[0:04] Good morning everyone. >> Good morning.

[0:06] » Morning. >> Good morning.

[0:07] » Welcome. And as chairman of the Nash County Board of Commissioners, I now

[0:11] call to order the August 3rd, 2026 meeting of the Nash County Board of

[0:17] Commissioners. We start our commissioner meeting with a

[0:21] prayer invocation and also the pledge of allegiance. We'll be asking Commissioner

[0:27] Fred Balefield to give our invocation and Commissioner Wayne Outlaw to lead us

[0:32] in our pledge of pledge of allegiance. Will we all please stand?

[0:42] Let us pray. Trust in the Lord with all your heart

[0:46] and lean not on your own understanding. Father, we are here to transact business

[0:53] monthly meeting of Nass County Commissioners. We pray that you are in

[0:58] our presence. We pray that you will lead and guide us and direct us with the

[1:03] challenges that we have in the decisions that we have to make. We know if we

[1:09] believe in you in our heart that you will be in our midst because there is a

[1:15] sweet, sweet spirit in this place. And I know it's the spirit of the God. Now,

[1:22] Father, we are ready to start our August meeting. And we know there are things

[1:31] that we need to attend to for the citizens of Nash County. And we pray

[1:39] also that you will bless this county, bless the state, bless the nation and

[1:45] the world. These blessings we ask in your name. Amen.

[1:49] » Amen. >> Would you join us in the pledge?

[1:52] » I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the

[1:57] republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and

[2:04] justice for all.

[2:14] » All right. Uh, first we'll have the approval of our minutes for our July

[2:19] 13th meeting. Any correction to the minutes of our

[2:24] July 13th meeting? Hearing none. Is there a motion to

[2:29] accept the minutes of our July 13, 2026 meeting?

[2:33] » Motion to accept, Mr. Chairman. >> Motion by Commissioner Wilkins and

[2:38] » second. >> Second by Commissioner Wayne Outlaw. Any

[2:42] further discussion? All in favor of the motion, let it be known by saying I.

[2:46] » I. >> All opposed. Motion approved.

[2:49] » Uh we will now uh approve our agenda with some

[2:55] additions. Uh >> chairman, if I may, um the board members

[3:01] have a number of items in front of them and I'd like to just kind of walk

[3:04] through those with you real quick since there are so many and I apologize for

[3:09] that. I believe the top one um is budget amendments. And actually, from what I

[3:16] can tell, these are the budget amendments that are in your your packet.

[3:21] So, if you'll just kind of put that aside until later when we address budget

[3:25] amendments, but I think you will find that those are the same ones that are in

[3:29] your agenda packet that you've already seen. Stacy. Um I think um Nikki had a

[3:36] change to the health department budget amendment. There was an amount that she

[3:41] got corrected from the state and that's the reason it is up there. Okay. There

[3:45] was a change. >> So

[3:48] if the board heard that the last item number five for the health department,

[3:53] that amount um is different from what's in your packet. So we'll address that

[3:58] when we have budget amendments. Um, we also have uh the board appointments. I

[4:04] believe in your packet we did not have information for the ABC board chair and

[4:09] so the item in front of you um printed in front of you has the information for

[4:14] the ABC board chair. We have a request to add an item for for the sheriff's

[4:20] office for the North Carolina Governor's Highway Safety Program uh driving while

[4:25] impaired grant. Uh they are going to ask this morning um if you will allow them

[4:31] to add this to the agenda as item number A or sorry 9A.

[4:36] Um they have three items and their last item is item number nine. And if we can

[4:42] add this one as 9A onto the agenda and there's an attachment that goes

[4:48] along with that one that's in front of you as well.

[4:51] Mr. Boon has also provided you all with an update on capital projects. That is

[4:57] in front of you. And then um also in front of you is a letter from the chair

[5:03] of the um uh Nash County Community College Chair Board of Trustees, Russell

[5:12] Proctor, um in support of an item that you all will address today. And then if

[5:19] I can make one more request to add to the agenda. Um as item number 26A

[5:27] after we do our budget amendments. Um Commissioner Freddy Howell has a request

[5:33] to the board for a letter of support. And if we could add that request for a

[5:39] letter of support as item number 26A.

[5:47] He needed to move the community college item.

[5:53] Thought the community college item was going to come at uh well after 9 a

[6:02] » after 9A. Yes, sir. If we could move the Let me see what number is that one. I

[6:07] apologize. >> That's going to be

[6:11] we'll call it 9 B. >> 9B. If we could move the request for the

[6:17] land purchase. >> Yes.

[6:19] » Number 20. If number 20 could be moved up to 9B, please.

[6:31] » Okay. That it. >> Yes, sir.

[6:37] Commission, you've heard the request to uh

[6:42] the addendum addition to the agenda. Uh any discussion about that?

[6:51] Okay. Then I'll entertain a motion to accept the agenda as amended.

[6:57] » So move, sir. >> Move, excuse me. Moved by Commissioner

[7:00] Howard and second by Commissioner Outlaw.

[7:05] Uh any further discussion? All in favor of adopting the amended agenda, let it

[7:11] be known by saying I. I. >> All oppose. Motion carried. We will

[7:18] start with well our public comment. We have no one who signed up uh to speak

[7:25] today. So we'll move into our item number six uh retirement recognition.

[7:37] Good morning. >> Good morning.

[7:39] » At this time, I would like to call up Kimberly Barnes. Is she here today?

[7:46] » Hi, Kimberly. Kimberly has dedicated 13 years of service specifically to the

[7:53] public health department. I would like to uh congratulate her on her retirement

[8:00] and I would like to ask you to come down and join her

[8:06] pictures and hand.

[8:12] » Okay.

[9:02] Thank you.

[9:07] Thank you.

[9:30] All right, we will move to item number seven,

[9:35] uh, transfer of service weapon, uh, Deputy Alan Wilson.

[9:47] » Good morning, sir. >> Morning. All right.

[9:55] Uh thank you for letting us bring this before you this morning. Um

[9:59] in September, we're going to have a bridge dedication for uh Deputy Jared

[10:03] Allison who uh passed away in 2020 as a result of uh uh traffic enforcement on

[10:10] US 301 on Thanksgiving night. He was involved in a collision. Uh since that

[10:14] time, we've held his weapon in our armory. We've not done anything with

[10:19] that weapon. So, at the time that we have this bridge dedication in

[10:22] September, I think it would be fit be fitting and the sheriff thinks it would

[10:26] be befitting to be able to take this weapon and have it transferred to his uh

[10:31] mother and given to her and the paperwork can be completed for that. Uh

[10:37] just as we would give a weapon to someone that retired, uh he lost his

[10:41] life in line of duty and we think it would uh honor him and his uh service to

[10:47] this county by doing that. So, we're requesting the board give us approval to

[10:53] present the service weapon to his mother on in September.

[11:02] » All right.

[11:06] Excuse me. I missed I missed something. I was reading something else. I'm sorry.

[11:10] » Make a motion to approve the request, Mr. Chairman.

[11:13] » Okay. Second. >> Thank Thank uh you heard the motion. Is

[11:17] there uh any discussion on the motion hear? None. All in favor of the motion

[11:23] let it be known by saying I. >> I.

[11:26] » All oppose. Motion to car it. >> All right.

[11:30] » Okay. Thank you very much. The next uh item on the uh agenda for the sheriff's

[11:36] office is the soul source purchase of a swiftwater rescue boat package. I'm

[11:41] going to bring Lieutenant Tony Cameron up and let him speak on this. the

[11:44] sheriff has placed him in charge of uh organizing this new unit for the

[11:49] sheriff's office and the need that it uh that exists for the county to have such

[11:54] thing. >> Good morning.

[11:57] » All right. Come on. >> Uh uh the sheriff's office would like to

[12:01] initiate a swiftwater rescue team for this county and the ability to to

[12:05] respond nationwide. Uh this swiftwater rescue team will be a type three team

[12:10] capable of of uh rescuing folks uh that are stranded in their homes from flood

[12:15] waters. As we all well know from uh past events here in this county, uh this uh

[12:21] in Spring Hope, North Carolina, which was one of the biggest biggest issues

[12:25] that we faced with sudden flood waters suddenly flooding our areas and

[12:30] unfortunately in that event on uh in August of last year, took the life of

[12:35] two individuals. Well, the sheriff's office wants to combat that. We want to

[12:38] stand up a swiftwater rescue team to respond to those events, and we're

[12:42] asking for your support. All right. Uh, any discussion from the

[12:48] board? Mr. >> Chairman, I'd like to make a motion we

[12:50] approve this matter. >> It's been moved by Commissioner Howard

[12:55] that we approve this. Is there a second? >> Second.

[12:58] » Second by Commissioner Outlaw. Uh, we are now ready for discussion.

[13:02] Commissioner, >> Mr. Chairman,

[13:05] » uh, unfortunately, I I would not be able to support this. I think everyone knows

[13:09] I've always been against soul source purchases uh because they do not give a

[13:15] a look or other people to provide things. But more than importantly, I

[13:19] don't really understand us doing this. It seems to me a duplication effort of

[13:24] taxpayers funding when the city of Rocky Mount has a very well-known uh rescue

[13:31] team uh actually ranked number one of the three in the state as I understand

[13:35] it. And I don't understand the general assembly allotting money for a

[13:39] duplication effort uh with another one. I don't have any

[13:45] uh problems with the sheriff having one by any means, but it's just a complete

[13:49] duplication and uh of and if anything, we should be doing what we could to work

[13:57] with Rocky Mount uh swiftwater rescue team and uh provide funding uh to do

[14:04] that rather than to start a new one from scratch. But just just my thoughts on

[14:09] it, reason it bothers me, Mr. Chairman. With that, I'll stand now. Thank you,

[14:12] sir. >> All right. Any other discussion,

[14:16] » Mr. Chair? >> Commissioner Howard,

[14:18] » just a few questions if you don't mind. Um,

[14:22] do I understand this is being funded? So, this isn't count costing the

[14:26] taxpayers of Nash County any Nash County taxes at all?

[14:29] » Yeah. >> Yes, sir. That's correct. It's totally

[14:32] state fun. >> So, our our state elected officials have

[14:35] funded this project. >> Yes, sir.

[14:37] » Is that correct? So, they felt a need that we needed this. And just to help

[14:40] out, can you give me because I don't fully understand how much distance are

[14:45] we talking about from Edgecomb County to the other end of Nash County?

[14:50] » Well, I'm I'm not sure the exact distance. I know we're we're 512 square

[14:54] miles in this county and I and I can tell you um at from responding to

[15:00] Hurricane Floyd and Matthew, every resource was critical, specifically when

[15:05] we were doing rescues. Um, and I did take part in that here in Floyd and in

[15:10] Matthew as a state highway patrol. So, additional resources are definitely

[15:14] needed. I and I think it's a great asset not only for us here in Nash County, but

[15:19] as our partners here just as just as soon as LA this weekend, we had floods

[15:24] in Wataga County, we had floods in Siri County resulting in f folks having to go

[15:29] and rescue. So, it's it's very critical, I believe. And so if I understand you

[15:33] correctly that we would be willing to help in those situations others as we

[15:36] would expect help in our area when we would have an event unfortunately as

[15:40] well. And we hope we don't need this asset but it's one that if we don't have

[15:43] at the time of need we can't go out and get. Is that correct?

[15:46] » Absolutely. Yes sir. >> And if if I'm correct in saying seconds

[15:50] count when it comes to swiftwater rescues. So timing is critical to get

[15:54] there quickly. Is that be a fair statement?

[15:57] » Yes sir. Absolutely. >> Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Mr.

[15:59] Chairman. >> Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Wel,

[16:02] » I have a question. Um, it says for a startup of swiftwater flood search and

[16:07] rescue team. Do you anticipate after it's started up,

[16:12] » do you have any idea of how much the expenses will be to the taxpayers?

[16:18] » The expenses will consist of training our members uh on an annual basis uh uh

[16:25] as far as the swift water piece. Uh we must maintain our certifications. We

[16:30] have must maintain an EMT uh certification which I'm an EMT. Uh so it

[16:35] would be training is what we're looking at and maintaining the equipment, the

[16:38] boats and so forth. >> But that would be training of already

[16:42] existing personnel, not new hires in the budget and down the road.

[16:48] » We we've identified 19 members within the sheriff's office.

[16:50] » Okay. >> Already carrying some credentials that

[16:53] would aid in the team and Yes, ma'am. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[16:58] » Yes, Commissioner. had a question. Um, just to piggy back on um, Commissioner

[17:03] Wilkins comment, do you have any idea of the training hours needed to get this

[17:08] team stood up and then to maintain it? >> Yes, ma'am, I do. I have the exact list

[17:12] that we required as far as the exact what we have in currently on on staff. I

[17:18] can't give you an exact number, but we're looking at ICS classes. We're

[17:21] looking at EMT classes. We're looking at boat operator classes. We're looking at

[17:25] swiftwater rescue classes, shorebased rescue classes, boat operator classes.

[17:30] Some of my members, like I said, we already have that training and we're

[17:33] able to step in. I am ready to step in. I already carry those credentials as

[17:38] well. And that's one of the reasons the sheriff selected me for this position or

[17:42] this task. Um, but exact number, I can't give you that. I'm sorry.

[17:46] » Is is the um startup money is that some of that supposed to go towards training

[17:51] also or just solely equipment? >> Yes, ma'am. that it has been a certain

[17:55] amount earmarked for that training piece was 25,000.

[17:58] » Okay. >> Thank you.

[18:01] » All right. Any other discussion? >> Commissioner uh David

[18:06] » uh in response to Commissioner How's comment? I would like to point out that

[18:10] uh the fact that it came from the state of North Carolina through a local

[18:14] appropriation uh state of North Carolina receives funding through taxpayers in in

[18:20] North Carolina including ones in Nash County. So I can't look at that

[18:24] different. Uh they're still spending Ash County taxpayers money for duplication

[18:29] of effort. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> All right. Any other discussion?

[18:34] » Mr. Chair, >> isn't there a a newly developed or newly

[18:40] built facility in Eastern North Carolina as well specifically for training for

[18:44] this purpose? >> It is in Stanley County. has spent a lot

[18:46] of money >> putting in a training facility state of

[18:49] the art to prepare everyone for this to to minimize the risk involved and asset

[18:55] our citizens as far as in those times of need.

[18:57] » Yeah. Yes, it is. And and we've already reached out to the state highway patrol

[19:00] who's going to assist us in this training along with Rocky Mount. Uh

[19:04] they're willing to help us get this team stood up and our plan is to work in

[19:08] partnership with Rocky Mount. >> Thank you, sir. Appreciate you bringing

[19:11] the money back to Nash County. >> Yes, Mr.

[19:14] » All right. Uh, Commission Bfield,

[19:19] » I think it's important that the the two work together

[19:24] and not separate. >> Yes, sir.

[19:27] » Because there going to be times that we can send people to other states to help

[19:32] them when they're in a distressed situation.

[19:36] We certainly ought to work, sheriff department, ought to work with uh the

[19:42] city of Rocky Mount and collaborate together and and do

[19:48] what's necessary, save lives and and uh and just have a a happy relationship.

[19:59] » Yes, sir. Yes, ma'am. >> All right. Thank you. Well, you've heard

[20:03] the discussion. Uh, and we had a motion. All in favor? All in favor of the

[20:09] motion, let it be known by saying I. >> I.

[20:11] » All oppose. >> I,

[20:15] » uh, raise a hand and oppose. >> All right. Commissioner Davis, oppose.

[20:21] All right. Motion carried. Uh, thank you. Um, Major Wilson, you got another

[20:27] » Yes, sir, I do. >> All right.

[20:29] » Thank you, Lieutenant.

[20:34] So, I'm going to ask the board for approval

[20:38] of a a position for the uh for a full-time position for a uh office uh uh

[20:46] basically someone a records management office assistant uh

[20:51] over the past time particularly when the uh uh time sheets have changed from

[20:56] monthly to bi-weekly. Um by doing that it's increased additional workload uh

[21:04] downstairs we have additional workload with concealed carry classes not classes

[21:09] but con concealed carry permits uh that we have to attend to and other workload

[21:14] that's just been over and over and the Odyssey system uh has required more from

[21:19] the ladies downstairs working the civil part of uh of our our division. So, with

[21:24] that, we actually have uh 29,000 and and a few dollars left in account that we

[21:31] use for part-time that we could hire people part-time to help with this. Uh

[21:36] but the problem with that is we can't hire somebody part-time to come in and

[21:39] do what they need to uh do. So, I've spoken to uh uh county manager and

[21:45] requested that we be able to move forward and ask for a position, a

[21:49] full-time position for an office assistant. So with that office assistant

[21:55] um it actually uh will not um it will not affect as far as uh the cost of that

[22:03] it will not affect but like uh I want to say I calculated up around less than

[22:08] $15,000 for the year. Uh we're looking at if we can get this approved we add

[22:12] this on and uh and hire this position in October if we can do that. uh we really

[22:19] need to add this because of the workload that's been added on to the

[22:22] administrative assistance and we have when I look at the concealed carry we

[22:26] have average of 60 to 70 uh renewals and new concealed carriers come in every

[22:33] week. Uh last year they had almost uh 1,600 that they process through and

[22:39] that's people that they've got a fingerprint and conduct paperwork with

[22:42] and so forth and then with the walk-ins and so forth. So, it's just a lot of

[22:47] extra on the ladies downstairs that uh require us to have some extra personnel

[22:51] and some extra help. So, I'm asking to take that part-time money that we're

[22:55] already allotted, add a little more to that, and add a full-time position for

[22:59] that to help uh help our employees downstairs, our civilians.

[23:04] » All right. Thank uh any questions for

[23:10] Mr. Wil? I just have one and I realize it's as you say you're adding to that

[23:17] salary, but was this not in your budget? Was this not foreseen before we voted on

[23:23] the budget? Cuz we just voted on the budget.

[23:26] » We we did. Yes, ma'am. And I think it was in in in the budget we were going to

[23:29] request that and I I think at that time uh there were other things in the budget

[23:34] and that was just one item that we were not approved on for that. Um, however,

[23:41] with the part-time money, we were given uh $29,000 and I don't know the exact

[23:47] figure, like $900 or whatever, close to $30,000 for a part-time position. So,

[23:51] with that part-time money, instead of it sitting there and not being able to be

[23:55] used, uh we would like to take that money and apply that toward this

[23:59] full-time position and not use that part-time money and use that for a

[24:02] full-time position. And the salary for the full-time position uh is indicated.

[24:07] And with that uh the amount is what I just spoke of when I calculated it up

[24:12] and that's including fringe benefits for the remainder of the budget.

[24:16] » And Mr. Chairman, my last question would be to the county manager. Madame

[24:20] manager, is this um doable? I >> Yes, ma'am.

[24:25] » Okay. >> All right.

[24:27] » Thank you. >> All right. Any other questions for

[24:31] Commissioner Dave? Uh, Chief Deputy, is this position uh going to be publicly

[24:38] advertised or do you have someone in mind that would fill the position?

[24:42] » Right now, we don't have anyone in mind and if uh once once it's approved, u I'm

[24:48] not sure if we advertise it or if someone if we have somebody already in

[24:52] mind for it. And from what I understood, you said this position was requested in

[24:58] the budget, but it was not approved in the budget, and you're just coming back

[25:03] and asking for it again, but utilizing some part-time money to do it with. Is

[25:08] that what we're saying? >> Right. What I'm saying is that and and

[25:14] other things I asked for in the budget and we were uh and the budget was worked

[25:17] out. uh is just on this instead of using that money for that and then starting

[25:22] this position in October uh we're able to uh maybe make use of that money where

[25:27] we can actually use it to help uh take on some of the workload that we have

[25:32] because some of these ladies have a tremendous amount of workload um and

[25:35] most particular with the Odyssey system and some of the other things that I just

[25:39] mentioned >> but position would be ongoing it would

[25:42] not be >> it would be ongoing so it would have to

[25:44] be funded next year in the budget and I guess that would be something that would

[25:47] be considered Ed when we apply for a budget next year on hey we got this

[25:51] position so other things would uh have to be managed in order to maintain that

[25:56] position. >> Thank you sir.

[25:59] » All right. I will entertain a motion to uh deny or accept the full-time position

[26:05] request. >> Move for approval.

[26:06] » Second been moved by Commissioner Outlaw and second by Commissioner How that we

[26:12] accept the uh full-time position request. Uh any further discussion on

[26:17] the motion? All in favor of the motion, let it be known by saying I. I.

[26:22] » All oppose. I. >> Commissioner Davis.

[26:27] » All right. Motion car. I think you have one more item.

