Minutes 10-03-2017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

20 Commissioner Price said there is a difference in the minimum for the Buckhorn EDD and the Carrboro project, and asked if this matters should the BOCC decide to swap out the Carrboro project for the Buckhorn EDD. Bonnie Hammersley said they would have to back in to the $820,000. Chair Dorosin said they would submit less than the minimum that is listed. Commissioner Price asked if this would work with $820,000. Steve Brantley said Carrboro's estimate for total cost was $1.5 million, and he said the original request by the Town was $1.25 million. He said when the Manager's office, and the Economic Development Department, reviewed all five projects; the final recommendation was to include the Carrboro proposal at $820,000. Chair Dorosin said the question is if Buckhorn EDD is put in, and there is only $820,000 left, does this affect the proposal. Bonnie Hammersley said it would not, and there are Article 46 monies allocated to that EDD. Commissioner Rich asked if this does get switched out, Carrboro can apply to the County for Article 46 funds. Bonnie Hammersley said all towns can request Article 46 funds from Orange County, and she said the challenge with that is the debt service is being used with most of the Article 46 funds. She said staff would evaluate any requests as they come in, and weigh them against the priorities of the BOCC. Commissioner Rich asked if the percentage of Article 46 monies that have been spent on the towns is known. Steve Brantley said the EDD's infrastructure takes 60% annually, and the loan and grant programs are almost exclusively in the Towns. He said some funds go to the LaUNCh program in Chapel Hill. Commissioner Rich said she is interested in funds that have gone to infrastructure. Steve Brantley said some funds paid for a sewer line repair in Carrboro. Bonnie Hammersley said there have been no other infrastructure projects in the urban areas. Steve Brantley said the original core use for Article 46 funds was debt service for utilities in the EDDs. He said the use of the money, since the referendum was passed in 2011, has essentially followed that intent. He said it is at the discretion of the BOCC to maintain or change this intent as it sees fit. Chair Dorosin said he thought Commissioner Jacobs' comments were unfair to the Town of Carrboro, and if the BOCC is not receiving requested information, it should be following up. He said this project is on the agenda for the BOCC's joint meeting with the Town of Carrboro. He said the Golden LEAF opportunity came about very recently. He said he would support the recommendation, but noted it is important to the Board's relationship with the Town to move forward. He said residents' concerns should be heard and considered, but they are under a tight timeline. He said he doubts that two EDD projects will be funded, and the Carrboro project is valid and worth exploring further. He said he will not support a motion that does not include the Carrboro project. Commissioner Jacobs said he is not being unfair to Carrboro, and rather Carrboro is being unfair to Orange County. He said Carrboro has had 12 months to get this information to the County and the public, but Carrboro is not paying close attention. He said the BOCC would be irresponsible to agree to put water and sewer in a rural area, without knowing the consequences. He said the best way to limit its applicability to other parcels is to size it so small that it will not be that effective to spend the money on it. He said if it is going to be big enough for other development, then the BOCC must consider the consequences before