[Durham INC] DRAFT May minutes (updated)

[Pat Carstensen]

In preparation to the Delegate Meeting next Tuesday, I am re-sending the draft minutes.  The attendance list has been corrected.  Please let me know of any other additions or corrections.  Thanks, pat
-----















May
Delegate Meeting of the InterNeighborhood Council of Durham

NIS Conference Room, Golden Belt

May 28, 2013

 

Attending the meeting were:

Neighborhoods

Colony Park – Don Lebkes

Cross Counties – Pat Carstensen

Duke Park – Catherine Hart

Eagles’ Pointe – Donna Rudolph

Fairfield – Melissa Rooney

Falconbridge – Rosemarie Kitchin

Long Meadow Neighborhood
Association – Sheri Tibbs

Long Valley – Rush Childs

Morehead Hill Neighborhood
Association – Patricia Mohr

Northgate Park – Deb Hawkins,
Mike Shiflett

Old North Durham – Peter Katz,
John Martin

Old West Durham – Eric Heidt

Stage Stop – Dorothy Croom

Trinity Park – Philip Azar

Watts Hospital Hillandale – Tom
Miller

Woodcroft – Scott Carter

Woodlake – Robbie Willmarth

 

 

Visitors 

Jim Wise – N & O

Lynwood D. Best – City of
Durham, NIS

John Killeen – City of Durham,
NIS

Don Moffitt – City Council

Frank Hyman – People’s Alliance

Khalid Hawthorne – CCIP

Rukea Womack – City of Durham,
Parks and Recreation

Tom Bonfield – Manager, City of
Durham

 

 

John Martin called the meeting to order, and delegates and
visitors introduced themselves.  Tom Miller moved and Rosemarie Kitchin
seconded that we approve the April minutes, with the correction that Stage Stop
also paid dues; this was passed.

 

Tom Bonfield presented an
overview of the 2013 budget and its
challenges.  If you want to
read the whole tome about the $375M budget, go to http://durhamnc.gov/ich/as/bms/Pages/2013-2014_Preliminary_Budget.aspx.  The hard truth is that we are unlikely
to continue to have anything like the 10% growth we had in Durham in the past;
this means that growth in revenues will stay about 2%.  On the other hand, we have a pattern of
having 3-4% growth in expenses; for one thing, Public Safety is about 70% of
the budget and keeping the officers we train requires a 3-5% yearly increase in
their salaries.  Thus, the folks
working on the budget calculated a $5.4M deficit if they did everything the
same as last year.  A big part was
the $1.6M deficit for transportation; City Council indicated cutting routes,
raising fares, or using more general revenues were not solutions they wanted.
The good news is that our bonds are still AAA, and the previous bond issues
will actually need a lot less tax increase to support them because of the low
rates we were able to get.  In
terms of possible new bonds, we have a policy of keeping debt to 15% of the
general fund, and the little new debt we can take on before 2018 will be used
for Fire Station 17, a new police station and the 911 center.  We’ve built miles and miles of trails,
and now need to make sure they are maintained.  There’s a bunch of things that are really a state
responsibility (e.g. gang prosecutor and resources to address domestic
violence), but we’re not likely to see state funding for these things any time
soon.  The 4 policy changes used to
balance the budget are:

·      
Increase the cost of
downtown parking by $10/month (still doesn’t pay for itself)

·      
Increase the cost of a monthly
DATA pass (still a substantial discount, and the poorest users don’t usually
have the cash to use the monthly rate, so we are hoping the increase will
mostly fall on more well-off riders)

·      
Institute a $1.50/month
fee for solid waste capital recovery

·      
Operational
efficiencies, including cutting a net 11 positions (eliminating 16, but adding
3 new police forensics positions required by the state, 1 new position in 911
center that is paid for by fees collected by the phone companies, and 1 parking
manager).

There will be a E-Town Hall
meeting on the budget on June 3.  

