[0:01] It is 4 o'clock. So, I will call to order the second monthly meeting of the

[0:07] Hendersonville City Council, August 26, 2026.

[0:14] Um, you have the agenda in front of you. Is there anything you would like to uh

[0:21] change on the >> Yes. Yes. Mayor vote, members of city

[0:25] council, >> you're getting this nice feedback out

[0:29] here on >> So, uh, like to make a couple changes to

[0:36] the agenda. Would like to remove item A, farmland preservation bond referendum

[0:42] update from Henderson County. That will be a month from today. And I'd like to

[0:47] add a presentation by Father Andreas um, under item A. And then I would like to

[0:53] add item E, discussion regarding Lenny's law following the legislative updates.

[1:00] Those are my changes, please.

[1:04] » Right. Council, anything you would like to have added or removed?

[1:10] If not, a motion may move the city council approve the

[1:15] agenda as amended. >> Thank you. Is there any discussion?

[1:20] Not. Those in favor of approving the agenda as amended say I.

[1:24] » I. >> Those oppos say no. Eyes have it. We

[1:27] have our amended. Our agenda as amended. All right. Uh presentations.

[1:34] We have a special presentation

[1:39] introduction. So I think most people are you could

[1:43] just come to the podium father. Thank you. Um and Chief Ward,

[1:49] I think most people know that there was a fire at Immaculate Conception um

[1:54] during mass on Saturday afternoon. And I have heard just like a tremendous

[2:00] response from our parishioners and people in the community and our priest

[2:04] about the response time and how well you guys handled everything. Everybody was

[2:09] evacuated very quickly and so um we wanted to thank you but also so did

[2:15] Immaculate Conception and he wanted to bring a letter of appreciation today.

[2:19] » Yeah, thank you very much. Um it was just really nice to have the reassuring

[2:24] uh presence uh the professionalism of the fire department and the police

[2:29] department as well. Um it just brought a calm and everybody just was not alarmed.

[2:35] There wasn't panic. it was they were just doing their job and so it it you

[2:40] know it wasn't a huge huge incident but it was um it was an incident and so it

[2:47] it we lived it through with their help um in a way that I don't know um it was

[2:53] the best possible outcome that could have happened in a situation like that.

[2:58] So, just wanted to present a letter of appreciation to the members of the

[3:03] Hendersonville Fire Department on behalf of myself uh representing the parish and

[3:09] all our um 2200 families that um participate and our members of our faith

[3:17] community. So,

[3:22] [applause]

[3:33] No, that's that's all right.

[3:44] » Oh, thank you so much >> for uh thank you for thanking our fire

[3:50] department. >> It's great. It's

[3:55] All right. Uh, next we have a presentation regarding

[4:00] uh, improvements to city board and commission support.

[4:06] » Thank you, Madame Mayor, members of council. John and I are going to talk to

[4:10] you about a board and committees overhaul.

[4:13] the desired outcome for today. We want some feedback on proposed changes

[4:19] including marketing, training, onboarding, and the appointments and

[4:24] then hear any of your concerns or anything that we may have overlooked.

[4:28] » The reason we're doing this is we've had a pretty significant attrition rate on

[4:33] our boards and commission. Also, I know that members of um city council have

[4:38] received concerns about maybe how training, how meetings may be run. Also,

[4:46] um you know, we've had meetings where um we haven't had quorum a number of times

[4:52] and we want to make sure that our boards and commissions are running most

[4:55] efficiently as they can and also that everybody's getting value um not only

[5:01] value from city council, from the advice you get from the boards and commission,

[5:05] but also from our board and commission members um who are devoting their time

[5:10] to this work.

[5:14] So, as John mentioned, some of the reasons why we're uh proposing some of

[5:19] these changes, it was noted in your strategic plan under the focus area of

[5:24] engaged and educated community. The overhaul was a big rock that uh was

[5:29] captured um to increase retention of members and also to empower our staff

[5:36] assist to make sure that they receive the training that uh helps make the

[5:40] boards and committees more effective.

[5:44] So, a little bit of background. Uh, we met with staffis and the board and

[5:49] committee chairs. Uh, we actually met with the staff twice. And some themes

[5:54] that came out of those meetings included a lack of understanding of role in time

[5:59] obligations, a lack of board specific training, a desire to have input on

[6:04] applicants, and then overall concerns with civility.

[6:10] We had I mean I think we it was a good approach. I had previously interviewed

[6:15] members of the ESB um who had left that board. Um got a variety of reasons why

[6:21] people left the board um the resignations and things. Um so um a lot

[6:28] of it came down to uh maybe personality disagreements or um issues or just time

[6:35] obligations. So, and then when we sat down with the [clears throat] committee

[6:38] chairs, we received this kind of feedback, but nothing glaring. Um, but

[6:44] we feel like what we're presenting tonight or this afternoon will will be a

[6:48] good approach going forward.

[6:52] » So, moving into some suggested actions. First is to update kind of the marketing

[6:59] of the boards and committees. This includes introduction videos that are

[7:04] specific to each board and committee, web pages that clarify roles,

[7:08] responsibilities, what some of their ongoing projects are, and what typical

[7:13] tasks look like for members. One of the larger things that we're uh wanting

[7:18] feedback on are the prerequisites. Uh this would require before applying

[7:25] for potential applicants to either attend two board meetings or attend one

[7:30] board meeting and then meet with the staff assist one on- one. This would I

[7:35] think inform them more about kind of what they're getting into. Um and

[7:40] hopefully since they know what they're getting into, they're more likely to

[7:43] stay. And the reason we gave two options is some of our boards only meet

[7:47] quarterly, but we made them attend two board meetings. You know, it's half a

[7:51] year for they may lose interest. So, we gave them the option that they can go to

[7:56] one board meeting and then follow up with the staff to talk about what they

[8:00] saw um and what our um expectations.

[8:08] Increased training is a another large topic that we heard over and over during

[8:14] our meetings. Um, we would like to do one-on-one onboarding with the staff

[8:18] assist, which with each of the appointed members. And then we'd like to do yearly

[8:24] training for not only board members, but also the staff assist to cover things

[8:28] like procedural roles, civility, conflict of interest, and attendance

[8:32] requirements. and then for the council liaison for the boards and committees to

[8:37] really understand the roles and responsibilities of that position. Uh

[8:41] and then also the school of government does provide training and uh we think

[8:45] that the city should support board and committee members to attend those

[8:48] trainings. >> Um we as we were talking to the chairs

[8:52] about um the council liaison role. We felt like it's a role that each of you

[8:57] serve on a committee and they they would like for that role be for liaison to

[9:02] bring back their goals, bring back what they're

[9:05] doing to the full city council. They want to make sure there's that two good

[9:09] two-way communication. So, um, we would like so if they're going off track, the

[9:15] liaison can come back to council, talk about what they're doing if they are

[9:19] kind of because they're advising the city council, right? That is their role.

[9:23] One of their roles is to advise city council. I mean, planning board and

[9:26] board of adjustment um and HPC are a little bit different because they have

[9:30] statutory requirements or regulatory, but our others are are strictly advisory

[9:34] for you. And so, we want to make sure um that they are providing the advice that

[9:39] you want to and going in the direction. Not that you control what they're doing,

[9:42] but just make sure if they have projects or initiatives that don't align with our

[9:47] strategic goals and the council's vision that we can guide them through the

[9:52] council leaison to um to refocus their energy to prevent frustration farther

[9:58] down the road.

