SUMMARY MINUTES OF A BUSINESS MEETING

OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL

MONDAY, JUNE 27, 2005, AT 7:00 P.M.

Mayor Kevin Foy called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

Council members present were Sally Greene, Ed Harrison, Cam Hill, Mark Kleinschmidt, Bill Strom, Dorothy Verkerk, Jim Ward, and Edith Wiggins.

Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Deputy Town Manager Florentine Miller, Assistant Town Manager Bruce Heflin, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Town Information Officer Catherine Lazorko, Assistant Parks and Recreation Director Bill Webster, Human Resources Director Pam Eastwood, Traffic Engineer Kumar Neppalli, Transportation Director Mary Lou Kuschatka, Assistant Human Resources Director Anissa Graham-Davis, Senior Long Range Planning Coordinator Chris Berndt, Senior Development Coordinator Gene Poveromo, Police Chief Gregg Jarvies, Finance Director Kay Johnson, Senior Planner Phil Hervey, Internal Services Coordinator Bill Terry, Acting Planning Director J.B. Culpepper, Information Technology Director Bob Avery, Field Operations Superintendent Richard Terrell, Fire Chief Dan Jones, Urban Forester Curtis Brooks, and Town Clerk Sabrina Oliver.

Item 1 – Ceremonies

1a.       EmPowerment, Inc.

Mike Epps, Program Manager for EmPowerment’s development arm called the Midway Business Center, stated they were Chapel Hill’s first and only business incubator.  He shared their opportunities and successes, noting their support programs and services to the community.

Mr. Epps noted their building could house up to 13 starter businesses at a time. He noted that at least 51 percent of all jobs created by these businesses go to moderate to low-income individuals, adding that at the present time 87 percent of employees in these businesses were from that income group.  Mr. Epps noted they offer quarterly seminars so that individuals could strengthen their basic business knowledge.

Mr. Epps invited the Council and the public to visit their facility and patronize those businesses located there.

Item 2 – Public Hearings:  None.

Item 3 – Petitions

3a.       Petitions by Citizens

3a(1).   Downtown Economic Development Corporation regarding Wireless Internet Service.

3a(2).   Terri Buckner, Aris Buinevicius, Will Raymond, and Brian Russell regarding Downtown Wireless Initiative.

Mayor Foy noted that the first and second petitions pertained to the same subject and would be considered together.  He stated that Mayor pro tem Wiggins had distributed a resolution on this topic for the Council’s consideration.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins said she was pleased to see these two petitions, and was proposing that the Council take the two petitions and refer them to the Manager, the Attorney, and the Technology Committee with a request for reports and options for consideration by the Council regarding establishment of a wireless internet environment in the downtown and in neighborhoods adjacent to the downtown such as the Northside and Pine Knolls neighborhoods.

MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION R-0.1.

Laurin Easthom said she believed the Town would benefit from having wireless internet service for all citizens of Chapel Hill, as other communities were doing.  She said it could be done inexpensively if they plan ahead, noting that over the next year several transportation-related activities would occur that had the potential to support the development of a Town-wide fiber infrastructure.

Ms. Easthom requested that the Town look into the feasibility of laying conduit any time a road, sidewalk, or greenway was dug up for repair, expansion or new construction, and requiring developers to lay additional conduit along any transportation or utility route that is created or disturbed during new construction.  She said these actions would create significant cost savings, and were the first steps to make it easy for complete wireless access for all.

Gregg Gereau, Chair of the Technology Committee, noted that the Manager, the Mayor and Council Member Kleinschmidt had attended a recent Committee meeting and advised the members of the Town’s long range goals.  He said one of the initiatives discussed was development of a Best Practices document, which would include compliance with the State’s Open Meetings law.  Mr. Gereau noted the Town was faced with an “awesome” task to meet that challenge because of the use of different types of electronic communication.  He stated the Committee had enlisted the aid of David Lawrence with UNC’s School of Government to assist them in developing the Best Practices.  Mr. Gereau said they expected to have a draft for the Committee to review at its July meeting, which would then be forwarded to the Council in September.

Mr. Gereau said the petitions by the Downtown Economic Development Corporation (DEDC) and by the four citizens who happened to be members of the Technology Committee were well-intentioned, but were related to operational matters that were outside the scope of the Technology Committee’s purpose.  For example, he said, selecting hardware.  Mr. Gereau said they could review and advise on the development of a Request for Proposals, but not on the operational aspects of that proposal.

Mr. Gereau suggested that the DEDC meet with the Technology Committee to discuss and develop a joint resolution for the Council’s consideration.  He added he agreed with some of Ms. Easthom’s comments, but that some of the opportunities may not be as apparent as stated.

Steve Irving, a member of the Technology Committee but speaking tonight as a citizen, stated he was concerned about the two petitions under discussion.  He said he was generally in favor of providing such services so long as the affected businesses and citizens approve of the true cost, especially tax expenditures, and Town resources could be measured, managed and maintained.

Mr. Irving asked that the Council carefully consider whether it was appropriate to make the DEDC, a quasi-independent corporation, a partner with the Town’s all-volunteer Technology Committee, and how such a designation might limit the activities of the Committee with other agencies in the future.

Mr. Irving said he believed it was within the scope of the Technology Committee’s original charter to engage in discussions with the DEDC or any other agency about technology matters.  He quoted a statement from the Committee’s Mission Statement presented to the Council on March 23: “Foster strategic alliances within the community, the County, and the State in sharing and extending the benefits of technology resources.”  Mr. Irvin said clearly, the relationship sought by the DEDC fell within that purpose.

Mr. Irving stated that the petition submitted by the four citizens noted that this initiative was in the Technology Committee’s 2005-2006 Strategic Plan, specifically in the infrastructure plan also presented to the Council on March 23, which stated “Review the feasibility of developing a plan for the design of a fiber mesh network for Town operations connectivity but also supports elements for city schools and library networking needs and simultaneously creates the network backbone for a Town-wide wireless network.”

Mr. Irving said while neither petition mentioned the use of the Town’s networking resources in this matter, the strategic statement he had just mentioned clearly anticipated the need to study the feasibility of adding a public access network on top of the existing Town infrastructure.  He requested that the Council assure the DEDC that the Technology Committee would dutifully consider all requests for assistance and collaboration put before it, and that the Committee in its role as advisers to the Council had its “blessing” to do so.

Mr. Irving noted that the second petition requested that the Technology Committee work with the DEDC any other organization involved in implementing public wireless access within the Town.  He asked that instead, the Council allow the Committee to take up this matter in its normal course of business.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins noted that her resolution would refer both of these petitions to the Manager, the Attorney, and the Technology Committee for consideration. She said in no way would adoption of the resolution bind anyone to a joint collaborative effort.  Mayor pro tem Wiggins said that as these initiatives move forward, that they not forget that there were two important surrounding neighborhoods that could benefit.

THE MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION R-0.1 WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

3a(3).   Jerry Phelps regarding Childhood Cancer Awareness Month.

Mr. Phelps, President of the Optimist Club of Chapel Hill, said one of their major focuses was childhood cancer, with the majority of activities in the month of June.  He noted they had in the past two weeks presented checks to both the Duke and UNC pediatric oncology wards.  Mr. Phelps said over the last year they raised over $11,000 for that cause, and more importantly had spent that much money on childhood cancer and other programs for the youth of Chapel Hill and Orange County.

Mr. Phelps requested that the Council declare the month of June as Optimist International Childhood Cancer Awareness Month.

COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO PROCLAIM THE MONTH OF JUNE AS CHILDHOOD CANCER AWARENESS MONTH.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

3a(4).   Bob Krueger regarding the Elliott Road Theaters.

Mr. Krueger, owner of Great Harvest Bread Company, said he had spoken to the Council a year ago in support of the theater, but had now reconsidered some of the influences behind the project.  He said as of today, the project had not begun.  Instead, Mr. Krueger said, there was a chain link fence, weeds which he believed violated Town codes, and a lot full of trash.

Mr. Krueger said for the businesses that were affected by those conditions, that fence was the “white elephant in the living room.”  He said it was hard to live with when nothing was done about it and no one was talking about it.  Mr. Krueger said his business as well as others nearby were hurting because the theater was now gone, because patrons of the theaters no longer saw his store and came in to do business.  He said the lack of traffic had already caused the closure of a book store.

Mr. Krueger said they could not thrive without random traffic and new customers. He asked what if anything the Council could do to move this project along.  Mr. Krueger said he had spoken to a representative of Mark Properties who had said the Town was asking him to sign an agreement for construction of the new theater that contained “Draconian” measures that “no one in their right mind would sign.”  Mr. Krueger said if that was true, then maybe some renegotiations should take place.  He said unless the two parties were brought together, then nothing would happen.  Mr. Krueger said the theater was the hub of activity in that area, and without it everyone in that area would suffer.  Mr. Krueger said his business had dropped 40 percent since the theater closed.

Mayor Foy said the Town did not own this property, and they had granted a permit to the owners to build the theater several years ago.  He said this had been an embarrassment to Chapel Hill, adding that it was the “worse kind of petty squabbling” he had seen in all his years of service on the Town Council.  Mayor Foy said the owners of the property should be ashamed of how they had performed in this Town.

Mayor Foy said he would suggest that the Council ask the Manager to research what the Council might be able to do, noting they had been able to get the Wicked Burrito to react to the Council’s concerns.  He agreed with Mr. Krueger that the way that property looked should not be permitted in this Town, noting it was overgrown with an ugly fence, and it was an underused property as well as a blight on this community.  Mayor Foy said he believed it was time that something was done, and thanked Mr. Krueger for bringing this to the Council’s attention.

Mayor Foy said he believed that based on past performance that the Town had difficult people to work with who were not interested in being good civic citizens.  He said it was not fair to Mr. Krueger and the other businesses in that location, and it was not fair to the Town.

Council Member Kleinschmidt said that because the fence had been there for as long as it had it had become a safety problem.  He said if the owners were not going to do anything soon, could the Town do something about having the fence moved back to the Mark Properties store frontage line.  Council Member Kleinschmidt said he visits the stores in that area several times a week and the fence limited the sight line to the point that it was dangerous.

Mr. Horton said they would need to talk with the Town Attorney to discover what if any legal leverage the Town may have.  He said there was also the opportunity to make another appeal to the property owners to settle the issues to allow the movie theater to move ahead.

3a(5a). Jason Jolley on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce regarding Opposition to the Umstead Act.

Mr. Jolley, Director of Government Relations and Community Development for the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce, stated that the Umstead Act was created in 1929 to protect private enterprise from unfair competition from the State and its agents, including the UNC system.  He said dramatic changes were now being considered by the General Assembly that they believe would increase the ability of UNC and its constituent universities to directly compete with local businesses.  Mr. Jolley said the proposed revisions to the Umstead Act would add four additional exemptions that would allow UNC to compete with the private sector:

· Eliminating UNC restrictions on selling branded merchandise and services to alumni;

· Enable the University to use facilities and equipment to compete with private providers of similar services;

· Broaden the services that the University could sell to its faculty, staff and students; and

· Exempt anything that appeared to be mission-related activities from the Umstead Act protection.