 

On the Open Space and Trails Resolutions, Philip
Azar moved and Rosemarie Kitchin seconded the resolution on Open Space Grants
(see Appendix A).  This passed
unanimously.  The resolution on
funding for open space and farmland preservation (Appendix B) took considerable
more discussion.  Mike Shiflett
moved and Donna Rudolph seconded that we table the motion until next meeting.  This motion was defeated.  We then voted on the resolution, which
passed with 1 “no” vote and 4 abstentions.   

 

Various committees than made
reports:

·      
Zoning and Development. 
Co-Chairs Tom Miller and Pat Carstensen reported that the first meeting would
be Wednesday May 29.  They also
reported on House Bill 150, which severely limits a community’s ability to use
design standards for residential zoning. 
We contacted about 50 neighborhood organizations across the state to try
to do some “rabble rousing.”  The
bill is still in the House Rules Committee, with the planners’ state-wide
association leading an effort to get a compromise, but we aren’t in on what the
compromise might look like.

·      
Membership and Outreach.  Co-chair
Don Lebkes passed around a shorter list of neighborhoods to reach out to and
asked for contacts.

·      
Nuisance Abatement. 
Chair Peter Katz said they need more members so there is not such a
concentration of folks from Old North Durham.  They want to start by documenting the various kinds of tools
that can be used for nuisance abatement.

·      
Speeding and Traffic. 
Chair Phil Azar said there were 8 members, they would have a kick-off meeting
toward the end of June, and after that would be trying to work using social
media instead of driving all over town.

·      
Transit, Sidewalks, and Bicycles.  Chair Scott Carter said they met last Wednesday and see a need to
narrow the charter down to some area(s) to focus on.

·      
Public Spaces and Environmental Issues.  Co-chair Deb Hawkins said that Will Wilson had agreed to be co-chair;
they have 6 members and had a chance to chat before the meeting tonight.

 

 

 

John Martin, Philip Azar and
Eric Heidt gave a report on the Traffic
Separation Study Debacle. 
Driven by the plans for high-speed rail from DC to Atlanta, NC-DOT is
looking at the places where roads cross the railroad in Durham; any
implementation is a long way off. 
Since the ripple effects go way beyond the railroad corridor – it takes
a lot of space to make an overpass almost twice as high as a standard one on
the freeway – you would want as much community involvement as possible.  There isn’t any looking at how this
fits into other planning efforts in Durham (downtown open space, for
example).  There’s no PDF’s on the
web so folks can look at them and compare notes.  Eric was told he wasn’t a “stakeholder” so couldn’t vote on
the plans.  

 

Announcements, reports, and miscellaneous news:

·      
As noted on the list-serve, the mailbox issue has
re-surfaced.

·      
Donna Rudolph reported for
Eagles’ Pointe and Stage Stop that the Board of Adjustment ruled against them
and for the Planning Department on the cell tower issue.  The next step would be to appeal to
Superior Court.  It seems a crime
that neighborhoods have to pay $695 (fees for going to the Board of Adjustment)
to question decisions by the Planning Department.  Rosemarie Kitchin made a motion,
seconded by Donna Rudolph, that there should be a moratorium on new cell tower
approvals until the process is in place to have those approvals by a
legislative or quasi-judicial body. 
See Appendix C.

·      
Come to the 9th
Annual Beaver Queen Pageant on June Furst, 4PM, at Duke Park.

·      
Northgate Park’s next
Food Truck Rodeo is Thursday, with Tom the Piano Man, the Durham Mardi Gras
folks, and a variety of food trucks.

·      
The Tour de Fat is June
15th, downtown.  There
are lots of opportunities to volunteer.

·      
The next Bull City Play
Streets, to get people out having car-free healthy fun in the streets, is June
1st.  http://ahealthieramerica.org/play-streets/find-a-play-street/durham-north-carolina/ 




Appendix A: InterNeighborhood
Council Resolution in Support of  

Continued
Funding for the DOST Matching Grants Program  

 

Whereas Durham County adopted a Matching
Grants Program in 1991 and functions as a committee of the Durham Open Space
and Trails Commission (DOST), and 

 

Whereas the citizen volunteer Matching Grants Program is administered with the
aid and liaison of a member of the Durham County staff, and 

 

Whereas the committee has accomplished 19
annual cycles of application reviews and submittal to the Durham County
Commissioners for approval, and 