[10:02] » Input on appointments. Uh this came up both via staffis and the chairs. Um what

[10:08] we are suggesting is that we share the applications with staff assist and get

[10:14] general comments not recommendations on appointments but highlights if they you

[10:19] know volunteer with the HPC or they were previously on a board. Um that way it

[10:24] can better inform your decision on who to appoint. And then we're also

[10:29] suggesting that we change appointment months. So right now we appoint in June

[10:34] and December. We're suggesting we change that to May and November. That will give

[10:40] an additional month which will allow for that proper onboarding of the new member

[10:45] before their term actually begins. >> I would add here um we our tradition or

[10:52] my position and and the city attorney I think agrees with me. Um previously we

[10:58] believe or we still believe that appointment of boards and commission

[11:02] members are city council appointments. staff should not be driving that. These

[11:08] these are your appointments. These are folks in in our community that will be

[11:12] advising you. However, um and so historically we have just kind

[11:18] of left it and staff has not been involved at all. We took the

[11:21] applications, we gave you the applications and let you do what you may

[11:25] with them. Um, but we've also learned that, you know, there's some things that

[11:30] maybe we can put as general notes, general comments if people have been

[11:34] active that may help help you make decisions, help you discern who the best

[11:39] candidates are. Again, as um Jenny said, you know, somebody who if they want to

[11:45] apply for the ESB and they've been for the last five years have been working at

[11:48] Hindo Earthfest and other candidates haven't volunteered

[11:53] their time, that may be good information for you. doesn't mean you have to

[11:56] appoint that person. That may be good information. Same for historic

[12:00] preservation. If somebody's or downtown, somebody took it used their own time and

[12:05] their own money go to go to the main street conference. Maybe you should know

[12:09] that compared to other folks that are just filled out a form. Um but it is

[12:13] just want to be clear. It is it is still our belief that these appointments are

[12:18] your appointments. We just want to give you the information and the data so you

[12:22] can make good sound decisions.

[12:27] One thing that may help guide the boards and committees uh and kind of keep them

[12:32] from going off track is we're suggesting that they create yearly work plans. Um

[12:37] this will identify events, policies, projects, uh have them submit formal

[12:44] budget requests, identify alignment with the overall city strategic plan. uh and

[12:49] we'd want to put that in front of you for adoption uh during the budget

[12:55] ordinance adoption meeting as well. Um in addition to that, we would like I

[13:00] think we learned quite a bit meeting with the staff assist and the chairs and

[13:04] we'd like to continue that hosting semianual meetings with the staff assist

[13:08] and then annual meetings with the chairs. This will help us kind of keep a

[13:12] thumb on what trends we're seeing if retention isn't quite where we want it

[13:16] to be and so we can take corrective action like we're doing today. And then

[13:21] another thing that we are suggesting is uh offboarding to either do an exit

[13:25] interview or an exit survey to understand why people are exiting the

[13:29] boards. I think the thing I would add here as it

[13:32] relates to the work plan is our we our vision is that happens during the spring

[13:36] of the year um particularly um around February March maybe it definitely in

[13:43] the early part of the winter or in the winter so that if there's any financial

[13:47] resource request we can get it in the budget there's no surprises. Um, and

[13:52] then also have it adopted as part of the budget so that council can see the work

[13:57] that is being proposed by your boards and commissions. Again, making sure it's

[14:02] in line with the vision of the city council in line with our strategic plan.

[14:07] So, if we need to make adjustments of their work plan, we can do that. Um, and

[14:11] then the work plan will begin July 1. It'll go for a year. So, you know, we'll

[14:17] start it this January of 27, develop the plan and their first even though they

[14:22] some of them even the HPC has a work plan, but it'll be a formal process. The

[14:27] council is aware of what your boards and commissions and if there's things again

[14:31] projects or initiatives they want to do that may not align with what we want

[14:37] them to spending their energy on right now, we can give them that advice and

[14:40] and redirect that energy so again so they don't become frustrated.

[14:46] And that is all we have for you and we'd love to hear your thoughts and

[14:50] questions.

[14:54] » Question. >> I think all of this sounds great.

[14:59] » Fantastic. >> Um, yeah. No, I think there's definitely

[15:03] some training that needs to happen with the board members because I get

[15:06] questions a lot of like, can we do that? Do we need a second for this? and you

[15:11] know, whatever procedural issues that they may have and like I'm happy to

[15:17] answer them to the best of my knowledge. Um, but it would be nice if they already

[15:22] knew. And then I also think talking more about like time and these meetings don't

[15:27] need to be more than an hour and a half unless it's something like planning

[15:30] board or board adjustment or HBC, something that has some sort of other

[15:34] thing they need to be doing. But um, and I like the work plans. I think that'll

[15:38] help the boards also stay on track so they know like this is our plan for the

[15:42] year and this is what we're going to work on and this is what we're going to

[15:45] talk about and um I think I think the require the prerequisite requirements

[15:50] are also because I do think a lot of people like oh this sounds fun and then

[15:55] they start to do it and they're like oh this is a lot of work so it'd be nice

[15:59] for them to get an idea of and who knows maybe they'll find a board that they're

[16:02] interested in that they didn't know they were interested

[16:06] » yeah I agree with um Councilwoman Simpson. I think this a good idea

[16:10] because some board members uh have the impression that they're the

[16:16] voice of the for the public and um so some clarification on that

[16:23] would really help and then as a leazison then we know what we're not what we're

[16:27] to do and what we're not supposed to do. I know we don't have any voting power. I

[16:31] do know that we just act as a bridge between the city [music] and and the

[16:37] different boards. I definitely think the training is much needed.

[16:45] » Um I wonder about doing like personalized applications by board too.

[16:51] I think that some of this like what a did for us for the last appointments was

[16:57] super helpful and gave us sorry um I think a good comprehensive look at like

[17:02] all of the related pieces like the things that John mentioned as examples.

[17:06] I'm wondering if a way to streamline that might be to have specific

[17:11] applications per board so that folks who do have specific

[17:16] interests can identify those. Um just something that I think we the folks that

[17:21] on ESB brought up because there were things that were being missed in

[17:25] appointments and they were like, well, I've done this for this many years and

[17:31] council didn't know about it and and staff may not know about it, too. So,

[17:35] like to reduce the risk of us overlooking those things as just

[17:40] people who may be wouldn't know. I mean, I think you could do I don't

[17:45] know how I feel about different applications for every board just

[17:48] because that sounds logistically like a nightmare for Jill, but [laughter]

[17:54] I do think that we need to look at the application because I do think there are

[17:57] questions on there that could be added like, have you volunteered with the city

[18:01] in the past? Tell us when and for what. And like then that way we can have that

[18:06] singled out. And I do think that that spreadsheet

[18:09] » was extremely helpful last time because then we didn't have to go back and forth

[18:13] like between all the applications like what who did that and who did this and

[18:16] like you know it was just all there for us. So I do think we should look at the

[18:20] application and see what else we can capture as far as information that would

[18:24] be helpful for us to know but um >> that that's a good happy medium. I don't

[18:29] want to make Jill have >> I think you're completely right. Also, I

[18:32] think the staff comments will make a huge difference, which is what you're

[18:35] already suggesting to do. >> Yeah.

[18:37] » And so, >> um, you know, if I'm applying for

[18:40] something, I will put my best foot forward when I'm applying for it. So,

[18:43] I'm going to tell you on my application what all I have done and but should be

[18:47] on there. And then if we're getting comments from staff about things that,

[18:51] you know, specifically pertain to a higher level of education or

[18:54] qualification for that board, then that helps us to make the better decision.

[18:57] So, I think that's great. >> Yeah. Yeah. And I think staff also gives

[19:00] us a good insight of like it would be really nice if we had a person that had

[19:03] a background in this for this board. Yeah. Yeah.