[26:31] » I do. I have one more. So, we're requesting approval uh to receive one

[26:36] deputy on a North Carolina uh governor's safety grant. uh this one deputy with

[26:43] this grant for the fiscal year of 2627 which starts October the 1st would be uh

[26:51] paid for 100% means they pay for the salary, they pay for the vehicle uh and

[26:57] and the equipment. The only thing that this equipment would not cover would be

[27:01] uniforms and like a portable radio. Um and with that this one position would be

[27:08] uh granted to go out and it would be a DWI task force position. So we would

[27:14] actually assign another deputy to work with this position and they would focus

[27:19] solely on detection of driving while impaired individuals. And we know that

[27:23] the sheriff's office remains committed to uh protect the citizens of Ash

[27:28] County, protect all those that travel through and DWI and driving while

[27:32] impaired is something that causes uh serious collisions and serious uh uh I

[27:37] guess uh concerns. So with that, uh we're asking for the approval. Now, the

[27:42] way this works is it's a four-year grant, and every year in January, we

[27:46] have to reapply for the grant, and the state decides whether they're going to

[27:50] continue that grant or not. And if they continued it, then the grant next year,

[27:55] the federal part of it would pay 85% of the salary. It would not be any more

[27:59] equipment, right? They would pay for some training that they would go to. So

[28:03] the county would be responsible in year two of 15% of the salary. Then if we

[28:09] move to year three, the federal government would pay 70% of that deputy

[28:15] salary. And then in year four, 50%. And then in year five, uh that position

[28:22] would be assumed by the county. Um and as we know moving forward, that's just

[28:27] uh by then we would need other deputies to start with with other positions,

[28:31] right? So this is a good way to get a uh someone in to help protect and uh at no

[28:39] cost to the county, which is what we're trying to do.

[28:42] » Okay. Any questions for Deputy Wilson? Commissioner David? Just one uh chief

[28:50] deputy, what was your number? What do your numbers show that the cost would be

[28:55] for the first year all in for what you just would be?

[28:59] » Well, what they applied for for the grant and what's been approved is

[29:03] 163,748, >> right?

[29:05] » And that includes the salary and the vehicle.

[29:08] » Okay. But the first year, these numbers, look at them. I I don't know how your

[29:13] math works, but it the dogs don't hunt on the numbers. But anyway, what is your

[29:17] first year projection of it including equipment and everything else benefit?

[29:21] » That's what that's what that's what it came to. That's what they apply for in

[29:24] the grant. That's what the projection is.

[29:27] » Saying is that the 163 is for year one only.

[29:30] » Correct. >> Okay. Makes more more sense. Thank you,

[29:33] sir. >> Yes, sir. And there's a there's a

[29:35] resolution that uh has it written down. I'm not sure if you all have that copy

[29:39] of that resolution. The resolution indicates when uh when we sign this and

[29:43] turn it in that there's no cost to the county and and to be forthright the only

[29:48] cost is a uniform and radio. >> Right. I I I was thinking that was your

[29:52] total >> grand

[29:54] that's just for year one and uh each year you're required to come back before

[29:58] the commissioners bring a resolution and say we're requesting this amount of

[30:02] money. Got >> and that's what they're going to do.

[30:03] They'll approve a certain amount. >> Thank you.

[30:06] » Yes, sir. >> Okay. Uh,

[30:11] no further question, >> Mr. Chairman.

[30:14] » Yes, Mr. Chair. >> I have Okay. So, it's a 4-year grant

[30:18] that um gradually the county will have to pay the difference. So the 85% the

[30:25] county is looking at just for the sake of our citizens is looking at $32,700

[30:32] about a year and then that 70% that third year would be uh 50,000

[30:39] and then that fourth year 50% that the county would be paying is 81,000

[30:45] and I'm not against this but 81 >> C could I interrupt you ma'am and just

[30:50] say that the 163 is not for every year 163 is only for year one because it

[30:55] includes the vehicle >> and the equipment in the vehicle. So

[30:59] vehicles by the time you equipped them, that's 60 to $65,000. So that's coming

[31:04] off. The only thing that the county is going to be responsible for in year two,

[31:07] three, and four is the salary. So when you look at it, it's only 15% of a the

[31:13] deputy's salary that we will be requesting that the county pay in year

[31:17] two. So that's salary and fringe benefits. So we put all that in. And so

[31:22] that's what the county would have to pay in year two. And then in year three, the

[31:26] county would be responsible for 30% of the member's salary. And then in year

[31:31] four, 50% of the member's salary. >> And you all will re reapply every

[31:37] » we have to reapply every January. >> So you reapply in January, the state

[31:42] looks at it, decides whether they're going to approve it or not. If they

[31:45] approve it, then we have to come back before the board uh next year at the

[31:50] same time. And if we come back before the board and at that time you decide

[31:54] that you don't want to do that, then we just you can't participate in the grant

[31:58] because we can't participate without the county saying that you know this is so

[32:02] next year as we move forward in the budget. I'm sure that'll probably be

[32:06] calculated in the budget is what that grant's going to cost us if we continue

[32:09] with that and that would be factored in I would suppose.

[32:12] » Okay. And and that was my question. If the state does not approve it, we've got

[32:17] a position there that the county commissioners have to decide if they

[32:20] want to fund. >> That would be correct. If if we have

[32:24] somebody in that position, you would have a you would have a position there

[32:26] to decide whether you're going to fund that or how are you going to do with a

[32:29] with a position, right? >> Okay.

[32:31] » Yes, ma'am. >> Thank you.

[32:34] Uh uh Commissioner Davis, I

[32:38] » I do think uh it's important to understand that you've always got

[32:42] vacancies, so you would have somewhere to put that person.

[32:45] » Correct. >> Right.

[32:49] » Okay. You've heard the request for uh a driving while impaired impaired grant.

[32:55] Is there a motion? >> Move approval, Mr. Chairman.

[33:00] Uh second moved by Commissioner Davis and second by Commissioner Howell that

[33:04] we approve the request. Any further discussion?

[33:08] All in favor of the motion let it be known by saying I.

[33:11] » I. >> All opposed. Motion approved. Thank you

[33:14] sir. >> Thank you board.

[33:17] » Okay. We will now move to 9B which is the

[33:25] uh consideration on your agenda. Item number 20 on your agenda.

[33:31] » Yes.

[33:34] » Good morning. >> Good morning.

[33:36] » Nash County has negotiated the purchase of 39.84 acres located at 3538 Eastern

[33:43] Avenue in Rocky Mount. Uh property adjacent to Nash Community College. The

[33:47] board is being asked today to consider the purchase of this property at a

[33:52] purchase price of 1,950,000 and the agreement of purchase and sale

[33:57] is attached in your agenda. So let me know if you have any

[34:03] questions.

[34:06] Y'all have any questions at this time or uh

[34:09] » is there plan

[34:13] is there a plan for that >> property at that cost?

[34:20] » Mr. Chairman, >> uh

[34:22] wait one minute. Uh

[34:27] I think Mr. Honeyut wanted to make a a presentation. So, I would like him to

[34:32] make the presentation and we're going to come back and ask Mike the questions. Is

[34:36] that okay? All right. Well, great morning from Nash Community

[34:42] College. It's always good to be in front of you and see you all. I bring you

[34:47] greetings from the college from the students, faculty, staff, and board of

[34:50] trustees, many of which are with me today. And we thought you might just be

[34:53] interested to know why we might have an interest in the property in question. So

[34:59] the to start off with I would say and I say this pretty much to all of you every

[35:03] time I see you without the partnership we share with the county and it's a

[35:07] great partnership we could not do what we do every day and that has literally

[35:10] changed lives. So thank you for that for your continued support. The college

[35:16] continues to grow. We finally came out of our COVID slump where we lost 17% of

[35:22] our enrollment during the co years. We are now past that point. And last year,

[35:27] the last full year, which was the 2526 school year, the college served 23,860

[35:33] students, the most in the college's history. While that's a great number and

[35:38] hope to continue to report great numbers to you, what it does to us is fill up

[35:42] all of our buildings, which is a great problem to have. And so, currently, the

[35:47] existing buildings when we look at our future planning do not hold enough space

[35:53] for the students that are coming to the college. Again, a great problem to have.

[35:57] When we look at the entire campus, we've got a plan in place, a master plan,

[36:00] which includes a new health sciences building. Um, a basically a regional

[36:05] workforce training center. And then also two years ago, we moved City High School

[36:11] onto campus into temporary modular facilities because but the de merger, we

[36:17] were going to lo the school system was losing another set of schools. And so,

[36:22] Superintendent Ellis got with me and said, "Let's move them to your campus a

[36:25] little early." Well, we did that, but that has filled up every space we have.

[36:29] We're proud of that because now we have the Early College, which is all

[36:33] university transfer on campus, but we also have our skills high school,

[36:36] arguably as important in this county, and so they are on campus. We're proud

[36:40] of that. We're opening more programs to them, but again, it adds to the space uh

[36:45] space constraints. So, we have all these plans in place. One of the issues we

[36:50] have is we don't have the space on campus to put new buildings on unless we

[36:57] start changing the way the campus looks. We are very unique in the eastern part

[37:02] of the state in how our campus looks. It has been landscaped meticulously over

[37:08] our 58 years almost 59 years. We have green space that the community uses

[37:13] constantly. We have nature trails. We have a really aesthetically pleasing

[37:18] campus. The health sciences building, we know already we're going to have to take

[37:22] some of that aesthetically pleasing out to put it in and we're willing to do

[37:26] that because it kind of marries the two side north and south sides of campus.

[37:30] Barring that though, we're going to have to start stacking or doing something

[37:33] else. If we're going to add these other buildings, we have a immediate need for

[37:38] for something this land would really benefit us on. If you look at the map of

[37:43] the land, it's kind of a rough Lshape. On the north end, it comes back over and

[37:48] attaches to the college. It attaches to the college right next to our electric

[37:53] line construction field. We currently house electric cities on campus as well

[37:58] as our own two-year program and our 16week cadet um academy program. We are

[38:04] out of space in our our electric line construction training area. We haven't

[38:10] found the funding to do this yet because we haven't had the space to even think

[38:13] about it with yet. But if the college were to obtain the property in question,

[38:18] the area that attaches on our north side is right next to the electric cities

[38:23] field and would be an easy expansion of that program. So that's certainly an

[38:26] immediate need. Some of the the property, I know y'all have talked about

[38:30] this a million times, is is not suitable or will be approved for buildings. We

[38:36] understand that. But we also have and can expand our nature trail system, our

[38:42] natural area system with some outdoor classroom spaces that are used by our

[38:46] faculty, staff, and students, but the community at large. We have walkers on

[38:50] campus every day from the community, and I love seeing that. Um, the the kind of

[38:56] the selfish reason to to want to gain this for the college. This is the first

[39:01] position in my career where I haven't had multiple sites to take care of. In

[39:04] Texas, I had three over a 9,400 square mile area. In Georgia, I had seven

[39:10] across the whole state. At Nash, I have one. And it's contiguous. This is the

[39:15] last parcel of contiguous land around the college. We're going to have to

[39:21] expand to keep growing. To give you an idea of the growth, last summer we were

[39:26] 11.2% above the summer before. I told the team, look, don't get used to that.

[39:31] That's a fluke. It won't happen again. This summer we are 12.7%

[39:36] above last summer. That's nearly an entire quarter's growth quarter of

[39:41] growth in the last 12 months. So we're growing and I'm proud of that. In order

[39:45] to grow though, we've got to expand. This piece of property would allow us to

[39:50] expand well into the future for the needs of the college to keep serving the

[39:55] the constituents of our county and our region. And with that, I would yield the

[40:00] floor. >> Okay. Uh any question for Dr. Honey?

[40:07] » Mr. Chair, >> Commissioner How,

[40:10] » you mentioned that basically if you don't get this property, it's going to

[40:13] force us to do satellite facilities or start to go up and

[40:20] can you educate me just at a high level the cost to go up versus expanding on

[40:26] additional property there? Is it the same? Is it more? Is it less? It's the

[40:30] cost to go up would be more for us because um

[40:35] space is at a premium. Like I said, we can put other buildings next to

[40:39] buildings, but adding those second, third floors, number one, my CFO may

[40:43] quit if we put more elevators on campus because there are large one of the

[40:47] biggest problems we have. But but certainly the cost of doing that versus

[40:50] a one-story more spread out use. The workforce development center is about

[40:55] 50,000 square feet. the planning on it with 8,000 square, excuse me, eight

[41:00] 5,000 square foot labs that just can't be stacked. That's got to be a

[41:05] singlestory unit. We do not have a place on campus. That was our primary building

[41:10] goal until three years ago. We changed the health sciences mainly because we

[41:13] didn't we would have had to destroy a huge area of timber and natural space to

[41:18] put it on campus. So, if we ever get to do that building, which health sciences

[41:22] will be first, it's we don't currently have a place to do that. It will have to

[41:26] be we'll have to find another place to do it.

[41:28] » Thank you, sir. >> You bet.

[41:30] » All right. >> Uh, Commissioner Wel,

[41:33] » um, Dr. Honeyut, you mentioned a number of things here that we're in and um you

[41:40] wanted to do the electric line construction,

[41:43] the health sciences building, city net, city high um regional workforce

[41:48] development center. Would all that fit on the only usable 30 acres out of that

[41:54] 39.86 acres?

[41:57] We think it will because for the electric line for example, the part of

[42:01] the land that we're talking about is not usable for building sites, but for poles

[42:05] would work. When we talk about extending the electric line construction area,

[42:09] it's literally a series of poles, climbing poles, not a permanent

[42:13] structure of any type. It would just be an expansion of what we have. So that

[42:17] would be using some of the nonusable for a building site. The front portion that

[42:23] borders eastern would be a perfect position for a new building. And then in

[42:26] between would be that unusable space that we would utilize for nature and

[42:30] different things like that to to increase the aesthetics of the campus.

[42:34] » And how would you go about getting funding for all these buildings? Would

[42:36] it come back to the Nash County taxpayers?

[42:39] » Not we haven't done that in the past in a very long period of time. My hope we

[42:44] will begin a capital campaign for our health sciences building probably in the

[42:47] new year somewhere in there. That's our goal for the health sciences. We really

[42:51] haven't planned ahead for the workforce development center, but we know every

[42:55] year we go to the general assembly for with a with a really large ask to see if

[43:00] we can't get something built. I feel confident at some point we might. I

[43:04] would not rule out coming back to y'all for something, but that is not in the

[43:08] plan currently. >> Okay. And the last question I have for

[43:11] you is uh you said 23,860 um had enrolled the during the 2526

[43:18] year. This is August. Do you have any number yet for the 27

[43:23] 28? Well, the 26 >> 26 27. Yes, ma'am. That the 12% I told

[43:28] you for some our our year starts in the summer.

[43:31] » So already we're 12% ahead of last summer. Fall doesn't start for another 3

[43:36] weeks, but we have met last fall and we were 7.9% up. And so anything any

[43:42] students that add from this point forward are going to tick that up. I

[43:45] think we'll end up four or five% above last fall. probably that in the spring

[43:50] with a year end of about 6%. Last year our full year was 7.9% which is

[43:55] incredible but another 6% increase is really going to stretch the the what we

[44:00] have. We're making it work but we certainly can't continue to grow. It's a

[44:04] great problem to have. We can't continue to grow with this rate, but we're going

[44:07] to have a space problem really quickly. >> Okay, Mr. Chairman, I'll reserve my

[44:12] other questions for the attorney. >> Okay. Uh any other question?

[44:19] All right. Thank you. Thank you very much.

[44:31] Excuse. Okay. Any question for the attorney?

[44:36] » Commissioner Wilkins. >> Um

[44:40] I I was going to call you by your by your first name and I caught myself.

[44:43] » That'll be fine. But um would you just confirm for the citizens and reiterate

[44:49] um in December of 2025 I believe that the land was um appraised

[44:57] at 550,000. Is that right? >> Well, it was it was appraised for

[45:03] multiple uses. Um and I think that the final figure was a million for

[45:08] commercial use and um and somewhere less than that um for residential use. based

[45:15] on the the infrastructure requirements. >> Okay, that's what I saw in print was

[45:21] 550,000 and um

[45:25] » and that may have been what the final appraisal

[45:29] showed, but he did the appraiser did discuss

[45:32] with me the the difference in value based on on the uses.

[45:37] » Yeah. Um, I'll I'll wait till after the discussion

[45:43] to say my final. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[45:46] » Okay. All right. Any other questions for the attorney?

[45:54] » Okay. U Commissioner Bfield. Well,

[46:00] in what the president has outlined needs for, I'm wondering how within a maybe a

[46:11] three or five year period they going to they intend to do use this property if

[46:16] we vote to purchase it or is it going to sit there for

[46:22] a long time? I would like for president to answer

[46:28] that

[46:33] » to answer the question. Great question. Um immediately pending funding and we'd

[46:37] have to find funding for this. The electric line program would be a quick

[46:40] expansion because that's something we need desperately electric cities Duke

[46:45] and our own program. Um the ally or the uh health sciences building we have a

[46:50] space on the current camp the current campus as it is for that building. The

[46:54] next big project would be the regional workforce development center. There

[46:58] really isn't a timeline for that. So my guess would be it would probably it was

[47:03] about a $30 million undertaking and so it would take a little longer to have

[47:07] that happen. So the it would sit there. Now the unused unusable portion nature

[47:12] trails and outdoor classrooms are pretty easy to put in. So we would begin using

[47:16] that relatively quickly.

[47:21] » Okay. All right. Thank you.

[47:23] » Thank you. >> Okay. Any other question for the

[47:26] attorney?

[47:29] Commissioner Outlaw? I don't really have a question. I just want to uh

[47:35] share some information related kind of piggybacking on what uh Commissioner

[47:40] Wilkins question was or comment was about the appraisal value.

[47:47] In February of 21, this board purchased the Edwards

[47:55] property which is also adjacent to the community

[48:00] college. This is in 21. This is prior to

[48:06] revaluation. The property was purchased

[48:11] for 37975 per acre. That's per information

[48:17] provided some time back from uh deputy manager

[48:22] Boone. The Kumar property we're looking at

[48:27] today at 1,950,000

[48:33] for the acreage is 48946

[48:39] per acre. That's a difference of 10 971

[48:46] or 28.9%.

[48:52] What's really important here is location.

[48:59] It's all about location. It's all about location.

[49:05] If you know this location, you know that the city of Rocky Mount

[49:11] purchased 336 acres

[49:16] adjacent to the community college across the street from the community college

[49:21] and they paid they've got invested in that approximately 17 million.

[49:29] Do the math on that. That's $50,595

[49:35] per acre, which is less than what this property is costing us, the Kumar

[49:41] property. And as a as kind of a personal note here, and it may not be apples to

[49:48] apples, but it's something that's in my mind. When we completed reevaluation,

[49:56] and that was effective January of 24, my home, my personal home

[50:06] value went up over 80%.

[50:11] And I I dare say that every person in this room that owns property in Nash

[50:17] County, they may have seen something similar. Uh

[50:23] my property is not located in a strategic location like this property

[50:29] is. If my home were sitting on the reservoir, uh it would be significantly

[50:35] valued higher. So, I want this board to keep in mind that the cost of this

[50:40] property is very much in line with the value of property in that area.

[50:48] Also, keep in mind that this property is contiguous to the community college and

[50:54] it's the last significant tract of land that the college could acquire through

[51:00] the board of commissioners for future expansion of this college. And I hope

[51:06] I hope that this board will have the foresight to see that the future of Nash

[51:14] Community College rest with the decision we're making today. Because when this

[51:20] land is gone, it's gone. And future expansion is going to require

[51:28] costs significantly greater than what we're looking at today. So I I encourage

[51:34] my fellow colleagues to consider the fact that we should not be cons so much

[51:41] locked in on price, but we should be looking at value

[51:46] and the strategic location of this property makes it

[51:52] tremendously valuable to Nash Community College and the future growth of the

[51:57] college, which is a shining star in Nash County. And uh I I know we all want to

[52:02] see that star continue to glow and grow. So, Mr. Chairman, with that said, I

[52:07] yield back the floor. >> All right. Thank you. Any other question

[52:13] for the attorney? >> Uh I have one uh Commissioner Bale up

[52:18] here. >> Uh maybe I need to address it to

[52:23] Commissioner Outlaw. Is there any competition for that property

[52:29] that you know of >> that I know of?

[52:33] » Mhm. >> The Kumar family has worked exclusively

[52:38] with the county on the purchase of that property. Uh, I I dare say there would

[52:44] be no difficulty with the family putting that property on the market and uh it

[52:51] going at a price at or greater than what we're looking at today. You know, I I

[52:56] know there's there's a piece of property sitting on the corner there. Joe Bale

[53:00] owns it. I don't know exactly how much it is, an acre, couple of acres, but uh

[53:06] I've been told I don't know uh because I'm not an appraiser, but I've been told

[53:12] that that property is worth probably 750 to a million dollars. I don't know. But

[53:20] that land in that area is extremely valuable, Mr. Bellefield. It's extremely

[53:26] valuable. And when it's gone, it's gone. Yeah, but that's when you said that,

[53:33] that's what I was thinking that maybe uh someone else might be interested in it,

[53:40] too. >> How would that benefit the community

[53:42] college? >> That's what we're talking about today,

[53:46] the community college.

