MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN

OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA, MONDAY, JUNE 11, 1990, 7:30 P.M.

Mayor Howes called the meeting to order.

Council Members in attendance were Julie Andresen, Joyce Brown, Joe Herzenberg, Nancy Preston, Alan Rimer, James C. Wallace, Arthur Werner and Roosevelt Wilkerson, Jr.

Also in attendance were Assistant to the Mayor Lisa Price, Interim Town Manager Sonna Loewenthal, Assistant Town Manager Florentine Miller, Public Safety Director Cal Horton, Finance Director James Baker, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Assistant to the Attorney Richard Sharpless and Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos.

Ceremony

Mayor Howes presented the Government Finance Officers' Association award for excellence in financial reporting. Mayor Howes noted that this was the fifth consecutive recognition for the Town's Finance Department. The Mayor and Council congratulated Mr. Baker and his staff for receiving the award. Mr. Baker recognized Accounting Services Manager Kathie Young and Accounting Technician II Joyce Davis for their efforts leading to the award.

Petitions

Council Member Preston noted that the Town Flag Committee was holding a public forum on Wednesday, June 13th at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber to receive comments on the proposed Town flag design. Council Member Preston urged Council Members and other interested parties to attend the forum.

Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos reported that the Supreme Court of the United States had found that the Town had acted properly in handling the Batch v. Town of Chapel Hill matter. Mr. Karpinos stated that the Supreme Court had declined to review this case.

Minutes of May 21 and 29, 1990

Two spelling modifications were requested in the minutes of May 21, 1990.

COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO ADOPT THE MINUTES OF MAY 21 AS AMENDED. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

Council Member Brown requested three corrections in the minutes of May 29, 1990.

COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO ADOPT THE MINUTES OF MAY 29 AS AMENDED. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

Budget‑Related Matters

Interim Town Manager Loewenthal briefly reviewed projected expenditures in the Mayor and Council's travel accounts.

Ms. Loewenthal noted that the State Supreme Court had recently denied a petition for review of an annexation area including the Oaks III and Sherwood Forest subdivisions and the Chapel Hill Country Club. Ms. Loewenthal noted that an estimated $80,000 would be realized from this annexation in fiscal year 1990‑91. Ms. Loewenthal said that between twenty‑five and thirty individual property owners had appealed their property valuations. Council Member Rimer inquired whether the $80,000 projected revenue would ultimately be transferred to the transportation fund. Ms. Loewenthal said yes.

Council Member Andresen inquired whether additional police personnel costs had been included in the anticipated cost of service for the annexation area. Ms. Loewenthal responded that the costs of service had been calculated incrementally for the coming year. Council Member Wilkerson inquired whether projections for additional personnel had been completed. Ms. Loewenthal said that there would be an inevitable need for additional personnel, adding that actual time horizons for needs were difficult to project.

Ms. Loewenthal noted that the revised federal formula for capital projects required a twenty percent, rather than ten percent, local match. Ms. Loewenthal stated that an additional $114,000 would be needed to fund three capital projects. Ms. Loewenthal said that this change could be accommodated by cutting into the Town's fund balance or by applying additional revenues from the General Fund. Ms. Loewenthal noted that the proposed capital projects involved improvements to park and ride and maintenance garage facilities. Mayor Howes observed that several members of the Council were examining possible changes to the proposed budget. Mayor Howes suggested that instructive votes could be taken on individual items.

Council Member Andresen inquired about the composition of the proposed $248,000 increase in the public safety budget. Ms. Loewenthal stated that public safety services tend to be labor intensive. Ms. Loewenthal said the majority of funding would be used for reclassifications, market and merit increases of employees. Police Captain Ralph Pendergraph noted that the proposed budget also included funding for providing holiday pay for those unable to take individual holidays off. Captain Pendergraph noted that funding of this item totalled approximately $30,000.

Council Member Andresen inquired whether the Police Department had a sufficient job rate to attract good applicants. Captain Pendergraph said the Personnel Department had been diligent in looking at the local labor market for comparable jobs. Captain Pendergraph said that the Town's salaries were competitive. Council Member Wilkerson expressed concern that he previously received a different answer to the question of additional public safety funding. Ms. Loewenthal said it was difficult to categorize increases in the area of public safety. Captain Pendergraph said that a variety of factors including University reimbursement and holiday pay impacted the proposed public safety budget.

Council Member Herzenberg said that he had three proposed modifications to the Manager's recommended budget: deletion of the proposed parking lot/groundskeeper position in the Public Works department; deletion of the Traffic Engineer position in the Engineering department; and increasing parking rates by ten cents per hour,

Ms. Loewenthal stated that the proposed groundskeeper position would be funded from the parking fund. Ms. Loewenthal noted that concern had been expressed about the cleanliness of parking lots in the downtown area. Ms. Loewenthal said the total cost of the position would be $18,000. Ms. Loewenthal stated that the traffic engineer position would attempt to improve the Town's transportation system without new major roadway construction. Ms. Loewenthal added that the traffic engineer would be responsive to seasonal and major event traffic. Ms. Loewenthal noted that the Department of Transportation had requested that the traffic engineer position be added. Ms. Loewenthal noted that the Town's signal system would be the prime responsibility of the traffic engineer. Council Member Werner said he was not convinced of the need for a full‑time person in the traffic engineer position.