[19:07] » Thank you. Perfect. Thank you very much. >> Thank you.

[19:15] » Okay. Uh next the draft data center moratorum plan.

[19:27] Good evening, Madame Mayor, members members of council. Um,

[19:32] gonna start with uh privilege of the podium to introduce uh Nico Amy. Uh,

[19:40] Nicholas Nico is our UNC School of Government fellow this year. Um, he

[19:46] joins us uh from Fagatville. He's a graduate of Wake Forest and he is uh

[19:52] interested in the field of law. Uh Daniel has yet to swerve him away from

[19:56] it, but [laughter] uh may continue to try. Um Nico is

[20:01] working with us and working with the community development department uh

[20:04] helping on a number of projects associated with our strategic housing

[20:09] plan and he is with us for a year. So he is with us through June 30th. I'm sure

[20:14] you'll see him again. And he comes free to us although he is getting paid. uh

[20:21] the school of government uh has a relationship with Americanore and he is

[20:26] uh supported via that program which is wonderful. So just wanted to take the

[20:32] opportunity to introduce Nico. He's been wonderful. He started with us at the

[20:36] beginning of August and has hit the ground running. So um

[20:43] so at the beginning of the month uh at your uh August regular meeting uh Mr.

[20:50] speaker introduced the review authority for a moratorum and we spoke about uh

[20:57] what was required for that and how it could be enacted uh and uh specifically

[21:05] as it relates to data centers and what I am presenting this evening is a highle

[21:11] review of what staff uh in an initial assessment see as what would be required

[21:21] during the moratorum to put together a zoning text amendment basically that

[21:27] would then allow us to regulate data centers going forward. So I'm going to

[21:30] talk about um that in the context of the uh moratorum

[21:37] requirements that are established via statute by the state. So, um, and I

[21:45] won't go back over that statute, but if if we do need to talk about that, we

[21:49] can. It's U 160D 107, and that was some of what, um,

[21:57] Angie talked about last month or earlier this month. So, um, what I'll

[22:02] specifically be looking at are the quote unquote required statements, including

[22:07] the identification of the problem. What what is why is a mortorium necessary?

[22:13] What is the problem? What's the timing suggested for the moratorum? What

[22:18] actions will we take uh during that time? And what approvals are affected?

[22:25] So um background first uh terms of the problem, we don't have data

[22:33] centers defined in our zoning ordinance. Um, we don't have the term in the zoning

[22:40] ordinance. It's not listed as a use. Uh, and there's no associated uh, CZD or

[22:47] special use um, that's specifically called out or even just a permitted use

[22:52] uh, for data center. So, if a data center were to come, uh, you know, that

[22:59] that presents an issue right off the bat. uh and because there's no use to

[23:04] find I don't have districts that where it's permitted or prohibited uh and then

[23:10] furthermore there are no standards associated with data centers and looking

[23:15] in of quickly across the state at what uh is happening in other communities.

[23:22] There are various conversations basically around the scale uh of the

[23:27] data centers themselves. So literally the square footage that they occupy and

[23:32] then uh the various uh impacts to utilities, most notably power and water

[23:39] uh that those differing sizes uh uh you know impact to the kinds of things that

[23:46] they have. And so many communities are looking specifically at scale design

[23:51] requirements and impact analyses uh and requiring those for submitt. So we've we

[23:59] don't currently have any of those things and so that's the problem. Uh we don't

[24:03] currently have a way of dealing with the potential impacts of a data center. Uh

[24:09] and then in terms of consideration for the moratorum itself, why would you do

[24:13] that? We will not be able to bring a zoning text amendment to you next month

[24:18] that would tackle the complexity of that amendment. Right? So the nature of the

[24:25] use is such that we may need to talk with Duke to understand what their

[24:31] reality is. Certainly we'll be talking with our water sewer folks to understand

[24:34] and what their concerns might be for a large use. uh and then looking uh more

[24:40] specifically at the typical zoning standards and I'll talk more about um

[24:46] what those are those categories on sort of the last slide when I talk about what

[24:51] we look at while we did uh the study and then what is the impact of the mortorium

[24:58] we would not issue zoning compliance permits for standalone data centers so

[25:03] data center as a primary not be issued during theorium

[25:08] Other things that we are looking or paying attention to or watching, there

[25:12] are two state bills. One that appears I I'm not sure

[25:18] defer to Mr. Conet in terms of whether or not either of them are moving, but uh

[25:23] Senate Bill 7:30 seems the the one that has more life. That's the rateayer

[25:28] protection uh act. And uh I would note that it is

[25:35] tackling very large facilities. Um the definition that they have uh is a

[25:45] uh facility that's a 100 megawatt facility which I was like what's 100

[25:49] megawatts? Uh it's enough to power 75,000 to 100 homes. So it's basically

[25:56] enough to power the city of Hendersonville probably. um including

[26:01] all of our commercial uses. So uh they're at the state level looking at a

[26:08] particular scale of data center and I've heard it called uh yeah that's the

[26:15] hypers scale. So I so we obviously we would need to

[26:20] understand what does that actually mean because that's what they're focused on.

[26:24] It would suggest that they're not regulating data centers via that bill

[26:29] that are drawing less power than that. So if the power draw was half the city

[26:36] of Hendersonville's power requirement, the state law, this particular state law

[26:41] wouldn't impact it. So we're going to keep paying attention to that. There's

[26:44] another one, House Bill 1189, which was more related, it was a two-year

[26:49] moratorum and related to the sales and use tax benefits that I think some of

[26:55] the existing data centers that were put in place

[26:59] had advantage of. uh and I I don't know again the status of that one either but

[27:05] we will continue to uh follow those as the process goes

[27:13] forward. So in terms of proposed plan this is what we're suggesting. Um you'll

[27:23] notice that the the actual timeline that's proposed is about 10 months. Um

[27:28] it is delivering the adoption to city council ahead of

[27:35] the recommended moratorum time length which is 12 months. Um

[27:41] call that a contingency fee. Um you know just to make sure that we do have the

[27:46] time to work through it. I do think that uh the proposed timeline here is one

[27:52] that will allow us to um fully review and develop a zoning text amendment that

[27:57] is appropriate for the city of Hendersonville and continue to manage

[28:02] the workload that we have um in the community development department as as

[28:08] it currently stands. Um, and so I offer that I outline kind of

[28:15] what we would propose to do during those time frames and uh am happy to answer

[28:21] any questions we you have about that. in terms of what we would specifically be

[28:26] looking at during that time frame. Um

[28:31] these are some of the you know potential ordinance elements and again this is

[28:37] reflective of a effort on my part just to

[28:41] you know understand how these are being regulated in other locations here in

[28:46] North Carolina and elsewhere. Uh so some of these may be uh things that we would

[28:51] want to uh not consider or consider at a higher

[28:58] level. Uh so obviously the use classification would be one whether or

[29:02] not we differentiate uh scale of impact. You know um

[29:08] currently with our commercial buildings we have a CZD standard that uh if a

[29:12] building exceeds 50,000 square feet it has to go through the conditional zoning

[29:16] process. if it's under 50,000, there are variety of uh different processes that

[29:21] apply. Um, and so we could look at that level specifically as it relates to data

[29:27] centers, looking at which districts it would be appropriate in, where would we

[29:31] want to see it located, uh, if um, you know, around the city. Uh and um and

[29:40] then any you know special use permits, conditional zoning, things along those

[29:45] lines that we might want to add in. Um and then in terms of the site

[29:51] requirements and infrastructure standards, I' I've listed a couple

[29:54] there. Things that uh I think are unique to data centers that I came across while

[30:00] reviewing those. Um there's a lot of discussion obviously about the

[30:07] electrical requirements but then pretty notably then about the backup

[30:12] electrical requirements and number of conversations or discussions around

[30:18] noise requirements. You have diesel generators that are turning on if the

[30:23] power goes out for these things. It's you know if you've been around the

[30:27] diesel generator at the fire station when it turns on when the power goes out

[30:30] it's you know it's pretty If you've got 30 of those running in a data center, I

[30:35] can imagine that could be pretty loud. So things like that that are pretty

[30:38] unique to the nature of the user. Um all of those would be uh the kinds of

[30:44] potential requirements that we would investigate and try to determine what

[30:49] the viability of those impacts would actually.

