Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
44 <br /> 1 experiencing reduced net migration both internationally and domestically, plus educational market share <br /> 2 diversification. <br /> 3 Commissioner Carter asked about Orange County's working-age in-migration compares to its <br /> 4 neighbors. <br /> 5 Nathan Dollar confirmed Wake County had significantly more working-age in-migration, noting <br /> 6 Wake was much larger and not an apples-to-apples comparison. After incorporating development data, <br /> 7 they adjusted forecasts upward slightly, but noted some development types wouldn't yield as many <br /> 8 students as others. <br /> 9 Chair Hamilton asked about how development types affect student yield. <br /> 10 Nathan Dollar explained they ground-truth developments by visiting sites, reviewing marketing <br /> 11 materials, estimating completion timelines, applying census tract occupancy rates and market share <br /> 12 assumptions. Single-bedroom apartments yield fewer students than multi-family or single-family <br /> 13 dwellings, and much of the current development included smaller units like studios and one-bedrooms. <br /> 14 Vice-Chair Fowler said she found this report very interesting and hopes it was shared with the <br /> 15 school districts as well. She appreciated the granular school-level detail and noted clear enrollment <br /> 16 drops after COVID and recent federal administration immigration policies. She expressed hope that <br /> 17 policy changes might reverse trends, emphasizing the importance of annual updates rather than <br /> 18 planning for the full 10-year period based on current projections. <br /> 19 Nathan Dollar said that immigration policy could absolutely affect student membership, but <br /> 20 noted it isn't the only factor at play. <br /> 21 <br /> 22 b. Discussion on Strategic Communications Approaches <br /> 23 The Board discussed and considered possible approaches to the County's Strategic Communications <br /> 24 efforts and provided direction to staff. <br /> 25 <br /> 26 BACKGROUND: The County formed a Strategic Communications Work Group (Work Group) on June 17, <br /> 27 2014, as part of a three-phased approach to developing a Strategic Communications Plan. The original <br /> 28 Work Group included the Deputy County Manager, County department representatives designated by <br /> 29 the County Manager, and two members of the Board of Commissioners. The Work Group met <br /> 30 periodically, but also experienced periods of inactivity. The Work Group, as most recently comprised, <br /> 31 included two members of the Board of Commissioners and the Community Relations Director. <br /> 32 <br /> 33 The BOCC discussed the Work Group at its November 11, 2025 work session and agreed by consensus to <br /> 34 sunset the Work Group's work. <br /> 35 <br /> 36 This item provides the opportunity for the Board to discuss possible approaches to the County's Strategic <br /> 37 Communications efforts for the future and provide direction to staff. <br /> 38 <br /> 39 Community Relations Director, Wil Glenn, explained they were developing a comprehensive <br /> 40 communication and engagement plan, that is due to the county manager in June. The plan will include <br /> 41 eight broad goals and strategies mapping opportunities to collaborate with residents and gather input <br /> 42 and feedback. <br /> 43 Wil Glenn made the following presentation: <br /> 44 <br /> 45 <br />