SUMMARY MINUTES OF A BREAKFAST MEETING

WITH THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL

AND THE TOWN’S LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION

FRIDAY, MARCH 4, 2005, AT 7:30 A.M.

Mayor Kevin Foy called the meeting to order at 7:30 a.m.

Council Members present were Sally Greene, Ed Harrison, Cam Hill, Mark Kleinschmidt, Bill Strom and Edith Wiggins.

Council Members Jim Ward and Dorothy Verkerk were absent, excused.

Members of the Legislative Delegation present were Senator Eleanor Kinnaird, and Representatives Bill Faison, Verla Insko, and Joe Hackney.

Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Deputy Town Manager Florentine Miller, Assistant Town Manager Bruce Heflin, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Assistant to the Mayor Emily Dickens, Police Chief Greg Jarvies, Fire Chief Dan Jones, and Town Clerk Sabrina Oliver.

Others present included UNC Local Relations Director Linda Convissor and League of Municipalities Executive Director Ellis Hankins and General Counsel Andy Romanet.

Welcome and Introduction by the Mayor

Mayor Foy thanked the delegation for their attendance. He also thanked Mr. Hankins and Mr. Romanet for their attendance. Mayor Foy announced that this was a work session for the Council and key staff. He noted that it was not a public hearing and that the public hearing on the legislative initiatives would be held at the Council’s business meeting on March 4, 2005. Mayor Foy added that the Council would use this work session to put forth its ideas and wanted advice from the legislative delegation.

Mayor Foy announced that Council Member Jim Ward had been hospitalized. He said that Council Member Ward’s interest was item #1 of the legislative initiatives – State registration of beer kegs.

Representative Hackney said he and fellow delegates wanted to hear from the Town.

Discussion of State Registration of Beer Kegs

Mayor Foy said that citizens had requested assistance with identifying options to police the distribution of beer kegs as a way to curb underage drinking.

Police Chief Jarvies said the issue had been addressed in 23 states and that some municipalities had adopted their own ordinances. He noted that local committees and groups advocating alcohol awareness had brought forth the request that beer kegs be registered. Chief Jarvies said that the registration amounted to the containers being tagged so they could be tracked from the point of sale. He said the container serial number would be on the sales receipt. Chief Jarvies added that he had spoken to merchants and that they did not believe the registration would be detrimental to them. He said the registration had been successful in other jurisdictions and emphasized that it was important that the registration be statewide in order to be an effective tool to reduce the prevalence of teens obtaining alcohol.

Who would protest this registration was the key question, Senator Kinnaird said. Chief Jarvies said merchants had said it would have no affect or be a burden on them. He said he had not spoken with distributors.

Representative Insko said two other legislators were working on similar legislation. She said keg regulations were hard to enforce. She also added that attempts to raise taxes on alcohol had been unsuccessful. Representative Insko said she would look into what might be feasible and keep the Town apprised of her findings.

Senator Kinnaird suggested that the Town contact distributors and get their reaction to keg regulation.

Mr. Hankins said the League had not adopted a stance on the issue and wondered if it could be a local bill.

Council Member Greene said that State-wide regulation was the only realistic way to enforce the registration.

Representative Hackney said that initially merchants had opposed keg registration. He added that the climate may have changed because of other states adopting similar legislation.

Council Member Kleinschmidt said that his concern was the connection of the issue with teen drinking when the connection needed to be made with the mass consumption of alcohol at universities.

Representative Insko said she had received email from staff that indicated that 2 percent of beer sales were from kegs, with the balance of sales being from canned beer.

Council Member Kleinschmidt emphasized that the problems were on campuses.

Representative Insko said it was difficult to tie the person who leased the keg to those who were drinking the beer.

Council Member Greene said she had concerns about privacy protection for lawful consumers over the age of 21.

Representative Insko said that public bill issues were due by April 13.

Representative Hackney said the legislation could be tied to the bill dealing with DWI taskforce issues.