[30:54] So, um

[31:02] I have other examples of these that I can offer, but um what I really wanted

[31:06] to highlight was kind of the overview. And so I I think at that at this point

[31:11] I'm going to stop and see if there are any questions that you all have.

[31:16] » Lou, I think the only thing I would ask and make make sure I'm correct for Angie

[31:21] correct me. you know, we're not allowed to, and this is for the public that may

[31:25] be listening, and we'll say this again next week at the public hearing. Um,

[31:29] we're not allowed to do an outright ban, I think. Am I wrong about that? I

[31:38] » I don't know. I I'm not going to say yes or no on that right now. That's an issue

[31:42] in our >> Friday, I think. So,

[31:45] » okay. So, >> anyway,

[31:48] » so maybe maybe not. Um, currently, so we'll see. Um um so well I just lost my

[31:55] whole train of thought there. So anyway, we're you know we're going to ask

[31:58] council um you know traditionally we've not been able to do an out traditionally

[32:03] been able to do an out outright ban. I mean if you can't do an outright ban to

[32:08] sexually oriented businesses I don't think you could do an outright ban.

[32:13] So she's going to disagree with me of more data centers. But anyway,

[32:17] historically, that may be changing case law, things like that, whatever the case

[32:21] may be. So, public hearing, council can make their decision next week as it

[32:27] relates to that. >> Um, and one thing I just wanted to say

[32:29] about why why do a moratorium? You know, that's a big question. Why? Um, and

[32:35] because the statutes were amended several years ago for permit choice, but

[32:40] you could undertake and do all of this study over the course of a year without

[32:44] doing a moratorum. And if somebody came in and applied for one in the meantime,

[32:48] they get to choose which version of our ordinance they um get to apply. And so

[32:53] it could allow somebody to kind of bypass whatever you're getting ready to

[32:57] put in place. And so that would be a reason to do a mortorium if you so

[33:03] choose.

[33:06] And sexually oriented businesses have a first amendment

[33:14] protection. Ah, thank you. That's why you're an attorney and I'm a city

[33:18] manager. [laughter]

[33:21] » So, not asking for any action tonight. Um, requires a public hearing and so um

[33:30] just want to um if you had any questions or any

[33:34] direction at this point. >> I just want to thank y'all for the

[33:38] amount of work that has gone into this. I know it's like a constantly changing

[33:41] landscape that's taking a lot of digging. I just pulled up both of those

[33:44] bills and they're both extremely dense and I don't know what's happening with

[33:48] them. So, thank you all for the work that you're doing to make sense out of

[33:51] it. >> I completely agree. The only thing I

[33:55] would like to ask is um is there a way in an ordinance to address a evolving or

[34:03] changing

[34:08] um because so many things are changing with data centers and the technology is

[34:13] getting it like it seems like it changes and improves within three to six months

[34:18] sometimes. And so when we're drafting an ordinance um and which I am supportive

[34:23] of a moratorium, but can we is there a way to add something like that to where

[34:29] if the technology is changing then we can amend things as we go or

[34:36] if we do this then there's no changing it.

[34:38] » I mean you can always amend things as you go but it depends on how it's

[34:42] crafted. So if you have some triggers in there that for instance

[34:47] uh electricity usage and or water usage and the technology becomes such that

[34:52] those aren't triggered any longer then you know they may not be fall under

[34:59] those restrictions. And so um you would want to stay a breast of that though

[35:03] because you know something on that scale and just in terms of business size you

[35:07] want to have some sort of separation setback minimal things I think but um

[35:14] but yes we can we can try and do consider that.

[35:23] » So then is the plan to do the public hearing next week? Okay.

[35:29] Awesome. >> We thought we would just give the

[35:32] council and the public um the idea of what the plan may propose

[35:37] » so they would have that ahead of time so they could speak to that at the public

[35:42] hearing if they felt like that was that so moved them.

[35:51] » Thank you.

[35:56] » Okay. Um, legislative update.

[36:04] » There it is. Thank you, >> Tom's team. I thought I'd take a few

[36:09] minutes. Uh, we participated or I participated in the league's end of the

[36:15] and mayor may have been on it last week, end of the year session wrapup. Did all

[36:22] of you participate? If you did, we'll just move on. No.

[36:25] » Okay. >> I did not. Okay. Did anybody else

[36:28] besides the mayor and I sitting at the dis? Okay. All right. Well, then I'm

[36:31] gonna keep going. So, I just thought we would give you a short wrap up kind of

[36:36] let you know um what happened in Raleigh this past year um and what we have to

[36:41] look forward to um probably assuming um elections um the short session or the

[36:47] long session next year. Uh just using their outline. I'll skip

[36:53] over the governmental affairs outline. That's typical boilerplate stuff from

[36:57] the league, but also share some political landscape session wrap up and

[37:02] any questions you may have for me or Angie or or anybody else in the room.

[37:09] Skip this. Uh so political landscape just kind of I

[37:14] thought this was interesting information regarding growth in North Carolina that

[37:19] our population um is now over 11.2 2 million as the 25 estimate. Um since

[37:26] 2020 and last um since for five years we added over 750,000

[37:33] people to our great state. That's a percent increase of 7.2 which is high

[37:39] high growth rate. We're the third fastest um state fastest growing state

[37:45] in the country. Um not only in number but also in percentage. And currently

[37:50] we're the ninth largest state, but by 2030 we're projected to surpass uh

[37:55] Georgia and Ohio to be in the top seven um as largest states in the union.

[38:04] But um most of that growth is in seven of the f or in the seven of the 10

[38:10] fastest growing North Carolina cities. Um um and they were in most of them,

[38:16] excuse me, seven out of 10 of the fastest growing are in the triangle and

[38:19] we did see and this was I thought this was an interesting point that those of

[38:24] us in the west that you'll see that we due to Helen we

[38:29] had a decline in population. Um we are down here in the green. So we are still

[38:34] growing in Henderson County and Hendersonville in our area but anywhere

[38:39] um along the French Broad and area around Asheville um there you see we saw

[38:44] a decline um in population um from 24 to 25.

[38:49] » What's up there to the west of Asheville? Is that Wesville?

[38:56] » What did I just do? Alison. Oh, sorry. It It's It's fine.

[39:01] » It's error. It's [laughter] Sorry.

[39:03] » It's error. User user error. You talk right over here.

[39:07] » And there's a blue dot behind the S or a green dot,

[39:09] » right? That green dot. I think that's probably Wesville.

[39:12] » Okay. >> Canton Canton would be the brown dot.

