[0:00] Councillor Thompson, second, aye, aye,

[0:24] aye, aye, aye, aye, aye, aye, aye, aye, aye, aye, aye, aye.

[6:36] I'm going to call

[6:42] to order.

[6:43] The Board of Commission is regular meeting for September 8, 2026.

[6:49] I thank everybody for being here.

[6:52] Appreciate that you take time out of your day to be part of the process.

[6:57] So we will move on into our invocation and pledge.

[7:02] Commissioner Williams has agreed to do the invocation and pledge.

[7:06] Will you all please rise, gentlemen, please remove your caps.

[7:14] Father, we thank you for this opportunity to come together and to do the people's business here in Brunswick County.

[7:18] And we just asked that you would guide us in our business and

[7:21] and keep everyone here safe as they travel home today.

[7:24] And I also want to especially lift up an anniversary

[7:27] that's coming up this Friday,

[7:28] and that's the 25th anniversary of September 11th, 2001.

[7:32] And we just pray that you would protect our nation

[7:34] from similar such attacks as we move forward.

[7:38] We're certain that there are those out there

[7:39] who would like to repeat what they did.

[7:42] We pray for the first responders who protect us every day

[7:45] and the families of those first responders

[7:47] and others who were killed on that day

[7:49] and who still deal with the grief from that event.

[7:51] and are going to be hit with that grief as it's all over the news for the next week.

[7:56] And Lord, in the wake of that, our country was remarkably unified.

[7:59] And I pray that you would help us to find that sense of unity again somehow moving forward.

[8:05] We ask these things in your name, amen.

[8:06] Amen.

[8:21] Thank

[8:25] you, Commissioner Williams, and thank you for bringing up 9.11. My younger brother

[8:31] is a 9.11 survivor. He was in the building. So I do appreciate that. All right. Any adjustments

[8:40] to the agenda, as I do have to, well, I'll bring those forward real quick.

[8:47] Under presentation, number two, the resolution for operation green light, we're going to

[8:54] move that into consent, speed up the process a little bit, and then under, under the administrative

[9:04] Creative Report, item number seven, the Southport Christian SRO budget amendment, an additional position.

[9:12] We're also moving that into consent.

[9:15] So mark those on your agenda.

[9:18] Any other adjustments?

[9:20] Yes.

[9:20] What do you got?

[9:25] Administrative Report.

[9:28] The NCHCP grant.

[9:29] Uh-huh.

[9:31] And I would also like to add another item of slot canvas.

[9:40] And

[9:45] that's what will under-admin now.

[9:48] Okay, so number 13.

[9:52] Okay.

[9:59] Anything else?

[10:02] Okay.

[10:03] So we have moving number 13 to admin and putting clock cameras under admin.

[10:12] All those, well, any discussion?

[10:15] All those in favor?

[10:16] Please say aye.

[10:17] Aye.

[10:18] Any opposed?

[10:19] Okay, done it.

[10:23] Then I will move for an approval of the agenda.

[10:27] Somebody please make a motion.

[10:28] Make a motion for a previous change.

[10:31] Second.

[10:31] Thompson Sykes.

[10:34] Any discussion?

[10:36] All those in favor, please say aye.

[10:38] Aye.

[10:39] Any opposed?

[10:40] Okay.

[10:42] Moving on to public comment.

[10:46] First up, I have Shirley Sullivan.

[10:59] Shirley Sullivan, 5-0-0-2, Seward Court, Southport, Chair Forte, commissioners.

[11:07] I don't agree with the public comment change to be discussed today.

[11:12] There are no time limits put on developers, attorneys, and engineers.

[11:17] It is up to the commissioners and their representatives at the sign-up sheet to monitor the group rule.

[11:23] Minimizing public comments is further denying valid argument.

[11:28] I have been denied to sign up others that are running late.

[11:32] I have been told it was forgery to sign their name.

[11:36] That's a fact.

[11:37] That's not the rulebook yet.

[11:39] I think you should allow all written comments that are submitted to be read.

[11:45] The first commissioner meeting to hear rezoning was held on August 17th.

[11:50] At that meeting on August 17th, one commissioner went on and on how the planning board worked

[11:54] hard to vet a rezoning that was approved and how the planning department worked hard

[11:59] to support it.

[12:01] Had that commissioner watched the same planning board meeting that I had?

[12:06] I got no impression that the planning board members had even read the packet.

[12:10] There was definitely no discussion before the vote to approve it.

[12:14] The planning department only provided information to support their opinion.

[12:19] Certain facts were omitted that would have shown what could have been built, had the area

[12:24] and not been rezoned.

[12:27] Limiting public comment does not help.

[12:30] I opposed the rezoning on 2.11 that night.

[12:34] Ironically, I was almost hit head on as I traveled home

[12:37] at 10 p.m. by a driver that did not see the stop sign

[12:41] or the road crew holding the stop sign

[12:44] at the other end of 2.11 near Southport.

[12:47] 2.11 had been narrowed to one lane

[12:49] to hold both directions while road work continued.

[12:53] I narrowly saw the stop sign and then the road crew on my end.

[12:59] After a couple of minutes the road crew waved me on.

[13:03] In the dark of night I saw headlights coming in my direction.

[13:07] I flashed my hybine often until I hoped I got the driver's attention.

[13:12] We slowly passed each other going about five miles an hour.

[13:16] I cautiously drove the rest of the way as I approached another set of headlights.

[13:21] I was relieved to see this vehicle was behind the road crew holding the stop sign.

[13:28] I wasn't worried about myself. I was worried about the road crew.

[13:32] They deal with this all night long.

[13:34] The road crew on either end should never wave a vehicle through if there is not a stopped vehicle at the other end.

[13:43] NCDOT has not replied to my concern.

[13:46] Thank you.

[13:47] Thank you.

[14:02] My

[14:13] name is Sarah Singer, 2149, Creekwood Court, South-Last.

[14:18] I'll be brief in my statements.

[14:19] I do want to say that I'm currently compiling comments from my friends and fellow residents

[14:23] regarding the toxic water and their thoughts on the new RO plant, which I will share next

[14:27] commissioners meeting I attend.

[14:30] For now, I would like to address concerns regarding burns with counties used of flock cameras.

[14:35] Not only do flock cameras help create a surveillance state, they also present ethical challenges

[14:40] and possible dangers when it comes to their use and applications as we have seen through

[14:45] recent conduct within our own police department.

[14:47] I have counted approximately 21 flock cameras throughout Brunswick and according to D-Flock

[14:52] ILM, over 83,000 searches have been done on flock in Brunswick and 90% have zero case

[14:59] numbers.

[15:00] While this doesn't implicitly mean long-doing, it's your serious concerns among every resident of Brunswick. It is important to note that the flock cameras in our county were manufactured by flock systems. Well, which Peter Thiel is an investor. Thiel maintained business and professional relationships with Jeffrey Epstein long after Epstein was found to be a pedophile. I believe Brunswick has a duty to use tax dollars ethically and conscientiously. I personally know I do not want one single tax dollar to fund the pockets of someone.

[15:30] like deal. For these reasons, I have launched a petition to present to share

[15:35] Chisholm and the numbers of masks requesting that Brunswick County follow a new

[15:38] hand over county's footsteps and in all contracts with flat cams not to be

[15:43] replaced by any other brands or types. Right now it's at 30 signatures. Let's make

[15:48] that 30,000 and collectively say no to flat cameras. Thank you. Thank you.

[16:03] So

[16:04] consent agenda. I know. I know. Second.

[16:08] Thompson Sipes.

[16:11] Any discussion?

[16:13] All those in favour? Please say aye.

[16:16] Okay.

[16:19] Moving on. Presentations.

[16:23] Emergency Management. David McIntyre. Come on up.

[16:36] Good afternoon, commissioners and fellow leadership.

[16:41] I want to thank all of you for letting us, letting me and a team come before you today

[16:47] and receive a recognition from National Weather Service that my team and myself take very

[16:54] dear to our operation overall.

[16:57] The ability to become and to be rewarded the title of a storm ready and tsunami ready

[17:06] community is very important to us here in Brunswick County.

[17:10] So my team is here with me today as well as Brandon Locklear from National Weather Service

[17:18] Office there in Wilmington that will actually be coming up momentarily to do the presentation

[17:24] of this award.

[17:26] But I just want to once again thank you for this opportunity, I want you to ensure you and

[17:31] our community that Brunswick County and the safety of our community is number one when

[17:38] When it comes to our team's planning and actions that are, you know, completed throughout

[17:44] the year, not just during catastrophic events, but day-to-day to ensure even near and

[17:52] blue skies that we're prepared.

[17:54] So I'll introduce Brandon Locklear with National Weather Service.

[18:01] Thank you, David.

[18:02] It's a pleasure to be here today to recognize Brunswick County, and it's continued designation

[18:08] of a storm ready community.

[18:10] you know communities that are prepared in advance of dangerous storms and

[18:15] dangerous weather we typically see less fatalities and we have less

[18:20] property damage and storm ready you know this is not a one-time achievement it's

[18:26] an ongoing partnership it's an ongoing commitment and in many ways Brunswick County

[18:33] sets that standard and what I'm holding here today is a certificate and it's showing

[18:39] their 8th recognition. So storm ready, it expires every three to four years, it started out at three

[18:45] years, and then it became four years. So you're talking about almost 25 years of dedication

[18:52] from the Brunswick County Emergency Management and from the county leadership. You know that's

[18:57] maintaining ready action plans, that's maintaining communication systems, and it's also keeping

[19:05] in a like a public awareness and all of that goes into making the residents safer.

[19:11] So I'd like to congratulate and I'd like to thank Brunswick County for their continued

[19:15] dedication of keeping this community safe.

[19:19] Thank you.

[19:19] Thank you, sir.

[19:29] I'd like to say thank you to our entire emergency management team, you guys do superlative

[19:35] work and you do keep us safe, so thank you for your dedication and hard work.

[19:40] I also like to recognize this entire board, we are the only county in the entire state of North Carolina that has all five of us have gone through the 100 counties prepared for storm management and all of that.

[19:56] So thank you to each of you.

[19:58] Thank you.

[19:59] You want to come down on this side for the camera?

[20:02] Yeah, I'm waiting for instructions from the boss.

[20:06] I'm married a long time.

[20:07] You must stand there up here.

[20:08] Actually, you all could stand up there.

[20:10] What Megan says.

[20:11] I need you.

[20:13] It's all me and you.

[20:14] Oh, thank you.

[20:15] Come on, tighten up.

[20:27] Even back here, I can't see you over y'all.

[20:30] I know.

[20:32] I know.

[20:39] I know.

[20:40] I know.

[20:41] I know.

[20:45] I know.

[20:46] I know.

[20:49] I know.

[20:49] get our best side.

[20:50] You got to follow.

[20:52] All right.

[20:52] One, two, three.

[21:01] Congratulations.

[21:03] Congratulations.

[21:04] Congratulations.

[21:06] Yes.

[21:09] Mr. Chairman, I just want to say that they drill all the time.

[21:12] And whenever we have something happen, it seems like it's just choreographed.

[21:16] It just goes off just like clockwork because they drill all the time and prepare for the

[21:21] unthinkable.

[21:22] And when the unthinkable happens, they pull the trigger and make it happen.

[21:25] So they're really good at what they do.

[21:28] if I can share one thing, I just want to make sure, you know, as you saw that, that was

[21:35] a decent sized group for a department to actually have to worry about this entire county.

[21:46] And the numbers that you saw this afternoon that hadn't been like that for the past few

[21:55] years. And so I commend our administration for really putting some attention into emergency

[22:04] management and emergency services to strengthen as we have all of our public safety entities

[22:13] within the county over the last couple of years because their numbers were getting low

[22:20] And they were carrying a big load and so I'm glad that our administration recognized that and I see the

[22:30] The outcome of making sure that we are a protected county, so I appreciate that from administration as well

[22:40] Any other comments

[22:43] Congratulations team

[22:44] All right. Administrative report. Mr. Manager, fire fee, agreed upon procedures.

[22:51] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Here we're requesting that the board approve an agreed upon procedures

[22:58] agreement and task by our independent Auditors, Martin, Starns and Associates. And the essence

[23:07] of this is for a couple of special tests to be done by our independent auditors of the nonprofits,

[23:16] fire departments rather than solely by their own auditors. And those two procedures are

[23:26] that the Martin Starns and Associates would select a sample of at least 20% of the payroll

[23:33] disbursements and verify that they're according to the proper pay rates timesheets and payroll

[23:40] registers and verify that the amount clearing the bank equals those disbursements and

[23:46] the second is to select all cash disbursements greater than $250. Make sure each item has

[23:54] the proper supporting documentation to verify the amount and its account classification.

[24:01] these are items that should be on hand with the departments is generally accepted

[24:10] accounting procedures for nonprofits would require these things that we're asking

[24:15] before it into our auditors be in place anyhow so should be a minimal amount of

[24:21] additional work and could be transmitted from the departments auditors to our

[24:26] auditors by a spreadsheet and on probability electronically.

[24:34] The file fees after the increase

[24:38] the new billings went to almost $34 million this year, which was about 4.3 million more

[24:46] than the prior year. And we feel with this level of fire fee funding, a little bit of additional

[24:52] scrutiny is appropriate.

[24:54] it?

[24:56] Any discussion? I have a couple of questions. When this issue was brought forth and the

[25:04] departments across the county were preparing their budgets, were they informed that they

[25:10] were going to have to pay additional funds while they were in preparation of their budgets?