Discussion Regarding the Repeal of Defense of Marriage Act and Opposition to the Proposed Constitutional Amendment Defining Marriage as Only the Union of One Man and One Woman

Senator Kinnaird said that a lot of things were at work in the General Assembly concerning this issue and that it would be good to hold these issues over until next year.

Council Member Kleinschmidt said that the general position of the community was to have faith in the delegation to support the Town with these two initiatives. He said opposition to the Constitutional Amendment had just arisen and that the Council needed to do what it could to kill the amendment.

Discussion of Inclusion of Sexual Orientation Under North Carolina Hate Crimes Law

Council Member Kleinschmidt referred to an incident that had recently taken place on Franklin Street where a young man had been attacked because of his sexual orientation. He said the incident had spurred a mobilization by the University and the community. Council Member Kleinschmidt said that, currently, sexual orientation was not a part of the hate crimes law. He added that it was absurd that this type of crime was not included in the law since this was one of the largest targeted groups. Council Member Kleinschmidt said he hoped that the legislators would support an amendment to include sexual orientation under the State’s hate crimes law.

Senator Kinnaird said it would be supported.

Discussion of Application of State Vehicle Regulations to Electric Personal Assistive Mobility Devices

Mayor Foy said the next legislative initiative was application of State vehicle regulations to electric personal assistive mobility devices.

Chief Jarvies said that Segways were not covered under State vehicular regulations, and if they were going to be operated they needed to be protected under those laws. Council Member Harrison said that there would be more and more of them, and they would be in the travel lane. Mr. Romanet said that the Segway had been removed from a bill that the League had been involved in. He said they were waiting for municipalities to regulate them.

Mr. Hankins said the industry did not want them to be prohibited.

Senator Kinnaird said that there were regulations for bicycles for such safety items as lights, and could the Town not require lights.

Mr. Horton said the Town was worried that somebody was going to get killed and could the Town make them less of a safety hazard. Council Member Greene said that they were an enhanced walking tool. Mr. Horton said that they were not safe in particular circumstances and especially not on Franklin Street at night.

Mayor Foy said the meeting needed to move along and the debate could be taken up at another time. He said ideas were just being put forth.

Representative Hackney said he would consider whatever they thought would improve safety in this regard.

Discussion of Repeal of NCGS 95-98 and Replace it with a Law that Would Establish Collective Bargaining Rights for Public Employees

Council Member Strom said several Council members supported this position and had received a significant amount of information that they could pass along to legislators. He added that the State of North Carolina was at the bottom of the list in this area.

Senator Kinnaird said it would take years and lots of education to repeal this law. She said that collective bargaining being against the law in North Carolina had for years been used by the Commerce Department as an advertising point emphasizing that the State was anti-union. Senator Kinnaird said that legislators could introduce a bill, and that would generate a lot of media exposure.

Representative Insko said she needed to know if there were other areas working on this.

Council Member Strom told Senator Kinnaird that statewide hearings to solicit support and spread education were needed. He encouraged her to keep this before the Legislature.

Discussion Concerning Support for the League’s Position Regarding Annexation Law

Mayor Foy said that this issue was not new to anyone.

Representative Hackney told Council Members to talk to their friends in Cary. He said that he and Mr. Hankins had had the conversation that as long as towns use this power with discretion it would survive and if they did not use discretion, then the law would not survive.

Council Member Kleinschmidt asked how an increase in population from 45,000 to almost 120,000 in just over 10 years could not be called aggressive annexation. He said that Chapel Hill had defined its extraterritorial jurisdiction and provided notice to its residents and did not allow voting rights for residents until they were annexed.

Mr. Hankins said that annexation was about providing urban services. He said the law had served North Carolina very well. Mr. Hankins also noted that in Cary, the annexations mostly had been voluntary.

Discussion Concerning Support of an Adjustment to the Law Enforcement Supplemental Retirement Program

Chief Jarvies said the Supplemental Retirement Program was adopted in 1986. He said the supplement is paid by the unit at which an officer retires. Chief Jarvies said he believed that the program should provide that each agency where a retiree worked should contribute a pro rata portion of the retirement allowance rather than having the entire allowance paid by the last agency where the retiree served.

