Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
2 <br />The County Manager and County staff reviewed the issue and the petition submitted and <br />provided a report to the Board at the Board's May 5, 2005 work session. The report included <br />information on the following: <br />1) the legal framework for structure of boards of county commissioners; <br />2) the various methods of at -large election, district election, and combination of at- <br />large /district election utilized for boards of commissioners in the 99 other North Carolina <br />counties; <br />3) a history of past discussions by the Orange County Board of Commissioners in regard to <br />Board representation and election; <br />4) some limited boundaries and statistical information showing the population distribution as <br />it may relate to the consideration /formulation of district representation for Orange County. <br />The report was intended to provide an initial framework of information upon which the Board of <br />Commissioners could deliberate and determine as appropriate any further steps in evaluating <br />this issue and responding to the request and petition submitted. <br />The Board then pursued a series of meetings over the past ten months. Those meetings <br />included two public hearings, one on August 24 and the other on August 31, 2005, to receive <br />input from the public on this issue. This was followed by, at an October 17, 2005 work session, <br />Board discussion of five initial draft maps /plans, an introductory preamble, a draft set of <br />Principles, and a draft Process/Timetable. From that meeting, the Board then scheduled and <br />conducted a public hearing at its November 2, 2005 regular meeting on three of the initial draft <br />maps /plans. <br />The next discussion occurred at the Board's November 15, 2005 regular meeting. At that <br />meeting, the Board determined that it would like to invest more time at a work session for <br />specific discussion of the issues and possibilities associated with the district election of <br />commissioners. The Board did approve a motion at the meeting "...[to] pursue a district election <br />system and have a referendum in the general election of 2006 on the map that the Board of <br />Commissioners adopt." <br />The Board also briefly discussed district elections at the January 20, 2006 BOCC Retreat as <br />part of the "Priorities" review, and members of the Board indicated an interest in reaching a <br />conclusion on district elections discussions with two additional meetings, if possible. <br />At a February 16, 2006 work session, the Board: <br />1) decided there would be a total of 5 members on the Board in a district plan submitted to <br />the voters; <br />2) determined the district map /plan would be the one designated as "Proposal 5 ", with one <br />member from District 1 (all of the County except Chapel Hill Township); two members <br />from District 2 (encompassing Chapel Hill Township); and two At -Large members; <br />3) decided that members elected from District 1 and District 2 must reside in their respective <br />District, but the qualified voters of the entire County would nominate all candidates for and <br />elect all members of the Board; <br />4) confirmed that a referendum on "Proposal 5" along with related items would occur in <br />November 2006 (As noted above, the Board, at its November 15, 2005 regular meeting, <br />had already determined to have "a referendum in the general election of 2006 on the map <br />and plan that the Board of Commissioners adopt'), <br />