Mr. Jolley noted that the Chamber was a firm supporter of the University and that the University was not a primary driver of this legislation, but they did stand to gain from its passage.

Mr. Jolley stated that the Chamber was leading a coalition that included the Orange County Economic Development Commission, the Chapel Hill Downtown Commission, and the Hillsborough-Orange County Chamber of Commerce.  He asked that the Council consider joining their coalition by passing a resolution tonight in opposition to the Umstead Act and its proposed revisions.

Mayor Foy said if the Council took action tonight, he believed it should be emphasized that these revisions were brought forward precipitously and there had not been sufficient time for people to think about and discuss it.  He said that some revisions may be warranted but others may not, but there still needed to be time to discuss that.  Mayor Foy said he believed the Council should endorse that no action be taken to revise the Umstead Act at this time, and that any modifications should be studied in a methodical and reasonable manner before any change is made.

Council Member Harrison said these revisions had already passed the House with strong support, and the Senate was now considering it.  He said the Council needed to act now and act firmly, and that the Council’s resolution be sent to the President pro tem of the Senate.

Council Member Kleinschmidt encouraged the Council to take action now.

Mayor Foy asked the Manager if he could draft a document that expressed the Council’s sentiment.  Mr. Horton agreed to do so.

Council Member Ward said he did not know what the reasoning was to move this legislation forward so quickly, but he had more of a concern than what had been described.  He said he could not see how it would be good for the local economy, and would be supportive of stating a greater concern other than it had come up quickly and more time was needed to study it.  Council Member Ward said he would like a comment added that the Council was concerned that this may have significant negative impact on local businesses.

Mayor Foy said the problem with these proposed revisions was that no one knew what the impact would be, adding that the legislation had been slipped in “in the dead of night” and this was not the right way to do the people’s business.  He said, the Council should object to that and communicate that to the Senate, and ask the Senate to stop the legislation.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins said passage of the revisions to the Umstead Act would allow the University to reap the benefits of retail business that many local merchants now have.  She said there was a time when you could purchase greeting cards on campus, but after the Umstead Act was “tightened up” you no longer could purchase such items.  Mayor pro tem Wiggins said that would be the effect on local businesses, that people would no longer have to go downtown to shop because many items could be purchased on campus.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins said she believed that UNC used its profits from such sales to benefit its scholarship and financial aid programs.  However, if such sales were allowed a lot of downtown business would be lost because UNC Student Stores would stock many items that students now purchase downtown.

Mayor Foy said one of the things that UNC wanted to do was sell items over the Internet, and he would like to know what they wanted to sell and why, and if that had anything to do with their academic mission.  He said those were all things that should be discussed.

Council Member Verkerk said there were 16 members of the UNC system, so 16 other communities would be impacted by this as well.  She said she didn’t know what their feelings were, but she did not believe they were pleased about it. Council Member Verkerk said she would like to know what their opinions were.

Mayor Foy said if the Council was in agreement, he would like to have the Manager move ahead and draft a document to be sent to the State.  He said that because the Council would not meet again until September, it would be a moot point if they did not do something now.

Council Member Verkerk said she would like to know what the other University communities thought about this.  Mayor Foy said that the NC League of Municipalities had a University caucus, and that may be a way to obtain that information.  Mr. Horton said they had already asked the League to prepare an analysis of the bill and what the potential effects of it might be State-wide, but they did not have that as yet.

THE COUNCIL AGREED BY CONSENSUS THAT IT DID NOT SUPPORT MODIFICATION OF THE UMSTEAD ACT AT THIS TIME, AND THAT THE MANAGER WOULD DEVELOP LANGUAGE TO THAT EFFECT TO BE SENT TO THE STATE.

RESOLUTION 2005-06-27/R-0.2

Council Member Harrison said if the sponsors and the University system wanted this bill to pass, then it would most likely be passed this week.  He said it was the kind of bill that did not have to pass this year, and they should take option of waiting and sending it to a study commission.  Mayor Foy agreed, noting others needed to be able to comment on it.

3a(5b).            Jason Jolley on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce regarding Privilege License Revisions (Agenda Item #6n).

Mr. Jolley noted that on behalf of the Chamber he had forwarded his written petition to the Town opposing the proposed Privilege License Fee revisions, Agenda Item #6n on tonight’s agenda.

3a(6).   Laurin Easthom regarding a Proposed Wal Mart in Chatham County.

Ms. Easthom said she was concerned about the possible arrival of a Wal Mart or other large retailer on the Town’s border to the south.  She said that many were saddened by the recent closing of Branch’s Book Store due in part from competition from nearby chain stores, and having a large retailer on the southern border would wreak havoc on the still young commercial center at Southern Village.

Ms. Easthom said such a development would also have negative impacts on the transportation system, adding congestion to the newly-widened US 15-501.  She asked that the Council not delay in investigating all means to influence this project, including but not limited to:

· possible access issues from Orange County or Chapel Hill;

· possible access issues through UNC property;

· possible action by the NC Department of Transportation and its related boards; and

· possible approvals by Orange Water and Sewer Authority.

Council Member Harrison noted he would be bringing his petition forward later in the meeting that would ask the Chatham County to discuss these and other issues with the Town.

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

3a(7).   James Carnahan, regarding a Meeting to Discuss Carolina North.

James Carnahan, Chair of the Village Project, invited the Council and others to a presentation by the Village Project of a concept plan for Carolina North.  He said it would take place on Wednesday, June 29, in the Council Chamber at 7 p.m.  Mr. Carnahan said the presentation would be televised on the public access channel.

Mr. Carnahan said a group of volunteers had worked to develop a concept plan of what Carolina North might look like given all of the information that had been gathered about the development.  He said major changes had been made since this development was first proposed, and those would be reflected in their presentation.

Announcements by Council Members.

Council Member Harrison thanked all those responsible for the Employee Appreciation Day held last Friday.  He noted some of those who received Employee of the Year Awards from their Departments:

· Chris Berndt, Senior Long Range Planning Coordinator in the Planning Department, who was a fountain of knowledge regarding land use in North Carolina and who would be retiring soon;

· Kumar Neppalli, Traffic Engineer, and M.C. Russell, Senior Engineering Inspector, who were a couple of insightful Engineers.

He said this event was always worth attending, and he hoped others would attend in the future.

Item 4 – Consent Agenda

Mayor Foy noted there was a citizen who wanted to speak on Agenda Item #4e, NC 86 and Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Study.

Wayne Pein said that the recommendations regarding the pedestrian element were reasonable, but the “informality and sloppiness” with which UNC conducted the bicycling element of this study resulted in numerous factual errors, mischaracterizations, and omissions of error.  He said he had recently prepared a critique of these recommendations, but neither the Town staff nor the University addressed his criticisms.  Mr. Pein said instead, UNC took the “low ball” approach and attached his credibility and objectivity.

Mr. Pein said that Town staff was complicitous, and parroted factual and other errors of the UNC study.  He asked that the Council read his critique, noting he would forward copies of it to them.  Mr. Pein noted that according to the NC Bicycle Facilities Planning and Design Guidelines, bicycle lanes were not advisable down long downgrades of 4 percent or more.  He said such lanes were dangerous, noting that the downgrade by the Police Department was 10 percent. Mr. Pein noted his report supported the rationale that 2 percent was the maximum.  He stated that the downgrade on South Columbia Street was 6 percent, so bicycle lanes were unsafe on that street as well.

Mr. Pein went on to discuss further aspects of UNC’s study, including high speed motoring and high speed bicycling.  He noted that putting bicycles behind a bicycle lane was a good way to allow motorists to speed up.

Mr. Pein stated that his critique provided two pages of optimal treatment for Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard that could be implemented now, yet his suggestions were not addressed.  He said that further examination of bicycling on that roadway was clearly warranted.

COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-1.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 5 – Information Reports

Council Member Kleinschmidt pulled Agenda Items #5f, Information Report on Posting of Signs regarding Road Extensions, and Item #5h, Response to Transportation Employees’ Request for Meeting Space.

Council Member Greene pulled Agenda Item #5c, Follow-up Report in Response to a Petition regarding Safety Issues on South Estes Drive at its Intersection with Fordham Boulevard.

Mayor Foy pulled Agenda Item #5a, Response to Petition regarding Consideration of Selling Town Buildings, to allow a citizen to comment.

Agenda Item #5a, Response to Petition regarding Consideration of Selling Town Buildings

Mac Clarke noted that in the Manager’s response to the petition, he stated that, “The petition states that a key element in the Manager’s response to the recommendation that the Council should consider selling one of the three buildings ‘was the statement that any or all of these buildings might be required in the near future to accommodate Town employees and other Town functions.’”  Mr. Clarke said the Manager’s response went on to say, “Our report to the Council does not contain such a statement.”

Mr. Clarke referred the Council to a budget working paper dated April 27, where the third conclusion states, “We think in particular that the Old Town Hall will be needed within a few years to meet Town public service, office space, and meeting space needs.”  He said clearly it was fair to say that the Manager at that time was of the opinion that that facility would be needed in the near future.  Mr. Clark said that what this showed him was that there was no real analysis behind the statement that the buildings would be needed.

Mr. Clarke suggested that the Council consider the development of an appropriate facilities plan so that they do have some reasonable way to judge what would be needed in the future.

Agenda Item #5c, Follow-up report in Response to a Petition regarding Safety Issues on South Estes Drive at its Intersection with Fordham Boulevard.

Council Member Greene said disappointingly but not totally surprisingly they had a roadblock from NCDOT who would not accommodate the request for the light phasing. She said the State’s response was that they did not find a significant accident problem, although they know that pedestrians had been injured at that location.  Council Member Greene said she did not want to wait until someone was killed there before it was considered to have a significant accident problem.

Council Member Greene requested that the Council not lose sight of this issue and continue to put pressure on NCDOT regarding this request.

Council Member Kleinschmidt agreed with Council Member Greene.  He said that when the Town received responses from NCDOT that stated there was not a significant problem, that they provide the accident statistics for a given location that caused them to declare it to be “not significant.”

Mayor Foy asked Mr. Horton if they knew what the accident history was at that intersection.  Mr. Horton responded that was correct.  Mayor Foy requested that he forward that to the Council.

Council Member Kleinschmidt reiterated that he wanted to request that NCDOT provide that information to justify their statements as to why something was not a significant accident problem.

Council Member Greene agreed, noting that NCDOT should tell them what they feel was significant and what was not.

Council Member Kleinschmidt said such information would put citizens in a better position to question these decisions by NCDOT by directly lobbying them rather than through the Council.  He said he specifically wanted explanations of what constituted a lack of significant accidents or events at particular intersections.

Mayor Foy suggested that the staff forward a copy of that intersection’s accident history and request that NCDOT respond to what there was about those statistics that were not significant, and ask them how many more accidents would be required in order for it to be considered significant.

