Browse
Search
Agenda - 01-23-2014 - 6i
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2014
>
Agenda - 01-23-2014 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 01-23-2014 - 6i
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/24/2014 2:35:38 PM
Creation date
1/24/2014 2:34:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
1/23/2014
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6i
Document Relationships
Minutes 01-23-2014
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
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
ATTACHMENT 4 <br /> 26 <br /> DCHC M PO M emorandum of Understanding <br /> 9ammary of Comments Received from DCHC M embers <br /> Note: Page and line references refer to marked version of MOU. <br /> Town of Hillsborough Comments-Received 8/28/13 <br /> Comment TAC Response <br /> No comments N/A <br /> Chatham County Comments-Received 9/6113 <br /> Comment TAC Response <br /> Page 6, beginning on line 36. The Chatham County Weighting voting provisions are in the MOU. The <br /> Board of Commissioners is unanimously opposed number of voteswas adjusted so that all local <br /> to the weighted voting provisions. governments have more votes than Triangle <br /> Transit and NCDOT. The proposed weighted <br /> voting is based on the current MOU,with small <br /> adjustments to account for current populations. <br /> Population distribution is not the only factor in <br /> developing the current weighted voting structure <br /> asthe Oty of Durham only represents42%of the <br /> weighted votes yet represents about 58%of the <br /> population of the M Fn. Weighted voting has been <br /> very rarely invoked by M FO Board members. <br /> General comment: The Board of Commissioners is No change. Federal regulations require the M PO <br /> also concerned about the 20%local match, citing to plan and conduct other activities within the <br /> the population differences between the urbanized entire planning area, not just the urbanized area. <br /> area and the planning area of the M PO boundary <br /> within Chatham County. <br /> NCDOTComments-Received 9/6113 <br /> Comment TAC Response <br /> Page 3, line 13-14. The M PO is required to plan for Change made <br /> the entire area, not just the Durham Urbanized <br /> Area as defined by the USGensus. Change <br /> "Durham Urbanized Area"to "Durham-Chapel Hill- <br /> Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Area" <br /> Page 4, line 21. Change "Planning Area"to "MPO" Change made <br /> Page 4, line 35. What is M FO policy for R [public No change. The M PO approved a revised Public <br /> involvement]? Expecting the public to show up in Involvement Policy on 11/14/2012. The Policy <br /> downtown Durham, in the morning, and pay to prescribesthe proceduresfor disseminating <br /> park may be limiting your R. information to the public and receiving public <br /> input into the MPO's decision-making process. <br /> The M PO holds meetings and workshops at night <br /> and in locations other than downtown Durham as <br /> 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.