Browse
Search
Agenda - 11-05-2015 - 6-a - Minutes
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2015
>
Agenda - 11-05-2015 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 11-05-2015 - 6-a - Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/30/2015 9:35:21 AM
Creation date
10/30/2015 9:13:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
11/5/2015
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6a
Document Relationships
Minutes 11-05-2015
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
50
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
9 <br /> 1 Commissioner Jacobs said he made the third party suggestion, as he wants to know <br /> 2 which facility is the most vulnerable to be entered by an unauthorized person. He said he <br /> 3 wanted to know this type of information as a whole, prior to talking to the voters about <br /> 4 supporting a bond. He said there must be some basis to take to the voters. <br /> 5 Chair Kelly asked if the five criteria are security, health and safety, structural integrity, <br /> 6 capacity, and improvement versus replacement as well as possibly adding logistics. <br /> 7 Commissioner Jacobs said yes, and that it may be wise to further the discussion to see if <br /> 8 more criteria should be included. <br /> 9 Chair Kelly said this proposal is logical, but the issues start to break down when deciding <br /> 10 to whose opinion one should listen. He said being objective is very difficult and that people <br /> 11 have been working on this for a while. He said some decisions are simply educational, and <br /> 12 should be made by an elected school board versus an outsider. He expressed concern about <br /> 13 the timeline when adding another variable into the process. He said the school districts have <br /> 14 been on this "train" for four years. He expressed concern for the cost of such an analysis, as <br /> 15 well as what would happen when the school board disagreed with the consultant or the BOCC, <br /> 16 and how disagreements would be resolved. He said $125 million is only a down payment on <br /> 17 what the schools need. <br /> 18 Chair Kelly said if this process is going to be applied to the bond funds, then similar <br /> 19 criteria should also apply to the Board of County Commissioners and the CIP. He said it is <br /> 20 valuable to have the best information possible, but no information is perfect. <br /> 21 Jamezetta Bedford echoed the comments of Steve Halkiotis and Chair Kelly. She said <br /> 22 capacity is a big issue for CHCCS, but not with OCS, and that is one problem with the proposed <br /> 23 ratings. She said this suggestion is a usurping of elected school boards by the Board of County <br /> 24 Commissioners. She said the architect being used by the CHCCS is the same one being used <br /> 25 by the County for the jail, and as such the County should have some level of confidence in the <br /> 26 architect. She said the architect has evaluated the older buildings objectively, and the resulting <br /> 27 assessments should be trusted. <br /> 28 Jamezetta Bedford said there is no value in this proposal, and asked what would happen <br /> 29 if the independent third party gave all the funds to only one school district. She said there must <br /> 30 be allocations to both school districts if there is any hope of gathering public support. She said <br /> 31 the suggestion makes no political sense. <br /> 32 Jamezetta Bedford said deciding how to allocate the proposed bond funds is important. <br /> 33 She said this suggestion is a very bad idea and not a positive step. <br /> 34 Annetta Streater said she believed that the public has confidence in the two school <br /> 35 districts, and their boards, to be responsible to the students, their families, and to the taxpayers. <br /> 36 She asked for the Board of County Commissioners to have the same confidence in the school <br /> 37 boards to make the best recommendations for the school districts. She said all involved have <br /> 38 thought through the variables and needs very carefully, with great dedication. <br /> 39 Commissioner Dorosin said in support of Commissioner Jacobs that the Board of County <br /> 40 Commissioners is the one body that is charged to look out for all the students through the <br /> 41 Board's funding capacity. He said if these are urgent needs that will be addressed through a <br /> 42 bond, the funding must be candidly explained to the public. He said being frank and <br /> 43 straightforward about the process is imperative. <br /> 44 Steve Halkiotis said the last time the County went out for a bond in 2001, specific <br /> 45 projects had to be listed. He said it is now his understanding that the bond counsel has said <br /> 46 that a lump sum can be approved on a bond without a listing of projects. <br /> 47 Chair McKee said the Board has not had this discussion. <br /> 48 Commissioner Rich said she echoed the comments of Steve Halkiotis. She said she <br /> 49 also agreed with Commissioner Dorosin that there was not a chance to discuss a lot of this as <br /> 50 part of the bond process. She said it is important to be as honest as possible with the voters. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.