[53:50] » We're talking about acquiring this land. >> No money

[53:53] » for future. >> Mr. Chairman, point of order. There's a

[53:56] conversation going on between two commissioners and it should be addressed

[54:00] to you by one, Mr. Chairman.

[54:03] » Commissioner Wilkins, uh, they were trying to

[54:08] answer a question. >> I'm just trying to respond to

[54:11] Commissioner Bfield. >> All right. Uh, you two gentlemen

[54:16] have any more question? >> Are are we where are you at in in this

[54:22] process at the present time? I I I have some things I want to say,

[54:27] but we have the attorney standing here. I don't have questions for the attorney.

[54:30] » Okay. All right. Well, we were giving everybody the opportunity to ask

[54:34] question and I can I do have the appraisal. Um

[54:39] just for clarification, it was uh for for residential 525 hypothetical

[54:45] commercial 775 to 1 million. So that was that was the figures that the appraisal

[54:51] prov appraisal provided to us. All right. Uh any other questions?

[54:59] Okay. Hear none. Stand there. Uh oh, yeah. Uh

[55:07] come back one minute. All right. And in the contract it says

[55:12] that uh once we uh agree on this that we have uh what 45 days to inspect the

[55:19] property and see if it deems feasible for the use.

[55:25] That that is correct. Um the um the contract gives us a due diligence

[55:32] period. Contract has not been signed right now. Um it it is contingent upon

[55:36] board approval. There also is a 45day due diligence period. Um, if the board

[55:41] were to vote to approve it and and then make a decision that it was not suitable

[55:46] for our uses, then they would need to come back and vote not to continue

[55:50] through with the process. >> All right. So, uh,

[55:55] the the question is, do we intend to do that inspection?

[56:01] Well, that would be in the discretion of the board as to what the the use of the

[56:06] prop the best use of the property for the county would be

[56:10] to direct the staff to do that, I guess. >> Well, right now it sound like it might

[56:16] not happen unless we approve that to happen. That correct?

[56:21] » That is correct. for for to move forward. Um t in a typical real estate

[56:27] transaction like this, the the the buyer would not want to expend a significant

[56:33] amount of additional funds to conduct these inspections so far as feasibility

[56:38] inspections um surveys, etc. until the property was under contract. Um and so

[56:44] so that's why that provision is in there to give the county an opportunity to to

[56:49] do further due diligence inspections. Yes. After we agree.

[56:53] » After you agree, if you would agree to if you would approve the purchase,

[56:57] right, then that that contract does provide for that.

[57:00] » Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Do we intend as a county intend to inspect as

[57:04] buyer the property for the use that we intended for?

[57:11] » Mr. Boone. >> Um,

[57:14] » I'm sorry, I was trying to review something.

[57:16] » No, that's okay. Um I we would the county Does the county have plans to

[57:21] conduct surveys um soil test etc on this property after

[57:27] the contract is is um >> there's probably some minimal amount of

[57:31] due diligence left but we've already commissioned an environmental assessment

[57:34] of the property to evaluate wetlands stream buffers

[57:38] » uh that determined there was about 30 acres of usable land in the track. Um so

[57:44] I mean that's the biggest concern is just the environmental uh issues. Uh but

[57:49] uh there would be some minimal amount of due diligence left but I think the

[57:52] biggest issue was the environmental constraints.

[57:56] » All right. So the environmental restraints those those have been met as

[58:00] far as you know >> right

[58:02] » they can be overcome. There's about that leaves us about 30 acres of usable land.

[58:07] So about seven seven and change >> uh that will be imp backed by wetland

[58:13] and stream buffers. >> All right.

[58:15] » And just for clarification, I mean the contract is the due diligence is not

[58:20] limited to any sort of study. The due diligence allows the buyer to back out

[58:25] at any time during that due diligence period.

[58:29] » Okay. >> Mr. Chairman, I question.

[58:32] » Uh Commissioner Wil, >> do we have a Can you give us a dollar

[58:36] amount? How much Mr. Boom that this or Mr. Gainner that um all that due

[58:43] diligence cost on top of the 1,950,000? How much did we pay to have all that

[58:49] land?

[58:52] » J, >> I want to I I would like to confirm the

[58:55] number for you, but we've already paid for the initial environmental

[58:59] assessment. So, that's that's money the countyy's already spent as we endeavored

[59:04] uh in this conversation with the Kumars, but I want to say we maybe spent $20,000

[59:08] or so on the initial due diligence. >> And you don't have maybe just a rough

[59:12] estimate of what it's going to cost further for us to do the other

[59:18] » well, in all likelihood that that uh seven acres or so will be unusable. So,

[59:23] any design plan will have to take that into account and avoid impacting those

[59:27] areas. There may be some buffers that need to be crossed with roadways would

[59:32] require some mitigation. Um, until they're designed, it's hard to say, but

[59:36] certainly I think 50 $150,000 would be a reasonable number in terms of buffer

[59:41] impacts. Um, so it's not, you know, in in terms of the scale of what the county

[59:46] invests in the land. It's not a huge amount of money. U, but there are some

[59:50] portions of the property that will not be able to be developed. And as um, Mr.

[59:55] Honeyut mentioned, you know, they have plans for walking trails, other kind of

[59:58] environmental elements that they would uh use that for as part of their

[1:00:02] development scheme. Uh there's about 30 acres that are usable on that track

[1:00:06] based on our initial assessment. >> So So once the county if if the county

[1:00:11] purchases this land and gifts it to the college, are we doing all that before we

[1:00:15] gift it to the college or is the college going to you're saying that the county

[1:00:20] is still going to pay for all that before we gift it to the college? Is

[1:00:24] that right? I think that would be part of the development plan and as u Mr.

[1:00:27] Honeyut mentioned I think the the community college is going to be looking

[1:00:30] to provide uh secure financing for the project without coming back to the

[1:00:34] county but I think I heard him say he couldn't rule that out.

[1:00:38] » Okay. Thank you.

[1:00:41] » Okay. Uh any other any other question?

[1:00:47] » All right. Uh seeing none >> Mr. Chairman.

[1:00:52] » Yes. I still don't know quite where you are. Are you getting ready to take a

[1:00:56] motion? Are we still discussing this among ourselves?

[1:01:01] » Well, we were This was part of the discussion and yes, I was ready to take

[1:01:05] a motion and uh I wanted everybody to give their uh opinion or opportunity to

[1:01:13] ask uh Dr. Hunut or the attorney questions that need to be asked.

[1:01:21] you have any further question?

[1:01:28] If not, then uh we all heard uh the presentation

[1:01:34] and uh we know some of the positions that some

[1:01:38] of you have taken before. Anyway, uh now is the time to uh

[1:01:45] uh consider the the motion to accept or deny the request for the purchase of the

[1:01:51] adjournant adjacent land to Nashville Community College.

[1:01:54] » Mr. Chair, >> I move we make a motion to vote to

[1:01:58] approve purchase. This really should be just a formality at this point. We've

[1:02:02] already took a vote on this in close session and had a majority of the board

[1:02:06] vote to move forward with it. We've already entered a contract with the

[1:02:11] purchaser. So, I think we need to go ahead and assist the the college in

[1:02:16] moving forward and acquiring this space for additional growth for the county.

[1:02:20] Our citizens need it. >> Is there a second to the motion?

[1:02:24] » Second. >> Second by Commissioner Outlaw. Any

[1:02:28] further discussion on the motion? >> Discussion.

[1:02:31] » Okay. >> I'd like a clarity if I could on the

[1:02:33] motion. >> Okay. first is that okay

[1:02:38] » or the statement was made that we've already signed the contract.

[1:02:41] » We haven't signed the contract because we haven't voted yet. So

[1:02:45] » correct >> that that is an incorrect statement and

[1:02:48] a point one I think. With that said, >> Mr. Chair,

[1:02:51] » I yield to Commissioner Wilson. >> Can I clarify my motion? We have took a

[1:02:58] consensus vote in close session to purchase this property at the price just

[1:03:03] mentioned here today that we're asking to vote on. The sellers have already

[1:03:10] agreed to those terms of that price and they have executed and signed a contract

[1:03:14] and turn it back over to us. General statutes prevents us from moving forward

[1:03:19] in close session with this matter. Therefore, it's here on the agenda today

[1:03:23] to take a vote publicly as required by open meetings law. So, at this time, I

[1:03:28] make a motion that we accept this contract so that we can execute it and

[1:03:32] sign it and move forward on the benefit of the citizens in Nash County.

[1:03:36] » That's same motion that you made. >> All right, Mr. Chairman.

[1:03:42] » Uh, Commissioner Wilkins had a question first.

[1:03:47] » I don't have a question. I have a statement. Um, and I thought about this

[1:03:51] over the weekend, the past week, and um, I just want to say I understand the

[1:03:57] purchase of this land by the county to give to the college would be an asset to

[1:04:03] them and it would be an asset to any entity being that it is being given.

[1:04:09] However, there are a number of thoughts that have caused me great trepidation if

[1:04:14] we did this. Um the asking price for one by the sellers of 1,950,000

[1:04:20] is an inconceivable cost that I believe we should not entertain at 39.86

[1:04:28] acres. Let's just divide say 40 into the 1,959,000.

[1:04:34] And yes, we would be paying a little over $48,000 per acre. But when you

[1:04:39] consider that approximately 10 of those acres are wet lands and say we divide 30

[1:04:45] the 30 usable acres into the 1,950,000 we're paying $65,000

[1:04:52] an acre and like I said well the attorney Mr. gainer. I had 550,000 in

[1:05:00] December. He said 525. But you know that was in 4 months later

[1:05:06] that April 2026 we were confronted with the 1,950,000.

[1:05:12] And yes, they had offered less than the 1,950,000

[1:05:16] before that if my memory serves me correctly. and but to keep going up. I

[1:05:22] just do not believe it is in the best interest of the taxpayers to pay

[1:05:29] $1,950,000. I believe they kept going up, kept going

[1:05:33] up. And as far as who negotiated, I mean, what did they negotiate? I feel

[1:05:42] like the county will benefit better keeping that money for our other things

[1:05:48] like the SNAP program. People are suffering right now. Things are being

[1:05:52] cut. $1,950,000. Families are hurting. And for us to just

[1:05:59] give this land away. Are we in the process of g of buying some land and

[1:06:04] giving it away? And yes, I realize it's the community college and education is

[1:06:08] important to me and everyone knows that. But I just come down off the price, you

[1:06:14] will get my yes vote. But at 1,950,000 when we have families and citizens

[1:06:19] hurting, not just in Nash County, across this state, and we have to find funding

[1:06:25] for DSS and other programs. I'm sorry. I'm against it. Thank you.

[1:06:32] » Okay. Uh, Commissioner Balefield was next.

[1:06:34] » Oh, I didn't quite understand Commissioner How's comments there, but

[1:06:41] did you say an independent contractor contract?

[1:06:47] » No, sir. M Miss Mfield, I my statement was that we've already voted on this in

[1:06:52] close session and the majority of members of the board agreed to negotiate

[1:06:57] the price. the m the majority of the board agreed to enter into a contract

[1:07:03] with the seller of this property at the price that we're looking to vote on

[1:07:07] today in close session. Therefore, a contract was executed with the seller.

[1:07:13] It's pending approval openly in the board today and once we execute that

[1:07:18] then it would be moved forward. But at this point, this was discussed in close

[1:07:23] session and everything about moving forward with the current price that

[1:07:27] we're talking about today was discussed in closed session agreed upon by the

[1:07:31] majority of the board. So, this is really should be just a formality today

[1:07:34] to approve this in public, which is required by general statute to move

[1:07:39] forward and execute this contract to secure this land for the future school.

[1:07:44] And I understand the concerns by Commissioner Wilkins,

[1:07:49] but I mean, it's a large amount of money. We knew that before we entered

[1:07:56] into these discussions and before we took a vote and agreed to move forward

[1:07:59] with this, but we've sat up here and voted for 1.2 million not too long ago

[1:08:04] for a church to use for parks and wreck. That's still sitting there. 14 years

[1:08:09] ago, we bought a 100 acres out on 97 as a shell building sitting out there that

[1:08:13] still sitting out there. So, I understand the investment, but you've

[1:08:17] heard today from Dr. Honeyut, the need for this is here.

[1:08:24] And if we're concerned about our citizens in Nash County, they're going

[1:08:27] to need additional education to enter into the workforce to be able to make a

[1:08:32] decent income. The prices of land are going up. We

[1:08:36] can't control that. as the growth continues to go, the the price is going

[1:08:40] to continue to increase. So, we're doing a disservice to our citizens by not

[1:08:45] providing an educational opportunity for them to be able to compete in the

[1:08:49] workforce by limiting the college on what it can do. Dr. Honeyut has

[1:08:53] indicated today clearly that if you go up, it's going to cost more. If you go

[1:08:57] to a satellite location, you got additional staff cost, the additional

[1:09:02] cost of management. You're going to have duplications

[1:09:05] in staffing to be able to cover this. So the the best option for the taxpayers in

[1:09:10] Ash County is to stay at the same location

[1:09:13] and this is the last piece of property that there's available to purchase to

[1:09:18] expand that school at that situ in that particular location. You've also heard

[1:09:22] from Commissioner Outlaw the property across the street, two acres over there

[1:09:27] is $750 to a million dollars to purchase two acres. We're getting 30 across the

[1:09:32] street. I understand part of it cannot be used to build on, but it also as

[1:09:36] mentioned by Dr. Honeyut and Jonathan Boone can be used for natural paths. It

[1:09:42] can be used for other outdoor open room activities but that the college can use

[1:09:47] and also citizens can partake in in the county. So, it's a multi-use piece of

[1:09:52] property. I hope that answers your question, Commissioner Bfield.

[1:09:59] » Commissioner Dave, uh,

[1:10:04] I do have quite a bit to say about this, and if you'll bear with me of the board

[1:10:09] and the citizens, uh, first of all, I want it known that

[1:10:13] there's not a bigger supporter on this board than myself of the community

[1:10:16] college system. I am a uh example of the community college system. Uh and I've

[1:10:23] done quite well in life uh thanks to what I learned in the community college

[1:10:28] and I've always supported this community college every way I could. But on the

[1:10:33] other hand uh as an elected official I feel I have to look out for the

[1:10:40] taxpayers funding and the money. Uh I think everybody knows I've always done

[1:10:45] that. been very passionate about that. This county is in excellent shape

[1:10:49] because of the boards in the past that have felt like I do that is very

[1:10:54] important to do things uh as conservatively as we can.

[1:11:00] » This particular piece of property is indeed the last one that is left in this

[1:11:05] quadrant. But on the other hand, uh the price that uh was asked for that's

[1:11:12] asking for and and I want it known that I haven't supported this in any votes

[1:11:16] taken in or and they are not really votes. They are consensus votes is what

[1:11:21] we call them. They have no meaning to them because we have to vote on

[1:11:25] purchasing land in the public or I I voted against it every time because the

[1:11:30] numbers do not make any sense. We've had this property appraised not one time but

[1:11:36] two times. It was appraised uh first in 2020 and

[1:11:42] that appraisal showed that the property was worth $350 to $370,000.

[1:11:51] It was appraised again in uh December of 25, which took into account the increase

[1:12:00] in value due to the rebound that was spoken of. It then appraised for

[1:12:05] $550,000. Because it is currently zone residential

[1:12:10] land. It said if indeed you were to get it zone commercial, it moved it up to

[1:12:17] somewhere between $750 and a million dollars. But folks, we're not talking

[1:12:22] about 550. We're not talking about 750. We're not talking about a million. We're

[1:12:28] talking about $1.95 million. Uh it's just too much for this land. Uh

[1:12:37] I personally uh have done this all my life. I know that land uh will not sell

[1:12:43] for $1.9 million, 1.95 million to anyone but Nash County. If this board chooses

[1:12:51] to move forward with this current property owner bought the

[1:12:56] property in 2011, that's 15 years ago. Just 15 years ago,

[1:13:01] they paid $135,000 for it or $3,388

[1:13:08] per acre. Uh that's a very nice return. Uh a and

[1:13:16] granted uh it is the piece that's left, but there's a lot of land in Nash

[1:13:21] County. We talked about the only 30 acres were usable. The rest of that

[1:13:26] acreage is in primarily buffer streams along the Brew Line stream. Uh you can't

[1:13:32] clear it. You certainly can't, Dr. 100 cup. I don't mean to disagree with you,

[1:13:37] but you can't put poles uh in in a buffer. I wish we could sometimes, but

[1:13:43] uh it it really has no uses other than potentially the trails that we spoke

[1:13:47] about and be very careful in doing that because we're not allowed to clear in

[1:13:52] these 50oot buffers on Blue Line streams. The property does not have

[1:13:56] sewer. There's no sewer to the property. It's going to be a tremendous cost. So,

[1:14:02] and we everything community college in Nash County does we do as partners.

[1:14:07] We've always done that. We will always have to do that. So, we've got a

[1:14:11] tremendous cost to get sewer to the property. Of course, to get sewer to the

[1:14:14] property, it would have to be annexed into the city of Rocky Mount. Uh that's

[1:14:18] not a bad thing. U but again, it would have to be doing that. And we speak

[1:14:24] about the property uh that Rocky Mount purchased. So I I think 95% of the

[1:14:30] people in in Nash County realized as well as the elected officials in Rocky

[1:14:35] Mount for the most part that that was a mistake. They paid an average of uh if

[1:14:41] you take the whole property in itself, they paid $47,000 per acre for that

[1:14:46] land. What we're talking about here is $65,000 for the usable land.

[1:14:53] I also have a problem with the way it was negotiated. Uh

[1:15:00] quite frankly, uh we we have a person uh on our board that negotiated and

[1:15:06] certainly had no problem with that, but that person served both boards at the

[1:15:10] time and I don't know that it was an armed length transaction. Senate Bill

[1:15:15] 473 is very clear where it says and it does

[1:15:20] not apply to the purchase of land. It applies to nonprofits is what this bill

[1:15:25] is about. And what it says is uh it would prevent wood subject to

[1:15:31] certain exceptions prohibit public officials from participating in making

[1:15:35] or administering a contract including the ward of money. Then it goes on to

[1:15:40] say for nonprofits, but I can't help but think the intent of

[1:15:46] this law was to prevent what we've had to happen here. Uh it should have been

[1:15:51] an independent uh negotiator that negotiated the price of this land.

[1:15:57] U the property is currently zoned R20. Uh

[1:16:05] therefore, it would certainly have to go through a reszoning.

[1:16:08] The property is shaped very linear in the dimensions of it. A very linear

[1:16:14] piece of land is much harder to use. And what I mean by that, it is narrow and it

[1:16:18] is very deep. Uh you don't get good utilization. You do not get good

[1:16:24] utilization of a piece of linear property like you could if it were more

[1:16:28] rectangular or more square. Uh which gives you the most. Uh again, uh Dr.

[1:16:35] Honey cup. I'll be very careful in saying this, but

[1:16:39] multi-story buildings are not more expensive to build. In fact, we build

[1:16:44] them anytime because they are somewhat less expensive to build. So, so it's not

[1:16:48] an issue with that. But of course, it brings on elevators. There's no question

[1:16:51] about that. And I question the transparent.

[1:16:57] We've got board me rumors that everything they bring up every meeting

[1:17:02] is about transparent. transparency. Uh

[1:17:07] I've looked at the statutes and I could not determine and I I think the case

[1:17:11] answer is no. But if we indeed going to seriously consider this, we should have

[1:17:16] a public hearing on it. The citizens should be able to weigh in on whether

[1:17:21] they want this amount of money applied

[1:17:26] to a use to buy a piece of land that appraised at 1/4th of what we're paying

[1:17:32] for. I can't in my conscious uh go back to the people in my district that voted

[1:17:38] me in and with a straight face justify why we would have done that. That's why

[1:17:44] you get appraisals appraisals on property to start with.

[1:17:49] Uh so a public hearing should certainly have been a step we would have taken. I

[1:17:53] know it's not a requirement. I don't think attorney but if it is uh I'd like

[1:17:59] for you to correct me on that. Uh

[1:18:05] the land is is almost totally wooded. Uh it's only two

[1:18:11] acres that's cleared on this piece of land. Uh so you got a pretty substantial

[1:18:16] cost in addition to the purchase of the land to get the land where it's usable

[1:18:22] in addition to the sewer. And of course you have the rather large blue line

[1:18:26] stream running through the middle of the property from one side to the other.

[1:18:30] that's going to have to be dealt with. And truthly, it can be dealt with. We do

[1:18:34] it every day. But the short to long of it is when you look at this, you just

[1:18:41] have no business paying four times what two appraisals showed you utilizing

[1:18:48] taxpayers money. And I hope this board uh will understand is and would not

[1:18:55] agree for us to enter this contract for this sales price. Thank you, Mr.

[1:19:00] chairman. >> All right.