THE COUNCIL AGREED BY CONSENSUS TO HAVE STAFF FORWARD A COPY OF THAT INTERSECTION’S ACCIDENT HISTORY AND REQUEST THAT NCDOT RESPOND TO WHAT THERE WAS ABOUT THOSE STATISTICS THAT WERE NOT SIGNIFICANT, AND ASK THEM HOW MANY MORE ACCIDENTS WOULD BE REQUIRED IN ORDER FOR IT TO BE CONSIDERED SIGNIFICANT.

Council Member Ward said he would also like to know if NCDOT understood the nature of that intersection, which was basically an entrance into a housing development and was not a thru street.  He said it had a dynamic that was unique and had a significant pedestrian component that many intersections did not have.  Council Member Ward stated that not addressing that component was disappointing.

Agenda Item #5f, Information Report on Posting of Signs regarding Road Extensions.

Council Member Kleinschmidt said on page 2 of the report, there was a statement that read, “We believe that the stipulation in the Zoning Compliance Permit requires the installation of signage at stub-out but that it was never installed.” Given that, he asked, what became of it now?  Council Member Kleinschmidt said would the sign be erected, and would the developer be charged for violating the terms of the Special Use Permit.  Mr. Horton responded that they would enforce the stipulation and if necessary would install the sign themselves.  He stated he believed the problem was the Town’s failure to enforce the stipulation.  Mr. Horton said he believed that if they had asked the developer to erect the sign they would have done so.

Council Member Greene noted that there was a fairly new law on required disclosures that stipulated that sellers of property and their real estate agents had to disclose such things as whether there was a road stub-out or whether there were restrictions on the property.  She said we had an unfortunate situation with some homeowners coming to the Council to complain that they knew noting about the stub-out to a new road.  Council Member Greene said the Town was at fault, but possibly so were the sellers and real estate agents of such property.

Council Member Strom said the report contained a rendering of what such a stub-out sign would look like, and suggested adding a line that stated “for information, contact…”, and have a phone number for either the Engineering or Planning Department so that citizens were led to the right place.

Council Member Kleinschmidt said that early purchasers of property in the Larkspur development would not have had the opportunity to drive up and see that stub-out because it was not in existence.  So, he said, the burden belonged to the developer in that case.  Council Member Kleinschmidt said that once it was built out the Town failed to enforce, but there were purchases that were not notified in advance of that stub-out being built.

Mayor Foy said it sounded as if the Council was suggesting that stub-outs be shown on the plats in future.  Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos responded that the stub-outs should be on the recorded plat, and the title attorney should find that plat and find the notation of the stub-out.  He said there was also the issue of should the stub-out be noted at the end of the phasing of a development or at the end of build-out of all phases.  Mr. Karpinos said for purchasers of property, it should be at the end of each phase.  Mr. Horton said the staff’s opinion was that was the way it should be done.

Agenda Item #5h, Response to Transportation Employees’ Request for Meeting Space.

Council Member Kleinschmidt said while he understood the staff’s position regarding the need for space, he asked the Council to request that the policy be changed to accommodate the employees’ request for use of the meeting room.  He said he believed they constituted a group that could be distinguished from other kinds of groups, noting they were regular users of the space when working, and that the proposed meeting times could be arranged in such a way as to not require extra security costs in order for the meetings to occur.  Council Member Kleinschmidt said it was his understanding that the meetings would occur during the day so that employees not on duty could attend, and if the meetings were scheduled on different days of the week then the Department would not have to lose a meeting room for an entire day.  He said he did not believe that was unreasonable, and that it would be an appropriate employee/management policy.

Ashaki Binta, an employee of the Transportation Department, said they had requested the Sanitation Meeting Room at Public Works because it was preferred by the employees.   She said she believed its use would facilitate the workers meeting and working together to solve problems and address issues of concern.  Ms. Binta requested that the Council honor their request.

Mayor Foy asked what types of meeting space they had used in other areas.  Ms. Binta responded that in Durham they had used union halls that were available as meeting space, but employees preferred to meet where they worked.

Mayor Foy said there were regularly scheduled meetings between Town staff and Transportation employees, and asked if it were possible to designate a room that could be used during these negotiations so that they know they have a space to meet for the next six months or for however long these meetings would take place.  Mr. Horton replied that they would make that a part of the discussions if the Council wished.  Mayor Foy said he believed we should make it part of the discussion and say that they could meet at least for the next six months and discuss this as part of the overall considerations.

Council Member Kleinschmidt said he was not sure what Mr. Horton meant by making this a apart of the overall discussion.  Mr. Horton responded that he understood that what the Mayor had asked was whether or not we could discuss the issue of meeting space and find agreement on that.

Council Member Greene asked what meeting space?  Mr. Horton said he had not responded to that, and would like an opportunity to have Deputy Town Manager Miller, who had worked with the employees, respond to her concerns about using this particular meeting space during normal work hours.

Ms. Miller said they while they recognize that the Sanitation Meeting Room was convenient, there were a number of problem areas.  She noted that while members of UE Local 150 were employees, the group could not be considered a Town employee group because they were functioning as a union.

Ms. Miller said regarding use of the Sanitation Meeting Room, there was already a shortage of meeting space in that location and that room was often used throughout the day by various employees for different purposes because of the lack of space elsewhere.  She said in addition, legally the meetings had to be open to the public.  Ms. Miller said another concern was that the restrooms were located upstairs and would not be accessible to persons with mobility impairments.

Ms. Miller said another issue that needed to be addressed was that if the meetings were held after hours or on weekends that facility was gated and closed.  She said should meetings occur when the facility was closed then in order to protect the Town’s assets security would have to be provided to open and close the facility.

Mayor Foy said he was suggesting that for the next several months there would be ongoing meetings, and part of the discussion would be how to address a long term solution to meeting space.  For the short term, he said, designate a meeting space during regular hours at a certain time and a certain day if necessary over the next three months so that there was some assurance that workers could meet during July, August and September.  Mayor Foy said then there could be some different advice to the Council so that a decision could be made.  He said that way the workers could feel that they were on an equal footing and not at a disadvantage with the staff.  Mr. Horton said they would need to be willing to do the same for any other employee group who made a similar request, and so long as the Council was willing for them to do that and so long as the hours and the number of days were reasonably limited he believed they could work it out.

Council Member Harrison asked exactly what was Council Member Kleinschmidt’s proposed change in the policy.  Council Member Kleinschmidt said he believed we should declare that this organization was of the type that could meet in this space to eliminate any local or legal impediment to their meeting, and that they direct the staff to coordinate with them the appropriate times.  He said that it should not be done in such a way as to deny the use of the room for an extended period of time by the Department, and he believed that the request by the organization would not do that.  Council Member Kleinschmidt said he did not believe allowing the organization to meet should require any additional expense for security personnel, but added he did not believe the request would require that.

Council Member Greene said that employees could not engage in collective bargaining, but they did have a Constitutional right to engage in free association.  She said they should do what was reasonable to reasonably accommodate their request for a designated meeting space for regular meetings.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins said she wanted to look at this group as not just a group from the community, but as a group of employees who were gathering together for a common interest to have their workplace needs addressed.  She said she believed it would help their relationship with employees to be as accommodating as possible, and this facility was convenient for them.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins said she did not believe they had anything to fear by working with the union because there were certain things that could not be by law.  She said she would like to approach this with as much accommodation and support and still carry on business.  Mayor pro tem Wiggins said she did not believe the employees would make demands that would interfere with the normal work flow of the Town.  She said if we were more accommodating it may help to prevent more adversarial relationships later on.

Council Member Verkerk agreed with Mayor pro tem Wiggins’ remarks.

Mayor Foy said the question then would be whether the Council wanted to change the policy or make an exception to the policy for this group.

Council Member Verkerk suggested making an exception to the policy for the next three months since it was obvious they needed to think about this.  But in the meantime, she would like the employees to be able to meet in their workplace.

Mayor Foy asked the Manager if he understood the Council’s wishes.  Mr. Horton replied he did, adding he hoped that his earlier comment regarding the number of hours and the number of days was a reasonable comment.

THE COUNCIL AGREED BY CONSENSUS TO GRANT A THREE-MONTH EXCEPTION TO THE MEETING ROOM POLICY TO ALLOW THE TRANSPORTATION EMPLOYEES TO SCHEDULE TIMES TO MEET IN THE SANITATION MEETING ROOM DURING NORMAL WORKING HOURS.

Item 6 – Considerations of Items Regarding the 2005-2006 Budget

Mr. Horton thanked the Council for its hard work and diligence in regard to the proposed budget.  He said they had prepared a final set of materials for the Council’s consideration that they believe accurately and faithfully reflect the decisions that the Council had made.  Mr. Horton said some alternate proposals had been prepared in case the Council wished to consider them, one of which would direct staff to work towards the preparation of a report on a play plan with 3 percent steps.  He said if the Council decided it wished to do that, they would bring a report forward in time for the 2006-2007 budget deliberations.

Mr. Horton said they recommend that the Council adopt pay the recommendation of 3.78 percent for merit increases.  He said they continue to believe that would accomplish the most good for employees, but they were not averse to considering a different pay plan.  Mr. Horton noted that later in the meeting the establishment of a committee to review the pay plan would be discussed.  He said he believed that for this year, the Council should grant the 3.78 percent merit increases for those employees on steps, and an amount that would average that for employees who were above the job rate.

Mr. Horton said the only change that had occurred since the last discussion was that the school system had seen fit to continue to support school resource officers, and were pleased to have gotten that information in time to include it in this budget.

Mayor Foy clarified that if the Council adopted Resolution R-13, it would adopt the budget as crafted to date.  But, he said, they could also pull out individual items for separate consideration.

Mayor Foy said regarding the 3 percent range adjustments, at the last budget meeting he had suggested moving to the 3 percent ranges.  However, he said he had now been persuaded by the Manager’s contention that the employees had not had time to see this proposal and talk about it so he was withdrawing his support for that.  Mayor Foy said he would support the resolution coming forward later tonight that would direct the Manager to conduct such studies as necessary including review by employees, so that employees could see what the effect would be and how it would work to have a 3 percent step next year.  He said doing that made more sense in our current inflationary environment and would lead to a more satisfactory budget process for everyone.

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-13.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY  (9-0).

Item 7 – Performance Motors – Application for a Special

Use Permit Modification

Senior Development Coordinator Gene Poveromo noted this was a continuation of the June 20 public hearing.  He said there were three key issues and some minor edits to be discussed this evening.  Mr. Poveromo said at the Council’s places were revised stipulations regarding landscape buffers as well as a summary of the Community Design Commission’s (CDC) comments.

Mr. Poveromo said the first issue was that they had discovered an error in the Traffic Impact Analysis, so they had gotten in touch with the Town’s traffic consultant and they had prepared an addendum to the Traffic Impact Analysis. He said the conclusion of the original analysis had shown no significant change, so they had now added some floor area that was omitted from the first analysis.  Mr. Poveromo said a copy of the analysis was located on page 29 of the memo.