[25:17] No, sir. They don't pay the additional funds. We would. It's about 35,000. The county

[25:22] would pay not the departments. The departments are not having to pay any

[25:28] participating funds. I wouldn't think they would. I mean, I can't, I can't speak

[25:33] for their auditors as to whether they would charge a nominal fee to transfer the

[25:39] information, but the actual cost of this procedure falls on the county, not the

[25:44] departments. Okay.

[25:51] I think that's all I've got right at the moment.

[25:52] Mr. Chair, I can't support this because I've been on four different fire departments

[25:59] in the county since the 70s as well as would rescue squad and serve as

[26:03] exficial on four as well. Then being said I know a lot of personnel, I know how

[26:07] hard they try to work, but it's almost in talking to them specifically about this

[26:13] issue. They say it is an arduous thing for them to have to do this. Their books are

[26:17] open. They try to make it as open as possible and one even told me that it would

[26:21] almost take another person to hire to be able to get the paperwork the county would want.

[26:27] So from that standpoint, I can't support this.

[26:29] This was not something that they've been asking previous years.

[26:32] If they've been asked for this in previous years, they'd be understood, but this is a new

[26:36] thing for them, and it's almost like a surprise for them.

[26:39] So I can't support it this time.

[26:43] Anybody else?

[26:44] Yeah, I'll be glad to say I support it.

[26:47] I think accountability and transparency is important to the taxpayers that are paying

[26:52] the fire fees and all of us are taxpayers and I pay a great deal in fire fees so and

[27:01] payroll and the other stuff they're looking at you got to keep up with anyway so I don't

[27:07] have a problem with it at all and we're paying the bill so I guess kind of a follow up to

[27:14] Mr. Cook's comment, if we are hiring the auditor that does the work, what extra work would

[27:19] it put on the department, if any?

[27:21] Well, the, as I said, generally accepted accounting principles for nonprofits would

[27:28] already require them to have the necessary payroll information, and they certainly should

[27:34] have, again, according to accounting principles, already have these receipts available, and

[27:41] and they should already be making them available to their independent auditors so the only

[27:48] additional work should be for their auditor to transmit that information to Martin Storne's

[27:54] and company.

[27:59] I would like though, if their auditor charges a fee for them to fill this information together,

[28:08] I would like for the county to consider some type of reimbursement and bring that back before the group.

[28:17] I mean, it is, I mean, it's hard to pick up the paper nowadays and not see the state auditor.

[28:28] You know, I'm just glad he didn't come visit us.

[28:31] low-wing visits sometimes in counties, but I, you know, so there's, there is a need

[28:43] for scrutiny sometimes in review. Obviously, whenever I came to the county in 2000, the

[28:53] reporting and accounting was, it needed a lot of repair. And then whenever we changed and

[28:59] went to fire fees that year, and the amount of money started flowing through the departments.

[29:06] There's no denying it that we had issues then.

[29:12] And we fully addressed those issues, as a matter of fact, there were charges brought against

[29:19] individuals associated with the departments, but we're well beyond that.

[29:25] and we have learned over the years and we are financially very well organized and I

[29:34] think the county has taken a lead on that, making sure that happens. I see this is

[29:39] one more step, but I also see the fact that if there is going to be a charge, I

[29:47] would like phone the departments to provide this information, which you've already

[29:53] said it's already something it should have already been collected here in the process I would like

[30:00] To make sure that they're not held accountable for whatever that fee is, I have a, I have a CPA that I work with quite often right now. And the fee to me is astronomical. So I don't, you know, I don't know how that would calculate out to, to a department or a department. But, but the possibility of getting another bill in the mail is there. So,

[30:29] So if we could just look at that, if that does become an issue, I would appreciate it.

[30:35] We would be glad to forward any such information to the board.

[30:41] I just want to say, I agree with the Commission of Sex.

[30:46] I think complete transparency is necessary when we're talking funding of over $34 million

[30:54] a year.

[30:56] And, you know, we're in the process of trying to change it over to attacks and get rid of

[31:01] this fee altogether.

[31:03] In order to make that change, we need to know actual numbers.

[31:10] I don't want to be putting good money into bed if there are any issues.

[31:15] I pray there are, and I doubt there will be, probably minimal at best.

[31:19] But I think we need to know the hard numbers and have a CPA firm confirm that the numbers

[31:28] are true, and that's where we go moving forward as we transfer over two attacks.

[31:35] I don't disagree with Commission of Thompson.

[31:37] If there's a minimal fee from their accountant, I would think this is the easiest thing.

[31:45] Everything should be on somebody's computer, and it's just a matter of hitting send and getting it over to our accounting firm

[31:55] But I would also

[31:58] support

[31:59] Well, you know if they have nominal fees for this, I don't want to get gouged by this accounting from Zilla

[32:07] That we cover that seems reasonable to me

[32:13] So I'm actually okay with this.

[32:17] Anybody else?

[32:19] Well, I make a motion that will move forward with it.

[32:23] I'm second as long as the issue of the...

[32:26] Yes.

[32:27] ...getting a reimbursement if that is there.

[32:31] Okay.

[32:31] Sykes Thompson.

[32:33] Any other discussion?

[32:36] All those in favor?

[32:37] Please say aye.

[32:38] Aye.

[32:38] All right.

[32:39] All those opposed?

[32:40] No.

[32:41] 4-1.

[32:42] Cook.

[32:45] Chairman.

[32:46] Why we're still on that subject.

[32:49] There was, I think, did I send the email up to begin with about the staff meeting with

[32:58] two commissioners?

[33:00] I requested that staff meet with two commissioners to discuss the fire fee situation before

[33:09] we ever moved to another fire committee so that we can know what they have learned over

[33:17] the past year and somehow I think because the email has blind copies on it. We don't

[33:24] see everybody's reply. But what I would like to do is for staff to meet with two commissioners

[33:32] at a time to run through with what they have to consider for the future fire situation.

[33:42] It would be great if we could do that in the next two to four weeks.

[33:46] I concur. I don't believe that needs a motion. That's just a direction.

[33:50] Right? Okay, we could do that. All right. Thank you.

[33:55] Moving on, NCACC, 2027 state legislative goals.

[34:11] I have a couple I scratched out on a post it note a few minutes ago that I can share

[34:15] as ideas.

[34:16] One of them with your permission, Mr. Chair, is something that the RPO has included in

[34:21] its legislative goals, which is to request that the state provide NCDOT with funds to maintain

[34:27] It's drainage ditches that it's responsible for in the area subject to the coastal area management act

[34:34] Is an area that the state regulates at a higher level so asking them to provide funds for DOT to maintain it's drainage ditches in that same area and

[34:43] We can I can make a motion if anyone has any questions. I wait anyone having questions or thoughts on that or do you want to I'll I'm asking the whole board

[34:51] Do you want to put them all out and do one motion?

[34:58] The second one, these are all DOT-related.

[35:03] Second one is to request, and this is one that RPO and I think MPO have sent up in

[35:08] the past, that the state consider adding evacuation routes as a scoring factor in prioritization.

[35:14] That's always been resisted in the past, but with Haleen, maybe it'll get some attention

[35:18] in areas that aren't coastal.

[35:23] And the third one, and this one's kind of nuanced, but NC DOT has an air bridge replacement

[35:30] program where they can consider a bridge separately in prioritization if it's being replaced

[35:35] by the same bridge, but because it has to be being replaced by something of light kind,

[35:40] the cake-fear memorial bridge does not qualify.

[35:43] So to request that they modify the bridge replacement program, whatever technicality is there,

[35:48] so that maybe the Cape Fear Bridge would fall under it.

[35:52] And also submit that to please, when you write it up and get something that we can go with

[35:56] to send that to New Hanover and Pender counties for consideration.

[36:01] I only had one that I wanted to submit.

[36:05] That was it.

[36:07] I find it incredible that we are the fastest-growing county in the state.

[36:13] And all Quad, Southeast Carolina, Quad counties is the fastest growing region in the state.

[36:22] And yet DOT for the 10 years that I've been on the MPO and the RPO has just totally

[36:29] ignored that.

[36:31] And they tell us go find your own funding.

[36:33] They gave us a rip rolling.

[36:35] What was it?

[36:36] 82 million?

[36:37] Something?

[36:38] On what is now a 1.2 billion dollar bridge?

[36:41] and oh by the way 10 years ago it was 350 million and we keep kicking this

[36:47] can down the road to the tune and now 1.2 billion. I find it incredible that the

[36:54] state does not recognize the need for this and so I am really in favor of this

[37:01] one. Anybody else? Well I'm sure we're all in favor of this one but I'd not

[37:08] I'm not sure that it will pass at our association.

[37:11] I'm not going to the association conference,

[37:14] but I know it has to apply to all the counties

[37:17] across the state.

[37:19] And if this one just applies to New Hanover County,

[37:23] it's not gonna, if you reword it and say

[37:26] that you want them to upgrade the replacement program

[37:32] that could have other counties might have issues too

[37:36] that could be addressed but I think that is a point well taken I think and I

[37:40] would say modify it maybe that they modify their bridge replacement program so

[37:44] that it doesn't have to be a replacement in kind which is what the way I saw

[37:49] the wording now and maybe we bring a separate resolution back just for our

[37:53] board and can get into the other nearby counties that addresses the specifics of

[37:57] this bridge.

[38:00] Well the only thing I keep I'm the only one on this board that's not on

[38:03] the RPO, MPO, or GSATs.

[38:04] I was on GSATs and on the RPO at one point,

[38:07] but the thing is, it's frustrating

[38:08] because what they'll do is they have you rank different roads.

[38:13] So you rank them and you do what they're told.

[38:15] Then you're told, well, you can't really do what you wanna do

[38:18] because the project's too big.

[38:20] So you need to go back and reset

[38:22] and come back with a smaller component.

[38:24] So you do that.

[38:25] And you go through all the ramifications of that.

[38:27] It takes a good bit of period and everything else.

[38:30] And then they finally come back to you and they say,

[38:32] we don't have the money. And then you say, well, where are we? Why did we do all the ranking?

[38:36] Why did we go to all the effort of doing all this? And then they say, well, that's what we have

[38:40] to do to the process. Otherwise, it wouldn't happen. And then the same thing we run into right now

[38:44] with respect to the bridge. They tell us, you must hold it. And we say, we don't want to hold it.

[38:49] And they say, well, you won't get any money if you don't consider it to tell it. So we say, okay,

[38:53] well, we'll consider it. And then a nanosecond later will say, well, we're not going to do it.

[38:59] And they said, yes, but you did consider it.

[39:01] We said, yes, we did.

[39:02] And so, well, then you went through the process

[39:04] and you have considered it.

[39:05] And so now you're all, it's so Mickey Mouse, it's ridiculous.

[39:09] It's like you can't get anything done

[39:11] and nobody is at fault.

[39:12] And nobody has the wherewithal to be able to pull the trigger

[39:15] and be able to say, yes, I'm going to get the money

[39:17] and I'm going to get happy.

[39:18] It just doesn't happen that way.

[39:20] And so what happens is it goes through this bureaucratic layering.

[39:24] And by the time we get to the end of the process,

[39:27] we already forgot what we started to begin with

[39:29] and it's called the paralysis of analysis.

[39:32] So my point being is it's very, very frustrating

[39:34] that we can't just fix a bridge

[39:37] or we can't just find the funds to do something

[39:39] or we can't identify the growth that is here,

[39:41] everybody knows full well the growth is here

[39:44] but yet we don't get the support.

[39:46] And I don't know why that is

[39:47] and not even to bring up the cost of insurance.

[39:50] Well, we have the lowest claims rate

[39:52] and we have the highest building codes

[39:54] but yet we pay more than anybody else does

[39:56] in the entire state of North Carolina

[39:57] because we're quoting more risk. Forgive me, Mr. Chairman, but it's just frustrating. I share your concerns.

[40:08] I've got a couple. I think the, and again, it's all in how you write this for that, but the down zoning issue is something that needs to be addressed.

[40:20] The other issue that needs to be addressed is development impact fees and increasing

[40:30] the percentage of the impact fees in which developers should be accountable for.

[40:38] As it gets into highways, we need to be looking at some type of improvement plan

[40:47] with our DOT that looks at existing roadways and starts planning ahead.

[40:57] Certainly, and they could use Brunswick County as the model, my Lord, with all the

[41:02] development that has been approved and waiting, you know, while wait until the

[41:09] roads are packed full before you start expanding. I mean, and obviously with

[41:15] the bridge issue in New Hanover with 31, the issue there, it looks to me that they would

[41:24] be making studies or involved in studies that would be widening 17, widening all of

[41:34] our quarters for the evacuation issue, coming out of our coastal communities and leading into

[41:43] adjacent counties. But I think whenever we look at 211 and the issues that's been associated

[41:52] with 211, you know, again, if you don't start planning, you start putting some money

[41:58] into it with the existing roadways. And again, I do think that Brunswick County is unique

[42:07] because we can we could be a model because of the development and what's what

[42:13] we know is coming down the road if where they could actually look at our

[42:17] roadways and say yeah you're gonna need to do something and put it into a

[42:23] plan and actually approve some dollars so those are my three. I actually had

[42:30] just before you started I wrote down myself impact fees for development it's

[42:36] It's time for North Carolina to come out of the dock ages and go along with 48 other states

[42:41] and implement impact fees.

