Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
21 <br /> 1 John Roberts said the County would still be in the agreement, but there would need to <br /> 2 be a meeting to determine how to proceed, with Orange County unable to provide additional <br /> 3 funds. <br /> 4 Commissioner Marcoplos asked if, in that case, Orange County is protected by <br /> 5 paragraph 15. <br /> 6 John Roberts said Orange County is not automatically in the agreement to find <br /> 7 additional funds. <br /> 8 Commissioner Marcoplos said this would allow Orange County to be out of it without <br /> 9 even voting. <br /> 10 John Roberts said the County is not automatically out of the agreement, and is still a <br /> 11 party to the agreement, but it could exercise its right under paragraph 15. He said the County <br /> 12 could state that the dedicated local revenues are its only contribution. He said, at this point, the <br /> 13 parties would have to work out a plan on how to proceed. <br /> 14 Commissioner Marcoplos said he wonders what the County's vulnerability would be at <br /> 15 that point, as it seems the County may be fairly well protected. <br /> 16 Commissioner Jacobs referred to page 6, and said it specifically speaks to material <br /> 17 changes. He said material changes would be part of the basis for reviewing the status of the <br /> 18 project. He said he thought there was a place where material changes were defined. <br /> 19 Travis Myren said this information has been recast to be called significant cost overruns, <br /> 20 or unmitigated funding shortfalls in provision #14. He said this mirrors the material changes in <br /> 21 previous document. <br /> 22 Commissioner Jacobs asked if there was a reason the language was changed. <br /> 23 Tammy Bouchelle said GoTriangle understood the request to be to link the definition of <br /> 24 unmitigated funding shortfall or cost overrun to the definition of material change that is in the <br /> 25 existing implementation agreements. She said this is what was done. She said the existing <br /> 26 implementation agreements are still in play and are valid documents. <br /> 27 Commissioner McKee said the process was in material change for a year, and yet it was <br /> 28 never triggered. <br /> 29 Commissioner Jacobs said quarterly and annual reports will be received, so that parties <br /> 30 can keep track of any material changes. He asked what will happen if the FTA receives a <br /> 31 document and takes issue with something within in it. <br /> 32 Katharine Eggleston said in this case the FTA has indicated in writing that GoTriangle <br /> 33 must provide documentation of the commitment by end of April and if not, FTA will withdraw the <br /> 34 project from the New Starts pipeline and project development. <br /> 35 Commissioner Jacobs said that relates back to what the FTA told GoTriangle verbally in <br /> 36 February. <br /> 37 Katharine Eggleston said yes. <br /> 38 Commissioner Jacobs asked if this process is standard in FTA's operating procedures. <br /> 39 Katharine Eggleston said there are specific requirements for four things that must be <br /> 40 completed within the two-year time frame of project development, and if these requirements are <br /> 41 not met, the project is withdrawn. She said this is very typical. <br /> 42 Travis Myren resumed the PowerPoint presentation: <br /> 43 <br /> 44 Cost Share Agreement Provisions <br /> 45 0 Prohibition on Other Local Revenues <br /> 46 • County is not obligated to use any revenue other than dedicated transit <br /> 47 revenue to pay its share <br /> 48 • Annual Reports <br /> 49 • Annual reports to Board of Commissioners on collection, allocation, and <br /> 50 expenditure of transit revenues <br />