Mr. Poveromo said the second issue had to do with a specimen tree, noting there had been some question by the Council in preserving a 22-inch oak tree along Fordham Boulevard.  He said the Council had heard an argument from the applicant about how difficult it would be to preserve that tree, and the Manager’s revised recommendation was to allow the applicant to remove that tree, and that was supported by the CDC.  Alternatively, Mr. Poveromo said, the Planning Board’s resolution, Resolution B, had a stipulation that preserved the tree, so the Council could consider that if they chose.

Mr. Poveromo said the next key issue was bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure.  He said on June 20 a Council member had requested that the Metropolitan Planning Organization Feasibility Study be considered in regard to making crosswalk improvements and providing a bike lane at the intersection of Old Durham Road, Scarlette Drive, and Fordham boulevard.  Mr. Poveromo noted that the Manager’s revised recommendation was that a bike lane be provided and that the Metropolitan Planning Organization be contacted and asked to review the improvements as part of the final plan.

Mr. Poveromo said the landscape buffer edits mentioned earlier more clearly reflect the Manager’s recommendation for alternate buffers along Old Durham Road and along the service road on Fordham Boulevard.  He noted those were stipulations 20, 21, and 24 in the resolution.

Phil Post, speaking for the applicant, said they were appreciative of the support they had received from the CDC and other advisory boards, as well as the diligent work of the staff and the Manager.  He said they supported adoption of Resolution A and asked for the Council’s approval.

Council Member Harrison said that a citizen who had spoken at the public hearing had highlighted some problems, one of which was use of the employee lot for dealership cars.  He said he believed they had learned not to put cars in the NCDOT right-of-way.  He said these issues may not be directly related to the SUP but they were still there and were still happening, and wanted it on the record that the applicant was requested to fix them.

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO ADJOURN THE PUBLIC HEARING.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Mayor Foy said he did not object to the SUP, but did not agree with the Manager’s recommendation to allow the tree to be removed.

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION R-21a.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED 8-1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS GREENE, HARRISON, HILL, KLEINSCHMIDT, STROM, VERKERK, WARD, AND WIGGINS VOTING AYE, AND MAYOR FOY VOTING NAY.

Item 8 – Orange County Senior Center – Application for a

Special Use Permit Modification

Acting Planning Director J.B. Culpepper noted this was a continuation of a public hearing held on June 20.  She stated at that time they had recommended that the applicant construct crosswalk improvements on Homestead Road at the park entrance prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.  Ms. Culpepper said they had revised that recommendation, and while the resolution still called for the crosswalk, the revised language indicated if the Town and the NCDOT approve the plans for the crosswalk, then it would be constructed at that time.  She noted the revised language did not link construction of the crosswalk to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.

Ms. Culpepper stated that the Manager’s recommendation was for adoption of Resolution A with the revised language noted.

Mayor Foy asked for clarification, stating that if the crosswalk was approved two years from now, would the Senior Center be responsible for it.  Ms. Culpepper stated that was correct.

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO ADJOURN THE PUBLIC HEARING.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Mayor pro tem Wiggins noted that Orange County Commissioner Moses Carey had expressed concern about that stipulation, in that if the crosswalk was approved sometime in the future then its construction should be a collaborative effort rather than the County’s responsibility.  She said the Commissioners had discussed this at their last meeting and were somewhat critical of the Town for adding cost to the project.  Mayor pro tem Wiggins said the Commissioners had been pleased that the Manager had revised that particular stipulation so that the project could go forward without requiring additional funds from them.  She added that there was a lingering concern that the County not have total financial responsibility into the future.

Mr. Horton said clearly this was a decision for the Council to make.  He added they believe there was a basis for the recommendation.

Council Member Greene said that since there was some potential ambiguity here about who would be responsible for paying for the crosswalk, for the benefit of future Councils it should be noted that it was the Town’s expectation that the applicant would pay for the crosswalk.

Mr. Horton noted that the stipulations in the resolution would have to be carried out by June 27, 2008, and if they were not then the applicant would be required to request an extension of time in order to be allowed to construct the crosswalk at a later time.  He said one option the Council could take would be to revise the stipulation and include a time limit on it, then if the applicant was not able to obtain approval from NCDOT by June 27, 2008, then the requirement is waived.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins said she favored that option.

Council Member Ward said the report indicated that the applicant was willing to make a payment-in-lieu for the stipulated crosswalk improvements.  He said it seemed to him that the applicant would not want the ambiguity of the cost and when this would face them, since the approval process with NCDOT as well as the design was uncertain.  Council Member Ward asked if they could include a dollar figure in the stipulations that would reasonably cover the cost of the improvements, thereby removing any ambiguity.  Ms. Culpepper stated that Traffic Engineer Kumar Neppalli had suggested a figure of $10,000.

Council Member Ward asked Mr. Horton could language be included that would state a figure of “up to $10,000.”  Mr. Horton replied the Council could require the applicant to make a payment-in-lieu of $10,000 if the crosswalk was not constructed by June 27, 2008.

COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION R-22a AS AMENDED TO INCLUDE AT THE END OF STIPULATION #5 THAT PHRASE “PROVIDED THAT IF THE NCDOT DOES NOT APPROVE THE PLANS IN TIME TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS BY THE TIME OF COMPLETION, THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE A PAYMENT-IN-LIEU FOR SUCH IMPROVEMENTS OF $10,000”.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 9 – Office/Institutional-4 Zoning District Annual Transportation Report

Mr. Poveromo stated that this was a follow-up to the June 15 public hearing in which the Council heard some concerns from citizens regarding a Development Plan Report on Transportation for development in the Office/Institutional-4 (OI-4) zoning district.  He indicated that Town staff had met with UNC representatives and neighbors and offered two revisions to the guidelines.  Mr. Poveromo said the guidelines were now proposing that the report occur every year, and that it include a brief overview of existing and proposed traffic calming measures in adjacent neighborhoods.

Joyce Brown said she was speaking for herself, but believed her statements would reflect the sentiments of those who had worked on this issue, neighborhoods that were close to the OI-4 zone, as well as several other neighborhood organizations that had participated in the previous discussions.  She said she was grateful for the progress that had been made and was pleased with the resolution and guidelines that were before the Council for consideration.  Ms. Brown thanked the Council for its clear and strong directions on the issue, and thanked the Manager and staff, particular Kumar Neppalli for the work on this document.  She thanked the University for the important part it had played in bringing them to this point.

COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-23.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 10 – Rogers Road Small Area Plan

Ms. Culpepper said on June 15 the Council considered an item on the Planning Department’s work load, and at that time the Council asked how a Small Area Plan for the Rogers Road area might be accomplished this fall.  She said their recommendation was that work on a Small Area Plan occur after the completion of the four Neighborhood Conservation Districts (NCD) next June.  Ms. Culpepper said they recommended that the work be led by the Planning Board and supported by Town staff as with previous such plans.

Council Member Ward said he realized the reality of the significant work load that had already been placed on the Planning Department, and accepted the description of the process as described by Ms. Culpepper.  He said we have to be committed to this, and if not it would be another example of how a neighborhood who did not have the same voice as others got shortchanged and forgotten.  Council Member Ward said he did not want that discussion to come up again.  He said he would personally remind the Council of this in January, so that as soon as the NCD process was completed next June, work on the Rogers Road Small Area Plan would begin.

Council Member Ward asked if he was correct in his understanding that Town staff would have the capacity to do this without a consultant.  Mr. Horton said he believed so, and that this would be the best way to do this type of work.  He said it was important to have a group of citizens led by the Planning Board but involving many others from the community most directly affected involved. Unlike a neighborhood where the rules were clearly in place, he said, they would be developing the rules for a new neighborhood that would be constructed in part in addition to the neighborhood that was already there.

Council Member Ward asked that the Manager keep the Council abreast of his expectation over the next nine months that this schedule was still realistic, and if not what they could do to get it on track.  He said that was a conversation he did not want, either.  Mr. Horton said they were conscientious about lamenting their inability to do things on occasion, and they would certainly let them know of any difficulties.

Council Member Kleinschmidt said it was disappointing to him that this would have to be put off until June.  He said on June 15 when the Council discussed the work load, the NCD question was present and there was some discussion about hiring a consultant and different options were offered.  Council Member Kleinschmidt said he thought they would be able to free up some staff time and they would then not have to delay this.  He noted that since one thing got “bumped off” the list, why didn’t this get moved up.  Mr. Horton said when this was discussed on June 15, he had commented that they did not believe they could do the Rogers Road Small Area Plan at all given resources that were available, and that was including the assumption that the consultant would take on the major portion of the work load for the NCD process.

Mr. Horton said one of the key limitations was the Planning Board’s time in addition to the staff time that was involved.  He said right now the Planning Department remained short staffed because the salary that would normally be paid to a new employee would be eaten up by the consultant.  Mr. Horton said we still have the condition that another senior level staff member would be leaving at the end of July, but was pleased she had agreed to continue on a part-time basis to work on economic development initiatives in the downtown. He added they still had the challenge of having one employee on parental leave.  Mr. Horton said what was being proposed was the best they could offer.

Council Member Greene said Demolition by Neglect was at the bottom of the top priority list.  She asked wasn’t that just about done?  Ms. Culpepper said the revised ordinance needed to be sent to the Planning Board, and that the Board of Adjustment had made revisions.  She said they hoped to have it back to the Council this fall, adding there was not much left to do.

Council Member Strom said he did not think it was wise to wait until the strategic planning retreat to have another conversation about long range planning.  He said it was disappointing that they were in a position that they could not move ahead on this Small Area Plan, and at the risk of lobbying for another meeting he believed it would make sense for the Council to have either a late summer retreat or a work session in the fall about where they were headed in their strategic planning so that they could define the type of projects and needs that they wanted to emphasize.  Council Member Strom stated that the community was changing dramatically and they had different needs than they had even a short time ago.  He suggested that the Council schedule a planning retreat in late summer or early fall so that they could position themselves from a personnel perspective to restate and redefine Council goals.  Council Member Strom said just from an affordable housing point of view, this neighborhood had an enormous impact and potential.

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT, THAT THE MAYOR SCHEDULE A PLANNING RETREAT IN LATE AUGUST OR EARLY SEPTEMBER TO DISCUSS STRATEGIC PLANNING.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 11 – Affordable Housing

11a.     Council Task Force on Inclusionary Zoning (Council Members Greene, Hill, Kleinschmidt, and Strom)

Council Member Greene stated that on April 27 the Council had conducted a work session on inclusionary zoning, and made the decision to go forward with developing an inclusionary zoning ordinance that would in effect have much stronger requirements for affordable housing.  She said a Council Task Force was formed, and they had met with the Town Attorney to discuss how to more forward with the ordinance.