[42:45] It's only us in Texas that don't do it.

[42:49] It's ridiculous that my current citizens have to pay for future growth

[42:54] when they've already paid theirs.

[42:58] I had another idea while we were sitting here.

[43:02] Again, DOT related.

[43:03] requested the legislature commission to study to examine how to speed up DOT's programming

[43:08] development.

[43:09] Go Robert, I won't even speak with that one further.

[43:13] I look at other states including one just south of us and it's like, why do they get things

[43:18] done so much faster than us?

[43:19] Mr. Chairman, same thing, okay, Mr. McIntyre sitting right back here, just got an award for

[43:24] tsunami and storm red because we drill, we've been in a lot of different drills and we've

[43:28] already gone through that aspect of it.

[43:30] So we have to be proactive.

[43:31] We have to be ready.

[43:34] State doesn't.

[43:36] State doesn't.

[43:37] State basically says you're on your own.

[43:39] They're going to give us all what is it?

[43:40] $80 million.

[43:41] I think it is for the bridge replacement for a 1.1 billion.

[43:44] Is that right, Mr. Chairman?

[43:45] $1.2 billion.

[43:46] Yeah, and they're going to give us what?

[43:47] $80 million for it?

[43:48] That's so far.

[43:49] Yeah, thank you very much.

[43:50] In other words, they don't have to be proactive.

[43:52] They can wait until the cows come home.

[43:55] They have to wait until somebody moves here before they're going to say,

[43:58] oh, gee, we need to expand those roads.

[44:01] But we don't we have to be proactive. We have to put all these things in place. We have to have the personnel

[44:06] We have to have law enforcement. We have to have EMS. We have to have all this stuff in place and we do and we have to be prepared

[44:12] Like Mr. McIntyre is doing back there, but yet the state doesn't do it

[44:16] Now I feel like we're being failed by them unfortunately, and I wish that they would spend the money and you know I get I get they said

[44:21] Well, if you want to do it then we'll just turn the roads over to you and I said fine

[44:24] Give us the personnel the money and the equipment and we'll take them sure

[44:27] They don't like to give us personnel, but they're a good one.

[44:29] No, they don't like it because they want to throw it back to you and say, well, we'll

[44:32] just give it to you.

[44:33] And I go, yeah, that's fine.

[44:34] Go ahead and give it to us.

[44:35] They give us the money.

[44:36] Give us the equipment.

[44:37] And they just give us the personnel.

[44:38] And we'll take it.

[44:41] And while it is on top of all the uncharted mandates that they keep hitting us, where you got

[44:45] to do this, but don't give us a dime.

[44:47] Or not even to mention the special legislation that comes down the pike and they don't

[44:51] even consult us on it, where it should be collaborative.

[44:54] It should be something that helps us, but instead they just issue and eat it.

[45:00] Anything else for legislative goals? Well, I hope you'll get them accomplished. Yes, procedural question. When is the deadline to submit these? October.

[45:15] It's either here or just passed, but we've got another week or two. That was individual. The end of August was individual. If we wanted to send one in, particularly like Frank and I as board members for the NCACC.

[45:29] I think the county ones are October 15th.

[45:32] It's the different than the federal and state.

[45:37] Okay, I can check it in verify.

[45:41] So if I got this right, these are the three for five that we will submit.

[45:47] State DOT funds for draining the ditches.

[45:50] In Camus service area.

[45:51] In Camus.

[45:52] DOT again, request state evacuation routes.

[45:57] everything else that you had with that the bridge replacement modified a

[46:02] program for replacement impact fees for development and address the

[46:09] down zoning issues where we are powerless to do anything. Did I miss anything?

[46:17] Development impact fees. I got that. I just said down. All right so those are the

[46:22] We will submit. I need a motion.

[46:26] Second.

[46:28] Camps and Williams.

[46:31] Any other discussion?

[46:34] All those in favour? Please say aye.

[46:36] Aye.

[46:37] Thank you.

[46:38] All right. Moving on.

[46:41] Cooperative extension.

[46:43] Morgan King.

[46:45] Hello, Morgan.

[46:48] Good afternoon, commissioners.

[46:50] Thank you for your time today.

[46:51] I'm here to request that you consider the addition of a new full-time cooperative extension

[46:57] agricultural extension agent.

[46:59] If approved, this position would be cost-shared between NC State and Brunswick County.

[47:04] That would be a full-time Brunswick County employee.

[47:08] This position would focus on livestock and the deal candidate would also be able to support

[47:12] field crops, so producers and growers.

[47:15] But one of the pieces I'm excited about as well as that this position could support our

[47:19] youth livestock programs to include dairy cattle, poultry and goat shows and things of that

[47:26] nature for our youth programs. With that, I'm happy to answer any questions. Any questions

[47:31] from Morgan?

[47:34] You got me whenever you guys saw Steve Stone with that cow walking the cow

[47:40] around it. Why would not? Yeah, I'll make it into a motion.

[47:49] Thompson Williams. I do think that it is a great educational opportunity for the youth.

[47:55] So yes, very much support. You want the Calorama?

[48:02] I'm a city boy. I painted it on set.

[48:06] They didn't like you either.

[48:07] They didn't like me either.

[48:09] All right, so I have a motion.

[48:10] I have a second.

[48:11] Any other discussion?

[48:13] All those in favor?

[48:14] Please say aye.

[48:16] Any?

[48:17] All right.

[48:17] Thank you.

[48:19] Thank you.

[48:20] Thank you.

[48:20] That was literally, literally, literally.

[48:23] Done.

[48:24] All right.

[48:25] Mr. Attorney, modification to the Board of Commission

[48:28] is public hearing and public comments policies.

[48:31] Yes, sir.

[48:32] Thank you very much.

[48:33] The board has requested modifications to the public comment policy as well as the

[48:42] policy on the legislative public hearings.

[48:46] Typically what the board has done has been three minutes per speaker unless there is a group

[48:54] at which point in time no one else in the group is to speak and the group representative is to have

[49:00] eight minutes, and that is to allow more time for other topics and other individuals to speak.

[49:07] Recently, actually, I think as recent as last meeting, there was a speaker at one of the hearings

[49:13] who spoke for the Property Owners Association. Someone else in the Owners Association then spoke

[49:20] after that eight minute period of time, and then someone else who lived in the neighborhood

[49:24] that said they don't actually speak for me also spoke.

[49:28] So the board had asked for modifications to eliminate the eight minutes for groups and just allow every individual to speak for three minutes and it remains in the board's discretion to allow additional time.

[49:47] And I'll say I was the one who requested that we look at this because I thought it was confusing for a while.

[49:52] Well, I could see a distinction between public comments and public hearing.

[49:57] So I'm open to discussing if we wanted to treat a public hearing differently.

[50:02] And then in a public hearing, if it's, you know, to me, that's a different animal than

[50:06] public comments.

[50:06] But I know I would rather hear ten citizens speak for three minutes than three group reps

[50:12] speak for eight minutes each and tie up most of the time and we got 30 minutes allotted.

[50:16] So I'm generally supportive of this.

[50:18] I'd be interested to hear what everybody else has to say before we put a motion on the floor.

[50:21] But that's not the only thing he's changing on this, and there's another item on this thing, the size to eight minutes.

[50:30] Yeah, there was another item in this agenda.

[50:33] So that was accidentally attached.

[50:35] Okay, that's not part of the, I was wondering where that came from.

[50:39] It does get confusing because you got a person comes up just as restated.

[50:43] I'm here to represent the world or whatever it is.

[50:45] You know, and then they used to beat there for eight minutes.

[50:47] And then I said, well, I don't have anything to do with him.

[50:49] And so then they do it just as we just stated, so it would be a lot clearer if we did that.

[50:54] Is this the red line version that's on screen?

[50:56] No.

[50:56] Okay, I didn't think so.

[50:58] Is there a way to put the red line version on and just show exactly what's being changed

[51:01] to make sure we're all on?

[51:03] I'm just going to say this.

[51:07] I'm not for making any changes at this time, and it's due to we've got a election coming

[51:12] up.

[51:13] And with the election coming up, there'll be two people, could be two new people on the board.

[51:19] We know we're going to have one person.

[51:21] And I think that they need to be part of this change if we're going to change something

[51:25] because we could change it again in December or January.

[51:29] So I think they need to be part of being able to speak on this issue.

[51:34] And I think it needs to wait, but that's my opinion.

[51:39] any other discussion? Yeah, I'll go ahead. You know, yeah, it does add for confusion and

[51:47] it does add for, I guess, a little bit linked to your meeting, but you know, people take

[51:56] your time and they come up here and they wait to get it that podium to address issues that

[52:04] that are concerning not only to them, but in this eight-minute case concerning to others

[52:11] that have an alike opinion.

[52:14] And I think by right now, by taking that opportunity away from those, you know, I'm

[52:24] sure with just about everything, there are those that differ from the way in which the

[52:32] policy or procedure was actually designed. I think that happens with a lot of

[52:38] things but providing the opportunity for those to speak that follow the

[52:48] directions, I would honestly hate to take that away from that group. So I would say

[52:55] leave it alone right now, understand and be made public that hey we've got some

[53:02] concerns with the speaking arrangement not following some of the guidelines and making

[53:12] sure that is there anything that we can do to make the guidelines even more clear than

[53:18] what they are before the individuals decide who's going to come to the podium.

[53:24] So I don't know that we've done everything that we can do to make sure that our position

[53:30] and our policy is well understood by the public that's coming forward to speak.

[53:40] So I would say let it roll for the moment, but that's just my thought.

[53:46] And again, I brought it up because I thought it needed to be discussed, but also this is

[53:50] something I want the board to all be on the same page on if we change it.

[53:53] So I will make a motion that we table this until after the new board has seated next year

[54:00] and then consider revisiting at that point.

[54:03] I'll second.

[54:06] Able, Williams, Thompson,

[54:10] any other discussion?

[54:11] Yes, thank you to the attorney for putting time

[54:13] and putting this together and don't delete it.

[54:17] Mr. Chairman, I thought we brought it forward

[54:19] because the fact is that we were somewhat challenged

[54:22] by individuals who would come up and claim

[54:24] that they were speaking on behalf of a group of people

[54:27] that there's no way of really vetting it.

[54:30] So the thing is we'd have to do that.

[54:31] than also the confusion of the individual who speaks as we just stated twice that we

[54:36] could have other individuals said, well, he doesn't represent me or she doesn't represent

[54:39] me.

[54:40] So we were trying to come up with a way to be provide an ample way of doing it.

[54:45] And I think Chairman William Sedated, you'd rather have whatever, you know who I'm talking

[54:52] about, right?

[54:53] But anyway, you'd rather have a bunch of people that come up and they speak their mind

[54:57] versus somebody that says, oh my gosh, I couldn't say what I wanted to because this

[55:01] guy already spoke on my behalf. So that being said, I really don't want to put it off.

[55:05] I think we should go ahead and pass it tonight because that's why we brought it forward

[55:08] as the cause of the problems that we've existed with it. Now we've got it coming forth

[55:12] and I think it's fair. We didn't restrict people. In fact, we make it more of an availability

[55:17] for individuals to be able to come up and speak their mind if an individual that supposedly

[55:21] represents a group does not address their concerns. So that being said, Mr. Chairman, I can't

[55:27] really support tabling yet, I would like to see us push it forward.

[55:31] I'd like to say it in the going on two years that I've been the chairman, there's been

[55:36] numerous incidents where somebody got up and spoke for eight minutes and even extended

[55:41] that sum and I've let it go and I've even had on occasion asked, would the people at this

[55:49] individual speaking for please stand up or raise their hand and they have and then after

[55:55] that person talks, somebody I'll call another name, and it's going to speak the same thing.

[56:02] And it has been confusing.

[56:05] And I've let them speak.

[56:06] I haven't stopped anybody.

[56:08] But I agree we need to be more concise with the rules, figure something out where, if

[56:17] you're speaking, and I've said this numerous times, if you're speaking for a group, nobody

[56:22] somebody else can speak on this particular topic and then they stand up and say, no, I want

[56:26] to talk. I don't even know who that is, that's speaking. It's, it's touchy. You don't want

[56:32] to stifle somebody or shut them down when there's commission of time. They drive up here

[56:39] to be heard and then we tell them that you can't.

[56:45] I personally would be in favor of just letting

[56:47] as many people speak for three minutes as they want. I need a spokesman. I can get the same

[56:51] in Pro from six or seven people instead of one, but I'm okay with tabling it for now

[56:59] and we'll revisit this and perhaps we can come up with a better way to define how we

[57:05] do this. If we're going to let one individual talk, how do we do that? And not necessarily

[57:15] She cut off other people who weren't part of that, as that last meeting, as you said,

[57:22] an individual said she was speaking for the POA, H-O-A, whichever one it was, and

[57:27] then other people, like three more, got up and said, no, she don't speak for me, I don't

[57:31] know, huh?

[57:33] So there's an issue when we got to figure out a way to fix it.

[57:37] And the other person with the POA did have the opposite viewpoint, so, right, in fact we're

[57:41] not speaking for him.

[57:42] Right.

[57:44] So I have a motion to table this. It's been seconded. So all those in favor of

[57:53] tabling this for now. Please say aye. Aye. Those opposed? No. 4-1 cook. Okay. Thank

[58:05] you. Yes, sir. Thank you.

[58:10] So let's see what you get. Brian, options for the

[58:13] The regulation of burning in the county.

[58:16] Let me grab this piece for work.