[1:19:03] Any others? Okay. >> Mr. Chairman, point of clarification

[1:19:07] from Commissioner Davis. >> So, is he suggesting that the board

[1:19:12] going forward anytime we spend or have a request to spend a dollar matter in this

[1:19:17] case $1.9 million that we'd hold a public hearing? If that's the case, is

[1:19:21] we going what's the criteria we're going to use going forward for that? Just out

[1:19:25] of curiosity, I'm just wondering why we're proposing that this time.

[1:19:29] and we voted on several other things in the past exceeding this and he hasn't

[1:19:34] entertained a having a public input from that. Uh we're not going to have that

[1:19:40] discussion. All right. That was the statement he

[1:19:45] made.

[1:19:48] All right. Any other discussion?

[1:19:55] Okay. Well, you've heard the motion. the motion to

[1:20:00] » Mr. Chairman, I would like to amend that motion

[1:20:06] » to table this issue for future.

[1:20:18] Let's see. All right. Well,

[1:20:24] I think he has to have >> on the amendment if I get a second.

[1:20:30] » Was there a second that? >> Well, we have a motion on the floor.

[1:20:33] » There's a motion. He would have to agree to amend the I'd entertain Commissioner

[1:20:38] Bedfield's reason for tableing this and would like to hear what it is in order

[1:20:42] to decide whether or not I should amend that motion or not. Mr. here.

[1:20:46] » Well,

[1:20:49] Robert's rules of order. So, once the motion is approved, uh once once the

[1:20:54] motion been second, now it's the board's the board's motion. And now, uh we

[1:21:01] listen to the amendment and whether the board want to agree on

[1:21:08] the amendment.

[1:21:11] I think you would have to vote on the motion that's been seconded unless the

[1:21:16] original motion maker agreed to the amendment

[1:21:20] is my understanding. >> Well, that's right.

[1:21:25] Uh like I say, the training I went to

[1:21:30] this past weekend said that once the motion is made, the the motion and his

[1:21:36] second is no longer belongs to the person that made the motion. It belongs

[1:21:41] to the body. So the body

[1:21:47] uh it's the bodies now once a second. So you correct me on that, Mr. Chair.

[1:21:53] Wait, wait, wait a minute. Uh, Mike's checking on that

[1:22:02] and uh

[1:22:07] yes, once the motion is made and second, the it it becomes the body's motion

[1:22:15] and it doesn't necessarily need to it need the body's approval to accept the

[1:22:21] amendment.

[1:22:24] Mr. Chairman. Uh, wait a minute. Commissioner will

[1:22:43] » just give me one second. >> Okay.

[1:23:50] So it does appear that Robert's rules would allow a proposal for amendment

[1:23:54] that would have to be voted on by the board.

[1:24:03] So we can proceed with Commissioner

[1:24:09] Bfield's amendment.

[1:24:15] » So he amended the motion that we >> to discuss the amendment and then they

[1:24:19] would vote on the amendment >> first.

[1:24:24] » All right. Commissioner May made the amendment. Who

[1:24:28] second the amendment or that need us second?

[1:24:34] » Let let me let me clarify with our rules of procedure real quick before we before

[1:24:38] we do this just to make sure that

[1:25:16] Uh so according to our rules of procedure, an amendment to a motion must

[1:25:20] be germanine to the subject of the motion but it may not achieve the

[1:25:23] opposite effect of the motion. There may be an amendment to the motion and an

[1:25:27] amendment to an amendment but no further amendments.

[1:25:32] Okay. The amendment didn't change the motion. Amendment as for a delay,

[1:25:41] » Mr. Chairman. >> Wait a minute. Trying to

[1:25:46] » I mean I I don't I mean, right. The amendment didn't change the

[1:25:52] motion. >> It It would not change It would not

[1:25:54] change the Well,

[1:25:58] » it didn't change the motion. It just asked for a delay. It it is according to

[1:26:02] our rules of procedure. It is germanine to the subject of the motion.

[1:26:08] I I'm I'm agreeing that it should be permitted according to our rules of

[1:26:11] procedure. >> The amendment

[1:26:13] » the amendment should be considered. Yes, sir.

[1:26:16] » So now I guess we're we're voting on whether the amendment will be accepted

[1:26:21] by the body to the main motion.

[1:26:27] » Point of clarification, Mr. Chair. >> One minute.

[1:26:29] » A second. Right. Right. It would need the amendment would need to have a

[1:26:33] second. >> Right.

[1:26:37] And we would take a vote on the amendment.

[1:26:40] » Correct. >> Right.

[1:26:42] » All right. Was there a second to the amendment?

[1:26:47] » All right. Well, >> I'll second your amendment.

[1:26:52] » All right. Are we in discussion now, sir?

[1:26:55] » Yeah. >> The amendment.

[1:26:56] » Yeah, we will. >> We will.

[1:26:59] So again, back to my original question to Commissioner Befield, I'd just like

[1:27:03] to understand what his reasoning is for tableabling the vote today.

[1:27:12] » I didn't I didn't understand your question.

[1:27:15] » He Well, he asked uh your reason for wanting to make an amendment to postpone

[1:27:22] the vote at this time. >> Well Well, I think that that's two

[1:27:25] different things. So, so either we're we're I mean I think that we're either

[1:27:32] tableabling it or or amending it in some way. So, I think that we need to get

[1:27:36] clarity from Mr. Bellefield on what what his proposal is.

[1:27:40] » Yeah. Well, my motion was to the amendment was to table this issue and

[1:27:48] maybe bring it back up in a future date. Could you

[1:27:56] » I second that motion, Mr. Chairman. >> He's already

[1:28:00] » Well, it already >> I second it for him.

[1:28:03] » Um >> I thought he I thought he did the

[1:28:07] amendment. >> Yeah, that was that right on the

[1:28:11] amendment. I second his amendment. >> Uh and now we are having a discussion on

[1:28:16] the amendment. >> Mr. Chairman, the motion was to table

[1:28:21] » Mr. Bellefield. Commissioner Belelfford made a motion to table the um

[1:28:28] » right >> the vote and but that's not the

[1:28:32] amendment. >> I was seconding his motion to table

[1:28:38] » it was stated differently but it appears to me that he is attempting to table the

[1:28:43] motion. So we would need to clarify that for Mr. Bellfield.

[1:28:46] » Right. >> He just stated

[1:28:49] » that he was tableabling. He didn't specify a date.

[1:28:52] » Okay. >> But

[1:28:53] » no, I didn't. Uh that could come up late. Well, table it

[1:29:00] at least for further discussion

[1:29:04] and maybe get back with the property owners and maybe we can work

[1:29:11] work out a better deal for for the interest of the county and the college.

[1:29:20] » Mr. Chairman, point of order. When you table something, it stays on the table

[1:29:25] until someone brings it off. >> Bring it back.

[1:29:28] » No date has to be stated. >> That's right.

[1:29:31] » All right, >> Mr. Gana, would you confirm or deny

[1:29:34] that? >> That's correct. But it um

[1:29:41] according to the strict Robert's rules of order, if the motion is not brought

[1:29:45] back off the table at the next regular meeting, then that is it's dead.

[1:29:53] » Okay. >> And I I'll continue to review our rules

[1:29:57] of procedure as we go through. >> Uh

[1:30:05] Mr. Chair point of clarification if I may.

[1:30:08] » All right. >> So, I made a motion. It was seconded to

[1:30:11] take a vote on this for approving it. Commissioner Bedfield has made an

[1:30:17] amendment to my motion. Not another motion, but an amendment to my motion.

[1:30:23] » Requesting that we table it. We're now you had a second on that. You

[1:30:28] seconded it yourself. So, we're in discussion. So again, my question is I

[1:30:34] just ask Commissioner Bellefield, what's the reason for tableabling it? Not the

[1:30:39] time frame, but just >> why is he suggesting an amendment to my

[1:30:43] motion to table it? Morn

[1:30:50] » Well, he had stated, you know, clarification

[1:30:54] to do two more work on it. But anyway, >> of order. Yes, but we need to uh we're

[1:31:03] discussing the amendment and we need to take a vote on whether we accept the

[1:31:07] amendment >> in further negotiation.

[1:31:13] » All right. And that's my question for clarification, Mr. Chairman.

[1:31:17] No, I mean I may entertain supporting this as well, but I just would like

[1:31:21] clarification on the reasoning behind it.

[1:31:25] That's all I'm asking. I think that's a fair question.

[1:31:30] further the negotiation. >> Thank you, sir.

[1:31:34] » All right. Point of order. >> We're discussing the amendment.

[1:31:38] Commissioner Davis, >> if indeed I want to ask the attorney, if

[1:31:43] indeed it was a motion to table, my understanding is a motion to table

[1:31:48] cannot have discussion. >> That's right.

[1:31:51] » That that is correct. >> So, I don't know how we going to discuss

[1:31:54] that motion. >> Well, I think

[1:31:56] » but it's amendment. It's you can't >> I think that the question is is it an

[1:32:01] amendment or is it a motion to table? It's an amendment.

[1:32:04] » And I think that that's it was stated as an amendment.

[1:32:08] » Correct. >> And and we need to get some

[1:32:11] clarification of was it a motion to table or was it an amendment?

[1:32:18] » Well, I was amending the original motion to table it for further negotiation.

[1:32:25] » I think it's got it

[1:32:29] Is that >> I think you can amend you can amend the

[1:32:33] motion >> need to be one or the other

[1:32:35] » to I think you can amend the motion to continue further negotiations

[1:32:41] » or you can table the motion to vote on it at a later time.

[1:32:44] » Correct. >> So those would need to be your two

[1:32:46] options. Do you want to amend the motion to continue the negotiation or do you

[1:32:51] want to vote on it? Do do you want to make a motion to table the motion to

[1:32:55] take it up no later than the next meeting?

[1:33:01] » Further negotiation. If that can be done before our next meeting, then we bring

[1:33:07] it back up next meeting.

[1:33:13] » So, so do you want to restate your amendment?

[1:33:19] Uh I offer amendment to table uh this issue.

[1:33:26] » You you can't you can't offer an amendment to table and have discussion.

[1:33:30] If you want to table it to the next meeting, then you should table.

[1:33:34] » Okay. Well, I my amendment is to table until the next meeting.

[1:33:40] » Well, that's that would not be an amendment. That would be a motion to

[1:33:43] table. At which point there would be no discussion.

[1:33:50] Okay. All right.

[1:33:55] All right. So, >> on said that

[1:34:01] » then we have a mo >> a

[1:34:02] » motion to >> a motion to

[1:34:04] » miss Mr. Chairman. Motion to table this until our next meeting.

[1:34:09] » Second the motion. >> Already got a second.

[1:34:15] That was >> all right.

[1:34:18] So now we're going to vote on the amendment.

[1:34:21] » We're not talking about an amendment. There's a motion.

[1:34:23] » I mean a motion. The motion the table. >> Okay.

[1:34:26] » So that would need to be voted on >> without discussion.

[1:34:34] » Mr. Chair, question for attorney. Which motion are we voting on? Since there's

[1:34:38] two motions on the floor now. >> There are two motion. There are three

[1:34:41] motions on the floor actually. He he well there's two and then there's your

[1:34:47] motion which was seconded properly seconded. Mr. Bellefield made it a

[1:34:51] motion to amend and he revised that to make a motion to table. So we are voting

[1:34:57] and that was seconded. So we're voting on the motion to table your motion.

[1:35:07] » All right. Call for a vote.

[1:35:15] What discussion? >> I'd like to make a comment. I don't know

[1:35:18] if discussion I'm confused as to whether it's appropriate or not.

[1:35:24] » Well, if you're if you're discussing the motion to table, that's not permiss not

[1:35:29] permitted. But if you I guess a point of legal clarification that would be up to

[1:35:36] the chair. >> Yeah. Uh,

[1:35:39] » could I ask for that point of legal clarification from the attorney?

[1:35:49] » That would be up to you. >> Well,

[1:35:54] we're going to vote on the motion to table and see where that goes.

[1:35:58] » My question is simple. You've got a motion on the floor. You keep adding

[1:36:04] motions. So, if we're going to do that, then I want to make another motion that

[1:36:09] we vote on the original motion. >> Well, he made a motion to table. He

[1:36:13] amended his a motion to amend and make it a motion to table. So, there can't be

[1:36:17] any discussion on that and that was seconded. So, that needs to be voted.

[1:36:20] » Well, I'm I'm confused about the negotiation because let me be very

[1:36:26] clear. >> I don't think the motion to table as a

[1:36:29] permits discussion. >> Yeah.

[1:36:30] » I'm making a comment. I'm not discussing >> that motion to the chair.

[1:36:33] » Mr. Chair, may I make that comment? >> Well, we

[1:36:41] there's amendment. Well, there's >> nothing as a courtesy.

[1:36:44] » I know a motion to table it so that we can have this discussion more.

[1:36:50] » It can happen. >> That's the purpose of that.

[1:36:52] » There's no discussion allowed question, Mr. Chairman.

[1:36:56] » Right. That's the purpose of amendment. so we

[1:37:00] can come back and discuss it and vote on it.

[1:37:05] All right, you've heard the amendment.

[1:37:08] » So, are you are you refusing me the courtesy of making a comment regarding

[1:37:13] this? >> I'm trying to follow a basic uh Robert's

[1:37:17] rules of order. uh the is to try to come back and make a to carry out the men to

[1:37:26] carry out the motion to table it so that we can have further discussion.

[1:37:31] » Well, if we were doing that on recent meetings, we've had at least two motions

[1:37:35] that were amended and we determined that the presenter of the original motion did

[1:37:42] not accept the amendment and we did not allow the amendment.

[1:37:46] » No. Well, that wasn't once the motion once the motion is made

[1:37:52] and then it's second. I bet it becomes the motion of the body. So, I got to

[1:37:59] call a motion for uh a vote on the amendment

[1:38:03] » to vote on the tableing of the motion. >> Yes. Just for clarification,

[1:38:08] » right? So you heard the the motion to table

[1:38:13] until is that going to be our September meeting?

[1:38:18] All in favor of the motion, let it be known by saying I.

[1:38:21] » I. >> I.

[1:38:22] » All oppose. >> No. No.

[1:38:26] » Uh raise hand for no.

[1:38:31] » Wait. >> Raise hand for what?

[1:38:33] I said all all those who are in favor of not

[1:38:37] all those opposed to tableabling it

[1:38:43] uh raise your hand. All those who opposed to tableabling it raise your

[1:38:50] hand.

[1:38:53] All right. So there's a for vote to not table it. So the the amendment did not

[1:38:59] pass. So, you're back to the original motion.

[1:39:03] » You're back to M Mr. Pow, >> right? We're back to the original

[1:39:06] motion. >> What about the second one?

[1:39:08] » All right. >> It's okay. Now, the motion is that we

[1:39:12] accept this uh purchase of the land agreement.

[1:39:18] Uh any further discussion on the motion? All right. Commissioner How?

[1:39:23] » I want I want to be very clear about this.

[1:39:29] Uh, Commissioner Davis spoke of negotiation

[1:39:34] on this contract. I was the point person.

[1:39:40] I did not negotiate anything with the Kumar family. Every close session

[1:39:47] meeting we had, this board was in total agreement, the majority, with what we

[1:39:54] were doing. And my simple piece in that was to be the point person to

[1:39:59] communicate what this board majority recommended to the Kumar family. And in

[1:40:06] our last meeting where we had consensus vote majority where members of this

[1:40:11] board voted that we would accept this price under these conditions and then we

[1:40:18] that was needed so our attorney could do the work he needed to do to prepare the

[1:40:24] contract. And so the Kumar family could do the same thing on their end of this

[1:40:28] contract. And so the community college could do the same thing with its naming

[1:40:34] rights responsibilities. So, uh, that's that's somewhat of an error to say that

[1:40:39] I negotiated this contract. I took what this board supported and I signed the

[1:40:46] letter or the manager sent the letter to the family stating what this board

[1:40:50] agreed to do. So, I want that to be very, very clear. And the second thing I

[1:40:55] want to say is if we table this today, which that's all that vote's been taken,

[1:41:01] what is to be accomplished? I'm not going back to the family and negotiate

[1:41:05] anything. If this board wishes to do what they've done in the past to change

[1:41:10] the parameters for this contract, then this board will determine that and that

[1:41:15] letter will be sent to the family and they'll either accept it or deny. I have

[1:41:19] nothing to do in terms of that negotiation. So, I want to be very clear

[1:41:24] on that matter. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[1:41:28] » All right. Any other discussion on the motion,

[1:41:32] » Mr. Chair? Commissioner How?

[1:41:38] I tell you, this is a struggle sitting up here just going through this when

[1:41:41] it's supposed to be a formality and people want to make it about money and

[1:41:44] this and the other. The decisions already been made. We've already drawn

[1:41:50] up a contract. We've paid legal fees. We've agreed in close session to move

[1:41:55] forward with this. We have a executed contract on behalf of the seller that

[1:42:00] was already agreed to at the negotiated price. This should be a simple formality

[1:42:06] to move forward. Um I I just I urge my fellow commissioners

[1:42:12] to do the right thing here. I I think it's pretty clear and if not, I mean, so

[1:42:18] be it. as uh Commissioner Davis said, they they voted some in. I guess they

[1:42:22] can vote some out. So, thank you, Mr. Chair.

[1:42:25] » Mr. Chair, Mr. Chairman, >> Commissioner Le.

[1:42:29] » Okay. Thank you. Um, you know, I understand there's been been a lot of

[1:42:34] discussion up here today and there's different points of view. No, this has

[1:42:39] not been a unanimous process all the way through. There's there's different

[1:42:42] feelings on this and um no, I don't think this is the best deal the county

[1:42:48] has ever gotten on land. Um but this is about supporting our community college.

[1:42:55] I mean I I don't I I think the price is a little bit too high. Uh yes, but yes,

[1:43:02] I think that we should pursue this to support the community college and give

[1:43:06] them the room for expansion that they're going to need.

[1:43:10] » Thank you. All right,

[1:43:13] » Mr. Chairman, >> Commissioner Wilin,

[1:43:15] » I just want to say in regard to what uh Commissioner Howell said, it hadn't

[1:43:21] already been decided just because the county did its due diligence and doing

[1:43:26] their background into the land and whatnot. But here again, we did our due

[1:43:33] diligence. That wasn't a rubber stamp. $1,950,000

[1:43:38] again for that land is outrageous. And to have the citizens of Nash County, the

[1:43:45] taxpayers paying it and that's not going to be the end. Again, we have other

[1:43:50] costs that are going to come into it before it's transferred to the college.

[1:43:55] And so again, I I will not be voting for this

[1:44:00] in the interest of Nash County taxpayers and what I see coming down the stream

[1:44:07] for our citizens who need funding or need help with their everyday living. So

[1:44:15] thank you. >> All right. Any other discussion on the

[1:44:20] motion?

[1:44:24] Just a point of clarification, Mr. Chairman.

[1:44:27] » Directed to our attorney,

[1:44:32] » Mr. Gainer, were you advised by the majority of the board in close session

[1:44:37] to proceed and execute a contract for the agreed upon amount that we're voting

[1:44:42] on today? >> Um,

[1:44:44] » by the majority of the board, >> Commissioner How? Uh, what we do in

[1:44:48] close session is close session. >> No, sir. per general statute once we

[1:44:52] bring it out to public. >> General statute, we are going to vote on

[1:44:55] this matter today and question the attorney on who done what in the closed

[1:45:01] session is is not at should be discussed at this time. Uh I I just

[1:45:07] » point of order sir directed to the attorney. Am I correct

[1:45:11] in my statement sir that once an item gun is posted on the agenda

[1:45:16] » those items can be discussed. It was discussed in close session per general

[1:45:19] statute >> under open meeting law.

[1:45:23] » I I would say that the the closed session is for the purpose of

[1:45:28] negotiating the terms of the agreement. Um I I there there are some question

[1:45:35] about um what should be revealed from the close session based on the rule per

[1:45:42] the rules of conduct the code of conduct that the commissioners executed and

[1:45:46] signed. So I I'm I'm not at liberty to discuss that. Um that would be up to the

[1:45:52] chair whether he wants to permit that or not because there is a code of conduct

[1:45:56] that that clo what happens in close session would not be discussed. So

[1:46:00] clarification, does general statute override conduct or does conduct

[1:46:04] override general statute? Which order we follow?

[1:46:08] » Call for the vote. >> Commissioner, how we uh we need to move

[1:46:14] forward and like say what happened in close session is close session business.

[1:46:19] That's why we do everything that we do. >> I challenge that and just ask for

[1:46:23] clarification. Mr. Chairman, >> you going to need to go someplace else

[1:46:27] to do that. >> Okay.

[1:46:30] Uh there's now time for the vote. Uh all in

[1:46:36] favor of the purchase of the land adjacent to the Nash Community College,

[1:46:42] let it be known by raising your right hand.

[1:46:48] All right, I'm going to vote for it. All oppose.

[1:46:54] All right, motion carries.