Council Member Greene said at the work session the Council recognized that before work begins some things needed to be done including a study of what the need was, and the staff would be working on that.  What the Council needed to think about, she said, was setting up a task force of citizens to help craft the ordinance.  Council Member Greene said the Council Task Force was proposing that the task force be made up of approximately 15 to 18 persons and include, without limitation, persons with particular professional experience and interest:

· Residential Land Development

· Affordable Housing Development (3)

· Banking (Development Financing)

· Residential Real Estate

· Home Mortgage Finance

· Home Building/Contracting

· Chamber of Commerce

· Economist/Urban Planning (academic background)

· Council (2)

· UNC Housing Staff

· Neighborhood Representatives (2)

· Persons needed workforce housing (2)

Council Member Greene asked for the Council’s comments on the composition of the task force so that recruitment could begin as soon as possible.  Then in September, she said, the Council Task Force could complete a charge for the Council’s adoption and the task force could then be appointed and begin its work.

Mayor Foy stated that he believed this was the right way to proceed, noting that having a citizens’ task force to develop an ordinance would result in community buy-in.

MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-24.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY  (9-0).

Mr. Karpinos confirmed that it was the Council’s intention to begin recruitment now for the task force, so that when the Council meets in September they could consider the pool of applicants and make appointments.  Council Member Greene stated that was correct.

11b.     Report on Affordable Housing Proposal Work Plan Initiatives

Senior Long Range Planning Coordinator Chris Berndt stated that on April 27 the Council had looked at a number of different initiatives:

· Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance

· Potential deletion of size restricted house ordinance provisions

· Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan regarding payment-in-lieu

· Operating assistance

· Options for property tax payment assistance

Ms. Berndt briefly reviewed the two resolutions before the Council for consideration. She said that Resolution A would establish a schedule and process for the inclusionary zoning starting with the summer of 2005 doing background work where a draft ordinance would be prepared and advertising for task force members.  She said in September the Council would establish the task force and they would begin their work, with a report scheduled to come to the Council the end of November.  Ms. Berndt said this should put the Council in position to hold a public hearing in January 2006, and then consider enactment of the ordinance in February.

Ms. Berndt stated that Resolution B related to the Comprehensive Plan amendment, and if adopted would call a public hearing for September 26, 2005 with consideration at the end of October.

COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION R-24.1a.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-24.1b.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 12 – Presentation by Consultant on Energy Bank

Mayor Foy noted that the Council Committee on Sustainability, Energy and Environment (SEE), made up of Council Members Verkerk, Strom and Ward, and tonight the Council would hear a report from the consultant.

Council Member Verkerk, Chair of the Council Committee, noted that the Energy Bank was approved by voters in 2003.  She stated that Brenda Morawa of BVM Engineering, the Town’s consultant, would discuss the draft Energy Bank concept.

Senior Planner Phil Hervey commented that this project was funded by a State Energy Office grant that had also paid for energy efficiency improvements and the solar panels now located at Fire Station 1.

Ms. Morawa said tonight she wanted to discuss the Energy Bank concept and the mechanics of that, as well as the implementation which would include enrollment and savings calculations.  She said she would then give the Council of the energy audits performed for Fire Station 1 and the Town Hall.

Ms. Morawa stated that the basic concept of the Energy Bank was to encourage energy efficiency improvements, and in addition it was intended to loan funds and keep track of savings.  She displayed a diagram of the schematic approach that the SEE had developed along with staff.  Ms. Morawa said it was important to note that the Energy Bank was intended to supplement Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) for better performance, and any savings realized would go back into the Energy Bank.  She said such a concept could be started through a CIP project or by Public Works with a general energy project.

Ms. Morawa stated when a project was enrolled in the Energy Bank you would want to make sure there were potential savings, and for larger scale projects she recommended that energy audits be performed.  She said minimum qualifications for enrollment in the Energy Bank that still need to be set up were the payback period, the availability of funds, the expected useful life, and terms for payback to the Energy Bank.

Ms. Morawa noted that savings calculations could be straightforward or extremely complex, but cautioned not to spend the savings in calculating savings.  She stated whether corrections or adjustments were made is key, for such things like the weather, utility rates, occupancy, changes in the facility, operating parameters, and other improvements.  Ms. Morawa said that utility management software could be used to correct for all of those things.  She said they had decided as a group to keep the process simple and not correct for all of those issues unless it was deemed necessary.

Ms. Morawa displayed a chart with an example of how calculations were performed. Using IFC window replacement as an example, she noted that the calculation contained data from the previous year and the current year, with the savings calculated quarterly.  Ms. Morawa said the chart showed an aggregate savings of $3,000 for the year.

Council Member Verkerk asked if the project included replacement of all windows at IFC.  Ms. Morawa said she was not familiar with the project but believed that all the windows had been replaced.  She added that typically you did not see that kind of savings, which amounted to about 50 percent, with these types of improvements.

Mayor Foy asked how did they know that the energy savings came from the windows.  Ms. Morawa responded that they didn’t.  She said it was a challenge to validate the energy savings, so some metering and modeling would be necessary.  Ms. Morawa reiterated that you would have to be careful not to spend all of your savings conducting that modeling.  She said that all of the savings realized were internal savings for the Town, so extensive metering or modeling should not be necessary.  Ms. Morawa said you never know exactly where the savings came from unless you metered it, but you cannot meter windows.

Ms. Morawa provided a brief overview of the energy audits and energy modeling conducted at Fire Station 1 and the Town Hall.  She said they created models of the buildings, with all of the attributes of the buildings included, for instance the walls, the windows, and the roofs, all of which affect the energy consumption of the buildings.

Ms. Morawa displayed a chart of the energy calculation for Fire Station 1.  She said they had looked at adding more roof insulation, wall insulation, replacing bay doors and windows.  Ms. Morawa noted that the information highlighted in yellow were the items that they had decided to implement.  She noted they were anticipating savings of $2,700 a year in energy savings based on about $8,000 a year in energy costs.

Council Member Hill asked where on the graph for the IFC window replacement was the actual cost of the replacement.  Ms. Morawa stated that information was not included.  Council Member Hill said then they didn’t know if they spent $50,000 to save $2,000 a year.  He said you would want to look at what you spent compared to what you saved.  Ms. Morawa said that was correct.

Mr. Hervey stated that the cost of the windows was a little over $30,000 and was paid for through a grant, and the solar panels were around $8,000.  He added that the photovoltaic panels yet to be installed were around $35,000, mostly paid for by a grant.

Council Member Kleinschmidt noted that the windows were going to be replaced in any case, so the cost was not as important.  Ms. Morawa said the grant monies made the projects more attractive that if they had been funded by the Town.

Mayor Foy asked what happened to the savings, such as the $3,000 saved at the IFC Shelter.  Ms. Morawa said with respect to the Fire Station, that project was not enrolled in the Energy Bank because it did not yet exist, so any savings were rolled back into the operating costs for the building.  Mayor Foy said if they had an Energy Bank, those funds would be deposited there.  Ms. Morawa replied that was correct.  She said when a project was enrolled certain factors would be stipulated, such as how much we expect to save, over what period of time, what was the first cost, and how would the calculations be performed.

Council Member Hill said suppose that with rising utility costs you are saving on a project dwindle.  He asked would the payments to the Energy Bank reduce accordingly.  Ms. Morawa said that was correct, because the calculation would be made using a comparison to the previous year’s data.

Council Member Verkerk said this discussion pinpoints just how complicated this could get.  She said they were focusing on dollars, and she believed they were missing what was most important.  Council Member Verkerk said that by using an Energy Bank they were reducing their use of fuel, which to her was the main goal, with the cost savings being secondary.  Ms. Morawa said another important aspect of this was the reduction long term in pollution that was created by generating the electricity.

Mayor Foy noted that this would come back to the Council in the fall once it had been refined, and then they would make some decisions on how to proceed.

Item 13 – Recreation Facilities

13a.     Acceptance of Parks and Recreation Trust Fund Grant and revision of Phasing Plan for Southern Community Park Grant.

Assistant Parks and Recreation Director Bill Webster stated that the Town had received a grant in the amount of $500,000 from the Parks and Recreation Trust Fund, and they now had the goal of deciding how to use those funds.  He noted that both the Parks and Recreation Commission and the County Project Planning Committee (PPC) had submitted recommendations, included with the Council’s materials.  Mr. Webster said the recommendation before the Council included lights for three athletic fields, a maintenance building, two basketball courts, and additional $23,000 for public art, and enhancements for the play area if any funding remained.

Mr. Webster said a question had been raised about the size of the maintenance building, and had asked Public Works to analyze that.  He said that analysis showed that a smaller building was warranted, so the cost for the maintenance building was revised to about $65,000, a significantly lower amount that what was first estimated.

Diane VandenBroek, a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission, but speaking as a citizen, noted that the Commission had voted to use the funds for the lights, an in-line hockey court, the basketball courts, and the play area.  She said she was disturbed to see that the hockey court was removed and in its place was a maintenance building and additional funds for public art.

Ms. VandenBroek said there was no in-line hockey court in the County, and the maintenance building was for Public Works.  She added that the public art portion had nothing to do with Parks and Recreation programs.  Ms. VandenBroek strongly urged the Council to use the grant to fund those items recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission.

Mark Marcopolis stated he was one of a growing number of local roller hockey enthusiasts, adding it was a growing sport.  He said many of our youth play roller hockey in the neighborhoods, on the streets and in cul-de-sacs.  Mr. Marcopolis stated these youth played in leagues in Cary and elsewhere because there were no facilities near their homes for this growing sport.  He commented that roller hockey was a great way to exercise, adding it was low-impact so aging athletes such as him could participate.  Mr. Marcopolis said it filled a real need for fitness in the community.

Mr. Marcopolis asked the Council to use the grant funds to include an in-line hockey court in the park plans.  He said it would also be helpful if when building the parking lot at the park that it be built flat.  Mr. Marcopolis said then it could be used for hockey when not in use, adding all they really needed was space.  He said a lot of parking lots contained islands or other barriers, and if the Town built any additional parking lots to consider keeping it flat.

Dan London, coach of the UNC roller hockey team, said he had been coaching the team since its inception five years ago.  He said the first year they had seven participants, and this year they had 35.  Mr. London said in the beginning they played teams from colleges close by, but now play teams from Tennessee, Kentucky and other states.  He said the sport was expanding, and the players were coming from the streets and parking lots of their hometowns.  Mr. London encouraged the Town to build a hockey court, and volunteered his time to come out and teach youth the game and to help set up a Town league.

Steve Irving encouraged the Town to build the hockey court.  He said that even though the Parks and Recreation Commission had a better feel for the Chapel Hill community and its interests, their recommendation was dropped in favor of the PPC. Mr. Horton noted that the Committee had local representation as well.

Mr. Irving said there was a demand for in-line hockey in Chapel Hill as well as the County.  He said in his neighborhood the youth play in the streets and cul-de-sacs, and it was not unusual to see nets set up in driveways and children practicing.  Mr. Irving asked the Council to provide a safe place for these kids to go and play hockey.  He said that Chapel Hill prided itself on its diversity and uniqueness, and providing an in-line hockey court would set Southern Community Park apart from other facilities.