Council Member Wilkerson inquired whether some responsibility for the signal system could be assigned to the Senior Transportation Planner position in the Town's planning department. Ms. Loewenthal stressed the need for an engineer with an electronics background who could handle responsibility for the geographical information, drainage and signal light systems. Ms. Loewenthal added that the Department of Transportation preferred to work with a full‑time traffic engineer. Ms. Loewenthal noted that the job rate for the traffic engineer position was $42,000, with total position cost amounting to approximately $75,000. Council Member Preston inquired about the viability of hiring a consultant at lower cost. Ms. Loewenthal stated the Department of Transportation desired a full‑time staff member to assure that the signal system was being used most effective.

Council Member Andresen inquired about the possible impact of not funding the traffic engineer position. Ms. Loewenthal noted that funding for the traffic signal system would be in jeopardy.

Council Member Rimer noted that the Council had recently requested the staff to evaluate the Town's drainage system. Council Member

Rimer stated that this would be a time‑consuming task, adding that the City of Durham has two‑full time positions to oversee its zone drainage system.

Council Member Werner inquired whether a maintenance technician position would be needed if a traffic engineer were hired. Ms. Loewenthal said yes, noting that there would be a need to add another maintenance technician in the future. Ms. Loewenthal noted that the North Carolina Department of Transportation would reimburse a portion of these services. Council Member Wilkerson said he was having difficulty in believing the Town's need for several positions to operate the signal system. Council Member Andresen expressed concern that the Town was being asked to provide the position in order to receive funding for the signal system. Mayor Howes inquired whether State funding for the signalization project had been secured. Ms. Loewenthal stated that negotiation of a draft municipal agreement was in process.

Council Member Wilkerson said he was comfortable with the initial hiring of a traffic engineer, but concerned about the need for future additional staff. Ms. Loewenthal said that the staff would provide follow‑up reports on the use of the position during the next fiscal year. Council Member Werner inquired when the system would be operational. Ms. Loewenthal stated that the system would be operational eighteen to twenty‑four months after entering into the municipal agreement. Ms. Loewenthal noted that the traffic engineer would principally work on system development and attend training classes during this interim period. Council Member Werner said that eighteen to twenty‑four months appeared to be a long time for these types of activities. Ms. Loewenthal noted that construction of the system would take approximately twelve months. Town Engineer George Small said it was essential to have a full-time engineer in place during the two years prior to system installation.

Council Member Brown inquired about the proposed system start‑up date. Mr. Small said this was predicated on when the municipal agreement was executed. Mr. Small said that proposals were currently being evaluated, adding that selection of a consultant could possibly occur in July. Council Member Rimer inquired whether the proposed system was computer‑controlled. Mr. Small said yes.

Ms. Loewenthal noted that the Town staff had made some projections concerning increased revenues from higher parking fees. Ms. Loewenthal stated that actual revenues would depend on the elasticity of demand. Ms. Loewenthal noted that final projections for the proposed parking facility were forthcoming from the project's financial consultant. Council Member Andresen suggested charging higher parking fees for longer time periods. Council Member Werner, noting that demand for parking was relatively inelastic, suggested that fees be raised by ten cents per half hour.

Council Member Rimer suggested that additional revenues realized from higher parking fees be placed in the Transportation Fund. Council Member Brown noted that the proposed higher parking fees had initially been proposed as a substitute for higher bus fares. Mayor Howes noted that there appeared to be some sentiment to increase parking fees, but the point of allocation was uncertain. Ms. Loewenthal inquired whether revenue from the parking increase or all parking revenues should be allocated to the parking or transportation fund. Mayor Howes said that additional Council discussion was needed on this question. Council Member Werner said he did not think there would be trouble in reaching consensus in this matter.

Transportation Director Bob Godding noted that demand for parking in Town lots was quite strong and inelastic, with little shift in demand anticipated in the future. Mr. Godding noted that the average parking time was less than two hours. Mr. Godding stated parking lot Ml was scheduled for closure in January, 1991, with higher parking fees likely associated with this project. Mr. Godding added that higher Town parking lot fees would be needed in eighteen to twenty.four months.

Mayor Howes inquired about the anticipated impact of increased parking fees on the proposed property tax rate. Ms. Loewenthal stated that the impact would be the equivalent of one‑quarter of a cent. Mayor Howes said he concurred that fees for parking should be increased, but did not foresee agreement this evening on the fund allocation. Council Member Rimer stressed the importance of receiving additional information from the parking lot ?1 consultant concerning proposed revenues.

COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO RAISE PARKING FEES IN TOWN LOTS BY TEN CENTS PER HALF HOUR, WITH EXCESS REVENUES DESIGNATED TO THE TRANSPORTATION FUND.

COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT DELETING THE PROPOSED GROUNDSKEEPER POSITION FROM THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BUDGET. THE MAIN MOTION AND FRIENDLY AMENDMENT WERE ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED THAT THE PROPOSED TRAFFIC ENGINEER POSITION IN THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT BUDGET BE DELETED. THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.

Council Member Wilkerson inquired about the proposal to shift the Town's half‑time exercise physiologist to full‑time. Ms. Loewenthal noted that a cost of approximately $15,000 would be associated with the proposal. Personnel Director Patricia Crotts stated that the exercise physiologist had been working approximately thirty hours per week. Council Member Wilkerson expressed concern that the position was utilized at thirty hours per week, since the Council had authorized only a half‑time position. Council Member Werner inquired about the impact of the exercise physiologist on the Town's health insurance premiums. Ms. crotts noted that a recent national study had concluded that savings of approximately $50 per employee per year are realized from of this type of program. Ms. Crotts said that this would translate into possible annual savings of $24,000.

Council Member Wilkerson inquired about the Town's past justification for contracting for wellness services. Ms. Crotts noted that this contract involved only testing for fitness, rather than attempting to make improvements in fitness levels of individuals. Council Member Brown asked about the possibility of utilizing the services of University graduate students to assist with wellness special projects. Ms. Crotts responded that this approach might be helpful for individual projects, adding that a full‑time in‑house person was needed to coordinate a concentrated Town wellness program. Council Member Werner said he was agreeable to approving the position full‑time for a one‑year trial period. Council Member Werner stated that the impact on worker's compensation and sick time could be evaluated at the end of this period. Council Member Wilkerson expressed concern that the Town staff had expanded the hours of the position without Council direction.

Council Member Preston inquired about the proposed expanded role of the exercise physiologist position. Ms. Crotts stated that the position was primarily involved with the Fire and Police Departments at present. Ms. Crotts noted that a full‑time position would provide more time for health risk assessments and wellness training classes for all employees.

COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO MAINTAIN THE WELLNESS COORDINATOR/EXERCISE PHYSIOLOGIST POSITION AS A HALF‑TIME POSITION. THE MOTION FAILED BY A VOTE OF 2‑7, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS WILKERSON AND BROWN SUPPORTING THE MOTION.

Council Member Werner inquired about the number of currently unfilled positions. Ms. Crotts said that there were approximately ten currently unfilled positions. Council Member Preston inquired about the fiscal impact of leaving these positions unfilled. Ms. Crotts noted that the average Town salary was approximately $23,000. Council Member Werner inquired about the impact of delaying hiring of these positions for six months. Ms. Loewenthal said that this would be an arbitrary means to cut services.

Council Member Andresen inquired about the fiscal impact of not enacting proposed reclassification increases. Ms. Crotts said the proposed reclassifications totalled approximately $20,000. Ms. crotts added that proposed merit and market increases averaged about 7.5%, compared to an average of 8.47% in other North Carolina communities over 10,000 population. Council Member Andresen inquired about the impact of reducing the market adjustment by one percent. Ms. Crotts said savings of approximately $36,000 would be realized from this approach. Ms. Crotts stated that the proposed five percent market adjustment would keep the Town competitive in the Triangle labor market. Council Member Herzenberg expressed his preference for eliminating one position rather than decreasing the proposed market adjustment.

Council Member Wilkerson inquired about the total cost of market adjustments and reclassifications. Ms. Crotts noted that the proposed reclassifications totalled $20,000, while the market adjustment would cost $110,000. Council Member Wilkerson stressed the importance of controlling Town personnel costs. Council Member Wilkerson expressed concern that salary increases had been averaging seven to eight percent over the past few years. Council Member Wilkerson said he was more comfortable supporting a personnel increase package totalling $350,000 rather than the proposed $500,000. Council Member Wilkerson noted that the Town's tax burden was placed on individual homeowners rather than spread over a broad tax base as in other communities such as Raleigh and Durham.

Council Member Werner suggested that the Council examine proposed positions rather than possibly decreasing the market adjustment and related compensation such as merit increases. Council Member Rimer said this approach would have a much less significant impact on staff morale. Council Member Wilkerson stressed the importance of the morale of Town taxpayers. Council Member Wilkerson stated that many taxpayers do not receive merit or market adjustments to their income. Council Member Wilkerson suggested that the Town's personnel system and policies warranted evaluation in the near future. Council Member Wilkerson said he had difficulty supporting the proposed reclassifications and market and merit increases. Council Member Werner suggested that the Council could request the new Town Manager to examine the employee performance evaluation system.