[1:47:00] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> All right,

[1:47:04] we will now move to our next item of business,

[1:47:09] which is public hearing. Uh,

[1:47:15] Mr. Tyson,

[1:47:25] » good morning. >> Good morning. Hi.

[1:47:27] » This is the first of four planning related public hearings on the board's

[1:47:31] agenda this morning. Uh this is a conditional resoning request for a

[1:47:37] self-s storage warehouse facility to be located on South NC Highway 231.

[1:47:44] The subject property, which is shown on the map outlined in red, is

[1:47:49] approximately 4.69 69 acres along the front of a larger 54 acre tract of land

[1:47:55] owned by Travis Felts. This is the larger 54 acre tract of land. And then

[1:48:01] of course the portion that is up for reszoning is this front corner outlined

[1:48:06] in red. This is at 2260 South NC Highway 231 Middle Sex. This is in western Nash

[1:48:13] County. It is southwest of the town of Nashville, north of the Samaria

[1:48:18] Crossroads. And if you see the green color on the zoning map on the right

[1:48:23] hand side of the screen, this whole area is zone A1 agricultural.

[1:48:28] The rear portion of this subject property was previously approved for the

[1:48:33] operation of a land clearing and inert debris or LCID landfill through the

[1:48:39] issuance of a special use permit by the Nash County Board of Adjustment back in

[1:48:43] May of last year. An LCID landfill is a commercial disposal facility for

[1:48:48] non-hazardous materials like yard waste, soil, untreated wood, brick, and

[1:48:54] unpainted concrete. Per the conditions of that permit, the

[1:48:59] landfill is surrounded and screened by earth and BMS that are scheduled to be

[1:49:03] planted with vegetation this fall. There's also a smaller vegetated

[1:49:09] screening burm required along Highway 231

[1:49:13] on the front of the larger property. This request has been submitted by the

[1:49:18] property owner, Mr. Phelps, to reszone the property to an RCCZ, rural

[1:49:23] commercial conditional zone for the development of a self-s storage

[1:49:27] warehouse facility. The conditional nature of this request

[1:49:32] allows for the attachment of reasonable sightsp specific development conditions

[1:49:36] with the consent of the applicant. The proposed site plan that you see here

[1:49:42] has been prepared by StockX Engineering. And again, this is the LCID landfill.

[1:49:48] The area we're focused on reszoning this morning is this front corner that

[1:49:53] depicts a gated and graveled facility with seven self-s storage warehouse

[1:49:58] buildings that total up to over 48,000 square ft of storage area. There's also

[1:50:04] an area designated there for a stormwater control measure as needed.

[1:50:08] And all of this is behind an existing vegetative screening berm that runs

[1:50:13] along the highway here uh as a condition of the LCID landfield. Uh but this

[1:50:20] facility will also be behind that BM or behind the screening buffer. This

[1:50:26] site plan also uh as I said includes the LCID landfill on the back. There's a

[1:50:31] related gate house on the entrance driveway. Uh, also on this property, the

[1:50:38] applicant is planning a landscaping supply business over on the right side

[1:50:43] of the entrance drive. Um, that would be north of the self- storage facility.

[1:50:49] That is a land use that is permitted by Wright in the A1 zoning district. And so

[1:50:54] that area does not need to be reszoned, but it is shown for context to this

[1:50:59] morning that when you come in the entrance drive, you will have the mini

[1:51:03] storage to the left, the landscape supply business, and its parking to the

[1:51:07] right, and then the LCID landfill in the back.

[1:51:12] All three of these commercial land uses, as I stated, will be accessed from the

[1:51:16] highway using the same shared driveway point.

[1:51:20] As with all resonance, we are required by state law to review its compliance

[1:51:26] with our comprehensive land use plan. This request is generally consistent

[1:51:30] with the plan's recommendations for establishing a non-residential land use

[1:51:36] in this residential agricultural area. And you can see on this excerpt from the

[1:51:41] future land use map that the area is designated green as a residential

[1:51:46] agricultural area. is consistent with the plan's recommendations because

[1:51:50] number one, the subject property has frontage along and direct access to

[1:51:54] Highway 231, which is a major state highway. Number two, the subject

[1:51:59] property is located less than a/4 mile from the intersection of South NC

[1:52:03] Highway 231 and another statemaintained secondary road, Burgess Road, to the

[1:52:08] south. Number three, the subject property is in close proximity to other

[1:52:12] commercial land uses, specifically the immediately adjacent landfill and the

[1:52:18] proposed landscaping supply business, both of which are on the same larger

[1:52:22] tract of land as this mini storage. Number four, the subject property does

[1:52:27] not have significant spatial separation from the existing single family

[1:52:31] dwellings that are located directly across the highway as recommended by the

[1:52:36] plan, but the existing vegetated burm along the road will help to mitigate the

[1:52:41] overall visual impact of the facility. Number five, the conditional nature of

[1:52:46] the resoning request and the limitations of the proposed site plan will restrict

[1:52:51] the self-s storage warehouse facility to a context appropriate scale.

[1:52:57] This request may be considered reasonable in the public interest and

[1:53:01] not unreasonable spot zoning because the larger tract of land has already been

[1:53:06] approved for commercial use as an LCID landfield

[1:53:10] and a landscape and supply business. And number two, a self-s storage warehouse

[1:53:16] is traditionally a relatively low impact commercial land use that provides a

[1:53:20] service to the community while typically generating only limited traffic and low

[1:53:24] noise levels that can be reasonably compatible with surrounding residential

[1:53:29] development. The TRC considered this request back on

[1:53:34] May 28th and recommended approval subject to the development conditions

[1:53:38] that are suggested in the staff report. The planning board considered this

[1:53:42] request on June 15th. Mr. Kevin Varnell with Stocks Engineering addressed the

[1:53:47] board on behalf of the applicant and in support of the request and no other

[1:53:51] members of the public addressed the board regarding the request at that

[1:53:54] meeting. The planning board voted unanimously to recommend approval again

[1:53:59] subject to the development conditions that are suggested below. In the staff

[1:54:04] report, you have a motion to approve the zoning map amendment as well as a motion

[1:54:09] to deny the zoning map amendment. Both are accompanied by uh statements of plan

[1:54:16] consistency and reasonleness. Under the motion to approve, there are

[1:54:22] six development standards. Number one, if approved, the property should be

[1:54:27] developed as a self-s storage warehouse facility only, only in compliance with

[1:54:32] the approved site plan and the requirements of our unified development

[1:54:35] ordinance. Number two, any outdoor lighting at the facility should be

[1:54:39] located, angled, shielded, or limited in intensity to cast no direct light upon

[1:54:45] adjacent properties. Number three, the 50- foot wide

[1:54:49] vegetative screening BM located along 231 shall be maintained in compliance

[1:54:53] with the conditions of the previously issued special use permit for the

[1:54:58] landfill located behind the subject property. Number four lists the other

[1:55:03] approvals that would be required prior to construction of the facility,

[1:55:06] including erosion and sedimentation control plan approval, a driveway

[1:55:11] permit, storm water permit, zoning permit, building and trade permits.

[1:55:17] Obviously, if there are any significant or substantial modifications or

[1:55:21] revisions to the site plan following approval, then at my discretion as a

[1:55:26] zoning administrator, it may require further review by the TRC, the planning

[1:55:30] board, and the board of commissioners. And this conditional zoning map

[1:55:35] amendment would be invalid unless and until the petitioners consent in writing

[1:55:40] to all the development conditions that are attached today including those that

[1:55:44] are listed in the agenda or any others that may be added during the board

[1:55:48] discussion. Uh with that I will pause and take any questions that the board

[1:55:53] has on the staff report before we open the public hearing.

[1:55:59] » Any question for Mr. Tyson?

[1:56:04] Seeing none, is there a motion to go into public hearing? So move, sir.

[1:56:08] » Second. >> Moved by Commissioner Howell, second by

[1:56:12] Commissioner Outlaw. We go in the public hearing. Any further discussion? All in

[1:56:17] favor of the motion, let it be known by saying I.

[1:56:19] » I. >> All oppose. Motion carrot. We are now in

[1:56:23] a public hearing on the reszoning request for the self storage warehouse

[1:56:27] facility on Highway 231. Anyone wishing to speak?

[1:56:35] Seeing none, uh, can I get a motion to close the public hearing?

[1:56:39] » Some move. >> A move by Commissioner Leot. Second.

[1:56:44] » Second by Commissioner uh, Balefield that we close the public hearing.

[1:56:48] » All in favor of the motion, let it be known by saying I.

[1:56:51] » I. >> All opposed. Motion carried. We'll come

[1:56:54] back into uh, regular session. Uh any further discussion by the board to

[1:57:01] uh Mr. Tyson?

[1:57:05] Seeing none, is there a motion to uh approve or disapprove the resoning

[1:57:11] request? >> Mr. Chair, I make a motion we approve

[1:57:15] the zoning map,

[1:57:20] » the conditions, right? >> You mean reading the whole motion?

[1:57:24] » Yeah. I make a motion that I move that Nash County Board of Commissioners adopt

[1:57:28] the statement of planning consistency and reasonleness below and approve

[1:57:31] conditional reszoning request for CZ 26601

[1:57:36] to reszone the pified property to an RCCZ

[1:57:41] for the development of a self- storage warehouse facility subject to develop

[1:57:44] conditions attached. >> All right, you heard the motion and and

[1:57:50] second. >> Second,

[1:57:52] » Commissioner Wilin. All right. Uh any further discussion on the motion?

[1:57:58] Seeing none, all in favor of the motion, let it be known by saying I.

[1:58:02] » I. >> All oppose. Motion carrot.

[1:58:07] Okay, we will go to our next item. Uh number 11,

[1:58:14] Mr. Tyson. That's the self storage building on Stony Hill Church Road. This

[1:58:20] is a similar request in that it is also for a self- storage warehouse facility.

[1:58:26] The subject property again is highlighted in red on the maps before

[1:58:30] you. This is a collection of three adjacent lots totaling 1.87 acres. It's

[1:58:37] owned by Service Central LLC and located at the northeast corner of the

[1:58:42] intersection of South NC Highway 581 and Stony Hill Church Road north of the town

[1:58:47] of Bailey. The property, as you can see in on the right hand side of your

[1:58:52] screen, is zoned R40 single family residential currently. Uh I would note

[1:58:59] that the new boundary does not conform necessarily to the boundaries of the

[1:59:04] three parcels on our tax map, but that's because it is based on uh more recent,

[1:59:10] more accurate survey data. So, these three parcels actually do fit inside the

[1:59:16] red parcel when mapped correctly. This request has been submitted by the

[1:59:23] property owner to reszone the property to RCCZ

[1:59:27] for the development of a self- storage warehouse facility. This again is a

[1:59:30] conditional reszoning that allows for the attachment of conditions.

[1:59:35] This is the site plan that's been submitted by StockX Engineering. It

[1:59:39] depicts a fenced and graveled facility with four self- storage warehouse

[1:59:44] buildings, three vehicle parking spaces, a storm water management area, and then

[1:59:49] along the north side back here, a 25- ft wide planted vegetative screening buffer

[1:59:55] to consist of trees and shrubs that would screen that facility from the

[1:59:59] immediately adjacent residence to the north. Um the proposed driveway access

[2:00:05] to the site is located off of Stony Hill Church Road. Uh we've had significant

[2:00:12] conversations with NC DOT and they've confirmed that that is their preferred

[2:00:17] access point uh given the amount of traffic on um Highway 581 there.

[2:00:26] When we review the future land use map, again, this area is designated as

[2:00:31] residential agricultural area. And so this request is generally consistent

[2:00:36] with the recommendations of the plan because number one, the property has

[2:00:41] frontage along and direct access to both the major state highway and Stony Hill

[2:00:46] Church Road, a state maintained secondary road. Number two, this time

[2:00:50] the property is located immediately at the intersection of those two roads.

[2:00:55] Number three, the subject property is in close proximity to other already

[2:00:58] existing commercial land uses. Specifically, the adjacent property to

[2:01:05] the right or to the east that is uh purple that is a property zone for

[2:01:10] outdoor storage of equipment and accessory buildings. There is an

[2:01:15] insurance office here to the south across the street. um that's existing.

[2:01:22] Uh and just to the south, a little further, there's a retail store um

[2:01:27] already existing here. Number four, the subject property does not have

[2:01:31] significant spatial separation from the surrounding residentially zoned and used

[2:01:36] properties. Uh but again, as stated, there will be a significant vegetative

[2:01:41] screening buffer along the north side between the facility and the nearest

[2:01:45] home to mitigate the overall impact. and the conditional nature of the

[2:01:51] resoning and the relatively small size of the property will effectively limit

[2:01:56] the development of the facility to a context appropriate scale. This request

[2:02:01] may be considered reasonable in the public interest and not spot zoning

[2:02:06] because number one, this particular intersection has previously been

[2:02:09] identified for commercial development through the establishment of the

[2:02:13] existing RC rural commercial zoning district that you see here in this

[2:02:17] pinkish color. Number two, a self-s storage warehouse facility. Again, is a

[2:02:23] relatively low impact land use that provides a service while typically

[2:02:27] generating only limited traffic and low low noise levels and that can be

[2:02:32] reasonably compatible with surrounding dwellings.

[2:02:36] The technical review committee considered this on May 28th and

[2:02:39] recommended approval subject to development conditions. The planning

[2:02:43] board considered this on June 15th. Mr. Andrew Stocks with Stocks Engineering

[2:02:48] addressed the board at that meeting on behalf of the applicant and in support

[2:02:51] of the request. There were no other members of the public who wish to

[2:02:55] address the board at that meeting and the planning board voted unanimously to

[2:02:59] recommend approval. Again, subject to the development conditions.

[2:03:04] Again, you have motions to approve or deny accompanied by statements of plan

[2:03:08] consistency and reasonleness. Um, this has uh very similar conditions

[2:03:15] to the previous case and so I won't read those aloud. Um, but I will gladly take

[2:03:22] any questions that the board has on the staff report before we move into the

[2:03:26] public hearing on this matter. >> All right. Any questions for Mr. Tyson?

[2:03:34] » Seeing none, is there a motion to go into public hearing on this?

[2:03:38] » So moved. >> Second. I've been moved by Commissioner

[2:03:41] Outlaw and second by Commissioner Howard that we move into a public hearing.

[2:03:46] Any discussion? All in favor of the motion let it be known by saying I.

[2:03:50] » I. >> All opposed? Motion carried. We're now

[2:03:53] in a public hearing on the self storage warehouse facility located on Highway

[2:03:59] 581 Stony Stony Hill Church Road. Anyone wishing

[2:04:05] to speak on this matter?

[2:04:10] Seeing none. Okay. I get a motion to uh end the closed

[2:04:15] public hearing. >> So moved.

[2:04:17] » Been moved by Commissioner Leot. Second by

[2:04:21] » second >> Commissioner Outlaw that we close the

[2:04:23] public hearing. Any further discussion? All in favor of motion, let it be known

[2:04:29] by saying I. I. >> All opposed? Our motion carried. We are

[2:04:33] now back into our regular uh session of the board of commission. Mr. Tyson,

[2:04:40] » I have nothing to add but happy to answer any questions.

[2:04:43] » All right. Are there any further questions for Mr. Tyson?

[2:04:49] Seeing none, is there a motion to uh accept this uh this recondition of

[2:04:55] zoning request? >> Mr. Chair,

[2:04:58] » Commissioner How? I move that Nash County Board of Commissioners adopt a

[2:05:02] statement of plan consistency and respons reasonleness below and approve

[2:05:06] the conditional reszoning request for ZZ2603

[2:05:12] to reszone the specified property to an RC CZ for the development of a self-

[2:05:18] storage warehouse facility subject to development conditions listed.

[2:05:23] » All right. Is there a second? >> Second.

[2:05:26] » Second by Commissioner Outlaw. Any further discussion on the uh motion?

[2:05:34] Seeing none, all in favor of the motion, let it be known by saying I.

[2:05:37] » I. >> All oppose. Motion carried.

[2:05:41] » All right, Mr. Tyson, I believe you have one more.

[2:05:44] » That's correct. >> I actually have two more, but one more

[2:05:47] reasonzoning request. >> Okay.

[2:05:50] » The third reasoning request again is conditional. The subject property is a

[2:05:55] 2acre portion of a larger approximately 10 acre tract of land. So what you see

[2:06:00] outlined in red is the 2acre portion of the larger tract. Uh and of course the

[2:06:07] red boundary is what's up for reszoning. This property is owned by Sergio Salana

[2:06:12] Arenus and Esparanza de la Cruz Tolantino. It's located directly beside

[2:06:17] the Redemption Center Church, which is right here at 13705 NC Highway 98

[2:06:24] Springh Hope. This is in extreme western Nash County and not far from the Nash

[2:06:29] Franklin County line. As you can see on the zoning map, this area is zoned A1

[2:06:35] agricultural. The lot here, or at least the front of

[2:06:40] this lot, has historically been used as a parking lot area for the neighboring

[2:06:45] church. Uh, it also includes an existing detached classroom building and a

[2:06:51] storage building currently owned by and used by the church.

[2:06:55] This request to reszone has been submitted by Pastor Lisa Mercer of the

[2:07:00] Redemption Center Church to reszone the subject property to an OICZ

[2:07:05] office and institutional conditional zone to permit this lot to continue to

[2:07:10] be used for church activities, parking and storage. Uh now that raises the

[2:07:16] question, if the church is allowed in the A1, why would the church parking not

[2:07:21] be allowed in the A1? And the answer is it would if this property could be

[2:07:26] combined with the church. However, Pastor Mercer plans to purchase this

[2:07:31] property with her own private funds and so it will not technically be owned by

[2:07:35] the church. Therefore, it can't be combined with the church property. And

[2:07:40] unfortunately, it does not have the minimum lot width that it needs to exist

[2:07:45] in this A1 zoning district as an independent lot. However, if the

[2:07:51] property is reszoned to office and institutional,

[2:07:54] that would reduce the minimum lot width requirement from 100 ft to just 60 ft.

[2:08:01] And this lot is just shy of 100 ft. So, it would certainly meet that. Um, and

[2:08:06] reszoning it to office and institutional not only allows it to stand on its own,

[2:08:12] but it also allows the property to be restricted just for church use.

[2:08:18] The conditional nature of this resoning request does allow for the attachment of

[2:08:23] conditions. When we review the conditional, excuse me, the future land

[2:08:29] use map from the comprehensive land use plan. This is also designated as a

[2:08:34] residential agricultural area. And the request is consistent with the plan

[2:08:39] because a small church such as this one is an institutional land use that is

[2:08:44] explicitly anticipated and allowed by the plan in a residential agricultural

[2:08:49] area. The conditional zoning request may be

[2:08:54] considered reasonable in the public interest and not unreasonable spot

[2:08:58] zoning because the proposed continued use of the subject property for church

[2:09:02] activities is similar to and consistent with the already established immediately

[2:09:07] adjacent church on the immediately adjacent property. The TRC considered

[2:09:13] this request on July 2nd recommended approval subject to conditions. The

[2:09:18] planning board considered this request on July 20th. Pastor Lisa Mercer, the

[2:09:23] applicant, Craig Mercer, and Jimmy Day, the current property owner's realtor,

[2:09:28] all addressed the board on behalf of the applicant and in support of the request.

[2:09:32] There were no other members of the public who chose to address the board at

[2:09:36] that meeting. The planning board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the

[2:09:40] request subject to the development conditions that are listed in the staff

[2:09:45] report. Um, the most important development

[2:09:49] condition under the motion to approve would be number two and it addresses the

[2:09:55] two existing buildings on the property, the detached classroom building and

[2:10:00] detached storage building. Those buildings were put there without the

[2:10:05] proper permits and inspections. The church has offered to uh have those

[2:10:11] permitted and inspected prior to today's public hearing, but it is important to

[2:10:16] settle the zoning first so that they know what their minimum setback will be

[2:10:20] off of that side property line because we certainly don't want them to relocate

[2:10:25] those buildings more than once. And so development condition number two in the

[2:10:29] event that the resoning is approved states that both those buildings shall

[2:10:34] be relocated to comply with the minimum building setback requirement applicable

[2:10:39] to the OI zoning district which I believe would be 10 ft off that property

[2:10:43] line and that those buildings shall be properly permitted and inspected by the

[2:10:48] Nash County Planning Inspections Department once they've been relocated

[2:10:52] to meet that minimum setback requirement.

[2:10:56] And with that, I will pause and take any questions on the staff report.

[2:11:01] » Any questions from Mr. Tyson?

[2:11:05] » Seeing none, can I get a motion to go into public hearing?

[2:11:10] » Moved by Commissioner Le. >> Second.

[2:11:13] » Second by Commissioner How. We move in the public hearing on this uh

[2:11:18] reconditional reasoning request. Any further discussion?

[2:11:22] All in favor of motion, let it be known by saying I. I. All oppose. Motion

[2:11:27] carried. We're now in public hearing on the reszoning request for Redemption

[2:11:32] Center Church on NC Highway 98.