Tim Crothers said he and his group play hockey every Saturday in a parking lot, and once every couple of weeks that have a random stranger approach them to ask about the game and how to get involved.  He said that had resulted in a group of about 100 people who they had on a contact list.  Mr. Crothers said that was an indication of the growing interest in roller hockey.

Mr. Crothers said the problem was that they had to work with poor facilities.  He said the lot they were using at this time had a 10 percent to 12 percent grade, so the teams were designated as the “up hill” or the “down hill” team.  Mr. Crothers said it was their hope that facilities could be provided that would allow those interested to have a safe place to play.

Joe Patterson said he was an avid supporter of roller hockey.  He said there was a huge group of people in Chapel Hill who wanted to play, but there was no place to do so.  Mr. Patterson commented that there were many facilities for every other athletic endeavor in Town, and nothing for roller hockey.  He urged the Council to accept the recommendation of the Parks and Recreation Commission and include an in-line hockey court at the park.

Anson Dorrance, coach of the UNC Women’s Soccer Team, commented that when he first began playing his team used a tennis court, but the skates began to tear up the surface so they were kicked off.  He said now they were chased from one place to another, and were constantly struggling to find places to play.  Mr. Dorrance said at this time they were using a park and ride lot, but it was not the ideal place to play.

Mr. Dorrance said that Mr. Marcopolis was correct when he stated that in-line hockey was a game that you could continue to play as you age.  He said they had people who play ranging in age from high school to late 50s, both men and women.  Mr. Dorrance said he knew that there was a large population in Town that wanted to play.

Mr. Dorrance said he had chosen to live here because he loved the Town, and the Council had always made wise decisions for the community.  He said that they were successful in 80% to 90% of their recruitments, in part because of the beauty of Chapel Hill.  Mr. Dorrance said that if the Council agreed to place an in-line hockey court at Southern Community Park that it would have remarkable use, from every age group.  He said he and his hockey team were hoping the Council would support it.

Mayor Foy clarified that the PPC was the group that had been shepherding this project, noting that the funding for the park and the funding for the aquatics center were funded in part by the Town and in part by the County, so it was a collaboration.  He said that he and Council Member Strom were the Council’s representatives on the PPC, and at last week’s meeting they had discussed how to spend this grant.

Mayor Foy said he had questioned whether all of the lights needed to be put in, since that was $300,000 of the $500,000 grant.  He had suggested lighting only one field but staff had said it was not cost effective, that you did all or nothing.  Mayor Foy said the Orange County Parks Director had noted that if all the lights were put in then that would extend the playing time on the fields, resulting in a big job to maintain them.  He said the Town’s Public Works director was present at the meeting and explained that maintenance of the fields involved moving equipment from the Public Works facility at least three to four times a week.

Mayor Foy said the conclusion was that if these added enhancements were made then it was illogical to expect the staff to deal with the burden of moving maintenance equipment, resulting in the decision to provide a maintenance building.  He said even though it was not an exciting amenity, the maintenance building was necessary if they were going to put in the lights.  Mayor Foy said that used up $375,000, leaving only $125,000 for other uses.

Regarding the dollars for public art, Mayor Foy said he believed that this Council had been a strong proponent, and the public art planned for the park would be an attraction rather than passive.  He said he felt strongly that the additional dollars should be dedicated so that the public art planned for the park could be implemented, noting that much of the original funds set aside for the art had been used during the planning phase.

Mayor Foy pointed out that the PPC’s recommendation was actually $75,000 less than the grant amount.  He suggested it might be possible to build the hockey court and the basketball courts together for around $100,000.

Council Member Strom said that the $150,000 suggested by the Parks and Recreation Commission for the in-line hockey court was for an elaborate facility.  He said the Mayor’s suggestion that they build the two basketball courts with a large flat surface for the hockey players might be the answer.  Mayor Foy said they had put aside the space for it, so maybe it could be added in phases.

Council Member Hill asked why was the cost for the maintenance building coming out of the grant funds.  He said it appeared to him that it could be paid for with Public Works funds, since it would house their equipment.  Council Member Hill stated that Public Works mowed grass at Cedar Falls and other places, and there were no maintenance buildings there that he knew of.  He asked if that was paid for out of the Parks and Recreation Department’s budget or from Public Work’s budget.  Mr. Horton said at this time it was not charged back to the Parks and Recreation Department.

Council Member Hill said that in this instance, it appeared that the grant for the park was being used to subsidize a maintenance building for Public Works.  Mr. Horton said once the Town moved to full cost accounting, these types of items would be charged back to Parks and Recreation.  Council Member Hill said it seemed reasonable to him to put the cost of the building elsewhere and use those funds to build the in-line hockey court.

Mr. Webster said their research into in-line hockey courts was that to have a true hockey experience it would cost around $150,000.  He said we could provide a slab for people to skate on for far less.  Mr. Webster said what their strategy would be when they bid the park project was to include in the base bid the grading, road improvements and traffic calming.  He said that most likely they would do the recreational facilities and add alternates, because the climate in the construction industry was unpredictable and did not know how much money they would have.

Mr. Webster said it may be that some of the things they wanted to do would fall out, and when the bids came back to the Council for approval the Council would then have the opportunity to look at the priorities.  He said if they took the approach of providing a slab, they might be able to bid both of the items and then see what happened.  Mr. Webster said at this point their estimates were preliminary, and it may be that either more or less money was available.

Council Member Harrison asked what was it about the maintenance building that cost $75,000.  Mr. Webster said it was based on an estimate of $85 per square foot for a basic building.  He said that because they occasionally have problems with vandalism, the building would have strong doors and other features.  Mr. Webster said another reason to have a sturdy building was that it would house the irrigation switching equipment and controls.  He said they would be planning a smaller building than what was originally proposed, and they estimated the cost at $65,000.

Council Member Ward said having an in-line hockey court appealed to him, because he believed it would bring teenagers into the park, adding that was an age group that did not traditionally use the parks on a regular basis.  He said he was interested in seeing what could be done with $100,000 or $110,000, though he necessarily was not in favor of doing a “one surface for two facilities” kind of thing, such as having the basketball court and the hockey court share a surface.

Mayor Foy commented he had meant by his comments that we take $100,000 and try to build both, not share the surfaces.

Council Member Ward said there were numerous basketball courts in the area and he would place them in a secondary category.  He suggested putting in the lights, the maintenance building, and the public art, leaving approximately $110,000 to provide for an in-line hockey court.  Council Member Ward said he would prefer to let the basketball courts wait unless they could fully fund the hockey court.

Council Member Verkerk agreed with Council Member Ward, and wanted to promote athletics for young men and women.  She said she would like to find the funds to building the in-line hockey court as well.  Council Member Verkerk said what she was hearing from the speakers was that they were not asking for something elaborate, and she believed providing just the basics would work just as well, including for basketball.

Council Member Strom asked Mr. Webster to explain basketball opportunities in the southern part of Town, and why the Committee had made the courts a priority for the park.  Mr. Webster replied that basketball courts were located all over Town, except south of Fordham Boulevard.  He said currently they had a large development in the area with others planned, but there were no public basketball facilities in that area except at Culbreth School.  Mr. Webster said it was a popular sport, and no matter where they put a basketball court it would be used.

Council Member Strom asked if Mr. Webster received directions to building the basketball courts and a hockey facility, would that be possible.  Mr. Webster commented that they could go ahead and design both facilities, and as he had mentioned earlier each piece of the park would be broken out into separate add alternatives.  Then, he said, they could pick and choose what we wanted to see in the park.

Mr. Horton said one option they might want to explore would be in the conceptual stage make some estimate of what it would cost to provide a basic slab with an appropriate surface.  He said then they could get some sense of the cost of adding features that might be desirable.  Mr. Horton said his guess was that the budget would look even worse by the time they reached that stage, and he was not sure he wanted to pay a designer to design every detail when they knew they could not build it all.

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-25a.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

COUNCIL MEMBER HARRISON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-25b, AMENDED TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OF A BASIC SLAB SUITABLE FOR IN-LINE HOCKEY.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE O-8.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY     (9-0).

Mr. Horton noted that Mr. Webster and Parks and Recreation Director Kathryn Spatz had worked over a period of several years to get us in a position to qualify and obtain this grant, and he wanted to express his appreciation to them for their efforts.

Mayor Foy said the Council appreciated those efforts as well.

13b.     Proposed Revisions to the Aquatics Center

Mr. Webster stated that the design and permitting process for the Aquatics Center were halted in December of 2004 to allow the PPC, the SEE Committee and staff to address three issues that had the potential to significantly impact the project: construction cost increases, LEED Certification, and possible use of Public Buildings Bonds to supplement the project budget and add certain energy saving enhancements to the project.

Mr. Webster said they had held many discussions over the last seven months, and were at the point of providing two basic options for the Council to consider. The first, he said, would be to stick with the original concept of a two-pool facility, consisting of a 25 yards by 25 meters pool and a family/warm water pool 25 yards by 10 yards with zero depth entry.  Mr. Webster said they would have to forego the LEED process because of time and money constraints, or, eliminate one of the tanks and use the remaining funds for energy sustainability projects.

Mr. Webster said those were difficult decisions to make, but that was what they were facing given the budget.  He said the choices came down to sticking with the original program and foregoing many of the energy ideas, or concentrate on energy and forego one of the major facilities.  Mr. Webster said Josh Gurlitz, the architect for the project, was present to answer any questions the Council might have.

Mayor Foy noted that the Manager’s recommendation was to resume the permitting and design for the Aquatics Center with a two-tank design but not implement the LEED Certification requirements.  He commented that they hoped that some energy and water saving measures would be incorporated into the project, so we would not be sacrificing everything but they would not be meeting the standard they had set for the project.

Council Member Verkerk said her understanding of the LEED process was that it would have had to be implemented from day one when Mr. Gurlitz began his work, so LEED Certification was not possible in any case.  Mr. Horton said that was a key requirement of the LEED program.

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-26a.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Council Member Ward noted that on page 4 the Manager had discussed a list of other sustainability projects that could be included in the budget with a smaller building footprint.  He said he fully supported pursing that, and also wanted to continue to investigate the ability to fund a solar heater for the pool water.  Council Member Ward said it would be a shame not to do that, noting that it was a huge energy demand to heat on this facility and to miss that opportunity would be a travesty.  He said he hoped that they could figure out a way to include that in the energy priorities that we were able to fund within the budget.  Council Member Ward said he believed it was critical to include that in this facility.

Council Member Strom asked Mr. Horton for a comment on that.  Mr. Horton said he did not believe it would be possible to find $200,000 to cover the cost for this facility.  He said if there was a way to do it, having an energy expert as part of the team might be a way to discover it.

Mayor Foy said one of the things happening with this project was that when they find themselves able to go ahead with something, the costs go up and we have to cut something, and that keeps happening.  He said it had been almost 10 years since voters approved the bonds for this, and they were not even going to break ground for another year and a half or more.  Mayor Foy said it was getting to be demoralizing.

