Browse
Search
Approved Minutes of March 27, 2024
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Board of Health
>
Minutes
>
2024
>
Approved Minutes of March 27, 2024
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/23/2024 4:31:52 PM
Creation date
10/23/2024 4:30:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
3/27/2024
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Advisory Bd. Minutes
Document Relationships
Approved Agenda March 27, 2024
(Attachment)
Path:
\Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active\Board of Health\Agendas\2024
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
MINUTES <br /> ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH <br /> March 27, 2024 <br /> state. She added that Emergency Department (ED) visits related to mental health <br /> decreased over the course of the pandemic, even though self-reported mental health <br /> challenges increased during the same period. Ms. Creed highlighted this as an apparent <br /> access issue. <br /> • Despite Orange County commonly being considered an affluent county, Ms. Creed <br /> shared that it has the highest percentage of adults living in poverty (-15% countywide) <br /> of any county in the state. Mr. Bagby wondered if the population concentrations in <br /> various areas of the county might be distorting the figures, and Ms. Creed agreed that it <br /> was possible that the large student population relative to permanent residents in the <br /> county could be skewing the data. While looking at a map of the county comparing levels <br /> of poverty in each census tract, Victoria Hudson, Environmental Health Director, said <br /> that the most densely impoverished area appeared to be central Carrboro, which is a <br /> high-density housing area with a high number of residents who are refugees. <br /> • Orange County has an overall Gini coefficient of 0.5, which means that the county falls <br /> right in the middle between perfectly equal income distribution (0.0) and perfectly <br /> unequal income distribution (1.0). This score is higher than the Gini coefficients for the <br /> state of NC or the comparison counties. Ms. Creed went on to say that a fifth of Orange <br /> County residents are spending more than half their monthly income on their housing, <br /> leaving less money for things like healthcare, healthy food, education, and exercise <br /> opportunities. <br /> • Dr. Jonnal commented that income inequality is a behemoth issue and commended Ms. <br /> Creed for considering how access to money and health outcomes intertwine. She added <br /> that this is often a missing link in conversations about health and, though there's likely <br /> not a quick fix, it's important to acknowledge how this affects health. Dr. Stuebe added <br /> that there are many fraught policies in Orange County related to zoning and affordable <br /> housing (e.g., construction of single family vs. multi-family housing units) which the BOH <br /> can learn about and comment on; she added that affordable housing also needs to be <br /> safe and humane. Ms. Creed replied that Orange County is blessed with a large <br /> immigrant and refugee population but that unfortunately many of these people arrive to <br /> the county without the knowledge and ability to access resources such as money, jobs, <br /> or housing. She added that Chapel Hill is full of housing units but many of these units, <br /> especially new construction, are expensive and targeted primarily towards students. Dr. <br /> Stuebe chimed in that this is a complicated issue, but new housing built for students can <br /> free up existing housing for permanent residents. She added that Matthew Desmond's <br /> book Poverty, By America, weighs in on affordable housing and discusses how <br /> mortgages are subsidized by taxes in a way that rental housing is not, leading to <br /> inequitable outcomes. Dr. Stuebe suggested that all board members might benefit from <br /> reading this book. <br /> • Ms. Creed provided an overview of how the CHA team narrowed in on the priority areas <br /> identified by the CHA. She explained that the original CHA survey produced fifteen <br /> potential priority areas, which obviously could not all realistically be prioritized. These <br /> fifteen priority areas were then voted on by community members (during the listening <br /> sessions and at community events) and by the CHA leadership team. Both votes <br /> produced the same top four areas of concern, which were then funneled into the three <br /> identified priority areas: Behavioral Health, Access to Care, and Connections to <br /> Community Support. <br /> • In response to Mr. Bagby's question about how the participants for the CHA focus <br /> groups consisting of formerly incarcerated individuals and individuals with a history of <br /> substance use were recruited, Ms. Creed explained that the health department worked <br /> within existing partnerships to invite community members with specific lived experiences <br /> to participate. She added that those who did participate were excited to do so, though <br /> S:\Managers Working Files\BOH\Agendas &Abstracts\2024 Agenda and Abstracts/ <br /> March Page 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.