Council Member Brown inquired about the proposed expenditure of $50,000 for the second phase of a solid waste study. Council Member Preston not?d that this amount would be matched by the City of Durham for conducting a joint study of solid waste alternatives. Council Member Preston stated that this effort had been somewhat sidetracked by the search for a new landfill facility. Council Member Brown inquired whether alternatives such as composting and refuse‑derived fuel would be considered in the study. Council Member Preston responded affirmatively and requested that Solid waste Administrator Gayle Wilson provide additional detail on the study. Mr. Wilson noted that if refuse volume reduction strategies were successful, the landfill site might have a longer life. Mr. Wilson added that the study would examine a spectrum of waste disposal alternatives to arrive at a long‑term waste management plan.

Council Member Rimer said it would be beneficial for the Council to have greater control over consultant studies, including those for solid waste programs. Council Member Rimer requested that the Council receive a future briefing on alternative strategies for solid waste management.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON, TO DELETE FUNDING FOR THE VOLUME‑REDUCTION STUDY FROM THE PROPOSED BUDGET.

Council Member Andresen said she supported maintaining funding of the project since the intergovernmental solid waste effort to date had been very positive.

THE MOTION WAS ON THE FLOOR AND FAILED BY A VOTE OF 2‑7, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS BROWN AND WILKERSON SUPPORTING THE MOTION.

Council Member Werner said it did not appear unreasonable to reduce the Mayor and Council travel budget from $34,200 to $22,800. Council Member Rimer concurred. Council Member Andresen suggested that staff travel be similarly examined for possible reductions. Ms. Loewenthal stated that staff travel was used for training and expansion of staff knowledge in their areas of professional expertise. Ms. Crotts noted that the majority of training programs occurred in‑State. Council Member Brown inquired whether any department heads attended more than one national conference. Council Member Werner said that the travel policy did not appear to be overly extravagant compared to private sector programs.

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER, TO REDUCE THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL TRAVEL BUDGET BY ONE‑THIRD FROM $34,200 TO $22,800. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 6‑3, WITH MAYOR HOWES AND COUNCIL MEMBERS HERZENBERG AND WALLACE VOTING NO.

Council Member Werner suggested that the volume of paper being forwarded to members of the Council merited examination. Council Member Brown concurred. Mayor Howes not?d that the majority of Council Members appeared to enjoy the convenience of receiving materials individually.

Council Member Andresen urged members of the Council to think about the fiscal impact of new programs prior to proposing them to their colleagues. Council Member Andresen also stressed the importance of quantifying all current and future program costs.

Council Member Brown requested information concerning an allocation of $20,000 for consultant services in the Planning Department. Ms. Loewenthal said these funds would be used for consulting for small area plans, the Tandler homeownership project and to assist with preparing an administrative handbook for the resale of Tandler homes.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON, To DELETE THE $20,000 PROPOSED FUNDING FOR MISCELLANEOUS CONSULTANT SERVICES IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

Council Member Werner noted that voting to delete the funding would be an indication that the Council did not want to pursue these projects. Council Member Wilkerson suggested that in‑house staff could perhaps provide some of the projected services.

THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR FAILED BY A VOTE OF 3‑6, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN AND WILKERSON VOTING IN FAVOR OF ADOPTION.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO DELETE $5,000 FROM THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BUDGET FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF HANGING BASKETS IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA.

Ms. Loewenthal noted that these funds were used to keep the baskets watered, weeded and stored at a greenhouse during cooler weather. Public Works Administrative Assistant Randy Ballard said that the upkeep of fifty to seventy‑five hanging baskets was provided for by this budget item. Mr. Ballard noted that non‑funding of the program would mean the scope of the program would be diminished.

THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 6‑3, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS RIMER AND WALLACE AND MAYOR HOWES VOTING NO.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED TO CUT $2,000 FROM THE INFORMATION SERVICES BUDGET FOR THE PROVISION OF MEALS FOR COUNCIL WORK SESSIONS AND JOINT MEETINGS WITH ADVISORY BOARDS. THE MOTION DID NOT RECEIVE A SECOND.

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 1, REVISED TO REFLECT ELIMINATION OF THE PROPOSED GROUNDSKEEPER POSITION FOR DOWNTOWN PARKING LOTS.

Council Member Andresen suggested that the Council could freeze hiring of some positions. Council Member Andresen added that the planning staff appeared to be disproportionate to the current level of development activity.

Council Member Preston inquired whether merit and market adjustments were addressed in Ordinance 2. Ms. Loewenthal said yes.

THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 8‑1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON VOTING NO.

(please see pages 10 through 21 of the Minutes for Ordinance 1)

COUNCIL MEMBER WALLACE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 2.

