Orange County NC Website
5 <br /> <br />Commissioner Marcoplos said he agrees, and would want to make the term limits <br />retroactive. <br />Commissioner Rich said term limits should be 2 years. <br />Commissioner McKee said to start the term limits anew, not retroactively. <br />Chair Dorosin said the combining of options C and D seems most favorable, with <br />two-year term limits, a round robin process, and collegial conversation. He said option E <br />could be added, but that does not seem well supported by the BOCC. He asked if the <br />Clerk could bring this back for approval and the Board agreed. <br />Chair Dorosin said he wanted to bring up one more housekeeping item: when <br />the Board votes for Chair/Vice Chair in December, it is done via a written ballot that is <br />given to the Clerk; the Clerk reads the votes, but never states who voted for whom. He <br />said he finds this to be inappropriate, and akin to a secret ballot. He said the votes are <br />public record, but he thinks the votes, and who cast them, should be read aloud. <br />Commissioner McKee said it is available to the public as a public record anyway. <br />Chair Dorosin asked if there is a reason that the Clerk should not read this <br />information aloud, as it allows for greater transparency. <br />Commissioner Burroughs agreed with Chair Dorosin. <br />Commissioner Price asked if a written ballot is even necessary, or is a show of <br />hands acceptable. <br />John Roberts said the action will be reflected in the minutes, which is the official <br />record. He said other boards have used electronic voting, which shows up on the video <br />screen of the meeting. <br />Commissioner Price said if the intention is to see who is voting for whom, then <br />there is no need for a ballot; a raising of hands will suffice. <br />Commissioner Jacobs said any changes should be added to a future agenda for <br />a vote. <br />The Clerk will provide an abstract at the November 20th meeting. <br /> <br />2. Review and Update of Portions of the Unified Development Ordinance and <br />Code of Ordinances <br /> <br />John Roberts presented each of these items. His recommendations are noted in <br />red: <br />The purpose of this item is to both provide an update to the Board of Commissioners on <br />ordinance amendments that are in process and request direction from the Board on <br />what action to take on ordinances that may be outdated and no longer relevant, not <br />authorized by law, or confusing and burdensome to the public. The County Attorney <br />provided an overview and gave a brief background on the following ordinances for <br />discussion: <br /> <br />• Unified Development Ordinance <br />• Conditional Use Districts – Update <br />• Number of Land Uses – Update <br />• Major Subdivisions – Update <br /> <br />• Code of Ordinances <br />• Chapter 1; General Penalties – Request Direction <br />• Chapter 4; Animal Control – Update-Amendment forthcoming <br />• Chapter 6; Insulation Contractors – Repeal recommended <br />• Chapter 10; Cable Communications – Removal from Code recommended <br />• Chapter 16; Noise – Request Direction