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-26b.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 14 – Streetscape Master Plan Review Committee

Urban Forester Curtis Brooks said on May 23 the Council had requested that the Manager provide a process for getting feedback on the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan adopted in 1993.  He said that the Manager’s recommendation was adoption of Resolution R-27 that would establish a Streetscape Master Plan Review Committee that would include two members each from the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, the Community Design Commission, the Planning Board, the Public Arts Commission, and the Transportation Board.  Mr. Brooks said it would also include one member from the Downtown Economic Development Corporation and the Downtown Business Alliance, adding that Public Works staff would provide staff assistance to the Committee.  He stated that the Committee would be asked to develop any recommendations for revisions or additions to the existing Master Plan, specifically for guidance on projects on West Rosemary Street.  Mr. Brooks said their plan would be to return to the Council in the fall prior to consideration of any future Streetscape projects.

Council Member Greene said in regard to the Council’s direction to undertake a study of the custom street and pedestrian lighting installed downtown, she said the response in the memo was that, “Public Works staff contracted with an electrical engineer who specializes in outdoor lighting…”  She asked if that was the appropriate type of person, noting she did not know if they were a lighting designer or if they had a more aesthetic point of view.  Council Member Greene said she was not sure such a person would have the appropriate skills.  Mr. Brooks replied that his understanding of the request from the Council pertained to lighting levels and adequacy, if it met safety standards, the spacing of light fixtures, and changes that might be considered for the existing or future light fixtures to increase the lighting levels or make the lighting levels more uniform.  Mr. Books said the person they had contracted with was an appropriate person to answer those questions.  He said once they get that information they would provide it to the Council, and he believed they would find it useful.

Mayor Foy asked Council Member Greene what her thoughts were.  Council Member Greene responded that that may have been all the Council had asked for, but she was trying to push it up a level.  Mayor Foy asked what kind of person was she thinking of.  Council Member Greene said someone who thought about more than just engineering.

Council Member Strom said that Mr. Brooks had been responsive to their request, but he had been thinking about “set designer” types of persons who think about how to light facades, trees and significant architectural features, to make the environment of the Town look as good as it could.  He said it was not a random event, so he thought they could probably address this issue by making it a component of what they were asking this Committee to consider as it revisits the Master Plan.  Council Member Strom said the Town would look so much better at night if there was a strategy applied to the lighting scheme.

Mayor Foy asked if they were suggesting that the give that to the Committee as a specific task, of that a slot be reserved on the Committee for a person with that sort of expertise.  Council Member Greene said both.

Mayor Foy said then we should amend the resolution to include a person who had expertise in urban lighting aesthetics, and that the Master Plan review include consideration of how lighting could enhance the downtown, not just in terms of pedestrian safety but in terms of lighting facades and other architectural features.

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-27 AS AMENDED TO INCLUDE ON THE COMMITTEE A PERSON WHO HAD EXPERTISE IN URBAN LIGHTING AESTHETICS, AND THAT THE MASTER PLAN REVIEW INCLUDE CONSIDERATION OF HOW LIGHTING COULD ENHANCE THE DOWNTOWN, NOT JUST IN TERMS OF PEDESTRIAN SAFETY BUT IN TERMS OF LIGHTING FACADES AND OTHER ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 15 – Establishment of a Committee to Review the Town Pay Plan

Mr. Horton noted that the Council had held an abbreviated discuss on this issue and he recognized that they may not have responded to the Council’s intent.  He said they had done the best they could based on what they had heard, and would be pleased to work with the Council to modify it however they wished.  Mr. Horton said if the Council decided to proceed in this manner, they had outlined a schedule that would allow for proposals to be brought to the Council in early 2006 in time for consideration along with the budget.

Mr. Horton said they also recommended that the Council consider recruiting members of the Personnel Appeals Committee to serve on the Committee, because a number of them have experience in managing these types of human resource systems.

Mac Clarke said he welcomed the idea of forming such a Committee, noting he had been present at the work session when this was discussed and found it to be confusing.  He said he believed the Council clearly needed expert help in order to review this issue.  Mr. Clarke said he believed the resolution as drafted might be unduly restrictive for the Committee.  He suggested that the first order of business should be for the Committee to develop the parameters for what they feel should be examined in relation to the pay structure, and perhaps come back to the Council early in the process with a revised list of areas which they wish to review.

Mayor Foy said he thought it was important that whoever the Council appointed to this Committee have some related expertise.  He said the Council looked at the pay plan every year, and several years ago had hired a consultant to look at it. Mayor Foy said if we really wanted some insight then we would need to have some confidence in the Committee’s opinions.

Mayor Foy asked how the resolution under consideration now tied in to the resolution the Council adopted earlier this evening.  Mr. Horton responded that Resolution R-15a obligated the staff to work with employees regarding the 3 percent option, regardless of what decision the Council made on Resolution R-28.  He said if the Council made the decision to move ahead with the Committee to review the pay plan, then they would be supportive of that at the Council’s direction as well.  Mr. Horton said we hoped that any recommendations the Committee comes up with would be reviewed by employees so that they would have an opportunity to comment as well.  He said it was possible for both of these resolutions to go forward on parallel tracks.

Mayor Foy asked if there would be a conflict in having an employee representative on this Committee.  Mr. Horton said he did not believe so.  He said he would recommended several for the Council’s consideration, since different employee groups had different concerns, noting he believed they would want at least to have a representative from Public Works, Transportation, Public Safety, and then some general group representative.

Council Member Strom said regarding citizens with expertise, he understood they were thinking in terms of starting with the Citizens Budget Review Committee members to take on this task of addressing issues left hanging after the budget was completed.  He said he would like to invite that group to participate, noting they did have significant expertise to work on this task, and it made sense to him to allow them to begin work on it and come back to the Council for specific guidance as Mr. Clarke had suggested.

Mayor Foy said he believed that the Citizens Budget Review Committee may have members that were no longer interested, and the members who were interested could certainly be appointed to this committee.  But, he said, he believed they would be better served not to just hand this task to them because they may no longer have enough people to do that.  Mayor Foy said he thought they would want to find some additional members with particular expertise.

Council Member Hill said the advantage of using the Budget Review Committee members was because they were semi-up to speed.  He said he also wanted to comment on having employees serve on this committee, noting he was not entirely comfortable with that.  Council Member Hill said that may be a cross purposes to what they were trying to do.  He said employees were represented by the staff and were represented by the Council, and their membership on this committee may be an inhibiting factor.

Mayor Foy said he raised the issue because it was a point of view that the Council had to take into consideration, and it was possible that a committee that made recommendations but did not hear that point of view might not have the full picture.

Council Member Hill said he believed including employees on the committee would be a departure from what he thought this committee would be doing.  He said he wanted to make clear that what was to be considered was the total benefits package, not just the pay scale.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins said she was nearing the end of nine years of service on the Council, and for each of those nine years the Council had discussed the pay plan.  She said it had been said it was confusing, it was complicated, and people did not seem to understand it.  Mayor pro tem Wiggins said when they have our presentations by consultants and they walk us through the data, and when they vote on a set of recommendations or policy, at that particular time they do understand what they are doing because they have been working on it over a period of several months.  But, she said, if you asked me two months later to explain the pay plan, she did not believe she could do so.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins said it was one of those that she did not believe she needed to be able to explain in great detail because she could refer them to others such as the Manager of Human Resources.  She said she would bet that the employees understand it because they live with it.  Mayor pro tem Wiggins said it was explained to them in great detail and they discussed it often, and they could probably do a much better job of telling the Council how the plan worked than they could.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins said the Council would eventually have to adopt a plan and live with it for a while.  She said we keep changing it and keep studying it, which must be unsettling for employees and for Human Resources.  Mayor pro tem Wiggins said they were never going to understand it if they keep changing it. She said the question was whether or not they were going to look at employee compensation as an important part of what they do during budget deliberations each year.  Mayor pro tem Wiggins said she did not believe they would ever get to a point where they would not look at it each year because it was such a large portion of the budget and was one place where there might be some savings.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins said they had studied the plan many times, it was a good one, it addressed all of the issues several years ago that needed to be addressed, and she did not think this was the time to tinker with it.  She said they should live with it for a while and be committed to staying on track with the compensation level and letting that be one of their priorities at budget time.  Mayor pro tem Wiggins said she believed if they appointed a committee and made changes, in just a few short years the same thing would occur and the plan would be up for study again.  She said she questioned moving forward with this.

Council Member Kleinschmidt said Mayor pro tem Wiggins was correct in the way she described the process and how it was put back before the Council each year.  He said even though he shared her concerns, he believed there would be another committee looking at it again this year.  Council Member Kleinschmidt said he did not believe they should just send this back to the Budget Review Committee, noting they had been given a very large project and did an extraordinary job in looking at all aspects of the Town’s operations.  But, he said, they were talking about a limited number of people, and although they had more expertise that the average person they still did not have all the skill to solve all the problems.  Council Member Kleinschmidt said this was an example of one of those problems.

Council Member Kleinschmidt said some of the recommendations that came back to the Council reflected a lack of understanding in some areas, for example how the Human Services Advisory Board worked and how the Percent for Art program operated.  He said he did not think they should send this back to that committee and expect them to have the full level of expertise needed to address all the pay plan issues.

Council Member Kleinschmidt said he would be happy to have the Budget Review Committee members apply for this new committee, noting he believed the Budget Review Committee had been dissolved and their function was over once the budget was adopted.

Council Member Kleinschmidt said he was in favor of having employees serve on this committee, noting as a point of fact that the staff did not advocate for anything.  And, he said, it was explicitly a part of their job function to not advocate.  Council Member Kleinschmidt said the staff takes its direction from the Council, and they could not expect members of the staff who would be support this committee to then advocate for employee interests.  He said that was where an enormous conflict could inject itself into this process.

Council Member Kleinschmidt said without employees, they would be in the same position as this year where they had employee concerns over the pay plan one to two weeks before the budget was passed, and there was a reflection among them of a lack of understanding about what the Council was doing.  He said he believed it was a great idea to put them into the mix from the beginning.  Council Member Kleinschmidt said he believed three to four employees on this committee seemed appropriate in the way the Manager outlined, and that it would be appropriate to invite the former Budget Review Committee members to apply to serve on the new committee.

Council Member Ward agreed with Council Member Kleinschmidt’s remarks regarding the membership.  He said it may be uncomfortable, but he believed he would learn a great deal, and it would help him be more in tune with the realities and issues that they faced.  Council Member Ward said he believed having their perceptions on the committee would help the committee members as well.

Council Member Ward said regarding the resolution, he would like to amend the resolution to include a bullet to say “other pertinent issues” to let the committee think about the range of areas that should be explored and not limit them to those four bullets.