(please see pages 23 through 34 of the Minutes for Ordinance 2)

Council Member Preston noted that savings of $36,250 could be realized by implementing a 4% rather than 5% market adjustment. Council Member Preston added that savings of approximately $63,000 were possible from implementing a 3% rather than 5% increase. Council Member Preston inquired whether it would be more advisable to reduce the merit or market program. Ms. Crotts said it would be preferable to cut the market program, since cutting the merit program would impact all Town employees.

COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON, THAT THE MARKET RATE ADJUSTMENT BE REDUCED FROM FIVE TO FOUR PERCENT.

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO NOT FILL TWO VACANT SANITATION COLLECTOR POSITIONS.

Council Member Wilkerson said he had difficulty in supporting major reclassifications on an annual basis. Mayor Howes suggested that the new Town Manager could examine the Town's personnel evaluation system in the near future.

THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION, TO NOT FILL TWO SANITATION COLLECTION POSITIONS, WAS ON THE FLOOR. THE MOTION FAILED 4‑5, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS BROWN, HERZENBERG, RIMER AND WERNER SUPPORTING THE MOTION.

THE MOTION TO REDUCE THE MARKET ADJUSTMENT FROM 5% TO 4% WAS PLACED ON THE FLOOR. THE MOTION FAILED BY A VOTE OF 4‑5, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN, PRESTON AND WILKERSON SUPPORTING THE MOTION.

THE MAIN MOTION, ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE 2 WAS ON THE FLOOR FOR CONSIDERATION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED 7‑2 , WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS BROWN AND WILKERSON VOTING NO.

COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 1, THE PROPOSED ALLOCATION OF HUMAN SERVICES FUNDING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

A RESOLUTION APPROVING 1990‑91 FUNDING FOR SERVICE AGREEMENTS WITH HUMAN SERVICE AGENCIES AS RECOMMENDED BY THE HUMAN SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD (90‑6‑11/R‑1)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby approves the following appropriations for agreements with human service agencies in 1990‑91 to address the community's priority human services needs identified by the Human Services Advisory Board.

Amount

Association for Retarded Citizens of Orange County, Inc. $ 6,000

Chapel Hill‑Carrboro Meals on Wheels, Inc. 4,000

Charles House $4,000

Child Care Networks, Inc. $2,000

Day Care Services Association, Inc. $9,500

Dispute Settlement Center, Inc. $2,500

Franklin Street Teen Center $1,000

Joint Orange‑Chatham Community Action, Inc. $7,500

Orange Congregations in Mission, Inc. $5,000

Orange County Literacy Council $1,000

Orange County Rape Crisis Center, Inc. $8,000

Orange County Women's Center, Inc. $3,500

Orange‑Durham Coalition for Battered Women, Inc. $7,000

Planned Parenthood of Orange County, Inc. $4,000

Volunteers for Youth, Inc. $3,000

TOTAL: $68,000

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council hereby approves, and authorizes the Manager to execute on behalf of the Town, agreements with the above agencies for services described in the Human services Advisory Board's report on May 14, 1990.

This the 11th day of June, 1990.

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2, THE PROPOSED USER FEE SCHEDULE.

COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON PROPOSED A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO REDUCE THE HISTORIC DISTRICT CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FEE TO ZERO. THE AMENDMENT WAS ADOPTED.

Council Member Rimer suggested that the Town discontinue charging a $10 fee for inspection of load control devices, since these instruments are a means of energy conservation.

THE MAIN MOTION WAS PLACED ON THE FLOOR AND ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 8‑1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN VOTING NO.

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING USER FEE POLICIES AND SCHEDULES FOR VARIOUS TOWN DEPARTMENTS (90‑6‑11/R‑2)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby adopts the following user fee policies and schedules effective July 1, 1990 as recommended in the Manager's Recommended Budget and accompanying document dated April 23, 1990.

Development Review User Fees

Inspections User Fee Policy

Building Inspections Permit Fees General Policy and Schedule of

Building Permit Fees

Engineering Department's Inspection Fee Policy

Municipal Cemetery Fee Schedule

Street Cut Policy

Sanitation Services User Fee Policy

Police Department Fee Schedule

Parks and Recreation User Fee Policies and Schedules

Chapel Hill Public Library Fines and Fees Policies and Schedules

Transportation User Fees Policies and Schedules

Municipal Parking User Fee Rates and Schedules

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council hereby adopts the following tipping fees for the Landfill:

Solid Waste $ 20 per ton

Asbestos $100 per ton

Pick‑Up Trucks and Trailers $ 5 each

Cars $ 3 each

Tires $1 each; $100 per ton

This the 11th day of June, 1990.

Ms. Loewenthal provided an overview of proposed tax rates and Council adopted budget reductions from earlier actions in the evening's meeting. Council Member Herzenberg inquired whether Ordinance B would result in a property tax rate decrease of $0.00375 per $100. Finance Director James Baker said yes. Ms. Loewenthal noted that Ordinance B would have a greater impact on the Town's fund balance.

COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 3A.

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO SUBSTITUTE ORDINANCE 3B.

Ms. Loewenthal observed that the transportation tax rate would be reduced if Ordinance B were adopted. Mayor Howes inquired about the long.term implications of this difference. Ms. Loewenthal stated that approximately $100,000 less operating assistance would be available in the 1991‑92 fiscal y?ar. Mayor Howes observed that the Town Manager recommended adoption of Ordinance 3A. Council Member Werner inquired about the proposed tax rates for the alternative ordinances. Mr. Baker said Ordinance A would have a tax rate of 61.625 cents, while Ordinance B would have a tax rate of 61.125 cents.

THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION WAS PLACED ON THE FLOOR AND WAS Adopted BY A VOTE OF 6‑3, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN AND WILKERSON VOTING NO.

(please see pages 38 through 40 of Minutes for Ordinance)

Finance Director James Baker reviewed the budget adjustments adopted by the Council earlier in the evening, noting that the Town's new tax rate would be 61.125 cents per $100 valuation.

The meeting was recessed for ten minutes.

Mayor Howes suggested that the Council postpone consideration of board and commission nominations and appointments to the Council's June 25th meeting.

Cameron‑McCauley Historic District

Planning Director Roger Waldon noted that there was no consensus of opinion on the possible establishment of an historic district in the Cameron‑McCauley area. Mr. Waldon stated that the staff was presenting a variety of ordinances and a resolution for Council consideration this evening. Mr. Waldon noted that each of the alternatives had slightly differing boundaries. Mr. Waldon added that valid protest petitions had been presented for each of the proposed districts. He said that this necessitated seven affirmative Council votes for the creation of an historic district.

Mr. Waldon reviewed the alternative actions, noting that the North Carolina Division of Archives and Natural History did not support proposed alternative Ordinance D. Mr. Waldon briefly summarized main points in the staff memorandum to the Council. Mr. Waldon stated that there were benefits to b? gained from the creation of an historic district and recommended the adoption of Ordinance B to the Council.

Council Member Preston said she was glad that additional time had been taken to discuss the proposal in the neighborhood and Town at large. Council Member Preston expressed her support for the creation of an historic district as a good preservation tool. Council Member Preston noted that the community of Salisbury, North Carolina, with a population of approximately 20,000, has eight historic districts. Council Member Preston stressed the importance of maintaining the unique heritage of the Cameron‑McCauley area.

COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WALLACE, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE B, INCLUDING THE CAROLINA INN AND NASH HALL IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.

Council Member Brown requested an opinion from the Town Attorney on her voting eligibility in this matter because of her ownership of property in the affected area. Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos said he had reviewed the State law on matters of this sort and found that Council Member Brown was eligible to vote on the proposal. Mr. Karpinos noted that since there is no voting abstention provision for council members in the State statutes, individuals may request to be excluded from voting on individual items by a vote of the Council.

Council Member Andresen said she supported the formation of an historic district. Council Member Andresen expressed interest in streamlining of certain historic district regulations.

COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN MOVED ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE D. THERE WAS NO SECOND FOR THE MOTION.

Council Member Herzenberg expressed his support for Ordinance B. Council Member Herzenberg noted that Cobb Terrace, the street on which he resides, was the only street added to date to the Town's original historic district. Council Member Herzenberg said that in an informal poll of his neighbors, the overwhelmingly majority had expressed continued support for their inclusion in an historic district.

Council Member Wilkerson expressed concern about the inconsistency and political leaning of the staff on their recommendation to the Council. Council Member Wilkerson said his opposition to the formation of the historic district this evening was not a reflection on his belief of the need for neighborhood preservation.

Council Member Brown said that as a resident and property owner in the area, she supported the formation of the historic district. Council Member Brown cited the psychological importance of forming the district. Council Member Andresen said the proposed plan (Ordinance B) was an improvement from the original proposal.

Council Member Wilkerson stressed the importance of the Council receiving the best possible balanced professional recommendation from the Town staff on the basis of all information presented. Mayor Howes said the recommendation was a close call which had been handled professionally by the Town planning staff. Council Member Wilkerson said he expected that official information would be presented to the Council in an even‑handed manner.

ORDINANCE B, AS AMENDED, WAS PLACED ON THE FLOOR FOR CONSIDERATION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 8‑1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER WILKERSON VOTING NO.

