Browse
Search
Minutes - 19930524
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Minutes - Approved
>
1990's
>
1993
>
Minutes - 19930524
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/17/2017 1:59:11 PM
Creation date
8/13/2008 1:14:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/24/1993
Meeting Type
Public Hearing
Document Type
Minutes
Document Relationships
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - Agenda
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 1
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 2
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 3
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 4a, 5a, 6a
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 4b
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 5b
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 6b
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 6c
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
Agenda - 05-24-1993 - C 6d
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1993\Agenda - 05-24-1993
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
334 <br /> high quality school district which will lead to economic growth for the <br /> County. <br /> NANETTE FIELDS, President of the Board of Realtors, feels there is a <br /> fairness issue. The developer is paying fees from the very beginning of the <br /> process to build a house. These fees are then passed on to the homeowner. <br /> She would rather pay through her property taxes than .to impose another fee. <br /> Everyone benefits from the burden and should share it equally. She urged the <br /> Board to promote economic development and to encourage everyone to be better <br /> stewards of the County's tax money. She hopes that -the Board does not send <br /> a message that only people who can afford the higher price of housing can live <br /> in Orange County. <br /> KEN TOUW, resident of Chapel Hill and school board member feels that the <br /> impact fee will have very little impact on the sale of homes and the price <br /> range on these homes. He stated that the impact fee is fair and equitable <br /> because at the present time all citizens are being asked to pay the entire <br /> price associated with additional residential units and this fee will allow <br /> some of the additional capital cost to be paid by owners of new houses causing <br /> these additional costs. It is true that the student population is growing <br /> faster than the population of the County as a whole which is not all due to <br /> new, housing. This fee will begin to address the increased capital needs <br /> associated with the additional houses. <br /> HARVEY SADOFF, Principal of Glenwood Elementary School, spoke in favor <br /> of the impact fee. He told of the situation at Glenwood Elementary School <br /> -. with inadequate space in the cafeteria and other areas of the school. The <br /> school is not overcrowded but needs to be renovated, repaired and expanded. <br /> They are considering year-round school using single-tract planning, not <br /> multitract. The practical aspect of this fee is that for every person the <br /> school does not succeed with, it will cost money later due to crime, <br /> unemployment, job training, etc. It is a question of paying for education now <br /> or buying a security system for your house later. People who are interested <br /> in quality education for their children will not be deterred because of the <br /> impact fee. <br /> He feels that it is important. to provide a professional working environment <br />- - for -all the hard working teachers and a quality learning environment- for every <br /> child. <br /> R. ALEX ZAFFRON, Second Vice-Chair of the Orange County Democratic Party <br /> and speaking for himself, noted that the platform of the party calls for <br /> taxation to be applied fairly, equitably and progressively. This fee has <br /> Placed another obstacle in the path of ordinary working people who are <br /> struggling to buy their first home. The primary argument against this fee is <br /> that its implementation would add yet another barrier to one of the pressing <br /> problems in the County which is the creation of affordable housing. He agrees <br /> that the County should provide adequate funding for the schools but feels the <br /> sources of funding should be provided fairly, equitably and progressively. <br /> This proposal remains unfair, inequitable, unprogressive and runs counter to <br /> the solution of affordable housing. He urged the County Commissioners to find <br /> a better way to fund the schools. <br /> RUSS DAVIS, Executive Vice President of the Homebuilders Association of <br /> Durham and Chapel Hill, read some comments that their Governmental. Affairs <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.