[2:11:39] Seeing none, could I get a motion to close our public

[2:11:44] hearing? >> So moved.

[2:11:46] » Moved by Commissioner Outlaw. >> Second.

[2:11:49] » Second by Commissioner Balefield that we close the public hearing. Any further

[2:11:54] discussion? All in favor of the motion, let it be known by saying I.

[2:11:58] » I. >> All opposed. Motion carried. We're now

[2:12:00] back into our regular session. Mr. Tyson,

[2:12:05] » nothing to add, Mr. Chairman. >> All right. Uh, any further questions for

[2:12:10] Mr. Tyson? All right. I entertain a motion to

[2:12:14] accept or deny the reasoning request. >> Mr. Chair,

[2:12:19] » um, Commissioner How? I move that Nash County Board of Commissioners adopt a

[2:12:23] statement of plan consistency and reason reasonable below and approve conditional

[2:12:28] reasoning request to CZ26071 to reszone the specified property to an

[2:12:35] OI-CZ to allow its condition continued use for

[2:12:40] church activities, parking, storage and subject to development conditions that

[2:12:44] are attached. >> All right, you heard the motion there.

[2:12:47] Second. >> Second.

[2:12:50] » Second by Commissioner Outlaw. Any further discussion on the motion?

[2:12:56] Seeing none, all in favor of the motion, let it be known by saying I.

[2:12:59] » I. >> All opposed.

[2:13:01] » All right. Motion carrot. Mr. T number 13.

[2:13:07] » All right. This is the final public hearing related to planning this

[2:13:10] morning. Instead of being a resoning, this is a text amendment. and it's a

[2:13:16] text amendment that was requested by our planning board chairman.

[2:13:20] It has to do with the regulation of smoke, tobacco, vape, and CBD shops.

[2:13:28] Nash County Unified Development Ordinance does not currently recognize a

[2:13:32] smoke, tobacco, vape, or cannabidial CBD shop as a distinct commercial land use

[2:13:37] type. Therefore, if we had one proposed, we would have to classify it as

[2:13:42] miscellaneous retail sales, which means that it would be a land use permitted by

[2:13:47] right in the RC rural commercial and GC general commercial zoning districts

[2:13:52] without any specific development standards. This request is proposed to

[2:13:57] recognize a smoke, tobacco, vape, or CBD shop as a distinct commercial, retail,

[2:14:03] trade land use type and to establish related zoning requirements for their

[2:14:07] permitted development within the county's planning jurisdiction. The

[2:14:11] development standards that are proposed have been modeled after those that are

[2:14:16] already established in the ordinance for a bar, nightclub, tavern, or an internet

[2:14:21] sweepstakes cafe. That brings us to the actual language of

[2:14:26] the text amendment. We begin in uh section 93, table 931, which is our

[2:14:33] table of permitted uses. The use type that it would currently fall into

[2:14:39] miscellaneous retail sales is listed here for context. You can see that it's

[2:14:44] designated a P for permitted by right in both the RC and GC zoning districts.

[2:14:51] This highlighted uh level of the table here is what would be added. It

[2:14:57] identifies smoke, tobacco, vape or CBD shop as its own land use. It allows it

[2:15:02] still in both RC rural commercial and GC general commercial districts, but

[2:15:07] instead of a P, it's allowed with a D, which if you come down here to the key,

[2:15:12] a D says the use is permitted by a zoning permit, but the applicant has to

[2:15:17] meet specific development standards. And so on the second slide, we have those

[2:15:22] development standards. They would apply in both zoning districts, RC and GC.

[2:15:28] First, there's a use and property separation which would state state that

[2:15:33] no smoke, tobacco, vape, or CBD shop shall be located within 500 ft of any

[2:15:39] other smoke, tobacco, vape, or CBD shop, or within 500 ft of a church, elementary

[2:15:45] or secondary school, public park, residentially zoned lot, or an existing

[2:15:51] residence. And then letter C would apply

[2:15:54] specifically to the parking. Parking areas related to such a shop can be

[2:15:59] located no closer than 75 ft to the property line of abuing residences,

[2:16:04] churches, elementary or secondary schools, public parks or residentially

[2:16:09] zoned lots. I will state that again these standards are very similar to what

[2:16:15] we require for a bar, nightclub, tavern or internet sweep stakes cafe and they

[2:16:20] have been very effective in restricting those uses uh from development in

[2:16:28] commercial zones that are anywhere near residentially zoned areas or

[2:16:32] residentially developed areas. As with all text amendments, we have to

[2:16:38] consider its consistency with our county's land use plan. In this case,

[2:16:43] the request is neither consistent nor inconsistent with the plan because the

[2:16:47] plan does not venture to specifically address a smoke, tobacco, vape, or CBD

[2:16:52] shop as a distinct commercial land use. The TRC reviewed this text amendment

[2:16:58] back on July 2nd and recommended approval. The Nash County Planning Board

[2:17:02] considered this text amendment request on July 20th. Rocky Mount Wilson

[2:17:07] Regional Airport Authority Board Chairman Gary Hodgeges and Maggie Valley

[2:17:11] Subdivision Homeowners Association treasurer secretary Douglas Boris

[2:17:17] addressed the board in support of the request and the planning board voted

[2:17:21] unanimously to recommend approval of the request. You have in your packet a

[2:17:27] suggested motion to either approve or deny the text amendment. Uh and both

[2:17:33] would be subject to the same statement of plan consistency which is that this

[2:17:37] request is neither consistent nor inconsistent with the plan because it's

[2:17:41] simply not addressed. And I will be happy to take any

[2:17:45] questions on that UDO text amendment before we proceed with the public

[2:17:49] hearing. >> All right. Any questions for Mr. Tyson?

[2:17:56] Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion to go into a open public hearing.

[2:18:01] » So moved by Commissioner Davis.

[2:18:07] » Second is second by Commissioner Leget. Uh all any any discussion? All in favor

[2:18:14] the motion? Let it be known by saying I. >> I.

[2:18:16] » All opposed. Okay. Motion carried. We're now in a public hearing and anyone

[2:18:22] wishing to address the board, please step forward.

[2:18:28] » Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

[2:18:33] » So moved. >> Moved by Commissioner Le.

[2:18:36] » Second by Commissioner Bfield. We close the public hearing.

[2:18:40] » Any further discussion? All in favor of the motion? Let it be known by saying I.

[2:18:46] » All opposed? Motion carried. Well, now back to our regular session.

[2:18:51] Any questions? Any further questions for Mr. Tyson by

[2:18:56] the board? >> I would just add that this would if

[2:18:59] approved this morning, this would become immediately effective in the current UDO

[2:19:03] and then we will also incorporate it into the draft revised UDO so that it

[2:19:07] will remain effective as we move forward into a new version of the document.

[2:19:12] » All right. Is there a motion?

[2:19:18] » Move for approval. >> Commissioner Davis has a motion that we

[2:19:22] move for approval. >> Second. Second by Commissioner Howell.

[2:19:26] Any discussion on the motion? >> Seeing none, all in favor of the motion,

[2:19:31] let it be known saying I. >> I.

[2:19:34] » All oppose. Motion carrot. Uh, thank you, Mr.

[2:19:38] » Thank you.

[2:19:41] » All right, we'll move along to our monthly tax report. is Jamaica Terry.

[2:19:49] Yeah. Good morning. >> Good morning. Good morning, everyone.

[2:19:53] » Before we get into business, as usual, I would like to bore you for about 90

[2:19:57] seconds. >> All right.

[2:19:58] » I know month after month, I get up and I share the monthly tax report which is

[2:20:03] given to you all as a updated status in regards to the tax rate. But I would

[2:20:07] like to share 2025 was indeed a different tax year for the tax

[2:20:11] department. I must share through transition and opposition the best team

[2:20:16] on this side of heaven stay professional, positive and faithful.

[2:20:21] They show up daily without hesitation or complaint and make it look easy. I often

[2:20:26] tell them I need them to frown and or growl every once in a while as a

[2:20:31] reminder that we are the tax department. Most responded with Shemica, when you

[2:20:36] start growling and or frowning, so will we. So we know that day shall not

[2:20:40] happen. But I will tell you my dog of choice is a Doberman pincher. But um I

[2:20:44] said all that to say all this. Thank you to the entire tax department for

[2:20:48] committing themselves to what they assume is a thankless job. But I am

[2:20:53] thankful for them and the opportunity to work along beside them.

[2:20:58] » Business as usual. >> All right.

[2:21:07] In keeping with general statute 105350, the tax collector will be providing a

[2:21:11] monthly report showing the amount of taxes collected and efforts being made

[2:21:15] to collect taxes. This report is designed to keep the board current on

[2:21:20] activities in the tax collector's office. The report is for your

[2:21:24] information only and does not require approval. It is recommended that you

[2:21:29] accept the report so that it will be noted in the minutes. Any discussion,

[2:21:35] questions, comments? on the increased 98.84%

[2:21:40] tax rate. >> Any questions,

[2:21:43] » Mr. Chair? Mr. How >> I had faith in y'all alone. Great job.

[2:21:47] » You are too kind. Thank you. >> Okay, we acknowledge and accept the

[2:21:52] monthly tax report. >> Okay,

[2:21:56] we're going to move on to refund request.

[2:22:00] » Mhm. In compliance with North Carolina General Statute 105381, the tax

[2:22:04] collector will submit to the governing body for their approval a list of any

[2:22:08] tax refunds at the legitimacy of the refund has been established. There are

[2:22:14] no refunds for consideration. >> Okay.

[2:22:22] Item number 16. >> Okay. We'll move on to the annual

[2:22:25] settlement. Per North Carolina General Statute 105373,

[2:22:30] the tax collector will submit to the governing body an annual settlement of

[2:22:34] the monies received during the prior fiscal year and to charge the tax

[2:22:40] collector with the collections of fiscal year 26 27 property taxes and recharge

[2:22:46] the tax collector with the responsibility for the collection of the

[2:22:50] outstanding taxes for years 16 through 2025. Any questions or comments or

[2:22:58] » on the any annual settlement? >> Any discussion?

[2:23:03] » Okay. I will call for a motion to accept and approve the FY202526

[2:23:10] annual settlement report so it may be entered into the minutes. charge the tax

[2:23:16] collector with the collection of the FY202627

[2:23:22] property tax and charge the tax collector with the responsibility for

[2:23:27] the collection of outstanding taxes for the year 2016 through 2025.

[2:23:36] » So move >> moved by Commissioner Davis. Is there a

[2:23:40] second? Second by Commissioner Outlaw. Uh you've heard the motion. Uh all in

[2:23:47] favor of the motion, let it be known by saying I.

[2:23:50] » All oppose. Motion carried. >> Thank you all for the opportunity. Have

[2:23:54] a good day. >> Thank you.

[2:23:55] » All right. >> Okay. Uh item number 17, Miss Emily

[2:24:01] Moore.

[2:24:13] » Well, You know, when commissioners just walk out, maybe they need a break. Uh,

[2:24:18] we'll take a five minute break and we'll come right back. All right.

[2:24:24] » Item number 17, community block grant public hearing. Emily Emily Moore.

[2:24:30] » Good morning. >> Morning.

[2:24:32] » Morning. Nash County received 1,557,226

[2:24:40] in CDBGCV funds from the North Carolina Department

[2:24:44] of Commerce. Activities supported by these funds included trail extensions at

[2:24:50] Castellia and Spring Hope community parks, seven handwashing stations

[2:24:55] throughout the county, PPE supplies for volunteer fire

[2:25:01] departments, computers for public libraries, and EMS equipment and

[2:25:06] supplies, all of which are located in low to moderate income areas. The

[2:25:11] purpose of the public hearing is to review, assess the performance of, and

[2:25:16] close out the 2020 community development block grant corona virus project and

[2:25:22] allow the residents of Nash County an opportunity to express their views

[2:25:26] regarding the project. So, the recommendation is to hold a public

[2:25:30] hearing. >> Okay.

[2:25:34] Any questions for uh Miss Moore at this time?

[2:25:39] Seeing none, can I get a motion to go in the public hearing? So moved.

[2:25:44] » Moved by Commissioner Le. >> Second.

[2:25:46] » Second by Commissioner Wilkins that we move into a public hearing to discuss

[2:25:52] the community block grant Corona virus. Uh

[2:25:58] all in favor of the motion, let it be known by saying I.

[2:26:01] » I. >> All opposed. All right. Motion carried.

[2:26:05] We're now into open public hearing. Anyone wish to speak?

[2:26:14] All right. Uh, seeing none, uh, I'll call for a motion to close the public

[2:26:19] hearing. >> So move.

[2:26:21] » Moved by Commissioner Wilkins. Second, second by Commissioner Outlaw that we

[2:26:27] close the public hearing. All in favor of the motion, let it be known by saying

[2:26:30] I. >> I.

[2:26:31] » All oppose. Motion carried. Public hearing closed. Now we're back into our

[2:26:37] regular session. Uh Miss Moore, uh

[2:26:43] there's no additional voting on Right. Okay. Now, let's go to

[2:26:49] item 18, community block grant. >> Okay.

[2:26:54] » All right. Uh so Nash County intends to apply for $950,000

[2:27:00] of community development block grant neighborhood revitalization funds and

[2:27:04] applications are due by October 13th, 2026.

[2:27:09] The grant is used to address housing needs, community needs, economic

[2:27:13] development needs, or other community development needs within the county. any

[2:27:18] eligible need must address a national national objective of low to moderate

[2:27:23] income or removal of slums and blight. Uh so the recommendation is to hold the

[2:27:28] first public hearing. >> Okay.

[2:27:34] Any question for Miss Moore? All right. Seeing none, uh call for a

[2:27:40] motion to go into public hearing. So move

[2:27:42] » moved by Commissioner Davis, second by Commissioner Outlaw that we move into a

[2:27:47] public hearing. No further discussion. All in favor of

[2:27:51] the motion that it be saying I. >> I.

[2:27:54] » All opposed. We're now in the public hearing on the matter of community

[2:28:00] development block grant neighborhood reval revitalization grant application

[2:28:07] 2026. Anyone wishing to speak? uh please come

[2:28:12] forward and address the board. Okay, seeing none, there a motion to

[2:28:17] close the public hearing. >> So moved.

[2:28:20] » Moved by Commissioner Leot. >> Second.

[2:28:23] » Second by Commissioner Outlaw that we close the public hearing. All in favor

[2:28:27] of the motion, let it be known by saying I.

[2:28:29] » I. >> All opposed. Motion carried. We are now

[2:28:34] back into our regular session. >> Thank you.

[2:28:38] » All right. Thank you, Mr. Moore. Thank you.

[2:28:42] » Okay. Uh item number 19, uh a resolution calling for a public

[2:28:49] hearing on a proposed moratorum ordinance

[2:28:54] regulation on data center data processing facility and

[2:28:59] cyber parents and mining. Uh call on vice chair Freddy Howard to make this

[2:29:06] presentation.

[2:29:10] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[2:29:22] I just want to speak today in support of us to place a moratorum on new data

[2:29:27] center development in Nash County effective until June 2027.

[2:29:34] Let me be clear about what the vote is and what it's not. This isn't a vote

[2:29:38] against growth. It's not a vote against jobs or investment in our county. It is

[2:29:43] a vote to slow down and get this right before we make land use decisions that

[2:29:48] cannot be undone. Nash County, which was built on agriculture. Our farmland just

[2:29:54] isn't economic asset. It's a heritage. Families in this county have worked this

[2:30:00] soil for generations. And the land supports our identity, our food supply,

[2:30:05] and the way of life that sets us apart from more urbanized parts of the state.

[2:30:10] Once prime farmland is converted into industrial use, it does not come back.

[2:30:15] We don't get a second chance on this decision. Over the past several months,

[2:30:21] this board has heard directly from the people we represent. I want to

[2:30:25] acknowledge that clearly today because public comment isn't just a formality.

[2:30:30] It's information and it's our job to act on that information. We've heard from

[2:30:35] farmers concerned about losing least informed own acreage to industrial

[2:30:39] resoning. We've heard from residents who worried about the strain data centers

[2:30:43] place on our water supply and electrical grid. Resources that our agriculture

[2:30:48] operations depend on just as much as an industry user. We have heard concerns

[2:30:54] about noise, about the visual character of the rural landscape, and about the

[2:30:58] property values near proposed sites. And that we have heard again and again that

[2:31:03] people feel decisions are moving faster than the public's ability to understand

[2:31:08] and weigh in on them. A moratorium gives us the tools to

[2:31:13] respond to the feedback responsively. It gives staff and this board the time to

[2:31:17] study the real impacts. water usage, energy demand, tax structure,

[2:31:22] infrastructure cost, and to build standards in our UDO that protect both

[2:31:26] our agricultural base and our long-term tax interest rather than reaching

[2:31:31] for partial by partial under pressure from individual reasonzoning request.

[2:31:38] Other counties across the state and the country are taking the similar approach.

[2:31:42] A pausing to build thoughtful ordinance into an obstruction is due

[2:31:50] diligent. It protects Nash County's negotiating position and it protects us

[2:31:54] from litigation and inconsistent decisions that come from acting without

[2:31:59] clear standards that need to be in place. In June 27, it's not an arbitrary

[2:32:04] date. It gives us time to conduct conduct our proper process to get the

[2:32:09] unified development ordinance updated. An ordinance that reflects the values

[2:32:13] this community holds. It does not shut the door on data

[2:32:18] centers permanently. It simply says that before this kind of industrial

[2:32:22] development reshapes our farmland and our rural character, we're going to do

[2:32:26] it the right way. I've heard from people in the county and their message has been

[2:32:31] consistent. Protect our farmland. Protect our water and our natural

[2:32:34] resources. Don't let Nash County's rural identity be decided by reszoning cases

[2:32:40] moving faster than the public input can keep up with. So, I'm asking my fellow

[2:32:44] commissioners to support this moratorum. So, let's take time to get it right to

[2:32:49] for the farmers, the families, and the future citizens of Nash County.

[2:32:55] » All right. Uh, this require a public hearing. So, uh, I want ask for a motion

[2:33:03] for a public hearing to go in the public.

[2:33:05] » Mr. Chairman, >> yeah,

[2:33:08] » Commissioner How was just proposing to have the board approve the public

[2:33:12] hearing for the next meeting. We would have to notice that per the statute.

[2:33:17] Well, I'm following I'm following some instructions that uh

[2:33:23] that said that we have to open a public hearing now, but you're saying that we

[2:33:28] don't that we have to just approve whether we would go into

[2:33:33] » Right. >> Yes, sir. What what we're doing is

[2:33:35] getting the board's authority to advertise for the public hearing, right,

[2:33:39] for the next meeting. >> Mr. Chair, if I may.

[2:33:43] » Yes. Um, what I'm asking the board is to adopt the attached resolution to hold a

[2:33:49] public hearing Tuesday, September the 8, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. and to direct the

[2:33:54] clerk of the board to publish a notice of this public hearing in accordance

[2:33:57] with general statute 160D-601, sir.

[2:34:01] » Right. So, you're asking us to adopt a resolution,

[2:34:07] » right? >> To hold a public hearing. Yes, sir.

[2:34:10] » Right. Okay. >> To Mr. Gainer's comments notice the

[2:34:13] public.

[2:34:17] » All right. >> Is there a motion?

[2:34:23] » So moved. >> All right. And second.

[2:34:29] He made the motion. You uh Commissioner Outlaw second the motion. All right. Uh

[2:34:34] now we're open for discussion.

[2:34:40] Uh, Commissioner Dave. >> Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh,

[2:34:45] I certainly want it to be known that I also do not favor these large data

[2:34:50] centers, but I question if we really need to put

[2:34:56] a moratorum on Nash County. Uh, we have the tools in place currently to stop any

[2:35:03] data center that the board chooses not to have uh in a reasonzoning matter. if

[2:35:10] it comes before this board, but also if we have a piece of property properly

[2:35:14] zone, we have to have a special use permit. Uh it's my understanding and

[2:35:20] that also would be approved by this board. Uh so we got the tools in place

[2:35:27] and my concern is uh anytime you use the word moratorum

[2:35:33] uh regardless of how it used it puts a negative cloud on an area in this case

[2:35:39] it would be Nash County. uh having worked and knowing quite a few site

[2:35:44] selectors over the years uh as it relates to our industrial recruitments

[2:35:50] uh we all know that their goal when they come to an area look at the area is to

[2:35:55] eliminate it as quickly as they can. uh

[2:36:00] some of these site selectors wouldn't go any further than to see the word

[2:36:04] moratorum uh that we had in place kind of sort of

[2:36:07] regardless of what the moratorum was about whether it's about residential

[2:36:11] construction or whether it was about uh in this case a a data center moratorum

[2:36:19] and of course what we do here only affects those areas that we have

[2:36:24] jurisdiction on. It doesn't stop them from going in our municipalities.