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CHAPEL HILL ZONING ATLAS TO ESTABLISH A HISTORIC DISTRICT IN THE CAMERON‑MCCAULEY AREA (90‑6‑11/0‑4b)

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has considered the proposal to amend the Zoning Atlas to establish a local historic district in the Cameron‑McCauley area and finds that the amendment achieves the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan, particularly the Town Character goals and objectives to "conserve and enhance areas, sites, and structures of special visual, architectural or historical value;" and

WHEREAS, The North Carolina General Statutes 160A‑400.1 state that "The historical heritage of our State is one of our most valued and important assets. The conservation and preservation of historic districts and landmarks stabilize and increase property values in their areas and strengthen the overall economy of the State." And GS 160A‑400 authorizes the governing board to designate historic districts; and

WHEREAS, the Town has followed the procedures set forth in State law concerning the establishment of historic districts;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Tom of Chapel Hill that the Zoning Atlas be amended as follows:

SECTION I

That the property identified on the attached map B be included in a local historic district subject to the provisions of Article 6 of the Development Ordinance.

SECTION II

That all ordinances and portions of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

This the 11th day of June, 1990.

Woodbine Drive Right‑of‑Way

Engineering Director George Small said that a mixture of comments concerning the proposed closure of Woodbine Drive had been received at the public hearing. Mr. Small noted that the Town Manager recommended that no action be taken on the matter at this time. Mr. Small added that if problems occurred following the opening of the expanded Fordham Boulevard, the issue could be revisited at that time. Council Member Wallace observed that if Laurel Hill Drive Extension were cut‑off, traffic would be diverted along Coker and Morgan Creek Drives.

THE COUNCIL TOOK NO ACTION ON THIS MATTER.

Chapel Hill Ballet School SUP Modification

Planning Director Roger Waldon briefly reviewed the proposal, noting that the Town Manager recommended adoption of Resolution 5A.

COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 5A. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE BALLET SCHOOL OF CHAPEL HILL (SUP‑46‑A‑3) (90‑6‑11/R‑5a)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it

finds that The Ballet School development, proposed by The Ballet

School of Chapel Hill, Inc., on property identified as Chapel Hill Township, Tax Map 46, Block A, Lot 3, if developed according to the site Plan dated January 4, 1990 (Revised March 26, 1990), and the conditions listed below

1. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;

2. Comply with all required regulations and standards of the Development Ordinance, including all applicable provisions of Article 12, 13 and 14, and with all other applicable regulations;

3. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property or be a public necessity; and

4. Conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Development Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.

These findings are conditioned on the following:

1. That construction begin by December 11, 1991 (eighteen months from the date of the Council approval) and be completed by December 11, 1992 (thirty months from the date of the Council approval).

2. That final plans show replacement of the existing western curb cut along East Franklin Street with curb and gutter and sidewalk, to be built to Town standards.

3. That final plans show a street‑type entrance from East Franklin Street.

4. That the final utility/lighting plan be approved by OWASA, Duke Power, Carolina Cable, Public Service Company, Southern Bell, and the Town Manager, before issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

5. That the detailed building elevations, landscape maintenance plan and landscape plan, including a standard Type "D" buffer along the property frontage, a standard Type "C" buffer along the rear property line and two alternative Type "C" buffers (for the two side property lines), be approved by the Appearance Commission prior to issuance of the Zoning Compliance Permit.

6. That standing curbs, pre‑cast curbs, or other alternative to Town‑standard curb be us?d in the critical root zone of the existing 38" oak to minimize root disturbance. Curbing shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

7. That a Landscape Protection Plan be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

8. That the location of the refuse collection service area be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

9. That a soil erosion and sedimentation control plan be approved by the Orange County Erosion Control Officer before issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

10. That final plans to be approved by the To m Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit (detailed site plan, utility plan/lighting plan, grading and stormwater management plan with hydrologic calculations, fire flow report) conform to the approved preliminary plans and demonstrate compliance with the above conditions and the design standards of the Development Ordinance and the Design Manual.

11. That the applicant take appropriate measures to prevent the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.

12. That the continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.

13. That if any of the above conditions is held invalid, approval shall be void.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council hereby approves the application for The Ballet School of Chapel Hill Special Use Permit in accordance with the plans and conditions listed above.

This the 11th day of June, 1990.

Greenfields SUP Modification

Planning Director Roger Waldon noted that the staff had initially recommended denial of the applicant's request at the public hearing on this matter. Mr. Waldon stated that the applicant had subsequently expressed a willingness to comply with existing regulations. Mr. Waldon said the Town Manager recommended that the application be remanded to the staff for future follow‑up.

Council Member Werner expressed concern that extending the time frame for the project would be detrimental to having a finite construction time frame. Council Member Werner noted that no activity had occurred on the site to date. Mr. Waldon noted that the project had been approved under an old set of development regulations. Mr. Waldon stated that no action could be taken on the development application wit?out Council approval, Council Member wallace said it was none of the Council's business to resurrect projects. Mr. Waldon stated that the applicant was requesting a modification of the project time limit, subject to meeting current development regulations. Mr. Waldon said the staff recommended recessing the hearing, taking the application before the Planning Board, and reopening the hearing in the future.

COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIMER, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 6B. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

A RESOLUTION RECESSING A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN APPLICATION TO MODIFY THE GREENFIELDS SPECIAL USE PERMIT (90‑6‑11/R‑6b)

WHEREAS, the Council approved a Special Use Permit for Greenfields Planned Development on June 11, 1984; and

WHEREAS, the property owner, Summey Building Systems, Inc., has requested a modification of the permit to extend the required completion date by one year; and

WHEREAS, the application approved in 1984 would not comply with current provisions of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance; and

WHEREAS, the property owner has indicated a willingness to revise the project proposal to achieve consistency with current requirements of the Development Ordinance;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council recesses this Public Hearing to receive at a later date the property owner's proposals to redesign the proposal and remands this application to the staff to allow the owner an opportunity to revise the application.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council requests the Planning Board to review these revisions, when made, and to ?ring a recommendation to the Council.

This the 11th day of June, 1990.

Consent Agenda

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNER, TO ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS (90‑6‑11/R‑7)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby adopts the resolutions as submitted by the Manager in regard to the following:

a. A resolution authorizing contracts with the University of North Carolina, Town of Carrboro and City of Durham for provision of transportation services (R‑8).

b. Request to close 400 block of Tinkerbell Road for block party (R‑9).

c. A resolution authorizing an application for federal grant transit funding (R.10).

This the 11th day of June, 1990.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF CONTRACTS WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA, THE TOWN OF CARRBORO, AND THE CITY OF DURHAM IN 1990‑91 (90‑6‑11/R‑8)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby approves, and authorizes the Town Manager to execute on behalf of the Town, and in accord with adopted Memorandum of Understandings for transit services, contracts with the University of North Carolina and the Town of Carrboro for the Town to provide them public transportation services, provided said contracts not increase the Town of Chapel Hill transit services and are substantially in accord with the adopted budget of the Town of Chapel Hill.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Manager is authorized to enter an agreement and sign on behalf of the Town agreements, authorizations or franchises as required with the City of Durham to operate transit services within the city limits of Durham as negotiated.

This the 11th day of June, 1990.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TEMPORARY CLOSING OF PART OF TINKERBELL ROAD (90‑6‑11/R‑9)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby authorizes the temporary closing of the 400 block of Tinkerbell Road on Saturday, June 23, 1990 from 4:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. (or for the same hours on Saturday, June 30, 1990 in the event of rain) for a block party subject to the following conditions:

1. There shall be vehicles parked to serve as barricades at the end of the closed area with persons available to allow entry by emergency vehicles if necessary.

2. The closed street area shall be cleaned of litter by 9:00 p.m.

3. No alcohol shall be consumed in the public street right‑of‑way.

4. A permit for outdoor amplified sound shall be obtained from the Police Department if necessary under the Town's noise ordinance.

5. Participants in the event shall comply with reasonable directives of the Police and Fire Departments.

This the 11th day of June, 1990.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF APPLICATIONS WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FOR GRANTS UNDER THE URBAN MASS TRANSPORTATION ACT OF 1964, AS AMENDED (90‑6‑11/R‑10)

WHEREAS, the Secretary of Transportation is authorized to make grants for mass transportation program of projects; and

WHEREAS, the contract for financial assistance will impose certain obligations upon the applicant, including the provision by it of the local share of project costs; and

WHEREAS, it is required by the U.S. Department of Transportation in accord with the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, that in connection with the filing of applications for assistance under the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as amended, the applicant files an assurance that it will comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the u.s. Department of Transportation requirements thereunder; and

WHEREAS, it is the goal of the applicant that minority business enterprise be utilized to the fullest extent possible in connection with these projects, and that definitive procedures shall be established and administered to ensure that minority businesses shall have the maximum feasible opportunity to compete for contracts when procuring construction contracts, supplies, equipment contracts, or consultant and other services;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill:

1. That the Town Manager is authorized to execute and file applications on behalf of the Town of Chapel Hill with the u.s. Department of Transportation and the North Carolina Department of Transportation, to aid in the financing of operating, capital and planning assistance projects pursuant to Section 3 and 9 of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as amended.

2. That the Town Manager is authorized to execute and file with such applications an assurance or any other document required by the U.S. Department of Transportation effectuating the purposes of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

3. That the Town Manager is authorized to furnish such additional information as the U.S. Department of Transportation may require in connection with the applications for the program of projects and budget.

4. That the Town Manager is authorized to set forth and execute affirmative minority business policies in connection with the project's procurement needs.5. That the Town Manager is authorized to execute grant agreements on behalf of the Town of Chapel Hill with the U.S. Department of Transportation and N.C. Department of Transportation for aid in the financing of the operating, capital, and planning assistance program of projects.

This the 11th day of June, 1990.

COUNCIL MEMBER HERZENBERG MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PRESTON, TO MOVE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS LITIGATION MATTERS. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9‑0).

No report followed the Executive Session.

The Council meeting adjourned at 11:29 p.m.