 

Whereas the program provides active and
passive recreational opportunities for the benefit for the citizens of Durham,
and 

 

Whereas projects now enjoyed by Durham citizens are greatly varied and include
fitness courses, play equipment at schools, new and improved recreation
facilities, community gardens, environmental learning environments, hiking
trails, natural preserves, SEEDS, ball field lights and more (detailed in the
Attachment), and 

 

Whereas the committee has provided proper
stewardship in funding awards to non-profit organizations that clearly
establish additional outside funding, thereby leveraging community support and
funding through partnering in each project, and 

 

Whereas non-profit organizations
anticipate stable matching grant funding in their planning and implementation
of their various projects when seeking multiple financing opportunities over
one or more years, and 

 

Whereas to date, Durham County has funded
$1.2 million for the $2.3 million total monetary investment for these projects,
now 

 

Therefore be it resolved that
the InterNeighborhood Council urges that the Durham County Board of County
Commissioners continue funding of the Matching Grants Program commensurate with
historic levels of funding. 

 

Adopted this xxth day of xx, 2013. 

 

John Martin,
President 

InterNeighborhood
Council 

  
Appendix B: InterNeighborhood
Council Resolution in Support of  

Funding
Open Space and Farmland Preservation 

 

WHEREAS, the preservation of open
space is essential to protecting water quality, promoting and maintaining the
physical and mental health of residents, and providing recreational
opportunities for local citizens and visitors; and, 

 

WHEREAS, the preservation of open
space requires timely expenditures of funds, preventing the expensive
degradation of water quality and avoiding the future expense of environmental
cleanup; and, 

 

WHEREAS, Durham County has duly
adopted with citizen support three city and county open space plans over two
decades; and, 

 

WHEREAS, the preservation of open
space is a specific recommendation in the new Durham County Strategic Plan;
and, 

 

WHEREAS, the preservation of
privately held farmland is a vital method of preserving open space and is
crucial to achieving and maintaining local food security; and, 

 

WHEREAS, the open space program
is highly efficient in leveraging $3 in outside funds for every $1 of Durham
funds: NOW, THEREFORE 

 

BE IT RESOLVED, that the InterNeighborhood
Council supports the Durham County manager's recommended budget allocation of
$500,000 for open space and farmland preservation, and asks the County
Commission to ensure that these funds remain designated for those
purposes.  

 

Adopted this xxth day of xx, 2013. 

John Martin,
President 

InterNeighborhood Council
Appendix C: Resolution by the InterNeighborhood Council of Durham on the
siting and approval of cell towers in residential areas:

Whereas site plans seeking
to place Freestanding Wireless Communications Facilities (cell towers) in
residential zones should require local knowledge and opportunity for citizen
input, and

Whereas, Amendment
TC1100007 to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), which was adopted by the
Council on March 18 and went into effect June 1, shifted the approval authority
for such towers from a board of ten administrative staff (the Development
Review Board) to a single administrator (the Director of Planning), and

Whereas, Durham is still
out of compliance with state statutes that required local governments to
eliminate from their development ordinances unjustifiable administrative
discretionary authority by Jan 1, 2010, and

Whereas, In March
and April 2013, INC presented to Council, County Commissioners and the Joint
City County Planning Committee a review of the UDO, which found that the
existing administrative-only approval of Freestanding Wireless Communication
Facilities has no legal base, and that such discretionary decisions
require special use permits which are the province of quasi-judicial
and/or legislative entities, entailing public notification and hearings,
and

Whereas, we appreciate that
in response to citizen requests Durham City Council has committed to revising
its regulations for Wireless Communications Facilities but we are concerned
about cell tower site applications that may surface during that interim,
therefore

We request that City
Council place a moratorium on approval of cell towers in residential zones until
such time as the city and county legislators will have revised the existing
wireless communications regulations in the UDO to alter the present process
which allows cell tower siting in residential zones without resident
notification or input.

 

                                        This
___day of _______, 2013

                                        THE
INTERNEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL OF
DURHAM        

 

                                         John
Martin

                                         President

 

 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20130620/8d45af9b/attachment.html>