[39:15] Wesville would be the green dot. >> But we are seeing some growth. I mean,

[39:19] if you looked at some statewide um the folks down in Mon County around

[39:23] Franklin, that Atlanta influence is creeping up there. So, you're seeing

[39:27] some growth there. But you see majority of growth is around the big cities, the

[39:31] big metros um which ultimately will um you'll see here urban and halo counties

[39:37] are growing rapidly while the rural counties are losing population. We still

[39:41] are showing growth, positive growth. Um ours did slow because of Helen. Um and

[39:47] cities and towns continue to drive population growth across the state, but

[39:52] the metro areas are getting bigger. um certain pockets of rural areas where you

[39:58] may have influence um from Atlanta, like I said, in western North Carolina or

[40:03] Myrtle Beach, the beach area, or Virginia Beach, Tidewater area um in

[40:08] Northeast. But um that's where your growth is across the state of North

[40:12] Carolina. Uh Charlotte gained um more people in

[40:17] 2425 than any other city and they're now the 14th largest city um in the country

[40:23] with almost a million people. Um in Charlotte proper um Robbie's population

[40:28] now exceeds 500,000 with of course the triangle is what is is over a million as

[40:34] a region of course Charlotte is too um 70% of all

[40:39] North Carolina municipalities added population

[40:42] um that percentage was higher um the prior year I think you that also is um

[40:48] related to Helen causing many of our North Carolina cities in 2425.

[40:53] You can see some of the fastest growing cities in in North Carolina being around

[40:58] the triangle, Windendell, Zebulun, Angela, Edger, Four Oaks, um,

[41:03] Rollsville, um, and then you got Bolivia, which is on the coast down in

[41:08] Brunswick County, and then again back to the triangle and Charlotte region there.

[41:12] NASA is also down in Brunswick County.

[41:18] What does that mean for us as it relates to growth? Um everybody's moving toward

[41:23] from a electoral standpoint. Um this is your current breakdown of our

[41:27] delegation. Um our rural congressional delegation is 10 Republicans. Um um all

[41:34] in the large rural districts, four Democrats only in one only one of them

[41:40] in a rural district. whereas um that show you're seeing that your Republican

[41:47] um concentrations are in the more rural suburban areas. Uh urban uh general

[41:53] assembly representation um 30% or of the seats are in top three counties,

[41:58] Meckllinburgg, Wake and Guilford. You'll see there that they the number of

[42:03] senators and reps in those three big districts. What does that mean?

[42:08] Everybody's eyeing 2030 and 2031 2030 census and 2031 redistricting.

[42:16] Whichever party um holds um the majority in the general assembly at that time

[42:21] will be able to control that um redistricting process um and who will

[42:26] decide. And of course we all know that with redistricting comes litigation

[42:31] which is par for the course there. We expect an additional congressional seat

[42:36] in the state. Um, we have 11 now. So, we could probably pick up a 12th. Um, and

[42:41] also reallocation of representation in the general assembly and rebalancing for

[42:47] those municipalities in counties that have districts in 2030, you would have

[42:52] to rebalance. We are not, we're at large. Um, so we would not have to

[42:56] rebalance our districts.

[42:59] uh federal delegation as you see here um mentioned um two senators both are GOP

[43:07] and 14 house members 10 GOP for Democrats. Um district one was redrawn

[43:13] in 2025 which I think is a competitive district as well as is currently seated

[43:19] by um Congressman um Don Davis um who's a Democrat there. It's a competitive

[43:26] district and of course district 11 where we are has now shaping up to be a

[43:31] competitive district here. So also be dealing with the impact of Louisiana

[43:38] versus Callus. I won't dare try to take the city attorney's thunder about what

[43:43] all that means. But it that case was related to um the voters's right the

[43:48] voting right rights act and its implication in redistricting. That's as

[43:53] much as I'm gonna say about that. Uh our legislature now um Republican

[44:00] have a super majority in the Senate as you know 3020 close to a super majority

[44:06] um in the House uh 7149 but with the two Democrats that became

[44:14] unaffiliated of sometimes voting with the House that

[44:17] they can have a super majority if those two folks vote with the Republicans. So

[44:23] that is the current makeup. All this leads us to November. Um and will this

[44:29] story stay the same or will it change? Um and the next three or four months

[44:34] we'll we'll see. Um but that is um what the election is all about is the control

[44:42] particularly in North Carolina of our seats in the general assembly um by

[44:47] parties as well as um the congressional seats. Are they able Republicans able to

[44:52] hold on to the number of congressional seats in North Carolina and maybe try to

[44:57] pick up one or without losing? Political trends. Um

[45:03] couple things here. Um the process for getting laws passed at the general

[45:08] assembly is very much truncated. Um they are only working about two days a week.

[45:13] They're only making law about two weeks. Two days a week. Previously, they would

[45:19] come in on Monday nights. They would work Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and

[45:23] leave late Thursday night. Now, they're coming in on Tuesday, doing a little bit

[45:28] of business on Tuesday, doing business all day on Wednesday, and then

[45:33] taking off on uh late Wednesday or early 30. So, they're really shortening it

[45:38] down to about two days of work versus the three, three and a half that that

[45:42] was tradition previously. Um it is we're seeing fewer laws passed in 25 and I'll

[45:49] show that graph in a minute and al also some of the impacts of the one big

[45:54] beautiful bill. Uh they talked about the league folks

[45:59] talked about we had the first comprehensive budget since 23. Um

[46:04] there's growing Medicaid pressure on the state and feds for that matter. Uh we're

[46:09] still fighting for her h her lane hurricane Hela relief. Um and there's a

[46:14] strong desire um in the general assembly to lower

[46:18] income tax which is what they were focused on which was a lot of the budget

[46:22] discussions were tied to the lower income taxes and the comprehensive

[46:26] budget. That was a lot of the debate between the house and the senate the

[46:31] last couple years. uh practical impacts for us. Um very

[46:36] unpredictable. Um we're seeing a lot of um fewer number

[46:42] of bills, a lot of ominous bills where they take a single bill, strip it out,

[46:48] and throw a lot of everything but the kitchen sink into that one bill. U which

[46:53] and it typically does not go through a normal committee process.

[46:57] um it comes out maybe late on Tuesday night and they're sending it through to

[47:03] the floor um on Wednesday morning and there's very little ability to see

[47:09] what's in the in the bills and react to it. Um very hard and I talked about the

[47:14] the gut and replace that we're seeing there um seeing contradictory results um

[47:20] and some hostage taking. I will not leave that editorial I will don't touch

[47:25] that editorial comment. But one thing we're hearing from even folks that have

[47:28] been around the general assembly a lot. It's really hard to stop um bad things

[47:32] from happening whichever party you're in once it gets in its rolling um without

[47:38] much knowledge. And there's some examples of that as it relates to the

[47:41] budget bill that I'll talk about in a minute. Um here are the historical look

[47:46] at bills being introduced from 85 to the present. Um you can see there we hit a

[47:53] peak um prior to 200 um around 2007208 there and you've seen a gradual decline

[48:01] in the number of bills. The lowest point was in 2324

[48:06] but we've seen a little bit of an uptick the last couple years but still nothing

[48:10] like we were seeing prior to the great recession.

[48:17] And I think one caveat I just said to that is um and this is by no means a

[48:22] partisan also that is directly related to um when the Republicans took control

[48:29] of the general assembly in 2011. So there's a direct I mean obviously a

[48:34] direct correlation in how they want to govern and reduce um passing of bills

[48:40] and laws. Uh here's what's actually passed in a

[48:45] regular session. you know, all-time lows only passed. They had 20 of 2,300 bills

[48:50] introduced, only 151 were passed. Now, some of those 151 took a number of the

[48:58] 200 of the 2,334 bills um and put them in a single bill.