Chief Jarvies said the current program has had a negative impact on North Carolina police chiefs because of the financial burden they could have on units if they decide to retire five years after being hired. He said the supplemental program would impact the Town of Chapel Hill by $450,000 this year. Chief Jarvies said he believed if payment was pro rata it would be fairer and open up mid-level management opportunities. He said many units were going outside of North Carolina to hire chiefs of police. Chief Jarvies added that there was some support by some police associations, however, it was not popular with many rank and file organizations.

Mr. Horton said the Town was going to be losing a lot of upper level managers in many departments. He said that cost had to be taken into consideration when hiring.

Mr. Hankins said the supplement had been passed in 1986 and that from the League’s perspective, the supplement should never have been approved. He said many discussions had been held concerning the restructuring of retirement and getting rid of the separation clause. Mr. Hankins said discussions would continue and a bill was being drafted to do exactly what the Council had asked.

Discussion Regarding Support for a Change in Sate Law To Reaffirm the Confidentiality of Public Agency Work Product and Attorney Client Communications

Mr. Karpinos explained that under the North Carolina Public Records Law that public sector attorney files were subject to that law. He said the Town was supporting a change in State law to reaffirm the confidentiality of public agency attorney work product and attorney-client communications involving public agencies and their counsel.

Senator Kinnaird asked if Senator Clodfelter was introducing a bill addressing this issue. Mr. Romanet said he was and that he expected the bill was reaching an agreement and that there should be enough of a bill to be introduced for the work product alone.

Discussion Regarding Additional State Funding for the Provision of Town Fire Protection Services to State Facilities on the University of North Carolina Campus and in Town

Fire Chief Dan Jones said that Gov. Easley’s proposed budget contained an additional appropriation of $1 million in each year of the biennium for State property fire protection reimbursement, which would increase the State-wide annual amount from $3.8 million to $4.8 million annually.

He noted that the funding had come about in 1997 as G.S. 58-85A-1, however, it contained weak language stating the intent of the General Assembly to appropriate at least $4.2 million annually from the General Fund, Highway Fund and from University receipts. He added that the General Assembly actually appropriated $3.8 million for each of the last two fiscal years to be disbursed among fire departments that protect State property.

Chief Jones said the distribution formula had not changed since 1997. He said it is based on the value of the total State property protected by a jurisdiction figured as a percentage of all property and divided into the fund. Chief Jones added that Chapel Hill receives $849,000 annually from the fund but based on increases in State properties during the past seven years, he believed an equitable compensation for Chapel Hill for fire protection should be between $1.4 and $2.7 million annually.

Chief Jones said he had contacted similar communities and they were also interested in supporting this initiative.

Chief Jones said the current $1 million increase to the fund was an increase of 26 percent. He said that percentage would amount to an additional $221,000 for the Chapel Hill Fire Department. Chief Jones said that he could hire nine of the 18 firefighters he needed with that amount of money.

Mayor Foy said that one cent on the tax rate would generate $450,000. He said the 18 firefighters that the Town needed would cost more than $1 million. Mayor Foy said fire protection was getting to be unaffordable, but he did not want to see the service deteriorate. He added that the funding should at least stay where it is currently or it should be increased.

Chief Jones said the formula needed to be changed because it had been static for years.

Mayor Foy said that this was not just a Chapel Hill issue.

Discussion Concerning the Homestead Exemption Tax

Mr. Karpinos said a bill had been introduced to support the Homestead Exemption Act.

Representative Insko said counties did not like the exemption because funding for them was difficult at this time.

Senator Kinnaird said that the exemption had a big impact on county tax revenue.

Discussion Regarding State Funding of the State Highway Patrol System Known as VIPER (Voice Interoperability Project for Emergency Responders)

Mr. Horton said that surrounding municipalities and counties in the Triangle area were in support of interoperability.

