Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
24 <br /> 1 information for public consumption, and that that each party identifies a liaison for its respective <br /> 2 governing board. <br /> 3 <br /> 4 Subsequent to the initial review of the ILA and upon discussions with the Chair, the County <br /> 5 Attorney revised the document to reflect additional detail related to the major construction and <br /> 6 renovation projects. The major revisions are highlighted below: <br /> 7 • Requiring, to the greatest extent practical, projects to align with the principles Woolpert <br /> 8 Report. <br /> 9 • Establishing a minimum dollar threshold of $250,000 for projects to be overseen by the <br /> 10 Core Team. <br /> 11 • School Districts to propose projects, refer those proposals to the Core Team for <br /> 12 consideration, the Core Team will refer proposals to the County Manager, and the County <br /> 13 Manager will then refer projects to the Board of County Commissioners for approval. <br /> 14 • Provides construction manager at risk ("CMAR") as the default procurement method. <br /> 15 • The School Districts shall select a design professional and submit to the Board of <br /> 16 Commissioners for review and approval and upon approval the School Districts shall <br /> 17 manage the design of each project. Any amendments to the design contract shall be <br /> 18 submitted to the County Commissioners for approval. <br /> 19 • The School Districts shall directly manage school construction. Any change orders or <br /> 20 amendments that increase the total budget of the project must go to the County for <br /> 21 approval. <br /> 22 • Requires the completion of a sales tax recapture agreement(s) prior to beginning any <br /> 23 project. <br /> 24 • Provides for how defaults and remedies are addressed. <br /> 25 <br /> 26 Staff also recommends establishing separate agreements with each School District, that way one <br /> 27 District withdrawing from the agreement does not dissolve the relationship between the County <br /> 28 and the other District. <br /> 29 <br /> 30 Along with the ILA, the County reviewed options in managing this process, and determined that it <br /> 31 would be preferable to have staff provide oversight and communication during the project <br /> 32 construction, rather than hiring a project management firm. The Manager recommends adding a <br /> 33 1.0 FTE (full time equivalent) School Capital and Financial Analyst to coordinate the meetings of <br /> 34 the CORE Team, report back to the Board on school construction, and manage all public <br /> 35 communications, including maintenance of a dashboard. This position would also consolidate <br /> 36 other school related tasks that currently reside in different departments, like the coordination of <br /> 37 the Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Technical Advisory Committee (SAPFOTAC) <br /> 38 and the reporting of capital expenditures for financing and reimbursement. This position would be <br /> 39 funded out of the Pay-Go funds set aside for Project Management. $500,000 was budgeted in FY <br /> 40 2026, and $1,000,000 is planned annually for future years. The County will retain approximately <br /> 41 $45,000 for a position starting December 1, 2025, and will allocate the remaining Pay-Go funds <br /> 42 to the School Districts for project and program management expenses. If the Board moves <br /> 43 forward with the ILA, the formal creation of this position will be considered at a subsequent <br /> 44 meeting. <br /> 45 <br /> 46 <br />