Orange County staff presented an updated schedule and proposed outside speakers and facilitation services for the Land Use Plan 2050 review on Aug. 26. The board discussed consultant fees and the public-engagement approach and deferred decisions on contracting until a future meeting so staff can provide more detail.

The presentation and proposed costs: Senior planner Tom Altieri summarized a schedule of work sessions and two half-day retreats through November and listed vendor/guest costs staff had collected after the meeting packet went out. The proposed experts and estimated costs in the handout were: an applied groundwater/hydrology expert ($2,200.50 meeting attendance and presentation), a UNC School of Government Development Finance Initiative market analysis ($45,100), an expert on conservation subdivisions (Randall Arendt, estimated $8,500 plus travel), Clarion Associates staff time to attend up to five board meetings ($4,020) and a facilitation firm (True North Performance Group) to design and facilitate retreats and produce post-session summaries (estimated $17,500).

Board reaction and public comment: Several commissioners said they support bringing outside expertise but asked for clearer written scopes, independent academic voices for scientific subjects and a stronger county-hosted web presence for plan materials. Preserve Rural Orange (represented by Laura Streitfeld) urged the board to prioritize university scientists for independent groundwater and wastewater expertise, and to ensure all plan materials are accessible from the county website rather than an external consultant site.

Next steps: Staff will bring back more-detailed cost information and written scopes of work and will produce an outreach plan to ensure equitable access to plan materials; commissioners asked that the Sept. 9 meeting include a status briefing and that the formal contracting and cost decisions be discussed at a subsequent meeting after the board has had a chance to review proposed scopes.

Ending note: Commissioners emphasized balancing careful public input and a timely schedule; the board did not approve consultant or presenter contracts at the Aug. 26 meeting and asked staff to return with clarified scopes and cost breakdowns.