[58:18] Yes, sir, thank you.

[58:19] At the August 3rd meeting, Commissioner Thompson moved and

[58:22] the board voted and requested options to move forward.

[58:27] And that some of those options would be an ordinance addressing open

[58:31] burning, the board unanimously passed that request.

[58:37] As part of working on this agenda item and looking through the options,

[58:40] I did put together a history of what has been before the board and all of those items have

[58:46] been handed to you and they're in front of you and tabbed to the best of my ability.

[58:53] But back on June 2nd of 2025, there was a quest for proposed legislation prohibiting open

[59:01] burning. That was brought before the board on June 16th. That is on the first tab. The

[59:12] language is still there. And it requests that upon resolution of the Board of

[59:20] Commissioners in a Hyde Houser County that you could make it unlawful to

[59:24] burning debris with the current statutory exceptions.

[59:30] Then on November 17th, 2025, more information was provided on the limitations of the county prohibiting onsite burning

[59:42] evictation debris.

[59:44] As part of that, Mr. Stone presented an item which is attached and we included in the agenda item

[59:53] a discussion about how the county has statutory authority within 100 feet of an occupier.

[1:00:00] By dwelling within the unincorporated areas. Most people's concern with open learning has to do with air quality and public health. The state has a statutory scheme that if a county wants to regulate for air quality, then you are to put together a program and get approval from the Environmental Management Commission.

[1:00:29] And the information is included in agenda item, including the state regulations and the administrative code.

[1:00:42] On April 6th of this year, the county manager requested direction on possible options to regulate burning through the solid waste ordinance.

[1:00:51] What this item did is basically took rather well-drafted, but it basically took the current state rules and put them in to our solid waste ordinance, which already addresses burning.

[1:01:06] Now, it did not give us any ability to prohibit the open burning, but gave us the ability, well, put in our, in fact, regulations that we would also enforce the state rules.

[1:01:25] On April the 6th, 26th Commissioner Thompson also requested to be brought back letters to state legislatures on various issues,

[1:01:34] one of which was the impacts of land clearing and the burning of debris. That

[1:01:42] letter was sent and passed unanimously and that is included in your packet as

[1:01:46] well.

[1:01:49] I've included in the packet it looks basically like this. These are the

[1:01:56] portions of our solid waste ordinance that actually talks to open

[1:02:02] burning. It begins with the definitions and then the regulated activities. All open

[1:02:09] burning is prohibited except provided herein. And then it talks about burning of leaves

[1:02:15] in your yard, camp fires for outdoor cooking, fire set for fire fighting personnel, prescribed

[1:02:23] burns, open burning of agricultural fields, et cetera. And then in the enforcement section,

[1:02:28] And it specifically excludes from our authority anything with an otherwise lawful state permit which is the debris burning associated with the land clearing because the state has retained control of that Mr. Stone had a meeting with barstree just last week or the week before and I'll paraphrase for purposes.

[1:02:57] is, yes, they retain full authority to permit it.

[1:03:02] And yes, it is very hard for them to deny one of those permits.

[1:03:09] That's accurate.

[1:03:11] I mean, they can place some limits on the permits

[1:03:17] that are in statute.

[1:03:20] But then they tell me they have to issue them

[1:03:23] that there are three counties in the state

[1:03:26] state that do have an air quality program and it's there opinion that those are the

[1:03:32] only three counties that in essence can trump a forestry permit.

[1:03:38] I did go through and review various counties and they do have burning regulations similar

[1:03:45] to ours which exempt the lawful state permits.

[1:03:49] I've gone through and looked at, there's lots of public information releases and media

[1:03:58] releases that say, countywide burn ban in effect, and then it goes into, in conjunction

[1:04:06] with the state of North Carolina burn ban, which controls most open and incorporated areas,

[1:04:12] the county also did a burn ban within 100 feet of residential structures.

[1:04:18] So even those counties who say there's a county wide burn ban

[1:04:24] Recognize in there, they're limited authority

[1:04:27] So several options of where to go from here.

[1:04:31] I did put in the option

[1:04:35] Requested last time that's a ban of all burning in the incorporated areas and then several

[1:04:41] items which would be allowed, which would be allowed and allowed with permits.

[1:04:49] Let's see, burning associated with agriculture would be exempt, burning associated with forestry would be exempt.

[1:04:56] Controlled burns for vegetation, burning for the purpose of the food of warmth, and

[1:05:02] burns permitted for special events, bonfires of limited duration.

[1:05:06] That would require additional permits.

[1:05:09] As part of that, there was a quest for

[1:05:14] land debris to be free at the landfill.

[1:05:19] There's an attachment there from operation services regarding the cost of vegetable debris.

[1:05:29] I believe the direct impacts from just the past, I believe the past fiscal year,

[1:05:38] The current measure of long meal is had it been free, what people were bringing, it was approximately $160,000.

[1:05:45] That's without, say, any guesstimate on how much more would be brought in.

[1:05:52] That was just the current vegetable debris while we were charging.

[1:05:57] And then there's other information on equipment, purchases, and those type of items,

[1:06:04] which would be necessary for the increase.

[1:06:08] I have a question on the option.

[1:06:12] Okay.

[1:06:16] Choosing option one,

[1:06:18] do I still understand that that does not impact the state

[1:06:24] ability for the state to issue permits?

[1:06:28] Yes, sir.

[1:06:29] And so they would still be able to burn regardless of,

[1:06:32] As a matter of fact, regardless of any of your options, I guess, well, maybe option number

[1:06:39] four.

[1:06:42] But I don't see any way around state legislation at the county level.

[1:06:50] Am I correct in that with everything that you're preparing to present?

[1:06:55] I don't think so, I think the air quality program could impact whether the state is able to

[1:07:02] issue the permits and one of the options or request is also just getting legislative authority

[1:07:12] again. We can always resubmit that the actual legislation that was drafted, the board

[1:07:18] tabled, but they have followed up with a letter since then.

[1:07:22] I do think that maybe we need to consider adding that to one of our goals to see if they

[1:07:29] We would consider it again as one of our goals, but I'm good with my question from

[1:07:37] optional.

[1:07:39] Yes, sir.

[1:07:40] Option two is what had previously been mentioned is adopt the state regs and have staff go out

[1:07:51] and make sure they're followed.

[1:07:53] For example, I think there may be an initial visit from a forest ranger when there's a permit

[1:07:57] that validates the setbacks and whatnot.

[1:08:01] They don't go out again, it's my understanding

[1:08:03] until there's a complaint.

[1:08:05] Well, there's all the rules that need to be followed,

[1:08:07] like stop adding debris at 6 p.m.

[1:08:13] And things such as that, that county staff could monitor

[1:08:17] and then turn them over to forestry.

[1:08:20] And that would at least bring them into compliance

[1:08:23] with the forestry regs.

[1:08:26] option 4. Option 4 was interesting, Commissioner Thompson, you asked during the drought and while the wildfire was going on, could we issue a state of emergency and prevent open burning?

[1:08:44] I stated, well, one of the issues is going to be, they're going to say, well, we have a state permit at hand, and that says we can burn, take a hike.

[1:08:58] Well, one of the other things to consider is,

[1:09:05] well, during the drought, but specifically the fire that was going on, well, that limits, I think, public safety response and other areas of the county, I think that's fair to say.

[1:09:17] if everyone comes together and is fighting the fire that could affect responses in other areas.

[1:09:24] I think that would be an excellent opportunity to try and issue a burn band to say hey everyone's

[1:09:34] working on this one fire, you other guys need to stop burning.

[1:09:41] I think if we were to do something

[1:09:43] like that. It would be a helpful to amend our state of emergency ordinance. And we would

[1:09:49] put something along those lines in there specifically so that everyone knows this is what we're

[1:09:55] going to look at doing.

[1:09:58] That's a question reference. Yes sir. We had a conversation as you

[1:10:02] probably remember by week or so back and you were saying that the general feeling and forgive

[1:10:10] give me, I'm paraphrasing, I may not be exact, but you were saying that you think that

[1:10:16] there may be some latitude whereby counties could extend beyond the 100 feet of occupied

[1:10:23] dwelling, if we put it in ordinance. At least that's my understanding. So the big concern

[1:10:29] is we appeal to the state twice before the fire, and then once after the fire that they

[1:10:35] like what that we would like the unincorporated areas not to be able to burn and they denied us.

[1:10:41] We're sitting here saying we're doing everything we know how to do it. We're being another issue.

[1:10:46] I mean, for crying out loud, the ponds are all dry. So the thing is we're saying we're doing it

[1:10:50] and then we can, but the state just acts almost as a vacuum and says they ignore it.

[1:10:55] So could we write some way outside of an air quality or outside necessarily a state emergency aspect

[1:11:01] saying we now have an ordinance that says if we have a countywide burn ban it extends

[1:11:06] beyond the hundred feet of an occupied dwelling. That means all unincorporated areas. Is there a way

[1:11:13] we can write that? Not necessarily. What I have envisioned is something along the lines of

[1:11:21] our state of emergency ordinance says the county can declare a state of emergency. Here are some

[1:11:27] some of the actions you can take, depending on the state of emergency.

[1:11:32] We have different ones for hurricanes than we would see.

[1:11:38] I think we've done severe weather for ice as an example.

[1:11:43] So there would be different responses and one of those would be the burning up.

[1:11:49] Could a draft be considered a state of emergency?

[1:11:51] Could that do it which would be the litmus for, or the tipping point, if you will, to be

[1:11:56] to be able to initiate that burn man.

[1:12:00] I would, it's possible I would hesitate to go that far.

[1:12:04] My thinking is long the lines of,

[1:12:06] we're already out there with all of the county resources fighting this wildfire.

[1:12:12] We don't have the assets.

[1:12:13] And we don't need any other fires out there if it gets out of control.

[1:12:19] What are we going to do?

[1:12:21] The state looked at it from what are the available fuels?

[1:12:24] How are they looking?

[1:12:26] How could it cost?

[1:12:28] They don't look at it from the, it's my understanding,

[1:12:33] a public safety factor of,

[1:12:35] our follow-up resources are dumped into this.

[1:12:38] How do we actively fight fires elsewhere?

[1:12:42] So it's sort of nuanced,

[1:12:43] and I'm just thinking that's a possible avenue

[1:12:46] we could look at doing.

[1:12:50] I don't know that's really going to work.

[1:12:53] because on a given day there's no telling how many stacked calls there are for

[1:13:02] law enforcement. There's no telling how many EMS units we've already run out of

[1:13:07] in Brunswick County at our neighbors for EMS units and there's no telling how

[1:13:13] many fire apparatus. If you get one structure fire and you got seven to eight fire

[1:13:19] apparatus from different departments according to one structure fire. We're in a state of emergency almost

[1:13:26] every day at some point in the day. If you look at that because of our overdevelopment so I don't

[1:13:36] know that that's really going to work force putting it in there. I mean I appreciate the thought but

[1:13:42] But I look at it as we're in a state of emergency every day if you start looking at resources

[1:13:50] because our resources, because of the demand of this county, or sucked in every day.

[1:13:59] So I don't know unless you're going to be in a state of emergency every day.

[1:14:06] Valet points, sir.

[1:14:08] Over the last 15 or 16 months, we've had two woods fires.

[1:14:13] I don't want to boil and spring lakes in the one in Shiloh.

[1:14:16] We've had two major large-scale wood fires.

[1:14:20] I think there's always little ones.

[1:14:24] I meant the two big ones, BSL and Shiloh.

[1:14:30] The Shiloh one, while we were fighting that, as to option four, was where I'm going.

[1:14:39] There was at least three other fires going on in the county at that same time.

[1:14:48] They weren't out of control, that's not the point I'm trying to make.

[1:14:52] but forestry had issued about four burn permits at that time.

[1:15:00] At a control, the others did not thank God. But to your point of declaring a state of emergency,

[1:15:10] and I don't disagree with commission of Thompson, in that instance, had we gone to Shalot

[1:15:18] and were in the command bus, and the chairman, whoever it is at the time, or Shalot would

[1:15:24] have been me, I was in the command bus, had I declared a state of emergency, what would

[1:15:29] that have possibly done for the other three fires that were already raging for a day or two.

[1:15:36] I would hope that at a minimum, they would quit adding to it

[1:15:44] because most of these,

[1:15:46] they constantly, as long as between the certain hours,

[1:15:52] add additional fuel to the fire.

[1:15:56] That's why some of them can go for days. That's my limited understanding.

[1:16:01] Okay, and option five, you want option five basically states that the local Fire Departments will not issue burn permits.

[1:16:14] Right? Is that what I'm taking?

[1:16:17] Yes, sir. That's an option. I was asked to include. I believe county staff has already stopped issuing state burden permits.

[1:16:26] And if anyone wants one, they direct them to the online portal, but there are still.

[1:16:30] So five or six places within the county that people can go to a state burn permit.

[1:16:38] I believe what was conveyed to me was something along the lines of the state is not going to stop the burying and we think they should.

[1:16:50] Why should local resources be used to help provide permits?

[1:17:01] I think we've got two different things. I think we've got conditions non-favorable and

[1:17:10] why are they issue permits. And I think the department can make a decision on that, not

[1:17:17] to issue. I would hate to see if we only govern within a hundred foot and you've got a home

[1:17:28] owner that has a pile of rubbish that they want to burn, that's legally and it's 200

[1:17:37] foot away, then the fire department or whoever the agency is can write that permit.