[2:36:28] And we we do know that there's one been considered uh in one of our towns at the

[2:36:33] current time, but there's really nothing we could do about that because they have

[2:36:37] total jurisdiction over that area. Uh

[2:36:43] we're also closing the door if indeed we were to have one that wanted to look at

[2:36:49] Nash County. That is totally self-reporting. That has been my idea

[2:36:54] all along is to have uh data centers and consider them only when they can provide

[2:37:00] their own utilities, when they can provide their own cooling method,

[2:37:03] whether it be water or anything else. >> Uh and whether it was a situation where

[2:37:08] the noise involved would be compatible with the area that it was put in. Uh I'm

[2:37:13] just not in favor of of a moratorum uh for this type of reason knowing that

[2:37:20] we've got total control over it without that. We've got a UDO that we hope will

[2:37:27] uh be adopted uh in the next few months. So our goal is to do it before the end

[2:37:31] of the year I think and during that process of the UDO we will have those

[2:37:36] guidelines in there and the UDO itself will require a public hearing. So at

[2:37:41] that point, anyone that wishes to speak about data centers would sure certainly

[2:37:46] be able to come to this board and speak about that or anything else in UDO. It

[2:37:50] just seems like a possible duplication of effort to do it uh at this time. And

[2:37:56] that's my thoughts, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

[2:37:58] » All right. Uh anyone wait

[2:38:06] and

[2:38:10] » Mr. Chairman,

[2:38:13] » I have a I have a question of the staff and or um our attorney. Can we hold the

[2:38:19] public hearing um during the same time we hold the public

[2:38:24] hearing for the UDO? Can we hold it on the for the moratorum at that time and

[2:38:29] just have one public hearing?

[2:38:36] » The the moratorum requires a public hearing. So prior to voting on the

[2:38:40] moratorum, you would have to have a public hearing.

[2:38:44] What I'm saying is if we don't vote on the moratorum until we have the UDO

[2:38:51] public hearing.

[2:38:56] » I mean, Commissioner um How is asking that we have the more vote on the moring

[2:39:02] in September and I'm guessing vote on the public vote on the moratorum in

[2:39:07] October or late September? >> In September.

[2:39:10] » In September. >> It can be voted on at that meeting.

[2:39:13] Okay. But what what I'm asking is um I guess we would have to vote down his and

[2:39:18] then someone would have to make them >> you can't vote. I'm sorry. I'm sorry.

[2:39:23] » And someone would have to make a motion to have the public hearing on the

[2:39:27] moratorum during the same time we have the UDO. You understand what

[2:39:32] » if you vote down his motion today then there would not proceed with the

[2:39:37] public hearing. But but if >> I mean if the moratorum is on the agenda

[2:39:43] then there has to be a public hearing. >> Okay.

[2:39:47] » But it's not on the agenda yet until we vote.

[2:39:52] » That that's correct. >> You make the motion. We'll give

[2:39:54] everybody else opportunity. Any anybody else? Uh Commissioner Le.

[2:40:01] » Okay. I do have a question. Would a moratorum such as this affect our

[2:40:07] ability to adopt the updated UDO? >> Who can answer that?

[2:40:14] » Well, we'll give you my opinion.

[2:40:20] Uh, Mr. Tyson.

[2:40:26] So to answer Commissioner Leget's question, no, the moratorum would not

[2:40:31] affect u the county's ability to adopt the UDO because the moratorium is worded

[2:40:38] in such a way that it would last until June of 2027 or until a UDO with

[2:40:46] specific data center standards are adopted. And so, uh, the the adoption of

[2:40:52] the UDO would effectively repeal the moratorum, uh, if it occurred prior to

[2:41:00] June of next year, which we anticipate that it will because as long as that UDO

[2:41:05] has specific rules and regulations for data centers, um, to answer Commissioner

[2:41:11] Wilkins question, um, there would really be no need for the moratorum if we

[2:41:17] waited until we were ready to adopt the UDO.

[2:41:20] because the moratorum is designed to fill the gap in time before we have

[2:41:25] regulations for data centers. So it by the time we have a public hearing on the

[2:41:30] UDO to adopt it, the moratorum would presumably become irrelevant at that

[2:41:35] point. So it wouldn't make sense necessarily to delay the public hearing

[2:41:40] um on the moratorum to align with the public hearing on the UDO uh because the

[2:41:46] UDO will not be ready by the September meeting. Um so it would not be effective

[2:41:51] to delay the public hearing. Also to go back to a comment that Commissioner um

[2:41:58] Davis made currently we don't have standards for a

[2:42:03] data center. So, if we had an applicant who proposed one, they would make an

[2:42:08] argument that it was uh similar to a use we currently have in the table,

[2:42:14] presumably an industrial use. Uh now, that would only matter for property

[2:42:19] that's already zoned industrial without specific conditions. uh if a property if

[2:42:25] an applicant brought a property to be reszoned industrial then presumably the

[2:42:30] board wouldn't approve it without a condition on it to explain what it's

[2:42:34] supposed to be. So there wouldn't be a sneak attack by a data center through a

[2:42:38] reasonzoning. But for properties that already exist in the county that is GI

[2:42:44] if a applicant made an effective argument and of course this could end up

[2:42:49] in court to be litigated. But if the applicant successfully made an argument

[2:42:53] that there was a land use in the ordinance that was similar to a data

[2:42:57] center and that the county should permit it um then that would be that's what

[2:43:02] we're trying to guard against or that would be what the purpose of the

[2:43:05] moratorum would guard against. We have had discussions about requiring a

[2:43:09] special use permit for a data center. That is not in the current ordinance.

[2:43:14] That is something that will be proposed as part of the new ordinance. So I did

[2:43:18] want to make that correction. There's not a special use permit process for

[2:43:23] data centers because data centers aren't addressed in the ordinance. But the

[2:43:28] purpose of the moratorum would be to fill the gap in time between now and

[2:43:33] when the UDO is ready. But the moratorum would not hinder us in any way from

[2:43:38] adopting the UDO and adopting a set of regulations within the UDO for data

[2:43:45] centers. >> All right. Uh Mr. Tyson, what what's the

[2:43:50] time table for us to complete the UDO? >> So,

[2:43:56] the planning staff is currently going through the proposed UDO line by line

[2:44:00] and making revisions. I don't know exactly when we'll be done with that. Um

[2:44:05] I think we are likely to have it ready for adoption prior to the end of 2026

[2:44:12] but this moratorum extends into 2027 just to provide um you know a a cushion

[2:44:19] or a margin for error. Um and but as I stated the way the moratorum is worded

[2:44:27] as soon as we adopt a set of regulations for data centers whether it be

[2:44:32] standalone or as part of that UDO the moratorum would be repealed and so it's

[2:44:38] whichever occurs first the deadline of June 27 or the adoption of a UDO

[2:44:44] containing data centers and I seriously expect the UDO adoption date to happen

[2:44:51] well before the June 2027 deadline. >> All right.

[2:44:58] » All right. Commissioner How, >> Mr. Tyson, thank you for explaining that

[2:45:02] and apologize to my fellow colleagues up here. That's the whole intent behind

[2:45:06] this is to is a bridge to give us protection to protect the staff and

[2:45:10] having to spend additional time andor additional legal fees that if one would

[2:45:15] come up and and as Commissioner Davis mentioned there is already one being

[2:45:20] considered in one of our towns and I I also am aware there's also been some

[2:45:24] discussion as well in other parts of the county outside of the township for some.

[2:45:29] So my concern is that knowing we don't put ourselves in a position to where

[2:45:34] we're having to spend taxpayers money to defend something, we can simply put a

[2:45:38] mortorium on it today and give us time to do it. My other concern is um in our

[2:45:44] last meeting on data centers, we've got everything lumped together. And when I

[2:45:48] say everything lumped together, I'll make sure I explain. So you have the new

[2:45:52] AI data centers and you had the traditional data centers. A traditional

[2:45:56] data center does not use our natural resources. does not use a lot of

[2:46:00] electricity. Um, and because I stay at the the other end of the county, there's

[2:46:04] one in Zebulun right now behind the Bojangles. I mean, it doesn't make any

[2:46:07] noise. You wouldn't know it was there. So we got to make sure when we put this

[2:46:11] new UDO out that we don't penalize those storage facilities and lump them in the

[2:46:15] same group as we would one of these new AI data centers that uses 100 megawatts

[2:46:19] of power which by the way Sharon Harris is which where we get a

[2:46:24] lot of our energy from for Nash County only generates 900 megawws. So you're

[2:46:30] talking a ninth of the power. The backup facility in high demand for electricity

[2:46:34] in our area is from Goldsboro. Again, that facility only produces 920

[2:46:40] megawatt. So, we're talking about a 100 watt mega facility would put a

[2:46:45] tremendous strain on it. Also, there's other things to consider. Even though if

[2:46:49] they generate their own power, which a lot of them are having to do, they're

[2:46:52] having to put in temporary diesel generators that are running for extended

[2:46:56] periods of time with additional noise and additional air pollution because

[2:47:00] there's currently not enough power to do self generation at this point with the

[2:47:03] technology we have. Also, we have to consider our friends upstream

[2:47:09] to generate 900 megawatts of power from Sharon Harris. You're gonna they're

[2:47:14] going to consume one and a half million gallons to 2.4 million gallons a day

[2:47:20] just to produce electricity. That's even if the data center is using a closed

[2:47:24] loop system and doesn't need any water other than initial filling of the closed

[2:47:28] system. So, there's a lot of impacts just that we need to study before we

[2:47:32] move this forward to make sure we got it right. And all this is is a pause and

[2:47:36] let us do that. Don't penalize traditional data centers and have them

[2:47:40] lumped together as we currently do and our proposed UDEO. Separate those out

[2:47:46] and then figure out where in the county these new AI ones need to go and make

[2:47:49] sure we got clear direction. It's best for them and also best for the citizens

[2:47:53] of Nash County. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> All right, Commissioner

[2:48:01] » David Adam. uh just to clear up something you

[2:48:07] just said uh which is different than what I said and I appreciate you

[2:48:10] clearing that up but the special use permit I've noticed several times of

[2:48:14] late uh over the last year that if I'm not mistaken you've utilized something

[2:48:20] particular with the land development code when it was under construction

[2:48:25] uh in the presentation to the planning board about what we had in a particular

[2:48:31] item and the vote was based on the fact of not approving that because of

[2:48:38] something that was coming. Would that be the same case in this as far as a

[2:48:43] special use permit knowing that we would have one in our uh UDO that you could go

[2:48:50] ahead and utilize that like I've seen you do some in the past.

[2:48:54] Of course, I guess your answer is probably going to be it could be

[2:48:57] challenged, but anything can be challenged.

[2:48:59] » I'm not. And I'm just asking because it may change where I stand on it.

[2:49:03] » I'm not sure I follow the question. >> In order for the county to apply a

[2:49:08] special use permit to a particular land use, then our table of permitted uses

[2:49:14] has to assign it. It has to essentially have an S there. You know, we talked

[2:49:19] about vape shops today. We talked about a P or a D. Well, in land uses that that

[2:49:25] have an S is where they have a special use permit. Special use permits

[2:49:30] currently are all directed to the board of adjustment for quasi judicial public

[2:49:34] hearing. If in the future we adopt a special use permit requirement for uh a

[2:49:41] data center land use, then the board can make a decision whether that should also

[2:49:46] go to the board of adjustment or if that uh requires such special attention that

[2:49:52] the special use permit should be diverted to the board of commissioners

[2:49:55] to decide. Um, but if we had an applicant come in currently and proposed

[2:50:02] a data center and made the argument that it was similar to one of our existing

[2:50:07] land uses, then whether or not we could impose a special use permit would be

[2:50:12] determined by whether or not a special use permit is already required in our

[2:50:17] table for that land use. So if if and and it's hard to speculate what

[2:50:23] particular land use they might make an argument that it would be similar to,

[2:50:28] but if that land use doesn't already require a special use permit, the county

[2:50:33] can't decide on the fly to apply a special use permit. It has to be

[2:50:37] pre-ordained by the ordinance. I'm not sure if I followed your

[2:50:43] question, so maybe if that didn't answer it, you could lead me a little further.

[2:50:47] Uh well, I totally didn't answer it, but but I think I get to just what you're

[2:50:51] saying. I just know uh for instance, a couple of things on screening and things

[2:50:56] of that nature, we are using this standard that we're getting ready to

[2:51:01] adopt and talk about it during the public hearing uh as we move up to that

[2:51:06] adoption. But I think you made it clear that it most likely would not be able to

[2:51:10] do that with a special use permit probably.

[2:51:14] Uh and I I I do know that we currently have two

[2:51:21] uh data centers in Nash County. Of course, they're both located inside

[2:51:24] Rocky Mount and uh quite frankly, they are compatible. Actually, the city chose

[2:51:30] to put one of them on their own land, which uh I was surprised at, but uh and

[2:51:37] they are large power users. In fact, the first one that was built u

[2:51:42] is by far Rocky Mount's largest utility customer

[2:51:47] actually is five times larger than their second utility customer which is Dash

[2:51:52] General Hospital. Uh but had it not been for that revenue coming in, I I think

[2:51:58] Rocky Mountain would have probably been in in worse shape than they are in

[2:52:02] because they they are very profitable to their electrical uh grid system and

[2:52:08] they're able to make quite a bit of money off of them. But they would be

[2:52:11] making those decisions uh except for where they provide

[2:52:15] utilities in uh outside of Rockabout in the county. So, uh, I just feel like

[2:52:22] we've got enough protection at the current time to buy us to December,

[2:52:27] January, February, whenever we do the UDO. So, we're we're really not that far

[2:52:31] apart on what we are saying here. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[2:52:35] » All right. Well,

[2:52:40] well, my perspective on this is that uh with the with the current schedule that

[2:52:46] we have for the uh unified development ordinance

[2:52:50] and we intend or should finish this by November.

[2:52:57] And generally, I'm not in favor of moratoriums. And like I said, it's going

[2:53:03] to require another public hearing. And it it is possible it could delay what

[2:53:09] we're trying to do with the unified development partners to try to finish it

[2:53:14] sooner rather than later. And uh we've been collecting information on what data

[2:53:21] centers uh should be, shouldn't be, and the things that we might want to put

[2:53:27] into the unified development ordinance. And uh I'm hopeful that the three

[2:53:35] commissions that serve on that, Miss Leot, um Mr. Davis, and myself, that we

[2:53:40] will push forward with uh developing

[2:53:45] uh the unified development ordinance very soon before this year is out and

[2:53:51] we'll be able to address uh all the concerns about the moratorum.

[2:53:56] moratoriums create anxiety and sometime alone the public

[2:54:03] which they might not need to be alone.

[2:54:08] » Any other discussion?

[2:54:12] » Mr. Chair, I do have one follow-up question for Mr. Tyson.

[2:54:16] Yeah,

[2:54:20] » this is hypothetical of course, but let's say we get through with the UDO

[2:54:24] and are ready to proceed in December or November as you're shooting for by the

[2:54:28] end of the year, but we haven't worked out the UDO process because we need to

[2:54:32] put more definition in it to separate traditionals from the new AI need some

[2:54:38] more studying done. If we went ahead and adopted the UDO and there's nothing in

[2:54:43] there at that particular time for the data centers, would we be allowed to do

[2:54:47] it and still have protection to give you January, February to make specific

[2:54:51] adjustments in the UDO and do an amendment at that point or we locked

[2:54:55] into having to hold the whole UD up UDO up until we get the data center

[2:55:00] information in there? >> We are not held up. The board could

[2:55:06] adopt the UDO, revised UDO without um data center regulations if the data

[2:55:13] center regulations required more work before they were ready. The adoption of

[2:55:19] the new UDO without data center regulations

[2:55:23] would not repeal the moratorum because the moratorum is not tied if a

[2:55:29] moratorum was approved because the moratorum is not tied to the UDO. is

[2:55:34] tied to the approval of new zoning regulations regarding data centers, data

[2:55:40] processing facilities, cryptocurrency mining and similar uses. So the UDO

[2:55:46] could go forward ahead of the data centers but the moratorum if passed

[2:55:52] would not expire until the data center piece is adopted even if the whole rest

[2:55:57] of the UDO was adopted first. >> Thank you for that clarification. It

[2:56:01] wouldn't slow us up if we ran into more questions and concerns. It would let the

[2:56:04] county go forward everything else and still provide us protection

[2:56:08] » until June. Thank you, sir.

[2:56:10] » Uh you we can always amend the unified development ordinance.

[2:56:16] » Correct. >> Right.

[2:56:22] Okay. Any other discussion on the uh proposed

[2:56:26] resolution?

[2:56:30] All right. Uh, seeing none, we had a we have a motion. So, uh, all in let's see,

[2:56:37] hold, give me one minute here. All in favor of the, uh, motion as

[2:56:43] presented for moratorum

[2:56:48] uh, related to data center and data processing facility and cryptocurrency

[2:56:54] mining. Let it be known by raising your right hand.

[2:56:57] » Mr. Chairman. >> Yeah.

[2:56:58] » If I can just clarify, we're only voting on the to hold the public hearing

[2:57:04] at the next meeting. The board is not voting on the moratorum today.

[2:57:09] » No, >> they would vote on the moratorum at the

[2:57:11] next meeting. >> I can read my motion again, sir, if you

[2:57:14] like. >> Right. Read read your motion again.

[2:57:17] » Yes, sir. Uh that the motion here is for the board is being asked to adopt the

[2:57:22] attached resolution to hold a public hearing Tuesday, September the 8th, 2026

[2:57:27] at 9:00 a.m. and direct the clerk of the board to publish notice to the public

[2:57:32] for the hearing in accordance to general statute 16-601.

[2:57:38] » All right, you heard the motion. All in favor of

[2:57:43] the motion, let it be known raise your right hand.

[2:57:46] » Second. Who second? All all in favor of the motion.

[2:57:53] » All oppose the motion. >> All right. Motion car.

[2:58:07] » All right. Let's move to the uh next

[2:58:15] item number 21. Uh take uh yeah, item number 21. Uh Mr.

[2:58:24] Boone on the Southern Nash Middle School offsite traffic improvement project.

[2:58:33] » Good afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mhm.

[2:58:36] » Um item I have before you today is task order for Southern Ash Middle School

[2:58:40] offsite traffic improvements. As the board is aware, uh construction is

[2:58:44] currently underway on Southern New Southern Ash Middle School near the

[2:58:47] intersection of 581 and NC97. That school is expected to open in the fall

[2:58:51] of 2027. Uh, construction of the new school necessitates construction of

[2:58:56] several off-site improvements along NC97 and NC581 based on proposed access

[2:59:03] points and the anticipated increase in traffic volumes related to the new

[2:59:07] school. Construction of these improvements are required as con a

[2:59:11] condition of approval of the driveway permits to be issued by the North

[2:59:15] Carolina Department of Transportation because both NC routes are under the

[2:59:19] jurisdiction of the North Carolina Department of Transportation. Uh Nash

[2:59:23] County Public Schools has confirmed that they are agreeable to Nash County

[2:59:28] funding and managing uh responsibility for this work. Uh, and

[2:59:34] it's important to note that this expense is eligible for reimbursement by the

[2:59:38] North Carolina Department of Trans Transportation as outlined in North

[2:59:42] Carolina General Statutes 136-18 uh, subsection 29A and North Carolina

[2:59:48] General Statutes 168-307.1. Uh, so the recommendation from staff is

[2:59:54] that the board of commissioners approve task order 2 with stocks engineering.

[2:59:58] They will be managing this work. Uh task order two is uh enabled because of the

[3:00:03] master services agreements that master services agreement that was approved by

[3:00:07] the board last month. Uh and uh once approved, authorize the county manager

[3:00:11] to execute same on behalf of the board. Uh and with that said, I'd be glad to

[3:00:16] answer any questions that you may have. >> All right. Any discussion question for

[3:00:21] Mr. Boon? >> Mr. here.

[3:00:25] » There was a question you said uh in regards to this the school had

[3:00:30] authorized us to I know we got an email in here from the school stated that but

[3:00:35] has the school board had any knowledge or discussion or voted on this?

[3:00:39] » Our conversation has been with the superintendent. My conversation with the

[3:00:42] superintendent so I do not interact with the board. Um but again I I made an

[3:00:47] inquiry to the board that was a response we received from the superintendent uh

[3:00:51] to confirm that the school uh system uh would uh be amanable to the county

[3:00:58] managing the off-site improvements like we have we are managing the off-site

[3:01:02] utility improvements. Uh I don't know that the traffic improvements were

[3:01:06] necessarily um discussed or conceived uh at the beginning of the project. Uh but

[3:01:11] honestly I was not a part of those conversations. Um, but again, our our

[3:01:15] conversation has been directly with the superintendent, not with the school

[3:01:18] board. >> So, I mean, I fully support us doing

[3:01:23] this and spending the money to do so because we get reimbursed from the

[3:01:26] state. But I do have a problem moving forward and and voting to support it

[3:01:32] without the awareness of the school board. And and since our agenda meeting,

[3:01:36] I had had conversation with the chairman and there was no discussion with the

[3:01:40] chairman and another board member as well in regards to this. So there's to

[3:01:44] my knowledge not been an official vote taken or even a consensus vote. There's

[3:01:48] been discussion a while back, but nothing in the recent times.