Council Member Ward said the third bullet stated “Compare the Town pay plan to other local governments in the Triangle and similar communities elsewhere….”  He said they should look beyond local governments because they were not our only competition and was not reflective of most people in this community.  Council Member Ward said he would like the resolution amended after the word “governments” and include “and other major private and public employers in the area” so that they get a chance to look at a fuller range of our competitors in the job market.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins said she had two bullets she would like included in the resolution.  The first one was that there be a full review of how they arrived at the current pay plan, and the second would be that whatever recommendations were made that they simply and easy to understand.

Mayor Foy asked if there was a motion for Resolution R-28 with the following amendments:

· that there be a bullet added that there be a thorough review of how the Town arrived at its current pay plan;

· that the second bullet would read “Evaluate the total compensation plan…;

· that the last bullet be amended to include at the end of the sentence “and that the recommendations be simple and easy to understand”;

· that the third bullet include after the word “governments” the phrase” and other major private and public employers”; and

· that an additional bullet be added under “Evaluate the total compensation plan” that reads “and other pertinent issues.”;

COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-28 AS AMENDED.

Council Member Kleinschmidt asked if the committee would include employees.  Mayor Foy said the Manager had not given the Council a breakdown of the membership, but had suggested in his memo that the committee be made up of seven to ten members.  He asked if the Council would make that decision in September.  Mr. Horton responded that one possibility would be that if the Council wanted to consider appointing employees that the Employee Forum, whose members were elected by the employees, could put forth recommended candidates.  In addition, he said, any employee who wished to apply could apply.

Council Member Kleinschmidt asked shouldn’t that be a part of the resolution, since this would be a departure from our normal committee structure.  He said the resolution was directing the Manager to seek applicants for appointment.  Mr. Horton said that could be included in the resolution if that was the Council’s desire.

Mayor Foy asked if there was support for that.  The Council agreed by consensus. Mayor Foy said then the resolution would be further amended to state that candidates would be sought through the Employee Forum.

Mayor Foy suggested that the staff contact members of the Budget Review Advisory Committee and ask them if they were interested in serving on this committee, rather than having them fill out another application.  Mr. Horton said they would be glad to do that.

Council Member Verkerk clarified that tonight the Council was not deciding on the composition of the committee.  Mayor Foy said that was correct.

THE MOTION AS AMENDED WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 16 – Appointments

16a.     Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board.

The Council appointed Tabitha Combs, Audrey Nazelle, Kate Millard, and Wendy Sarratt to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board.

	Council Members
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board		Foy	Greene	Harrison	Hill	Kleinschmidt	Strom	Verkerk	Ward	Wiggins	TOTAL
Alex Ashton (Town)
Tabitha Combs (Town)				X	X			X	X	X	5
Audrey de Nazelle (Carrboro)		X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	9
Kate Millard (Town)		X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	9
Wendy Sarratt (Town)		X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	9
Other; please list:

16b.     Historic District Commission.

The Council appointed Ann Hartell to the Historic District Commission.

	Council Members
Historic District Commission		Foy	Greene	Harrison	Hill	Kleinschmidt	Strom	Verkerk	Ward	Wiggins	TOTAL
Ralph Bass
Keith Freeman
Ann Hartell		X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	9
Mark McGrath
Shawn Thompson
Other; please list:

16c.     Horace Williams Citizens Committee.

The Council appointed Albert Burk, Joe Capowski, Michael Collins, Julie McClintock, Ed Neely, Del Snow, and Diane VandenBroek to the Horace Williams Citizens Committee.

	Council Members
Horace Williams Citizens Committee		Foy	Greene	Harrison	Hill	Kleinschmidt	Strom	Verkerk	Ward	Wiggins	TOTAL
Vote for 7 Citizens with Special Expertise
Joe Capowski		X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	9
Julie McClintock		X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	9
Ed Neely		X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	9
Del Snow		X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	9
Vote for 3 Neighborhood Reps.
Albert Burk		X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	9
Michael Collins		X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	9
Diane VandenBroek		X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	9
Other; please list:

16d.     Orange Water and Sewer Authority Board of Directors.

The Council appointed Mac Clarke to the Orange Water and Sewer Authority Board of Directors.

	Council Members
Orange Water and Sewer Authority		Foy	Greene	Harrison	Hill	Kleinschmidt	Strom	Verkerk	Ward	Wiggins	TOTAL
Philip Berke
Bobby Clapp
Michael (Mac) Clarke		X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	9
Floyd Fried
William Kaiser
Gordon Merklein
Other; please list:

Item 17 – Petitions

17a.    Council Member Harrison, regarding a Proposed Wal Mart in Chatham County.

Council Member Harrison stated that Chatham County would soon be receiving an application for a large retail center involving as much as 62.9 acres on US 15-501 immediately south of the Orange County line, and therefore in the Joint Planning Area.  He petitioned the Council to request the Town Manager to ask that the Chatham County Manager, when he receives the application, facilitate a basic review of the land use program and related transportation aspects by appropriate Town staff.

Council Member Harrison said related to this overall review would be requests that:

· would it require a zoning action by the Chatham County Commissioners and what were the requirements they might put on a project of this scale;

· ask OWASA to see if it was in the University Lake Watershed, and what were the restrictions that would be appropriate;

· ask the Metropolitan Planning Organization to look at the effects on the projections for the 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan; and

· coordinate with any evaluation being done by Orange County.

Council Member Harrison said that last Thursday Orange County Commissioner Barry Jacobs had petitioned the Commissioners in a similar manner.  He said an additional area of interest was the development’s potential interaction with and effect on the immediately adjacent UNC-CH Park and Ride Lot currently under construction.

Mayor Foy asked the Manager how he would proceed in response to this petition.  Mr. Horton replied that the primary task would be to see what Chatham County was willing to provide, and he did not know what their reaction would be to this proposal.  He said they had been good neighbors, but whether their Manager would feel that he had the time or the authority to be cooperative in all of these regards he could not say.

Council Member Harrison said living where he did he was used to large Durham projects, and they did not get staff review comments until he got on the Council and got the Work Group to work out an agreement to get that.  He said people from his neighborhood had used staff review comments from Chapel Hill with the Durham City Council and gotten things to happen.  Council Member Harrison said that was, in a way, to give a leg up to Orange and Chatham citizens who would like to be involved in this.

Mayor Foy said he did not object to this, but did not know how it would play out. Council Member Harrison said the Chatham County Manager could just say no, but he believed there would be some public attention to this.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins said she was concerned about Town staff, noting this was a big project.  She said the Council had just heard from the Manager about how strapped the Planning staff was.  Council Member Harrison said he believed most of the work should be done by Chatham County, and that was why they could say no.  Mayor pro tem Wiggins said but the petition asked that it be submitted to the Town for basic review.  She said a basic review of such a large project would take a lot of time.  Mayor pro tem Wiggins said we needed to remain aware of where our Planning staff was, and prioritize their work load.

Council Member Harrison commented that the level of review that staff gave to Durham projects would be a good place to start.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins said she would like the Manager to make that determination. She said she did not believe the Council was qualified to decide how demanding something like this would or would not be.  Mayor pro tem Wiggins said she believed they needed to react to this because it was important, but they needed to look at where it fit in their priorities because it might mean that something else would have to wait.

Council Member Harrison said he was seeking rational and competent reaction, which is what staff had been giving to Durham projects.

Mayor pro tem Wiggins said if the Manager said this could be done with no problem, then fine, but she wanted to make sure we knew that when they get involved in this it was additional work for the staff.  Mr. Horton responded that Chapel Hill did not have the same kind of working relationship with Chatham County as they did with Durham and Durham County.  He said the Durham-Chapel Hill Work Group had been established for many years and there was a routine of working together and a regular exchange of information.  Mr. Horton said he had been trying to get the Chatham County Manager to work with him to establish a proposal for a work group, and the Chatham County Manager had been so busy that even though he had talked with him twice, the Chatham County Manager had not yet had time to do anything on his end.

Mr. Horton said he did not know how much cooperation they could expect, noting they were under the gun in many different ways.  He said if the Council would agree that they could limit our staff time to about eight hours for a preliminary report, then send that to the Council and decide if they wished to make more of an investment in it, then he believed that would be feasible.  But, he stated, to undertake every item that was listed could be a sizeable effort.

Council Member Harrison said he believed that would be acceptable.

COUNCIL MEMBER HARRISON MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS, TO REFER THE PETITION TO THE PLANNING STAFF FOR REVIEW.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

17b.     Council Member Strom, regarding the Intergovernmental Parks Work Group.

Council Member Strom said he was the Council representative to the Intergovernmental Parks Work Group along with Mayor Foy, and the Council had received a memo from Chair Alice Gordon with a resolution attached.  He said Ms. Gordon was interested in preparing a County-wide parks and greenways coordination document for the purpose of coordinating and combining existing plans for Hillsborough, Mebane, Carrboro, Chapel Hill and Orange County into one seamless map.  Council Member Strom said that would in no way alter the existing plans or develop a new County-wide plan, but would just be an amalgam of recreation activities and a resource for staff and citizens to use.  He reiterated that this would not be original new work, but would be combining existing plans.

Council Member Strom noted that Ms. Spatz was at the meeting and did not believe that this would be a significant request to her or her staff, and agreed it would be a useful document.  He asked that the Council adopt the resolution noted as Attachment 1 which would indicate our interest in participating and would make the staff aware that the Council would like to have the information passed on.

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-29 AS AMENDED.

Council Member Ward asked that the second “Whereas” include the words “and open space” after the word “greenways.”  He said he would also like to have the map include the critical natural areas that had already been worked on at the County level, so that they could see the relationship to other areas.  Council Member Ward said he believed that type of information would be useful as we looked at the bigger picture.

Council Member Strom said the Land’s Legacy staff was taken the lead on this, and at all Intergovernmental Parks Work Group meetings they have the maps.  He agreed to that friendly amendment to add the language regarding adding critical natural areas.

Council Member Ward asked if this was something that would be done every year, every five years, or only this one time.  Council Member Strom said that had not been discussed, noting the finished product might determine how often people wanted to see it.

Council Member Verkerk said the map would have public open space, public parks, and public recreation.  She asked what was meant by critical natural areas, and if that was public land.  Council Member Ward replied that they were the best natural areas that were worth saving.

Council Member Verkerk asked who they were targeting, stating she assumed they were targeting people who wanted to use parks and greenways and open space.  She asked do they want to put on that map privately owned land, adding she did not believe so.

Council Member Ward responded he viewed this as a planning tool.

Council Member Verkerk said if this would be used as a planning tool for politicians and for people who were making policy decisions then she was ok with that.  She said but if they were planning on giving it to people who wanted to go out and ride their bicycles, then she did not want to put private property on it, noting she would be deeply offended if it were her property identified in that way.

Mr. Horton said it was possible it could be done as a separate layer in a GIS presentation so that you could overlay the critical areas.  He said that way you could meet both needs.

Council Member Strom said clearly this would be a document that they would want to get in as many citizens’ hands as possible.  He said many people were not aware of some of the holdings, and the map would be helpful.

THE MOTION AS AMENDED WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m.