[1:17:43] It's my understanding that these huge high impact fires that are allowed to burn by land

[1:17:55] clearing are only issued, those permits are only issued by forestry after an

[1:18:01] out of valuation. So the fire departments or the supermart down the road that's, I

[1:18:10] don't know the actual name of the establishment, but it's the back of age. Yeah, as a high

[1:18:20] They're not going to go out in a value way, a land clearing and issue a permit.

[1:18:27] So it's going to be forestry.

[1:18:29] So our only way of controlling what the complaints are coming from is to get state legislation

[1:18:39] in my opinion.

[1:18:44] One question.

[1:18:45] We had the two major fires, as you mentioned, do we have any data on what level of drought

[1:18:50] We were in during each of those were they both during extreme drought or do we know?

[1:18:56] I

[1:18:56] Don't think the BSL one was. I don't remember I don't remember. I don't remember. It's a light was in the drought. Oh, it was in the extreme drought matter

[1:19:03] fact. I believe

[1:19:05] Commissioner Sykes and separately the county had reached out

[1:19:09] prior to the fire

[1:19:11] requesting a burn ban because of the drought

[1:19:14] and you know

[1:19:16] When I look at these I mean there's a lot of information in these documents

[1:19:18] So thanks for giving me a headache and a lot of reading to do a few days, but I'm you know, it's one of those things that

[1:19:25] I think the one when I look at option four if there's a state of emergency or a major fire or major

[1:19:32] drought going on I think that's a time when I could I could certainly support something there

[1:19:38] I would do I would want to make sure that if we put something in to our emergency ordinance that we put guardrails

[1:19:43] I looked back at COVID. We were under a state of a state-wide state of emergency under COVID

[1:19:49] for what seemed like three years. It was, I know it wasn't that long, but it was a very

[1:19:53] long time. Restrictions were in place for a long time. So if we did something, I would want

[1:19:58] to make sure that whatever restrictions we put in had to be reauthorized at a certain interval

[1:20:04] or they would sunset. And I just want to make sure that we, you know, whatever we do if we address

[1:20:09] We address the real problem and don't go so far that we put a law in that restricts a bunch of

[1:20:15] freedoms and puts a bunch of requirements on ordinary citizens who didn't have anything to do with the problem.

[1:20:21] Right, and to clarify for the state of emergency ordinance, the ordinance is only enforced and the

[1:20:28] options are only enforced when the county issues the state of emergency and specifically mentions those

[1:20:35] option. My concern is I think the State of Agriculture Commissioner should look at

[1:20:44] the state law and rewrite it so that when the forestry issues a permit and we're in

[1:20:53] a stream drought or an issue that is a emergency, I mean state of emergency, then we need their

[1:21:04] approval to band all burning. So I think we need to go and meet with the

[1:21:09] commission of agriculture. Two of the commissioners are all of us go up there

[1:21:14] and sit down and have a discussion with invite our situation. If I burn band

[1:21:20] if we have a burn band it should supersede the forestry permit. The other thing

[1:21:27] Frank it was eight hundred and eighty eight days we were locked down with

[1:21:32] kind of with frustrations.

[1:21:34] So almost three years, yes.

[1:21:35] Yeah.

[1:21:36] And to be clear, I'm not pushing for any options.

[1:21:39] Right.

[1:21:40] I don't do politics or policy.

[1:21:44] I'm trying to come up with options you could possibly

[1:21:48] look at, given the current statutory framework.

[1:21:52] I did want to mention though, at the end of the actual agenda

[1:21:57] item on its face, not an attachment,

[1:21:59] I did add some additional information on air curtain burners because the topic is brought up a lot and

[1:22:06] Let's get they get hot to the well, yeah, and quite honestly it took a bit of a research and several phone calls, but

[1:22:15] At the end of the day

[1:22:16] If when they're land clearing, they're gonna sell the timber to the extent they can get money for it

[1:22:21] They will so what you're left with is the tree tops and the root balls

[1:22:29] per acre, the tonnage can go anywhere from 10 to 50 tons an acre.

[1:22:36] It's really dense or if it's spread out, and depending on the

[1:22:43] air curtain burner, I mean, just a general

[1:22:46] Google search, hey, I want to rent an air curtain burner or buy an air curtain burner.

[1:22:51] What's it do? It can go anywhere from 2 to 13 tons

[1:22:55] an hour. So I want to provide you with that information

[1:22:58] just a show. So it feels like a spit in the ocean wouldn't do much. Well I didn't

[1:23:05] certainly I think the board would want to know that depending on an

[1:23:11] air curtain burner there's a big difference if it takes you two days to burn

[1:23:14] an acre or at least this shows you could most likely do an acre an hour. One of

[1:23:22] the other topics I did want to briefly mention is there are several permanent

[1:23:28] That burn sites within the county that use air curtain burners and none of these options were going any of these options were not going to be used to affect those if they were a lawful air curtain permanent burn site that these wouldn't really be applying to those unless we have state legislation.

[1:23:52] question. Correct.

[1:23:58] My own basically what you're telling me is options one through five really

[1:24:04] don't have any teeth. It's it's all the state. Am I wrong with that assessment? Option three is the

[1:24:12] air quality program and that would be a big bite to be able to establish one but you would then be

[1:24:21] able to establish some air quality rules to affect burning, but you didn't have to hire personnel.

[1:24:26] Oh, yeah, I looked at Mecklenburg County's air quality program.

[1:24:32] Oh, boy, big money.

[1:24:34] Yeah, to honestly informally called this one the big brother option just because we would

[1:24:46] go out and watch them in monitor and then tell the state when they didn't do something

[1:24:51] something correctly. I think we can still do that.

[1:24:56] Do what?

[1:24:56] They don't listen to us now.

[1:24:57] What would change?

[1:24:58] Well, for example, now a complaint

[1:25:01] comes into the Fire Marshal's office about a burn.

[1:25:06] They will say, OK, where's it at?

[1:25:09] They will follow up.

[1:25:11] Is there a state permit?

[1:25:12] If there is a state permit, case closed,

[1:25:15] there's nothing we can do.

[1:25:17] Well, to

[1:25:21] possibility, we could assign staff

[1:25:23] I could go out and say, hey, check the pile at 6 p.m.,

[1:25:28] check the pile later, see if any more has been added.

[1:25:31] Basically, policing to ensure they follow the state program.

[1:25:39] I'm not saying it's a good idea.

[1:25:41] I'm saying that's something we could do to take steps

[1:25:43] about the burning we can't stop.

[1:25:48] I think you're right, I think.

[1:25:50] Can I just make a recommendation that we add this to the list

[1:25:55] just for staff to come back to us with a goal.

[1:25:59] And we review that goal and see if that will address

[1:26:02] the situation and put it back on the state to help us out.

[1:26:06] I'm good with that because if we try to implement

[1:26:11] any one of these five options, we're really doing nothing.

[1:26:13] Yeah, it's lip service.

[1:26:16] Nothing's gonna be done.

[1:26:18] They have all the power.

[1:26:19] We can't stop any day.

[1:26:22] Right, the state rules say, or I could take control.

[1:26:25] Do you need that in the form of a motion?

[1:26:28] Do I?

[1:26:30] I wrote it down and we can bring it back to you without a motion.

[1:26:34] Okay.

[1:26:36] Thank you for your work.

[1:26:38] It's very, very thorough.

[1:26:42] It helps.

[1:26:43] So thank you.

[1:26:45] All right.

[1:26:47] Moving on.

[1:26:49] Information technology, Cindy.

[1:26:52] I didn't even, you know, I was looking.

[1:26:53] I didn't even see you.

[1:26:54] You were hiding.

[1:26:54] No, I'm not hiding.

[1:26:57] Good afternoon.

[1:26:58] Good afternoon.

[1:27:01] So county IT is here to request the Board of Commissioners approval regarding the newly

[1:27:05] revised Brunswick County IT password policy.

[1:27:09] And this pretty much replaces what we have in place.

[1:27:14] Our IT security team gathered requirements data for each area where compliance is mandated.

[1:27:21] Those areas include CEGIS, IRS 1075, PCI, HIPAA, and we use the NIST framework as a baseline,

[1:27:31] which is basically industry standard and best practices.

[1:27:35] Again, our recommendation to bring the county into compliance with these regulatory requirements

[1:27:40] is that each of our end users will be placed in one of two policy groups.

[1:27:45] One is slightly more restrictive and applies to DSS and IT staff, and it meets the IRS 1075 compliance.

[1:27:57] All of our end users will be impacted by the changes that we are requesting.

[1:28:04] Our minimum password lengths will be 20 characters.

[1:28:08] For the DSS and IT staff members, they would be required to change their password every 90 days.

[1:28:14] they would have password complexity in place which would require them to use one or excuse me three of the four

[1:28:22] character types uppercase, lowercase numbers and special characters.

[1:28:27] Users may not reuse any of their previous 20 passwords.

[1:28:31] I'll

[1:28:34] refrain from my next comment.

[1:28:36] Password?

[1:28:37] I'm sorry.

[1:28:38] Band password screening will be in place.

[1:28:41] Password will be automatically checked against a list of known or commonly used, compromised

[1:28:48] or other prohibited passwords such as password 1234, spring 2024 exclamation point and those

[1:28:56] do exist or they have.

[1:28:59] And then passwords found on the county's band password list will be rejected during the

[1:29:03] password creation or reset.

[1:29:05] that. Regardless of whether an end user is in group one or group two, if their password

[1:29:12] is compromised, they will be required to change it immediately, if it's suspected or

[1:29:18] known to have been compromised. So that's group one. Group two would be all other end users.

[1:29:25] And these are the requirements that would apply. A minimum password length of 20 characters.

[1:29:30] The password must be changed annually, that's once a year, character requirements, they can

[1:29:37] use any combination of uppercase, lowercase numbers and special characters.

[1:29:43] They will be applied against the band password screening list, and if it shows up on the

[1:29:48] list, then it will be rejected and they'll need to try again, and they'll receive a message

[1:29:52] that tells them to do that.

[1:29:54] And of course, if it's on, as I said on the list, they'll be rejected, and they also will

[1:29:59] not be able to use.

[1:30:00] Any of their 20 previous passwords. For account lockouts, DSS and IT will be allowed three attempts before being locked out of their accounts, and then all other end users will be allowed five attempts. We still have the south serve password reset in place for all of our end users. That pretty much sums up the majority of the password policy. And so I'm here this afternoon. Andy Byron is also with me.

[1:30:29] on Andy's team pretty much are the ones who did the research and put the request together

[1:30:34] for us. So if you have questions we'll be happy to address them. I have one. It seems

[1:30:41] that from time to time I get this notification I use iPads and so it's max and all those

[1:30:46] kind of stuff. The point being is that it'll say oh you need to update your password for

[1:30:51] the county exchange program. So I go to it and then automatically

[1:30:58] Mac, Apple, whatever, it, it already just drops it in there and you're off to the

[1:31:03] races you didn't even have to look it up and figure out what it was. So is it

[1:31:07] going to vary from that once you put your password in one time it'll pick it up

[1:31:10] the same way as it did before just drop it in all the other devices or is it

[1:31:13] going to be prohibited to go beyond one or two devices? I'm going to look to Andy

[1:31:19] to help with that answer. I believe that that behavior may depend on the group

[1:31:26] policy that applies to you as an end-user. I don't know that I need to-

[1:31:33] And so basically what you're saying, I guess, you're basically saying the only

[1:31:37] thing you want to change is your password. I'm sorry, could you-

[1:31:40] The only thing that's really going to change is your password.

[1:31:43] No, sir, there will be changes because we have various groups that are in

[1:31:49] place now where it's not applied consistently across the board.

[1:31:53] But you can still use the same applicant same devices that you did in the past, right the same devices. Yeah. Yes, sir. Good. Okay. Yes. Thank you.

[1:32:02] Okay, so the email that you sent me twice now. I think I got it on Friday and again this morning. Did you receive an email asking you to take a training?

[1:32:10] Take a train? No training. Oh training. What you said a train. I'm like what?

[1:32:17] Yeah, I have not done it because I noted on the agenda that this item was on here, and I didn't know if that pertained do I still go because I got to what the 23rd I think do my training until the 30th and we ask that all end users

[1:32:34] complete the security training online. And this one happens to be about passwords.

[1:32:42] I don't mind. Thank you. I probably took eight to ten minutes. I have this junk email thing comes in about every day says you haven't done your training yet, and it's like two. Yeah, I got that one this morning. I just chunk. Are you reporting that it's not job?

[1:32:55] I do. I just say a spam.

[1:33:01] I'm saying we know so we do track who completes the training and who

[1:33:07] I haven't done it.

[1:33:08] So it's not fair.

[1:33:10] No professions necessary but we do require that all end users complete.

[1:33:16] But you're saying that those spam emails I'm getting are from now.

[1:33:19] I'm saying they're not spam.

[1:33:23] Okay.

[1:33:25] All right, so I assume we have to take action on this, and it says approval regarding,

[1:33:32] oh, I'm sorry.

[1:33:33] Yeah.

[1:33:34] First I did the training yesterday, it wasn't that long, but you know, this is so important

[1:33:38] because to your point, people do use things like password 1, 2, 3, 4, and it sounds, I guess,

[1:33:44] everybody knew my password.

[1:33:45] Not to throw water on Commissioner Cook's question, but if someone stores their password

[1:33:51] in browser password manager, and their browser is not secure.