[49:06] Um so they, you know, put them in an ominous bill and one bill. So those

[49:10] bills are made. Some of those legislative actions are included in the

[49:14] 151 um just to reduce the number that were actually approved. But that's what

[49:18] we're seeing. Fewer bills um after they're introduced.

[49:23] What happened? Um what what they do? Um so we did pass the budget. They overrode

[49:29] some vetos. Still a couple vetos out there. We've added two more

[49:32] constitutional amendments that will be on the ballot. There'll be three on the

[49:36] ballot. Um this November they redrew the congressional map and a little bit more

[49:43] um issues they talked about was property tax, infrastructure investment, budget

[49:49] special provisions, downzoning, preeemption of local government

[49:53] authority, land land use zoning, deanexation, local elections, and local

[49:57] government oversight. Uh we all are familiar with the House Select Committee

[50:03] on Property Tax Reduction Reform that met. Uh Brian and I um were were

[50:09] involved in a working group of managers staying on top of that. We drove to

[50:14] Raleigh a couple times to committee meetings to just stay a breast because

[50:19] that is our one local revenue source um that we have that we have the only we

[50:25] have control of. um our only revenue source we have control of. So uh reform

[50:30] in the local property tax system does have direct impacts on our ability to

[50:35] provide services to our citizens. So we stayed on top of it. There was a working

[50:40] group in the Senate which got a whole lot less attention. They did not have

[50:44] any public meetings. Um uh membership was only one party. Um and most of the

[50:51] folks there had priority or had prior local government experience. But again,

[50:55] no public meetings. Um, not a lot of action.

[51:00] Nobody knows really what their method is. We assume it's it's in some of the

[51:05] bills that were passed related to property tax. Um, there that working

[51:09] group was put together um at the end right before the primary election

[51:15] um as President Prom Burgerer was in a tough uh primary fight.

[51:21] Here's what we have in November. constitutional amendment. Um, this is

[51:25] what it says. Um, very ambiguous and vague and general. Um, that will be on

[51:30] the ballot. The general assembly shall enact general laws limiting the amount

[51:34] by which the levy of taxes on property may increase, which may include

[51:39] exceptions. So, when you go to the pools polls,

[51:43] you'll be asked to vote on that. Um, so there you have it. um if that um is

[51:52] approved, which I don't know of, you know, we're North Carolinians and proud

[51:57] and who's not going to vote for le limiting the amount of taxes we pay. So,

[52:03] all anticipations is that that constitutional amendment will pass and

[52:08] then they'll come back into long session um to develop legislation um

[52:14] to address that constitutional mandate. Um, also in there, um, is, uh, that is

[52:21] moving forward and I let my

[52:32] a bill that is moving through um, and close to adoption or passing is a truth

[52:38] um, and taxation bill. It is a bill rated basically related to notifying

[52:43] that this city council if approved. All cities and counties will have to do

[52:47] this. Um will be an additional um requirement when we adopt our budget uh

[52:52] every during the reval years. You will have to um if we intend to um go above

[53:01] revenue neutral, we will have to hold a separate public hearing in addition to

[53:06] the typical budget ordinance public hearing. um they can occur

[53:11] simultaneously um or in order I guess um but you'll

[53:16] have to have two public hearings. We'll have to send out first class mailed

[53:19] notices to all taxpayers letting them know that you are proposing to adopt a

[53:24] budget um that will um include a tax rate that is above revenue neutral

[53:31] during the rebal year. Um and there's a couple other notification processes

[53:35] there, but um that is Yes, ma'am. Um just to understand the timeline. So next

[53:41] year's reval, right, for Henderson County, but this

[53:46] would not have the chance of actually capturing next year's reval in that

[53:49] truth and taxation. Correct. >> Um let's see here if they've got an

[53:53] effective date here. Um it would you are correct. It would not be it would be for

[53:58] fiscal years beginning on or after July 1 of 27. They would not be um so

[54:04] subsequently reval years. we would have to do that. But thank you for that

[54:08] question. So, so stay tuned on property tax and um

[54:17] uh the TRA truth and taxation laws.

[54:23] Here is the property tax reappraisal moratorum does not impact us. So, I'll

[54:27] keep on going from there. There was one positive bill that was adopted related

[54:32] to affordable housing. And there was a loophole that if a private developer um

[54:37] had a partner as small as a very small percentage as small as 1%

[54:44] um a nonprofit was a partner of that small they could get uh some of the

[54:48] property tax um exemptions that that nonprofit. So, um, this actually was a

[54:54] positive that that came out of the property tax subcommittee. Um, and they

[54:59] identified that early on and enacted legislation to close that loophole. Very

[55:03] positive. Uh, other things as it relates to

[55:08] earmarks or infrastructure investments, very few directed grants. Um, only over

[55:13] just over a million in the budget. Um I think that's you're seeing um the

[55:18] one-time money or extra money that what we all saw coming out of COVID um is now

[55:24] been spent. So the earmarks are dropping dramatically. Um our PAL bill was

[55:30] protected which was very positive for us. Charlotte was able to get a regional

[55:34] transit tax. Um fully funded federal grant programs that we use a great deal

[55:40] in our utility system. So that's positive. fully funded the state

[55:43] revolving loan and community development block grants that help support um

[55:48] business in the industry and our utility system and also contracting um the new

[55:54] DEI DEI laws. Um that bill is still out there has been vetoed by the governor

[56:00] waiting a veto override but they did eliminate the the hood office.

[56:08] So here are the things talking about what gets added to and this this has

[56:12] some implications for us. Um some some things that were dropped into the budget

[56:17] that nobody was aware of until after the budget was adopted. Some positive, some

[56:21] negative. Um I want to point to the SNAP error rate payment for county and

[56:27] municipal sales tax. So um traditionally the federal government has covered SNAP

[56:32] payments um and any errors related to that. But in the big beautiful bill,

[56:38] they passed um a part of that um made the dec made the decision that any

[56:43] errors assoc if if a county or state and then ultimately counties because the

[56:48] county administer the SNAP program have a high error rate, they were required to

[56:53] pay penalties back to the federal government um to cover that um those

[56:59] errors, potential fraudulent um pe people getting the the benefit don't not

[57:05] eligible things like that. So, the federal government passed it to the

[57:09] state. North Carolina chose to fund that by uh reducing if your county has a

[57:19] certain error rate. They will reduce your sales tax distribution before it

[57:25] comes back to the local level. Um, no one's quite sure how that's going to

[57:31] work yet. Um but um it does impact so if you take sales tax off the top before

[57:37] it's redistributed to North obviously it reduced the big pie the big pie which

[57:42] will reduce our distribution um at the city level even though we have

[57:47] no involvement in the SNAP program and have no say as it relates to um the

[57:53] error rate who gets so we um maybe um but we will be a be could receive

[58:02] receive or receive a less amount of our sales tax. It could drop our sales tax,

[58:07] which is concerning considering everything else that is going on related

[58:11] to the property tax levy. Um, just reducing our flexibility to provide

[58:15] services, but we are working on that. That does not go into effect until

[58:19] October of 2027. U, we will continue to monitor that. I

[58:24] know the league is working and the county commissioners association because

[58:28] that is also impacting the counties, right? I mean, the county has had to

[58:30] fund that. Um, so, um, looking for potential opportunities for that relief

[58:37] at the state and federal level. So, stay tuned for that. But something we're

[58:42] working on, but it could reduce your revenue. Our law enforcement officers

[58:45] got a 700 $1,750 bonus. Congratulations, Chief. Um, everybody, all certified

[58:52] officers get that. Um, it's being funneled through the SBI. We're still

[58:56] trying to figure out the logistics of that. Um but it's it's coming directly

[59:01] um it will come to our law enforcement officers. Uh new requirement to report

[59:06] economic development expenditures related uh anything over 25,000 um to

[59:11] the state auditor. That is what it says. There's no clear

[59:16] guidance of what is an economic development expenditure. So we're trying

[59:20] to work out that in technical corrections and figuring out exactly

[59:23] what what do we have to report to the state audit. They did merge um a number

[59:28] of u into the department of labor the three building code councils. There were

[59:32] three building codes. So they merged that into one and that will impact

[59:36] building inspections, fire code, those kind of things. Uh interbasin transfer

[59:42] moratorium and study. um two high-profile cases. One on the Kataba

[59:48] River basin related to Charlotte and the Hickory area over the water in the

[59:53] Kataba basin and also a similar down on the Capefere around Fable related that

[59:58] is more related to um Pifos and um things of that related to pollution

[1:00:04] there. And then they also shifted some powers from the governor. So you see

[1:00:08] some things that were special provisions, good, some good, some not so

[1:00:13] good, that were in the budget that um there was no opportunity for debate.

