanted to promote economic development then this was not the use you wanted to have in the middle of that zone. Mr. Ciao stated that Commissioner Jacobs had cautioned him not to get too excited because the process had been flawed up to that point, and there were a lot of sites that had been taken off the list that might be a better choice. 9:35:01 PM Mayor Stevens said he had seen a lot of nodding of heads at Commissioner Gering?s suggestion to create a work group, and it seemed to him that it would be in their interest to do that as quickly as possible with the charge of looking at all possible sites that would directly impact Hillsborough as well as crafting whatever Hillsborough?s interest might be in the larger County. He said there were acquisition factors, economic factors, social justice factors, and environmental factors that had to be considered. 23 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 24 of 30 9:36:25 PM Mayor Stevens stated having someone from Waterstone and the Community College on the work group would be appropriate. He asked Commissioner Gering if he would be willing to articulate what was being proposed. Commissioner Gering stated he would propose forming a work group as he and the Mayor had described with the goal of coming back to the Town Board at its October regular meeting with recommendations, and the Town Board crafting recommendations to be conveyed back to the st County in time for their October 21 meeting at 5:30 p.m. He asked if another Town Board member besides him would like to participate on the work group. Mr. Hornik stated if there were more three Board members then any meetings would have to be publicly noticed. Mr. Peterson stated they would need to notice anyway under the public meetings law, and that notice would need to be given 48 hours prior to a meeting. 9:39:31 PM Mayor Stevens said he would propose that Commissioner Gering chair that work group. There was no objection from the Board. Commissioner Gering said he would like to have Mr. Hornik participate on that work group as well, since some of the issues would have legal aspects. 9:40:10 PM Commissioner Lloyd stated she would be willing to serve on the work group. 9:40:20 PM Commissioner Lowen stated he would as well, noting that having the combined forces of a group of people with the same positive goal was much better than having someone set up a Web site and having a public information meeting when they did not know what the Town was doing. He said it should be made clear that they all had the same goal, which was not to have the transfer station in or around Hillsborough, and they needed to figure out how best to convey that message to the County. 9:41:01 PM Commissioner Gering stated to get the work done quickly, he did not believe they could have what would be equivalent to a public hearing. He said he would look to having a single representative from each of the groups mentioned. Commissioner Gering said the Arts Council had spoken at the public hearing, so perhaps a representative from that group should be included. Mayor Stevens stated it could be a two-tiered process, with the first process being people communicating with them through letters or emails, and the second being the meetings of the work group. He said that would provide a wider net where information could come in but still keep the work group somewhat contained. 9:42:10 PM Commissioner Gering stated he would work with staff to figure out meeting locations and to contact possible work group members as quickly as possible. 24 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 25 of 30 CLOSED SESSION 7. 9:42:38 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Dancy, seconded by Commissioner Lowen, the Board moved to go into Closed Session by a vote of 4-0. The motion was declared passed. A.Closed Session as authorized by North Carolina General Statute Section 143-318.11 (6) regarding a Personnel Matter(s) B.Closed Session as authorized by North Carolina General Statute Section 143-318.11 (5) regarding Property Acquisition for Riverwalk Phase II Upon returning to Open Session, by consensus, the Board authorized staff to proceed with property acquisition for Riverwalk Phase II as discussed in Closed Session and scheduled a meeting on Monday, September 29 at 5:00 pm to consider the property owner?s response. 8. ADJOURN Upon a motion by Commissioner Dancy, seconded by Commissioner Gering, the Board moved to adjourn at approximately 10:10 PM by a vote of 4-0. The motion was declared passed. Respectfully submitted, Donna F. Armbrister, MMC Town Clerk 25 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 26 of 30 26 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 27 of 30 27 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 28 of 30 28 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 29 of 30 29 September 22, 2008 Monthly Workshop Approved: November 10, 2008 Page 30 of 30 30