[1:33:56] How does that work?

[1:33:57] We do not recommend that.

[1:33:59] No, I wouldn't recommend that.

[1:34:01] My business, I do not allow my team to do that anymore.

[1:34:04] We actually have a password manager,

[1:34:06] and if we ever looked into a password manager for the county,

[1:34:09] I know that would be expensive on that large scale,

[1:34:11] but it could be something to look into.

[1:34:14] You're absolutely right.

[1:34:15] There are password managers available,

[1:34:17] and it would be at a cost to the county, so.

[1:34:19] and we can certainly investigate that.

[1:34:22] I mean, it's one of the, I would hate for someone

[1:34:24] who has a very secure sounding password to store it

[1:34:27] and an unsecure browser on a personal device

[1:34:29] and logs in using Wi-Fi and an airport.

[1:34:33] Right.

[1:34:33] And the person beside them gets into our server.

[1:34:35] You're absolutely right.

[1:34:37] And I will make a motion to approve the proposed policy.

[1:34:41] I'll second it.

[1:34:43] Williams, Sykes, any other discussion?

[1:34:48] All those in favor, please say aye.

[1:34:50] Aye.

[1:34:51] Any opposed?

[1:34:52] Thank you.

[1:34:53] Thank you.

[1:34:53] While we have heard the podium, I have a question.

[1:34:55] Do we have an A.I. policy for our employees on how to use A.I.?

[1:34:59] We do not have a published A.I. policy.

[1:35:00] That is something that our IT security team will be working on.

[1:35:04] Cool.

[1:35:05] Cool that you're working on it.

[1:35:07] Thank you, Cindy, as always.

[1:35:09] Okay.

[1:35:10] Sheriff's Office, we move to consent.

[1:35:12] All right.

[1:35:13] Utilities.

[1:35:15] Jeff.

[1:35:16] contract for AMI census products.

[1:35:26] He's got a necktown.

[1:35:30] Manitiah.

[1:35:34] Well, we have the new chairman, board of commissioners. I'm here today to request the board of commissioners to approve a contract with

[1:35:43] enterprises, for the amount of $1.498 million purchase census products relating to the

[1:35:51] county's advance metering infrastructure.

[1:35:54] County uses census proprietary advance meter infrastructure systems to remotely collect

[1:36:00] water meter usage data and transmit the information for an integration to the county's utility

[1:36:07] building system.

[1:36:08] The Census AMI platform is the county's established metering infrastructure and requires compatible

[1:36:15] census communication equipment and protocols for remote meter reading.

[1:36:21] Public utilities primarily install census water meters, however certain Neptune meters

[1:36:27] maybe utilize within the system.

[1:36:31] All meters incorporated into the county's AMI system rely on the census interface units

[1:36:37] which are MXUs, communication components associated with the equipment in order to communicate with the existing equipment.

[1:36:46] Board of Commissioners have already approved Ferguson as a sole source provider for census products back on August 18th, 2025.

[1:36:54] Staff requests the Board of Commissioners to approve the contract with Ferguson enterprises in the amount of $1.498 million for

[1:37:02] census products and support insulation for water meters, new utility customers, replacements

[1:37:08] of existing equipment, and a continued operation and expansion of the county's AMI system.

[1:37:17] I'll make the motion to approve, but let's wait until Commissioner Sykes comes back in.

[1:37:20] Mr. Chairman, about 15, 18 years ago, I took two days, I think it was, and went out door-to-door

[1:37:28] with a meter reader.

[1:37:30] And I saw what it was like to pull, I'll be a disconnect to the water lines for it.

[1:37:34] So the thing is, I know what it's like to have the spotters, the copperheads, everything.

[1:37:38] I didn't counter those, but I know what it's like and then have the radio meters and the impellers

[1:37:43] how they over time they wear it down. And so we lose money because we can't gauge it correctly.

[1:37:49] So it's a great cost saving. I know an individual sitting and saying, well, that's a lot of money.

[1:37:53] Well, the thing is, yes, a lot of money, but you really do get a payback because I was trying to count

[1:37:58] how many times that pickup truck went into park. The doors opened and closed. I know it had to be 500 times

[1:38:03] at least that day. So we're waiting for you to get back. Go ahead. I was going to move approval.

[1:38:11] Well, I do have a question. Are these made where you can use all these meters on houses?

[1:38:21] It's all for new construction maintenance. How about fire hydrants? Are they going to be issued

[1:38:27] when a developer needs to use a fire hydrant.

[1:38:31] That is also part of another program,

[1:38:33] but yes, there will be hydrant meters.

[1:38:36] What was that word?

[1:38:37] Hydrant meters.

[1:38:39] Because there's a lot of issues right now

[1:38:42] that I have with water being taken from fire hydrants.

[1:38:46] Couldn't agree with you more.

[1:38:48] And we're not keeping account of it

[1:38:50] and we're not charging them.

[1:38:51] So I just have concerns.

[1:38:54] And if we're gonna spend this much money,

[1:38:56] I want to make sure that we're addressing the issues.

[1:39:01] The ultimate goal is to account for every bit of water that we are producing.

[1:39:06] You're going to have a new policy at your next meeting on the hydrant use.

[1:39:14] I'll second.

[1:39:16] Okay.

[1:39:18] I would like to add something real quick.

[1:39:22] That dollar amount is based off of budget.

[1:39:25] this contract is set up to where it's a per item type contract. They purchase and replenish their inventory based on what they use based on new connections based on meters that need to be replaced.

[1:39:40] That is an amount that we will likely hit between new customers and the replacement meters, but it may be more it may be less depending on what the actual needs are throughout the year.

[1:39:52] So you may be before rushed in six months for a budget amendment for another million and a half no

[1:40:00] That would already be built into the budget

[1:40:03] This this contract should the contract and the budget should get us through the end of the year

[1:40:09] Like he said, there's also another contract

[1:40:12] Core main right for for main for Neptune. Yeah, where they've got a couple of different vendors that can actually provide the meter that will work with the MXU system

[1:40:22] based on product availability, based on what the needs are with what they have on the inventory.

[1:40:28] What they purchase might actually fluctuate throughout the year.

[1:40:31] So that exact amount, though, a reasonable guess on how much meters are actually going to,

[1:40:38] meters and mxUsers are going to have to buy.

[1:40:40] It won't be that exact amount. It will be something.

[1:40:42] It's on determined. Correct.

[1:40:44] And the contract set up that way.

[1:40:47] Thank you.

[1:40:47] All right, so I have a motion. I have a second. Is there any other discussion?

[1:40:52] Close in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

[1:40:56] Thank you, Jeff. Thank you all.

[1:41:01] Don't come back

[1:41:04] He said don't come back

[1:41:10] We just don't wear the tie that is yeah, we know the time means money. That is

[1:41:14] All right. Now we go back to what was in consent. The Sheriff's Office and CACP grant application approval.

[1:41:27] Elizabeth, good to see you.

[1:41:36] Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Board Commissioners. On this item is to request the Board Commissioners ratify the county managers approval.

[1:41:43] One minute, one minute, sorry. Leigh Ann, can we have the screen for the...

[1:41:47] Yes,

[1:41:50] switch off for this. We lose blood.

[1:41:53] Okay. If I don't have a copy of everything.

[1:41:57] Okay. We're good.

[1:42:00] Okay.

[1:42:01] Okay.

[1:42:02] So this request is for the Board of Commissioners who ratified the County Manager's approval of a grant application with the North Carolina Association of Police for the purchase of a software system to enhance and or replace existing systems of the Sheriff's Office that focus on employee's health.

[1:42:18] training and overall performance. The grant application started, you know, the

[1:42:23] first or second, so late last week, and are on kind of a first-come, first-serve

[1:42:28] basis, hence the asking for the ratification of the county manager's approval.

[1:42:32] There's more information there in the background of NAB, but just to summarize, this

[1:42:37] grant would help us to consolidate a couple of our existing software systems into

[1:42:42] one system that can help kind of pull a bunch of things that are happening in

[1:42:45] different systems into one and therefore hopefully saving the taxpayer

[1:42:49] dollars money in the future and this grant also has no cost share or

[1:42:54] requirement for the county and I'm happy to answer any other questions if

[1:42:59] if you have any and this money that is the money to apply for this grant is

[1:43:07] already in your budget all right there's no cost share or match required so if we

[1:43:12] were to be awarded this grant we wouldn't have any county obligations or any

[1:43:15] additional tax dollars, yes, sir. Okay, would go ahead. Would we be saving any

[1:43:22] tax dollars because this replaces? That is the goal, yes, sir. Depending on the

[1:43:28] timing of the grant period, getting an approved, getting the board to approve the

[1:43:32] award and going through all the contracting and what have you, we'd be hoping to

[1:43:35] either cancel some existing systems this year or whenever we are able to. So if we

[1:43:40] can't save the vast majority of funds this year, we would be able to hopefully

[1:43:43] please start that process to take some systems out of our use, if you will, to have savings

[1:43:49] down the road.

[1:43:50] And this grant would help us to get that replacement system underway while we work to eliminate

[1:43:54] some of those existing contracts.

[1:43:56] You have an off the top of your head.

[1:43:59] You have an approximate figure that would be set.

[1:44:01] What would we replace?

[1:44:02] No, sorry.

[1:44:03] I don't.

[1:44:04] The great thing about this product is that there are additional modules depending on what

[1:44:08] we decide to utilize and not utilize.

[1:44:10] And so depending on what the grant awards us, we can say, hey, we want to have ABC, and

[1:44:16] we'll wait for DE and F, maybe down the road and apply for that at a different grant.

[1:44:20] So it's kind of contingent on the grant and what they decide if they decide to award us.

[1:44:24] And so from there, we'd be able to take a look at our existing systems, say, okay, this

[1:44:28] is going to take over XYZ.

[1:44:30] Let's take that out, when are these renewals do, et cetera, et cetera.

[1:44:34] Make sure, of course, County IT is okay with that method and moving forward.

[1:44:37] we've already sent them some preliminary documents on this software system and they've given

[1:44:41] us the green light to initiate this initial this grant application and then we'd be able to

[1:44:46] there get a final figure for you.

[1:44:51] From the grant request, this is a one-time percent of money.

[1:45:00] So that means if you use the system, then you're going to have to, we're going to have to put it in the budget and pay for it in the years in the future. So that means it would be an expense to the county. More apply for additional grants for subsequent years. Yes, ma'am. So that don't mean you're going to get the grant. Correct. Absolutely right. But we will try. But basically it says you have from filling it out, you said it would not meet the requirements. So for future.

[1:45:31] You also said, let's say the grant commitment of funding will the grant

[1:45:39] create a program or require any county commitment for funding after grant

[1:45:45] funding ends and you said yes. So that means we have to continue to pay for it.

[1:45:52] Don't get a future grant, yes ma'am. And that let's see the grant contains

[1:45:58] subcontractors, sub-award and contractual services. So that means you have to purchase

[1:46:06] that software license. Yes, ma'am.

[1:46:08] You're purchasing from essential personnel. Yes, ma'am.

[1:46:12] So with that said, what program are you using now since you've been using a program for

[1:46:19] a good while and how long has this grant been in the making with the local police departments?

[1:46:27] I'm not sure about the question about that Association of Teases Police.

[1:46:30] I'm not familiar with this grant program and so I can't tell you how many years they've

[1:46:33] been around.

[1:46:34] I know that association has been around for some time, but what I can tell you is there

[1:46:38] are a couple of different software systems that we would be able to take away and replace

[1:46:43] with this essential person now.

[1:46:44] Like I mentioned earlier, there are different modules depending on what we are awarded and

[1:46:48] what we're allowed to use, but there's a couple of names of software systems I'm happy

[1:46:52] to share if need be.

[1:46:53] One of those is Guardian Tracking, aka Vector Solutions.

[1:46:57] That's one of the vendors that we're looking at that currently helps manage our early intervention

[1:47:01] and early warning system, which is a requirement by state statute that we have to manage and

[1:47:06] maintain that for our officer wellness and intervention.

[1:47:09] But if you maintain that for your wellness then you wouldn't need that for this program.

[1:47:15] This would be able to take over for that program as well as do additional services that Guardian

[1:47:20] and tracking vector solutions cannot do for us currently.

[1:47:23] So you would get rid of garden.

[1:47:25] Yes ma'am.

[1:47:25] So you said the state required it.

[1:47:26] So the state requires the tracking

[1:47:28] of an early intervention or early warning system.

[1:47:31] And so right now, guardian tracking is doing that for us.

[1:47:34] So how much are we paying for gardening and tracking

[1:47:37] for this track?

[1:47:38] That one program, I don't have the number right here

[1:47:40] in front of me, but I'm happy to pull it up

[1:47:41] and email it to you.

[1:47:43] Well, that won't decide on my vote

[1:47:46] because I don't have the information.

[1:47:49] Also, you won't receive the funds in advance.

[1:47:52] It will be reimbursed after you purchase the software.

[1:47:56] Is that not correct?

[1:47:58] If we are awarded the grant, then what typically would happen and Aaron please correct me if

[1:48:02] I'm wrong.

[1:48:02] But if we're awarded the grant and the board therefore approves that award, then the finance department

[1:48:08] would do a budget amendment to allow for the PO and secure of that product and then be

[1:48:13] reimbursed like we do other grants.