[1:00:17] There's no opportunity to try to talk to our legislators, which is concerning um

[1:00:22] because there's some in some of these things, as you can see with them in this

[1:00:25] the SNAP error rate, there's some unintended consequences that will impact

[1:00:29] local governments.

[1:00:32] uh downzoning uh no action as it relates to the downzoning provision that was

[1:00:38] passed in 2024. There was some movement um in the Senate um in early um May of

[1:00:46] 2025. We didn't see any action in the short

[1:00:49] session. In fact, Senate Bill 587 was stripped of the downzoning and now it's

[1:00:57] related to wave surfing. So um we will have to start over as it relates to um

[1:01:03] that also impacted Mills River. You may have read that Mills River had gotten a

[1:01:08] special provision in 25 to adopt their UDO that was repealed um right before

[1:01:13] the end of the session this year. But we're seeing these oneoffs. So still

[1:01:18] need to um that will be that's problematic for us because we know we

[1:01:22] need to update our zoning ordinance. We did our we've completed our comp plan.

[1:01:27] It's in great shape. Lou's been challenged with uh updating our zoning

[1:01:31] ordinance, but the law prohibiting um downzoning and non-conforming

[1:01:37] um uses is is um is problematic and we're trying to work through how we how

[1:01:43] we deal with the the drastic need to update our zoning.

[1:01:50] And here's some pree uh preemptive issues that some were passed, some were

[1:01:56] not. Some pertain to us, some do not. Most of these um I'll go through. Um

[1:02:04] some of are caught up in the 53 page of the regulatory reform act of 2026.

[1:02:10] Um minimum lot size does not pertain to us. Residential and commercial and light

[1:02:16] duty does not pertain to us. ADUs do not pertain to us. Vested rights do pertain

[1:02:23] to us. It extended the vested right from one year to three years. Angie, is that

[1:02:27] right? Two years ago, they adjusted that. U

[1:02:33] permit choice um became law in the budget. Um there was an attempt to put

[1:02:38] shot clocks on development. That did not pass. We are required to put fee

[1:02:43] schedules online which we do anyway. Um but so those were the things in the

[1:02:47] regulatory reform but all that was as I talked about the ominous bills that was

[1:02:53] those things are included in a 50 page 53 page bill um that was ultimately put

[1:02:58] forth there. Um did see a change as it relates to homebased businesses.

[1:03:04] uh we must allow we cannot control um homebased businesses as long as they

[1:03:09] have no impact that is um prohibit or now um provided by right cannot be

[1:03:15] regulated my understanding and then the big one

[1:03:20] here that you'll hear about and I think everybody pay attention to parking

[1:03:25] minimums um have been repealed um in residential and single family or

[1:03:32] is it across the board. Is it across the board, Lou, or is it just residential?

[1:03:39] Okay, I think so. I think I think it's across the board. So, uh we cannot

[1:03:44] provide parking minimums. So, um I know we have lots of conversations that come

[1:03:49] to the city council with conditional use about is a developer providing enough

[1:03:55] parking, those kind of things. Those conversations are been taken out of our

[1:03:59] hands. um there. So, storm water calculations or redevelopment, it's

[1:04:05] minor amendment there that really um deals with the redevelopment. So, the

[1:04:10] things that impact you going forward in the city council uh land use litigation.

[1:04:15] Um Angie can talk about this as it relates to, you know, sending

[1:04:19] administrative zoning decisions. Um instead of going to the board of

[1:04:23] adjustment, they can go straight to the courts.

[1:04:27] Uh the general assembly gave standing to statewide associations um or such as the

[1:04:35] homebuilders association or um board of realtors or somebody like that may

[1:04:41] appeal a zoning decision even if a developer or local individual chooses

[1:04:45] not to. Right. Um here's the extended the time appeal

[1:04:50] for zoning decisions from one to three years. Um Angie mentioned permit choice

[1:04:57] vesting rights decisions. Um adds mandatory award of this is big when

[1:05:03] mandatory award of cost the prevailing party in a zoning decision. So if

[1:05:08] someone challenges a zoning decision by council and they are found to be the

[1:05:14] agreed party and the zoning is reversed then we would be required to pay

[1:05:20] attorney's fees and legal cost. and also prohibits withholding zoning

[1:05:26] permits to compel employment agreements. I'm not exactly sure what that means.

[1:05:33] So, um but so you see some things whittling away at the city council's

[1:05:38] authority um as it relates to um manage development and growth in our community.

[1:05:47] And then there's a homeless bill HB437 which is out there been vetoed by the

[1:05:53] governor um waiting to be um see if that will be overridden. Um it does prohibit

[1:06:01] um public camping. um also allows we may establish

[1:06:07] regulated camps. It's um very similar to what you may do for

[1:06:13] migrant type facilities is governed by the board of of by the department of

[1:06:17] labor. But it also gives our residents and business owners the ability to sue

[1:06:21] local governments if we do not address public camping. Um I think an important

[1:06:27] component of that and I don't know the answer to this is what is defined as

[1:06:30] public camping um is sleeping on a bench public camping. Um so something to stay

[1:06:37] tuned if that bill passes and as it relates to additional um

[1:06:45] responsibilities for our law enforcement folks and how they interact with our

[1:06:49] unhoused particularly in our downtown areas

[1:06:54] or across the city for that matter. Uh number deanexation bills nothing really

[1:07:00] pertains to us here. I think the key thing here is typically to deanex

[1:07:05] property, you have to go to the general assembly. There's no local provision to

[1:07:08] do that, but um the league and some other folks worked on a bill uh to get

[1:07:14] that changed. Um that bill is still pending, but that would give the

[1:07:18] authority that you could deanex property here locally in the same way that you

[1:07:23] annex property.

[1:07:28] uh local elections there. Seeing more and more local elections either going

[1:07:32] partisan or shifting the elections similar to us to um even years versus

[1:07:39] odd years, moving those municipal elections to the even years.

[1:07:44] Um and then there is a local government oversight committee. A number of our

[1:07:48] peers across the state were called before the general assembly to answer

[1:07:53] questions for a variety of things um there at the general. So that is new

[1:08:00] um in the last couple years and the general assembly is taking it they are

[1:08:05] using it and calling folks to Raleigh to testify before their committee.

[1:08:15] Uh that's just showing where the HP437 is. Um and just us that is the

[1:08:22] environment we are in. Um you know um y'all know Aaron is our director of

[1:08:27] government affairs but kind of give you an update of where we are and what got

[1:08:33] passed and what will be potentially impacting us going forward.

