Agenda - 11-20-2012 - 5a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

27 1 new services and then turns around and uses it for existing services, then the County will lose 2 all credibility of the public. 3 Commissioner Jacobs thanked Commissioner Gordon for her discussion of the MPO 4 role. 5 Commissioner Jacobs said that he would entertain an attempt from Chapel Hill Transit 6 to provide a definition of the change in the document and then ask staff to analyze it. He thinks 7 that the plan will serve people throughout the County. He thinks that most of the staff and 8 elected officials have worked really hard to make sure that there is increased service 9 throughout the County. As long as this basic premise is not being threatened, he is open to a 10 proposal. 11 Commissioner McKee said that this is becoming political. He is not sure that there are 12 a dozen people in Orange County that could give a legally binding definition of supplantation. 13 He does not even understand it fully. He has a real concern that this is a move away from what 14 the County Commissioners should really be doing for the citizens. 15 Commissioner Yuhasz said that 60% of the budget comes from the University and the 16 scenario that the Board has heard is that the University is now putting satellite facilities out and 17 may not need the same kind of services. Unless there is a commitment from the University to 18 maintain their level of funding, there could be a significant drop in the funding to Chapel Hill 19 Transit. He asked if Chapel Hill Transit would make up that significant amount of money from 20 the Y2-cent sales tax, or if Chapel Hill Transit could meet its obligation to maintain the level of 21 funding, much less the level of service. He is not opposed to working something out. 22 Commissioner Hemminger suggested sitting down with both parties and specifying 23 where all of the funds are coming from. 24 Commissioner Gordon said that she thinks they should try and find a way to work with 25 their partners to accommodate the case for changes in the agreement that Chapel Hill Transit 26 has put forward. 27 Chair Pelissier said that her concern is that UNC is not making any contribution to the 28 transit plan but contributes 60% to Chapel Hill Transit. She does not want Orange County 29 subsidizing UNC. She asked Steve Spade if there was any formal agreement about a 30 continued commitment by UNC that does not put Chapel Hill Transit in jeopardy. 31 Steve Spade said that there are a couple of agreements in place. One is that there is 32 an annual agreement that is contractual with a cost allocation formula that determines how 33 each of the partners pay. There are also requirements that UNC will be a member of the 34 partnership as long as there will be development in Carolina North. 35 Discussion ensued between the County Commissioners and Steve Spade. 36 Commissioner McKee noted that the University's ability to fund at any particular level is 37 contingent upon the legislature. 38 Chair Pelissier said that what she hears is that there is no specific direction on this 39 issue, but the parties will continue to work on this issue and see what kind of recommendations 40 will come back. 41 Commissioner Jacobs said that he would like to be more specific and invite a proposal 42 from Chapel Hill Transit in consultation with other partners to include in the Implementation 43 Agreement that would address the concerns that Chapel Hill Transit has raised without straying 44 beyond the parameters that are already within the agreement. 45 46 A motion was made by Chair Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Hemminger to 47 continue the meeting past 10:30 p.m. 48 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 49