[1:48:16] most most grants are reimbursement based nowadays yeah so the county would do a

[1:48:21] budget amendment to allow for us to proceed in that route and then with the

[1:48:24] assumption or assurance of reimbursement yes ma'am so I know in the past we have

[1:48:31] purchased a lot of software for the service office and so I need a list of what

[1:48:36] you're gonna get rid of before I can approve this and the date starts out

[1:48:43] October the first. So why wasn't this brought to us sooner?

[1:48:47] It just opened in September and we've been waiting on the internal approvals to proceed

[1:48:51] from both county IT and from admin once we found out that the grant was available.

[1:48:57] So we found out the grant was available. We then started doing the research on the potential

[1:49:00] vendors, found some vendor options, took those options then to the application here and to

[1:49:07] county IT to kind of get that ball rolling. So as soon as we heard about it, we got the ball

[1:49:11] rolling.

[1:49:11] So, since you said you made contacts with vendors, what is the police department's shoes?

[1:49:20] Did they use the same vendor?

[1:49:23] I'm not sure.

[1:49:24] There are some other competitor vendors like IA Pro, things like that.

[1:49:28] We looked at that vendor a few years back, but it was like 70 grand, so we said no, thank

[1:49:32] you.

[1:49:32] It was very expensive.

[1:49:34] So, there are a couple of competitors out there.

[1:49:36] And as this early warning and early intervention system is becoming much more commonplace especially because of the state law

[1:49:43] That was passed. There's now a lot more software companies coming out trying to get a bite of that pie

[1:49:47] So we have been looking at ways to continue to improve this process for overall officer wellness and officer tracking

[1:49:55] And we hope that this vendor could help us consolidate some existing systems and provide enhanced services for that ultimate goal so

[1:50:03] essential personnel. Yes, ma'am Fender. Yes, ma'am. Where are they located? They're located in New

[1:50:09] Hinterver County in Wilmington and they are a veteran-owned company and at some of the focus of this

[1:50:13] granting and grantor as well. The North Carolina Association of Chiefs of Police they're trying to

[1:50:18] focus on North Carolina based businesses and businesses like minority-owned women-owned veteran-owned.

[1:50:30] Thank you. Thank you. Yes, sir. Just a couple of questions. First of all, thank you for bringing

[1:50:35] in this and then explaining it. The first year value is approximately 40,000. Would that

[1:50:39] be the estimated recurring value as well, or would it?

[1:50:42] We'd have to look at what the contract says, but I would imagine for at least a CPI type

[1:50:47] of increase, unless we can get them tied in for more than a year or what have you, but that's

[1:50:51] kind of contingent on all the legal stuff and that's a little above my pay grade. So I'll

[1:50:55] leave that to the attorneys.

[1:50:57] I understand leaving things to the attorneys. We leave a lot to them.

[1:51:00] Thank you, Brian. I appreciate you.

[1:51:01] You mentioned that this would replace some other things.

[1:51:03] I mean, you said you didn't have exact figures,

[1:51:05] but do you think that that could offset a decent amount

[1:51:07] of that recovery then?

[1:51:08] Yes, sir.

[1:51:08] That is the goal is to offset, if not help us save money

[1:51:11] in future years.

[1:51:12] But like I said, it's contingent on what we get awarded,

[1:51:17] if we get awarded, and the timing of our existing renewals,

[1:51:20] because they all kind of happened throughout the year.

[1:51:22] And there's a timing element there

[1:51:23] that we're hoping to capitalize on.

[1:51:26] And I guess as you guys opinion, this would do a better job

[1:51:29] of what it does than the one you're currently using

[1:51:32] I don't want to talk ill about existing software systems.

[1:51:35] They've done a great job for us, but some systems have more opportunities that can venture

[1:51:41] out into other aspects of what we're doing with other vendors.

[1:51:44] So we're hoping just to kind of consolidate and make things a little more efficient.

[1:51:47] And I guess final question, what we're voting on today is approval of the grant application.

[1:51:52] Correct.

[1:51:52] It's not for the award.

[1:51:53] We've not been awarded anything.

[1:51:54] It's just to say, hey, county manager, let us go ahead and hit send.

[1:51:58] We hit send.

[1:51:58] And if we get it, there's no county match and we hope to, you know, clean up some of

[1:52:02] these software programs and consolidate.

[1:52:04] But you then have to, you still have to buy future years and it could cost more.

[1:52:10] Yes, ma'am. And it would hopefully replace existing funds that are already allocated for other software

[1:52:14] systems and maybe even save money in future years. So that's what we're hopeful for.

[1:52:17] If you get the grant, wouldn't it come back before this board at that point anyway?

[1:52:20] I'm sorry.

[1:52:21] If you were awarded the grant, would it come back before this board at that point?

[1:52:25] Yes, sir. It would come back to you to approve the award and then allow the said budget amendment to be able to get that process going with all the contracts and POs and all that one stuff.

[1:52:34] I'll move approval of the grant application. Second.

[1:52:38] Williams Cook.

[1:52:39] I just want to say that I can approve it since I don't know how much savings we're going to have.

[1:52:46] I don't know what the cost would be down the road from this company.

[1:52:50] it would have been nice to have something from essential personnel to know their

[1:52:54] current cost of the thing. You know, are we adding any money to it? I don't have

[1:53:01] anything from them to show the contract with essential personnel.

[1:53:07] Sure if you

[1:53:08] want to do something. I would just like to add that you know, if 300 came out to do

[1:53:12] two things, number one, get bad apples out of law enforcement number, people ones

[1:53:15] that are trying to do a good job that may mess up. So this system will allow us

[1:53:19] better than what we have now to catch those ones that are kind of falling off track but we need

[1:53:23] to save. And then also help us get the bad apples. That's the whole point of Senate Bill 300

[1:53:28] so we can track this stuff within our agency. And, you know, our goal is to, yes, get rid of some

[1:53:34] programs. This is a better program. We feel, and it will help us do that. So in the long run,

[1:53:41] we obviously can't say if it's going to be going to be swapping the same amount of money.

[1:53:45] We hope it is, but if not, we're going to say money in the long room because we're keeping good people in retention in the agency and getting the bad ones out.

[1:53:53] So I think that's money was spent.

[1:53:55] Thank you.

[1:53:59] I look at this as two different pieces.

[1:54:05] This is an application.

[1:54:07] and so, as Commissioner Williams mentioned, you will have to come back before us to get approval.

[1:54:16] I would think that whenever you came back before some of the questions, some of them have already been answered.

[1:54:23] Consolidating systems, no cost to the county and no county share, but the ultimate goal I think is to have some type of cost savings.

[1:54:36] And it may be meaningful for the department to, you know, if it promotes recruitment of good officers, I think that that's could be a plus two, but because this is just the application, I don't see a problem when moving forward with that knowing that

[1:54:57] that a full report whenever the request comes forward to approve.

[1:55:06] We would, most of the questions that I think Commissioner Sykes was indicating would

[1:55:12] probably be in that package.

[1:55:14] So I would, I don't see a problem moving forward with the application itself, but this particular

[1:55:19] time.

[1:55:20] A little bit?

[1:55:21] Yes, sir.

[1:55:21] You have a time frame on when you think you might hear back from?

[1:55:25] That's the million dollar question, isn't it?

[1:55:29] They said they're on a first come first serve basis, so we're hoping that they're eager

[1:55:34] and they're hungry to get this underway, and since they didn't even give us a deadline

[1:55:38] to submit, they've said here it's open, go ahead and start going now, so we're hoping

[1:55:42] we'll hear back soon, if they're first come first serve, if they like an application,

[1:55:45] we're hoping they'll say yes, we're going to go ahead and fund this, you can proceed

[1:55:48] and send their letters that we really kind of at their back and call and hit and refresh

[1:55:53] on the email inbox.

[1:55:54] So thank you. Any other questions? Well, I'd like to say that I have to agree with

[1:56:00] Commissioner Thompson that the call I mean, as long as you put the cost savings in there and give us

[1:56:06] more information if you do get the grant, then I would reconsider yes or no. But so I don't mind

[1:56:14] voting for the grant, but to move forward, but it doesn't mean until I see the cost savings and stuff,

[1:56:23] I can vote for it if it's a received

[1:56:26] Okay, I have a motion. I have a second all those in favor. Please say aye. Hi any opposed

[1:56:33] Five on thank you Elizabeth. Thank you for your time. I'll see you Friday store. Oh, thank you

[1:56:42] All right moving on we have added

[1:56:46] Clock cameras mission of psyches

[1:56:50] Okay, well

[1:56:53] As you know, I'm not sure

[1:56:55] I sent the share of email back in August of 22, a request and information about flight

[1:57:04] cameras.

[1:57:06] I get to receive any information back.

[1:57:10] I need to know a complete list of existing flight cameras, any plan or proposed additional,

[1:57:18] the cost to the county, including installation, annual fees, maintenance and any other associated

[1:57:25] that expenses, any agreements, contracts or MOUs currently in place with

[1:57:30] flock or related vendors. Along with the request, I wanted to express my

[1:57:37] concerns, I have regarding the use of flock cameras in our county. Now,

[1:57:43] according to New Hanover County today, they have taken a mall out of New

[1:57:48] and over county will be taken out. The other thing right for beach had a police

[1:57:55] one that was fired today because of flight cameras. We've had Florida, the

[1:58:02] state of Florida, they have to take them out of the whole state. There is a

[1:58:07] continuous battle with flight. Yeah, uh-huh. Steve, didn't you say that? That

[1:58:13] Florida had

[1:58:17] well my thing is I have a major concern because of the fourth amendment and

[1:58:29] if you read the Constitution and I think everybody reads the Constitution and we're supposed

[1:58:35] to abide by the Constitution is the fourth amendment do we have any fault cameras I didn't

[1:58:40] We did. I've seen on private property.

[1:58:42] We did. We did.

[1:58:43] Okay.

[1:58:44] Okay.

[1:58:44] Okay. You have business owners that have and you have

[1:58:47] systems that have and you have to know that we also have.

[1:58:50] You have. Okay.

[1:58:52] Yes, I disagree. I don't think it's a violation of fourth

[1:58:54] of memory.

[1:58:55] The board approved a contract with flock January 16th of 2024.

[1:58:59] It's a two year term, it renewed in January of this year.

[1:59:04] I'm not really understanding how can we

[1:59:05] have violation of fourth of memory.

[1:59:06] If I can walk on the sidewalk and videotape and take pictures

[1:59:09] of people, but yeah, you can't take a picture, a picture image in that time on a public road.

[1:59:17] So I'm not really sure how it violates the constitution.

[1:59:19] There's a difference in a picture and a storage of a continuation of what you're taking.

[1:59:28] When you find my notes.

[1:59:31] As in this point in time, I can tell you that DC is working on a regulation too,

[1:59:38] that on-flight cameras. Just to let you know.

[1:59:43] First, the cost of flight cameras is very

[1:59:49] high. I have not been given any amount of money. Nobody has told me how much they cost

[1:59:54] yet. They cost the county to about $22,000, $24,000 and just so you're aware, all that stuff

[1:59:59] office.

[2:00:00] In the public, you can go on on. I would like to email from you and you can also see the contract as well. I would like to email from you with all that data that I requested. That's what I've requested. I'm a commissioner. You're part of the county and I requested the information. I would appreciate that you get it to me. I would find out why you don't have it, but it's all online. The public can see it. I'm not going to I'm not going to go online for it. I said I wanted it from you.

[2:00:29] and an email.

[2:00:31] No disrespect, man, but I don't work for you.

[2:00:32] I work for the citizens of Brussels County.

[2:00:34] I want to make that very clear right now.

[2:00:36] Well, I can tell you that we do set your budget.

[2:00:40] And that is part of our job.

[2:00:42] And I appreciate anything that you have.

[2:00:42] And we can amend, we can amend your budget at any time.

[2:00:46] You're absolutely right.

[2:00:47] You can stand there and yes, you are the power of the county to share for the county.

[2:00:52] But I also have a right as a commissioner to do my job as an elected official of this county.

[2:00:58] Now, with that said, I disagree with the flight cameras.

[2:01:03] The privacy, the tradeoff is enormous.

[2:01:06] How many deputies are abusing the system?

[2:01:10] I don't know.

[2:01:10] We've had one that we caught with our own audit and he is no longer working on it.

[2:01:14] We don't even want me to go there.

[2:01:16] I'm just saying that.

[2:01:18] Data sharing is a hidden risk.

[2:01:20] The data sharing, when you'll collect the flight camera information, it's anybody can

[2:01:26] and look it up, anybody can use it.

[2:01:29] Anybody or law enforcement?

[2:01:30] Law enforcement, I'm across the United States,

[2:01:33] so anybody can follow anybody.

[2:01:35] That's not true.

[2:01:37] Only if there's an agreement.

[2:01:41] That's why I asked you about all the MOUs

[2:01:45] and all the other stuff that has not been provided.

[2:01:48] So how am I supposed to know this

[2:01:50] if I'm not provided the information?

[2:01:52] I will get you the information that you asked for.

[2:01:55] The system is fundable, it can be misuse.

[2:02:00] Flight cameras do not address most crimes.

[2:02:05] The majority of our crimes in our county is not vehicle-based.

[2:02:11] It's domestic, incidents, drug offenses, assault, fraud, juvenile issues and crime.

[2:02:19] We expect it to help with all those if the suspect is any vehicle leaving a scene.

[2:02:24] We have several success stories that I can e-mail you guys where we found missing people,

[2:02:30] Alzheimer's pages.

[2:02:31] I mean, we have used this.