Chief Jones said that VIPER was the State-wide radio system used by the State Highway Patrol. He said there would be $15 million in the State budget that would allow for this infrastructure to be developed and implemented. Chief Jones added that the Chapel Hill area would benefit from the system and it would improve communications between units.

Senator Kinnaird said support for the VIPER system was on their list.

Mr. Hankins said the League supported the system which was linked with the federal Homeland Security Act. He said 80 percent of the funds would go to local governments and the State would come along with a dollar for dollar match.

Discussion Concerning a Local Bill to Authorize an Additional Tax on Utility Bills to Put Overhead Power Distribution Lines Underground

Mayor Foy said these funds could be used to bury utility lines. He said this had come about after the last ice storm. Mayor Foy said there was no opposition in Chapel Hill because of the affects of  the storm on the Town.

Mr. Karpinos said coastal communities had introduced a similar bill in 2003 with some favorable consideration.

Council Member Strom said that conversations with Duke Power revealed that the cost to bury cable would be staggering. He said the issue was a public safety issue. However, Council Member Strom said, it was complicated to bury existing lines.

Senator Kinnaird said it was a large undertaking since it not only included electric lines, but also cable, telephone and DSL lines.

Discussion Concerning Additional Substance Abuse Treatment Facilities in Orange County and Hiring Additional Alcohol Law Enforcement Officers (ALE)

Chief Jarvies said that there had been hiring cuts for ALE officers, and he believed that enforcement was key in regulating alcohol laws. He said even more important was the need for something outside of the criminal system, like treatment centers. Chief Jarvies said focusing on that would be making a successful dent in related crimes.

Representative Insko said substance abuse treatment centers were needed most. She said there had been significant increases in admissions to substance abuse centers, not mental health centers. Representative Insko said she believed that substance addiction was seen as a moral issue whereas mental disabilities were not. She said she was supportive of funding for substance abuse centers.

Senator Kinnaird said the State’s largest substance abuse centers were its prisons.

Representative Insko said that 40 to 60 percent of the prison population had substance abuse or mental health problems. She said there may be more support from the Administrative Office of the Courts and that treating those who are addicted is a very important issue.

Mayor Foy told legislators that they had the Council’s support.

Discussion Regarding Repeal of the Town’s Authority to Operate Automated Camera Equipment to Cite Red Light Traffic Violations

Senator Kinnaird said the issue could be worked out. Council Member Kleinschmidt noted that Senator Hoyle had submitted to eliminate it altogether.

Discussion Regarding a Per-Ticket Fee on Events at Large Venues

Council Member Strom said this referred to attaching a fee to tickets of $30 and more to high profile sporting events.

Mayor Foy said the $1 per ticket fee would be dedicated to public safety and transportation.

Representative Insko said she supported this. She said tickets go up significantly annually and she didn’t see how a dollar could affect ticket sales.

Council Member Strom said the economic contribution for transportation was a burden. He said the Council needed to talk to the University about the fee. Council Member Strom said there was a lot of logic behind the fee.

Mr. Horton said it would reduce the amount UNC would pay to the Town to pay for transportation costs. He said the local fee contribution made to the system would reduce the amount of money they would have to pay.

Mr. Karpinos noted that Greensboro had a transportation authority.

Senator Kinnaird said it might be possible to get the fee passed since it had local support and because the State’s budget deficit could force legislators to consider funding alternatives.

Discussion Concerning Revenue Enhancements

Mayor Foy said the Council supported revenue enhancements which included a gas tax, a one-half cent sales tax and a $15 per vehicle registration fee increase.

Mayor Foy said that Carrboro had made a similar request for a vehicle registration fee increase. He noted that the extra revenue raised by the fee would go towards transportation.

Legislators said that the vehicle registration fee had a better chance of being passed than the tax hikes.

Representative Hackney thanked the Council for inviting them to the Legislative Breakfast, noting that it had been educational. He asked the Council to keep in mind that the legislators represented other municipalities as well.

The meeting adjourned at 9:23 a.m.