[1:08:40] land use, um, budgets,

[1:08:44] revenue, things like that. >> When does long sessions,

[1:08:49] » when does the long session could start February, March they go back? Yeah, I

[1:08:56] think. Yeah, it probably take it'll be March before they really start. I have

[1:09:00] to go and get organized because the the Senate will have to

[1:09:05] elect a new president pro Tim which will be a change there and get organized

[1:09:10] particularly and don't know if there's any changes in the house obviously it'll

[1:09:15] be dependent on the election too.

[1:09:20] There you have it. Not to depress everybody

[1:09:24] » and and you did it quicker than Aaron did.

[1:09:26] » Thank you.

[1:09:31] All right. Any questions on that? Comments on that?

[1:09:39] We are under the thumb of the general assembly

[1:09:45] and we just best we can do is keep up and try to lobby for the things that are

[1:09:51] going to be best for our citizens. Okay. Lenny's law. you wants wants to

[1:09:58] start with it. >> So I will Alison I dropped that in the

[1:10:01] folder late. There should be a should be a resolution

[1:10:07] from the town of Wooden there as a draft. So I'm going to turn this over to

[1:10:12] Mayor Pro Tim Hinsley. I will say that um because she knows a lot more details.

[1:10:18] I think we've been requested from a group um from Woodin or a coalition of

[1:10:23] folks um Bunkham um county and Madison County maybe to um adopt a resolution

[1:10:30] supporting this potential law. So >> yeah, I I got contacted about it uh

[1:10:36] several weeks ago and it's um it didn't seem like something that we

[1:10:43] should get involved in. My suggestion was since we do have a um committee

[1:10:50] looking at at uh you know bikes and pedestrian that they could look at it

[1:10:56] see if it would be something that would relate to

[1:11:01] something that they are working on and

[1:11:07] I didn't hear anything more back from the folks in Woodfin until

[1:11:14] you they got in touch with you. >> So, this is less about the town of

[1:11:20] Woodin. Um, the city councilman, I think, that contacted you is trying to

[1:11:26] form a an additional bicycle safety coalition that he's wanting the city of

[1:11:32] Hendersonville to participate in. and I um he called and asked to speak to me on

[1:11:36] Friday and I told him that we would have that conversation at council, but I felt

[1:11:40] like we were already doing um many bicycle safety type things here and that

[1:11:46] it wasn't necessarily something that we would want to take on additionally. I

[1:11:49] mentioned um council me council member Baxter that she was the other person

[1:11:55] that represented the council that was serving on the bike plan and I didn't

[1:11:59] know the capacity of a joining an additional coalition when I felt like we

[1:12:03] were kind of already correlating and um but Lenny's law is a separate uh request

[1:12:11] that was brought to the no last week and it is um so that is a resolution from

[1:12:18] Woodin Then Lenny's law is a separate uh thing that was in that email attachment,

[1:12:23] John. And so Lenny and Telli and Jacob Hill were the two cyclists who were

[1:12:30] riding um alongside the French Broad River who were struck by a commercial

[1:12:36] vehicle last summer and they were both killed. And um so Maddie Bar, who is

[1:12:42] Lenny's fiance, is um attempting to create some more

[1:12:50] better policies around bicyclists and safety.

[1:12:53] And then given the incident at Milikin College with their cycling team, um and

[1:13:01] so basically what Lenny's law is, um allowing is to make a recommendation

[1:13:07] that there's more signs posted in frequently used bicycle zones. Um they

[1:13:15] would like to see bicycle safety zones created in higher cycling trafficked

[1:13:21] areas with better signage for um motorists to see that they're this is a

[1:13:27] this is a higher density of cyclist on these roads. And we have them in

[1:13:30] Henderson County where there are there are roads in Henderson County where we

[1:13:34] know that there are a lot more cyclists. And so the hope is is that they would um

[1:13:39] place more signage for motorists to be more aware and then potentially

[1:13:44] eventually have a higher penalty for speeding in those bicycle safety zones.

[1:13:50] Um and so that was brought to the MO last week and the MO um unanimously

[1:13:58] adopted supporting Lenny's law in the context of creating a bicycle safety

[1:14:04] zone signage and um and not that we would enact speed changes or um fees,

[1:14:12] but that it would then be taken to the general assembly for them to evaluate to

[1:14:17] see if that was something that they wanted to take up. Um but so they're

[1:14:21] asking um if local governments would support moving Lenny's law towards the

[1:14:27] general assembly to create these bicycle safety zones.

[1:14:34] » That sound >> I think that's correct. And so we

[1:14:38] and and NPO talked about it two times I think. Originally it got a luke to the

[1:14:43] mayor's point originally you had a lukewarm reception the first time

[1:14:47] » and then some other discussion some other events occurred

[1:14:51] » correct >> and um it came back and it was unanous

[1:14:55] was the second time is >> yes last Thursday it was unanimously

[1:14:59] adopted at the NO to support Lenny's law >> and what Mattiey's trying to do right

[1:15:04] now is just get local government support for it and nothing more

[1:15:08] » correct no legislative changes No impact any municipalities,

[1:15:14] » nothing now. And it's just like, hey, would you support us going to Raleigh

[1:15:18] and requesting um these additional signs be required in areas that are higher

[1:15:26] bicycle trafficked zones?

[1:15:31] My opinion is I don't know that it could I don't know that it hurts um at least

[1:15:35] having this analyzed on a higher level. Um I will say in these both of these

[1:15:41] incidences speed was not a factor. It was um impairment um and maybe even

[1:15:48] intent in one of the accidents. And so um

[1:15:54] he because I think they've actually said now in the for the Milligan College that

[1:15:58] the driver did not apply any brakes at all before he hit flew of cyclists and

[1:16:04] um and then in Lenny's law the driver was impaired and so speed would not have

[1:16:10] made a difference in these accidents but maybe had there been more awareness by a

[1:16:16] motorist that this is an area where you really need to be paying attention

[1:16:19] because there's you narrow shoulders and a lot more cyclists known to travel in

[1:16:23] this area. Um that could potentially save cyclist life.

[1:16:29] I am a cyclist and I've been on out on the roads many times and there are rural

[1:16:32] roads in Henderson County that scare me to death um with how close cars have

[1:16:38] gotten to me. I mean, I think it aligns with a lot of

[1:16:43] the work that we're already doing without um

[1:16:47] duplicating it in this particular instance, but I do I think that it

[1:16:51] speaks to a pattern that we see of cyclists being

[1:16:56] at higher risk in the past few years. I don't know if it's higher density or

[1:17:00] what it is, but it does seem and I'm supportive of whatever we can do to

[1:17:07] help address it as long as it um you know can move that forward without

[1:17:12] putting us in a spot where you know there's no tough decision there for us

[1:17:15] as a city right now.

[1:17:20] So would uh like to

[1:17:24] propose that uh staff bring this to council meeting for

[1:17:31] put it on our agenda. Any any objection to

[1:17:36] » ma'am and if it's okay I'll >> putting that on

[1:17:38] » since you discussed it today I'll just put it on the consent agenda and then if

[1:17:43] there's concerns if you feel or or I'm open for guidance if you want it on a

[1:17:48] new visit is consent okay or you want it okay I'll put it on the consent and you

[1:17:55] have questions we can we can pull it off and discuss it at that point

[1:18:01] » thank you [clears throat] All right.

[1:18:05] Okay. That is the end of our agenda. Unless someone has something they want

[1:18:09] to to bring up.

August 26, 2026 - Hendersonville City Council Meeting

Transcript