[2:02:33] I-

[2:02:34] You can put it on the interstate, but as far as it being in the county, on red, no.

[2:02:39] I'm just saying, not me personally.

[2:02:42] I want to be clear, our current cameras are on major state roads in and out of the county

[2:02:47] near the county lines.

[2:02:49] I don't have them on secondary roads throughout the county, no.

[2:02:53] I don't have a list.

[2:02:56] Have you provided me a list of your locations?

[2:02:59] No.

[2:03:00] Okay.

[2:03:01] So I'm going to read the 4th amendment to you.

[2:03:03] The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against

[2:03:09] unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated and no warrant shall be issued,

[2:03:16] but upon probable calls supported by oath and affirmation and particularly

[2:03:24] describing the place to be searched. The persons are things to be seized.

[2:03:30] Is taking a picture, a search? Well, if you can research it any time you

[2:03:35] want to. For law enforcement purposes. Okay, so you have a case for every time it's

[2:03:41] been searched. There's a reason. You have a problem. You have to list a reason. You have a

[2:03:46] A probable cause written down and filed that you own every search that you've done on

[2:03:52] the floor.

[2:03:52] It's used for law enforcement investigation.

[2:03:55] That it has to have a probable cause.

[2:04:01] There should be a record of every use of the flood.

[2:04:04] As of right now, no court is deemed a violation.

[2:04:07] Well, the U.S. is working on it right now.

[2:04:12] And I took an oath to abide by the Constitution, which I will do.

[2:04:17] It's not a probable cause, it's not a probable cause if you just want to look up a

[2:04:24] license tag number. Now let me say if somebody's missing you have a probable cause

[2:04:29] because it's you want to follow that vehicle that that person took off from their

[2:04:34] home and they have to let's be clear we're not following vehicles. It takes a

[2:04:38] picture in one point of time there is nothing else. There is no there's no

[2:04:43] No tracking, there's no GPS, there's no facial recognition, there's none of that.

[2:04:47] It is a point in time that somebody passed a location and then that is it.

[2:04:52] But how many locations is it passed?

[2:04:54] It dumps every 30 days.

[2:04:55] How many locations is it passing?

[2:04:58] And you're saying 30 days, so you deleted everything that was on there before up to the

[2:05:04] 30 days, correct?

[2:05:05] After 30 days, it dumps.

[2:05:08] Now it does, but it didn't before.

[2:05:10] When did the 30 days start?

[2:05:12] from the time from the time that the board initiated and signed the contract

[2:05:19] which everybody voted for.

[2:05:23] So it's always been 30 days.

[2:05:30] I'm just very passionate

[2:05:30] because I've seen what it does. Sure. And I get that you guys don't have that information.

[2:05:35] If you want the success stories, I'll get them to you. I'll get you the information that you won't miss out on.

[2:05:39] I want the information because I don't support the flight cameras and I am against them.

[2:05:44] and I think it's the public trust matters and, you know, we all want safe

[2:05:51] communities but safe. I understand that there is a group of people out there

[2:05:57] that is not for flock and that's fine. There's a lot of people. Like it's no

[2:06:00] more invasive than city cameras. Cameras that's your Walmart camera, your cell phone

[2:06:05] tracks you and listens to you. This is taking a picture in a moment of time. That's

[2:06:10] this is the most basic thing that we have is our cell phones and every other

[2:06:15] camera that ring doorbell cameras the camera at like I said it loads Walmart

[2:06:21] Home Depot you cannot go anywhere in Brunswick County and you're not on camera

[2:06:25] I have cameras around my house now mind on I'm not right next to the road but we

[2:06:30] use ring doorbell cameras to solve investigations because they catch

[2:06:35] stuff on the roadway now I think every sheriff in North Carolina every sheriff

[2:06:39] across the United States is upset that we've had misuse and I understand your

[2:06:44] concerns about the misuse but the first time that you have your your grandmother

[2:06:50] or your two-year-old walk away and we could have had them safe because of a

[2:06:54] flock camera we have instituted audits we audit this thing every single month

[2:07:00] I'm gonna do whatever I can to keep these cameras because I see the

[2:07:04] value. But again, there is some, I mean, we have to work on the ones that are

[2:07:08] you. I'll bring back more stuff, but I won't bring back more stuff until you

[2:07:12] provide me the information. Just share my mass. I don't see that the fourth

[2:07:18] amendment is applicable here because it isn't certain seizure. Not only that, I

[2:07:23] had a briefing from Motorola when the tag readers came out for a day.

[2:07:32] I

[2:07:33] been in the cars when we were trying to go after somebody I never got sworn but in the 1970s I

[2:07:38] almost spent every night riding with the police at night and we had a lot of drugs in our

[2:07:44] county back then and you probably know about that but anyway I've helped law enforcement I've

[2:07:49] shot pictures I've helped with drug investigations and done that and they're at sworn but I did ride

[2:07:53] with them a lot and the thing about is no one when you had an individual that came into your jurisdiction

[2:07:57] that had a warrant. That was a tremendous asset. My understanding was that the motor

[2:08:02] roll, I don't know about flock, but motor roll would trigger a flag and let you

[2:08:06] know that that car came through with a tag with a warrant on it. And when you

[2:08:10] did that, you knew, okay, I've got this individual's in my jurisdiction. We have

[2:08:14] a very low crime rate. And I do know the value of this thing. People are

[2:08:18] concerned and they sit there and they think it's like big brother, but the

[2:08:21] reality is no different than what you just stated with respect to your phone

[2:08:25] Or anything else that you find it was hardware or anything else like that point being is we're trying to determine who the bad guys

[2:08:30] Are and get them off the road. That's all it really boils down to we have got to get the handle across the United States with the missus

[2:08:37] I will agree 100%

[2:08:39] We see eye on eye on that. I don't agree with the fourth amendment

[2:08:42] Well, I don't also I don't want this county to have more crime because people are gonna know they can get away on the vehicle

[2:08:48] That's exactly anytime you have something that can be searched and you can follow a person

[2:08:54] through an area or a county. If you have 21 of these flocked cambers, then for-

[2:09:00] I was 16. So when they go from one place to the other, okay, and then you look up

[2:09:06] something without probable calls, you're going against the fourth and the-

[2:09:10] The only thing that is going to tell me is if they're going out of the county,

[2:09:12] because it's at the county, the entrances and exits to the county, that's all I'm

[2:09:17] going to know. If I'm not going to know where they went inside the county. If the

[2:09:20] system for not until you give me the location. I'm telling you that if it's

[2:09:26] telling you if the system flags a car that has a warrant on it, is that not

[2:09:31] probable cause? That's what I said. If he has probable cause all the time,

[2:09:39] because if we got we got deputies, we got this message that we are fired continuously.

[2:09:45] Why put it in front of them to abuse?

[2:09:48] We had one.

[2:09:50] Less than one.

[2:09:50] You had more than one.

[2:09:51] I'm not even going to go there.

[2:09:53] All right.

[2:09:54] All right.

[2:09:55] Before emotions get any more heated,

[2:09:58] I want you to say we move on and we will revisit this

[2:10:01] when you can supply the information.

[2:10:03] Thank you.

[2:10:08] All right.

[2:10:11] Moving on.

[2:10:12] Board appointments.

[2:10:15] Oceanale Beach Planning Board.

[2:10:17] Board of Adjustment.

[2:10:18] we have appointments.

[2:10:22] Darryl and did you want to say anything?

[2:10:25] Just the clerk for the Oceano beach sent these applications in with their letters of support

[2:10:34] to prove this.

[2:10:35] I'll go ahead and make a motion. Williamson Miller and Noel would be appointed to the respected

[2:10:43] positions that's on the agenda.

[2:10:48] I'll second.

[2:10:48] I'll second and say that Frank Williamson has the second coolest name I've ever heard.

[2:10:54] So I have a motion and I have a second.

[2:10:57] All those in favor, please say aye.

[2:10:59] Aye.

[2:11:00] Any opposed?

[2:11:02] Okay.

[2:11:02] Moving on.

[2:11:03] Clerk, they're board.

[2:11:04] Board appointment.

[2:11:06] JCPC.

[2:11:07] Yes, sir.

[2:11:08] I was notified that they had one member that stepped away.

[2:11:10] So I have supplied you all with the applications that I have on board.

[2:11:14] Mr. Cook, does somebody have I do okay and I I have reviewed all the applicants.

[2:11:20] We had quite a few good ones, a lot of good ones and that is not dismissed anybody there.

[2:11:26] But there was one that was quite unique.

[2:11:29] Dr. Tiffany Rogers, she's the professor of criminology for UNC Wilmington.

[2:11:34] She has lived in the area for four years.

[2:11:35] She is a professor of criminology and also the career intern coordinator in the criminology department, UNC Wilmington

[2:11:43] She's interested in behavior modification and I that she taught in the middle school level

[2:11:47] While in grad school. She's been guard in I'd lie to them in Brunswick County

[2:11:52] And she's also a graduate of the New Hanover County citizens academy and that being said

[2:11:57] I think that she is a stellar candidate. I've actually spoken with her

[2:12:01] I think she would be outstanding for JCP say so I'd like to bring forth her name for consideration that's a motion. Yes, sir.

[2:12:08] Second. Cook Thompson any discussion all those in favor. Please say aye. Aye. Any opposed. Thank you.

[2:12:18] All right. The last one is I received notification from the lower Kate Fairwater and sewer authority that Mr. Sue was

[2:12:24] stepping down

[2:12:25] October 1.

[2:12:27] So the applications have been sent and are attached permission to Williams.

[2:12:31] I'll make a motion that we appoint Donald Dickson effective October 1st.

[2:12:34] That's.

[2:12:37] We both set.

[2:12:38] That's OK.

[2:12:39] Come on.

[2:12:39] I think Bill did.

[2:12:41] All right.

[2:12:41] So I have a motion.

[2:12:42] I have a handful of seconds.

[2:12:45] All those in favor?

[2:12:46] Please say aye.

[2:12:47] All right.

[2:12:47] Mr. Chairman, I'd like to also say we appreciate Mr. Sue's service.

[2:12:52] He's done it so many different ways.

[2:12:54] He's served on the Board of Education.

[2:12:55] He certainly served on our board as well for a tremendously long time.

[2:12:58] Most of his career.

[2:12:59] So that being said, we really appreciate our hats off to his service to this county.

[2:13:03] Absolutely.

[2:13:04] And if I could add a word there, if y'all could keep him in your prayers, he's dealing with some health issues.

[2:13:08] These are part of the reason he's stepping away.

[2:13:13] Okay, thank you everybody.

[2:13:15] All right, any other business before the board? Mr. Chairman, I just want to make a comment.

[2:13:21] The 30th Armored Brigade right now has moved up and they are very close to the action.

[2:13:25] they are getting shield. Just the other day there was 6,000 drones and missiles shot at Allied

[2:13:32] forces but what you may hear is only 1,500 were intercepted. The reality is vast majority

[2:13:38] of the other ones went into empty areas where they just made a hole in the ground. So they weren't

[2:13:44] targeted. So they're in good hands but keep them in your prayers sir.

[2:13:52] I have something as well, Mr. Chairman, if I may, why don't we keep your son in Allen

[2:13:58] Prince?

[2:14:00] I know he's on the front line, ma'am.

[2:14:05] I have one if I may, obviously with the fire that we had recently, there was a lot of,

[2:14:09] I think, communication, or confusion regarding communication, and what I learned is that

[2:14:14] we were not the lead communicator on that.

[2:14:15] I believe it was forestry in the sheriff's office and I think that that's a little unique

[2:14:20] situation usually when I think forestry I think something out in the forest not in an area with

[2:14:24] that many homes. So I would request that we look into and I know you've already talked with forestry

[2:14:29] once but how we can develop a better communication protocol for events where they are the lead responder

[2:14:34] not us because our citizens don't understand how all that works and they come to us expecting the

[2:14:39] information and I know I think you were beating your head against the wall trying to get information

[2:14:43] sometimes what I gathered so we could be proactive on talking with them before we have another

[2:14:47] incidence if we can develop a better protocol. Sir, we had a discussion in our after-action

[2:14:54] meeting about communication and leadership in those events.

[2:15:00] It's hard for the manager to become a, or the mechanic to become a general manager. So, you know, you just gotta. I kind of gathered communication was not at the top of their priority list, but we had people asking us, and you know, it's kind of hard to put out information they haven't given us. You know, whenever they bring in their team, their, their huge conglomerate team, they do have a communications component in that, and they will set that up for

[2:15:30] days and weeks, but you're not going to see that in the first four or five days.

[2:15:36] No, it's not a rapid response communication either.

[2:15:41] Anything else?

[2:15:43] Mr. Attorney, take us into closed session, please.

[2:15:46] Yes, sir.

[2:15:47] Thank you very much.

[2:15:48] Request the board in a closed session for someone who didn't see GS-143-318-11-A1-3 is outlined

[2:15:53] in the agenda.

[2:15:55] So move.

[2:15:56] Second.

[2:15:56] All right.

[2:15:58] I'll second.

[2:15:59] All those in favour, stand.

[2:29:39] Mr. Attorney, anything to report?

[2:29:41] No, sir.

[2:29:42] Thank you.

[2:29:44] Motion to adjourn?

[2:29:45] Summit.

[2:29:45] Second.

[2:29:46] All those in favour?

[2:29:47] Aye.

[2:29:48] Thank you.

Board of Commissioners

Transcript