[3:01:52] » Right. So, why would we take a vote as a board without support from the school

[3:01:57] board first? >> Again, I I I I know the county manager

[3:02:01] had conversation with the superintendent. I'll defer to her after

[3:02:03] our agenda planning meeting last week. The manager reached out to the

[3:02:07] superintendent so she may want to weigh in on this conversation.

[3:02:09] » Correct. I spoke with the superintendent um and also Angie Miller and it's my

[3:02:14] understanding that in the planning of this project um we had um Commissioner

[3:02:20] Davis on that committee and the off-site improvements were agreed upon that the

[3:02:25] county would handle those. Um so this this is just another one of the off-site

[3:02:30] improvements. So this was this wasn't um a board decision. It was part of the

[3:02:36] planning of the whole project altogether. And I guess I'm not trying

[3:02:40] to be controversial, but my whole argument was we made a point earlier

[3:02:44] today that one person was doing negotiations was a claim for purchasing

[3:02:48] property. Are we allowing one person of the board to make that decision for our

[3:02:52] board ahead of time or does it take the majority of the board to make that

[3:02:55] decision?

[3:03:02] Uh do you >> Commissioner Howell, uh as we understand

[3:03:08] this is a traffic light improvement that we're going to be reimbursed by the

[3:03:13] state once it's done. Correct. >> Correct.

[3:03:15] » And there's no issue with that. >> And there has to be a traffic light

[3:03:19] there. Uh

[3:03:23] the the pointed at topic here is the fact that there's been no knowledge and

[3:03:28] support from the board of commissioners of the school system acknowledging that

[3:03:33] a request for us to spend $500,000. We've also had an email sent to us from

[3:03:39] the school system requesting us to to spend money to put in a new septic

[3:03:42] system for the new elementary school that's supposed to be built. But the

[3:03:48] board has not taken action on that yet neither. And here again, I'm just seeing

[3:03:51] a pattern. To me, the school board should vote on this matter first. Once

[3:03:56] it's voted on and the school board approves it, then send it over to us and

[3:03:59] then this board votes on it. We we didn't act off earlier of purchasing and

[3:04:04] enter into a contract with one person. So why would we look at and again I

[3:04:08] fully support this and it makes sense, but it's the process that I have a

[3:04:12] concern with here, not the action. So we need to have a precedence to set it

[3:04:17] should take the majority of the school board to support something that's

[3:04:20] communicated to us in writing. This board would take a vote on it and

[3:04:24] whatever that majority vote is that's the action we take.

[3:04:27] » Okay. Well, I want just say this. Look,

[3:04:33] the superintendent represent the board of education.

[3:04:37] And if the superintendent sends us something, we act on it with the

[3:04:41] assumption that the board of education has approved his action. And I'm not

[3:04:47] questioning whether the board of education has approved or not. I'm

[3:04:53] moving on the assumption that the the superintendent

[3:04:59] for credibility purposes is acting in favor of his board. Commissioner Davis.

[3:05:08] » Well, I think you just covered what I would say about it. Uh, all along the

[3:05:13] county has taken responsibility to do onsite improvement on that project. And

[3:05:19] of course, the whole project is run through the county because of the tight

[3:05:22] bending that it is. Uh, we approve all payments. Uh, actually there's a

[3:05:28] signature off from you, Mr. Chairman, as well as the chairman of the school board

[3:05:32] at the time. each time we have a payment to approve according to the way the

[3:05:37] grant was written. So, M I I Commissioner, I I really don't

[3:05:41] understand what your question is. It It's not a vote needed by the school

[3:05:47] board once they have adopted uh an ordinance saying they going to

[3:05:52] build this school. I'm just just not following you.

[3:05:56] » Well, we have ordinance here, too, sir. I mean, the county manager spends money

[3:06:01] up to $10,000. Anything over $10,000 requires the approval of this board. I'm

[3:06:06] going to make an assumption here that the school board has similar things in

[3:06:09] place and we're being asked to spend $500,000. So that well exceeds a $10,000

[3:06:15] limit. The other request is for over a million dollars. So I guess my my point

[3:06:20] of question would be to the attorney. Is there any legal ramifications to us

[3:06:28] if we take a vote and we approve to spend money without the approval of the

[3:06:32] school board approving it first with only taking an email from a staff member

[3:06:38] from the school system regardless of what that position may be.

[3:06:42] » It's it's my understanding that the county owns that property.

[3:06:46] » Correct. >> Is that correct? So, we would be making

[3:06:49] the improvements on behalf of the county for the property the county owns. But

[3:06:53] keep in mind these improvements are in the rightway. So they're not on private

[3:06:57] property. They would be in the rightway. Continuous to the project,

[3:06:59] » but they're contiguous for our development of the project.

[3:07:02] » Correct. >> Then there's no legal ramifications for

[3:07:04] that. >> Okay. For this case. Now, what about the

[3:07:08] if it on the septic system which is on other property that's not owned by

[3:07:11] » I would have to >> Can you research that and get back?

[3:07:14] » I would able to be able to answer that question.

[3:07:19] » Commissioner Le. >> Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh I I have

[3:07:24] no issue taking action on this item. Uh as I see it, it's part of the county's

[3:07:28] responsibility for this project and uh we sought guidance from the um head of

[3:07:35] the school systems to proceed and I don't see this as us superseding

[3:07:41] any type of um action that the school board would need to take. Um so thank

[3:07:47] you. >> All right. Any other discussion?

[3:07:54] Okay, let me get back down here. So, I need a motion to approve the uh

[3:08:02] task order two with stocks engineering and authorize county manage to execute

[3:08:08] the same. >> So move.

[3:08:12] » Second. >> That was Commissioner Davis.

[3:08:14] » Commissioner Davis made the motion and Commissioner Leot made the second. All

[3:08:20] right. Any further discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion, let

[3:08:24] it be known by saying I. >> I.

[3:08:27] » All opposed. >> I.

[3:08:30] » All right. Commissioner uh Howell voted against.

[3:08:35] Motion carried. Okay, Mr. Boone. Uh item number 22, Mech

[3:08:41] Park low voltage wiring contract. >> Yes, sir. Uh next item is a change order

[3:08:47] with Network South. uh that is the vendor assisting uh the county with the

[3:08:51] low voltage wiring uh improvements. Uh and that's really to provide uh network

[3:08:56] connectivity and wireless access at the Med Park building. Uh and this change

[3:09:01] order covers the cost of the network hardware required to build out the

[3:09:04] network closets of which there are four on this project and provide wireless

[3:09:09] access throughout the facility. The change order totals $92,286.88

[3:09:14] 88 uh and if approved would result in amended contract amount of $352,94923

[3:09:22] and no additional time being add added to the contract. Uh staff is

[3:09:26] recommending the board approve the attached change order and authorize the

[3:09:30] county manager andor her designate execute.

[3:09:35] » All right. Uh any discussion for Mr. Boone?

[3:09:39] Commissioner Davis, >> just an update on where we stand for

[3:09:43] contingency funds. Do we cover are we able to cover this out of contingencies

[3:09:48] for the project? >> Yes.

[3:09:50] » Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> All right.

[3:09:54] Any other discussion, Mr. B? Seeing none, can I get a motion

[3:10:01] to approve the change order authorize the county manager to execute the same

[3:10:06] with the meg park building renovation? >> So moved.

[3:10:11] » Moved by Commissioner Wilkins. >> Second.

[3:10:13] » Second by Commissioner Leot. Uh any discussion on the motion? All

[3:10:19] right. All in favor of motion, let it be known by saying I.

[3:10:22] » I. >> All oppose. Motion carried.

[3:10:27] All right. Thank you, Mr. Boo. >> Ready for next item?

[3:10:32] » Yes. >> All right. While we're uh while we're on

[3:10:34] the theme of change orders, uh same project, different contract. Um I have

[3:10:39] two change orders. Change orders four and five with Salsbury Moore. They're

[3:10:42] the general contractor on the overall building renovation project. Uh and this

[3:10:46] change order is related to uh again the Med Park building project and

[3:10:50] replacement of additional flooring in the building. uh and also additional

[3:10:55] electrical work requested by MIS uh in the network closets uh where the u uh

[3:11:02] items in the preceding change order would be housed. Uh these change orders

[3:11:06] total $68,53749

[3:11:10] and if approved will uh result in a revised contract amount of $3,582,2259

[3:11:19] and a revision to the substantial completion date. uh and it will change

[3:11:23] that to November 23rd of this year. Uh the cost of the additional flooring work

[3:11:28] will be paid for using funds from the health department and the cost of the

[3:11:32] electrical work will be paid for using contingency funds approved uh in

[3:11:36] conjunction with the project. Uh and the recommendation is that the board of

[3:11:40] commissioners approve the attached change orders and authorize the county

[3:11:42] manager to execute same. >> All right. Uh you any discussion from M?

[3:11:49] Any question? Seeing none, is there a motion to

[3:11:54] approve the change order? >> Move for approval.

[3:11:57] » All right, Commissioner Le. Second. Second. Second by Commissioner Outlaw.

[3:12:03] Any further discussion? All in favor of motion. Let it be known saying I.

[3:12:07] » I. >> All oppose. Motion carrot. All right.

[3:12:11] Thanks.

[3:12:15] Okay. Item number 24, Miss Nikki Stanton, North Carolina

[3:12:21] Department Environmental Quality Grant, wastewater and water infrastructure

[3:12:26] project capital project ordinance amendment three.

[3:12:31] » Good afternoon. >> All right.

[3:12:32] » Uh the first project ordinance amendment is for the NCDQ grant. Um, and basically

[3:12:38] what this amendment is doing is moving um some funds from construction um into

[3:12:44] construction from software and um equipment. It's just to make sure that

[3:12:49] we're covered in the areas that we need uh these funds to pay all the bills for

[3:12:53] this project. >> All right. Any questions from Miss

[3:12:56] Stanton? >> All right. Seeing none, is there a

[3:13:00] motion to approve the amendment capital project? So move

[3:13:05] » moved by Commissioner Davis. Is there a second?

[3:13:10] » Second. >> Second by Commissioner Wilkins.

[3:13:14] » All right. Any further discussion on the motion?

[3:13:18] All in favor of motion. Let it be known by saying I.

[3:13:20] » I. >> All oppose. Motion carries.

[3:13:24] Okay. Item number 25. Uh

[3:13:28] county capital project and fund ordinance amendment. The attached

[3:13:32] project ordinance is presented to amend the senior center expansion project. Uh

[3:13:37] the request is to move the 5% county match of $23,750

[3:13:41] from the construction line into the renovation line for grant reporting

[3:13:45] purposes. The grant that we received for this can only be used for renovations,

[3:13:49] not for construction. The match should follow that as well. So this is just

[3:13:53] amending that to move it to the renovation line.

[3:13:57] » All right. Any question?

[3:14:01] Seeing none. Is there a motion to approve the amendment?

[3:14:05] » So moved. Second. >> Moved by Commissioner Wilkins. Second by

[3:14:09] Commissioner >> How?

[3:14:12] » Second by Commissioner Bfield. >> Any further discussion on the motion?

[3:14:17] » All in favor? Let it be known by saying I.

[3:14:19] » I. >> All oppose. Okay. Motion carried.

[3:14:23] Okay. Item number 26.

[3:14:28] » Okay. Budget amendments. Um the first budget amendment for this month is uh to

[3:14:33] budget Nash County Sheriff's Office citizen support donations for community

[3:14:37] support. So this is taking the $2191 from citizen support revenue and moving

[3:14:42] it to the community support expense line so that they can support a back to

[3:14:46] school event. The second request is for the asset

[3:14:50] forfeite funds. This budget amendment is to reappropriate unspent 26 Department

[3:14:54] of Treasury funds and Department of Justice funds for the swiftwater rescue

[3:14:59] needs, including the boat and other expenses. The amount of those of this uh

[3:15:03] budget amendment is for $23,48.

[3:15:08] The third request is the control substance. This budget amendment is to

[3:15:11] reappropriate unspent 26 controlled substance tax and investment earnings um

[3:15:17] from the revenue line to the expenditure line for equipment supplies for weapons

[3:15:20] and optics in the amount of $53,311.

[3:15:26] The fourth request is to budget additional funds from the enhanced

[3:15:29] voluntary agricultural district for legal services for partial termination

[3:15:34] of enrollment in the program. Uh this was a an investment um in the farmland

[3:15:40] preservation enhanced voluntary agricultural district and they were

[3:15:45] terminated. There was a $300 legal amount uh legal services that we were

[3:15:49] reimbursed by that um land owner. So this is taking that revenue and taking

[3:15:53] care of that legal expense that we incurred.

[3:15:56] And number five um this dollar amount is different than what was originally put

[3:16:01] in your packet. Um we got new numbers from the state. So, this is just the

[3:16:05] budget amendment move um for the new revenue um amount from the local

[3:16:09] workforce development state funding and it's moving it to the expense line for

[3:16:13] the local workforce development line in the amount of $359,846.

[3:16:20] » Are there any questions? >> All right. Any questions from Miss

[3:16:23] Stanton?

[3:16:27] » Hearing none. Uh well, I entertain a motion to accept all

[3:16:34] amendments. >> Move for approval.

[3:16:37] » Motion by Commissioner Le. Second. Second by Commissioner How that

[3:16:44] we approve all the budget amendments. Uh any further discussion?

[3:16:50] Seeing none, all in favor of the motion, let it be known by saying I. I.

[3:16:54] » All oppose. Motion carries. >> Thank you.

[3:16:56] » Thank you.

[3:16:59] Okay. Number 27, Miss uh Tool. >> Um Chairman, excuse me. We added 26A.

[3:17:07] » Yeah, we did. And what was 26A? >> Uh for uh Commissioner How wanted to

[3:17:14] make a request for a letter of support. >> Oh, yes. Right. Sorry. Thank you, Mr.

[3:17:19] Chairman. Thank you, Madam Manager. Uh, I come today seeking support from my

[3:17:27] fellow colleagues to a letter of support for the Southern Nash Wastewater and

[3:17:33] Sewer Authority. uh as far as in regards to meeting with elected officials over

[3:17:38] the next few weeks and just seeking basically a consensus vote that everyone

[3:17:43] is in support of me doing that and asking for financial support from our

[3:17:47] state and federal elected officials to bring funds back to Nash County.

[3:17:55] » All right, you've heard the request is I'm well I'll entertain a motion.

[3:18:03] Is there a motion? >> I just had a question.

[3:18:06] » Okay, one question before the a motion. Go ahead. Question.

[3:18:09] » Okay. Um, since this is brand new on our desk this morning, um, can you give some

[3:18:16] more background about the Southern Nash Water and Sewer Authority?

[3:18:20] » So, we're still having meetings. Commissioner Davis and I had a meeting,

[3:18:24] I think it was last week, I believe it was Monday, and getting updates and

[3:18:28] looking at additional alternatives. Um, Mr. Boon making comment. We also had a

[3:18:32] conference call Friday morning with some new technology. Um the purpose of this

[3:18:37] letter of support is basically just seeking their assistance. The whole hold

[3:18:42] up once we finalize option A and B that we can do and bring back to the board.

[3:18:46] Even if we approve it, the whole holdup's going to be funding for this

[3:18:49] and we're still looking at 100 to $120 million as it currently stands. So even

[3:18:55] if we agree to move forward, we need financial assistance to help us with

[3:18:58] that. And this letter is basically going out and having these conversations to

[3:19:02] the latest start to get those requests in that once we do make a decision on

[3:19:07] what we're going to do and move forward that we can get it sourcing for it for

[3:19:10] us financially. >> Okay. So at this time the partners are

[3:19:14] um Bailey Middle Sex >> correct the county has not got in the

[3:19:18] authority yet. We're waiting till we get everything together

[3:19:21] » and there's still potential uh in the last meeting there was conversations

[3:19:24] with Spring Lake as well. They did attend the meetings

[3:19:27] » and what the what the vote is today. What you're asking for is this letter

[3:19:32] specifically? >> Yes, ma'am. Just I don't I'm going to go

[3:19:35] regardless and have these conversations, but I'd rather have the blessing and

[3:19:38] support from my fellow colleagues on this to bring funds back to the county

[3:19:42] to save the taxpayers and Nash County funding.

[3:19:45] » And there's no specific amount on this letter at this time because we haven't

[3:19:49] finalized. >> But I didn't want to misrepresent the

[3:19:53] board without their approval. Mhm. >> All right. Uh,

[3:19:58] » Mr. Chairman, are we saying we've got something

[3:20:02] that we we've got before us this morning?

[3:20:06] » What this is? >> Yes, sir.

[3:20:09] » Thumb through uh support of Southern Nash Water and Sewer Authorities.

[3:20:15] Okay. I'll put my hand on. I had seen it.

[3:20:18] » Okay. All right. >> Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion for

[3:20:22] approval. All

[3:20:26] right. Uh, Commissioner Howard made a motion. Is

[3:20:31] there a second? >> Second.

[3:20:33] » Second by Commissioner Outlaw. Okay. Okay, we're still open for discussion on

[3:20:38] the motion that uh we support uh Commissioner House and his effort to

[3:20:44] find financial support for the Southern Nash Water and Sewer

[3:20:49] uh authority system that they are trying to

[3:20:54] develop. >> Correct.

[3:20:59] Commissioner Day. Uh, of course I I very quickly speeded read

[3:21:05] that. Don't know that I understand it. But how is this uh different from what

[3:21:10] we normally do where we establish a set of goals and request funding uh for the

[3:21:16] county once a year with our legislators? What's the difference in this and what

[3:21:21] we generally do? >> May I respond, Mr. Chairman?

[3:21:25] » Yes. Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Davis. this here uh due to invitations

[3:21:30] that was extended to me by some of our state officials and also some of our

[3:21:34] federal elected officials. This is just laying the groundwork to your point that

[3:21:38] we're going to come back at a later time and do those ask and that I don't want

[3:21:42] to speak on behalf of the board without their knowledge of it and approval of

[3:21:46] it. The the procedure that we've been doing

[3:21:49] would still take the same place. This is just laying the groundwork since the ask

[3:21:53] is going to be so large in this. It's going to take our state elected

[3:21:57] officials and our federal elected officials to support this project due to

[3:22:01] the financial cost of it. >> So, he want to be the representative to

[3:22:07] uh speak on behalf of the board in support of the project.

[3:22:15] » And Commissioner Davis, as you're aware, because you were in the meeting, we

[3:22:17] haven't finalized which direction we're going to go yet or option, should I say.

[3:22:22] So, that's why there's no amount on here. But again, I don't I want to be

[3:22:27] transparent and just make sure that I'm open and uh before I go represent the

[3:22:31] board, I want to make sure the board's aware of it and it approves it.

[3:22:36] My only concern is, and I'm okay with what you're saying. My only concern is

[3:22:42] where we at today with that southern wastewater treatment plant. Uh is we I

[3:22:47] think we all pretty much know it's not going to come to fruition or it seems

[3:22:51] like it is not going to come to fruition the way we were working it. Uh I

[3:22:56] personally think part of the issue there is the way it's been handled uh through

[3:23:02] the process and I'm not going to get into details about it but it it does

[3:23:08] concern me uh why we lost the original thought and I think I know why we lost

[3:23:14] it but uh just with that said I think it's a very needs to be moved forward

[3:23:19] with a lot of precaution uh and not alienate people uh any of our towns like

[3:23:26] may have done been done before too quickly because we lost the one

[3:23:30] opportunity we had it appears like always trying to mend things to move

[3:23:35] forward with that treatment plant and yes other alternatives we certainly need

[3:23:40] to look at at this point because I don't think we going to make it work how we

[3:23:44] were we just got too many obstacles where it was so uh

[3:23:50] I personally think this could be done without the support but ever how board

[3:23:57] choose to do it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[3:24:00] » All right, >> Mr. Chairman.

[3:24:02] » Yes, Commissioner W. >> I just um

[3:24:06] I want to ask by us supporting this letter and it's evident that we need the

[3:24:11] water and sewer in Southern Nash, >> but by the board individually saying,

[3:24:17] you know, we support this. We support you getting funding. If you don't get

[3:24:21] that funding, will this letter be held up? If those

[3:24:26] towns come to the board for so many millions of dollars or and need our help

[3:24:32] and we say we can't do it, then we you get the opportunity to say, "Well, you

[3:24:37] signed this letter in support of it." Um, are you solely just going to the

[3:24:43] state and federal for this? >> Yes, ma'am. Just for clarification,

[3:24:48] um, two of the three partners that have been at these meetings, other towns, uh,

[3:24:53] Middle Sex and Bailey, actually have already jointly put together a letter

[3:24:58] very similar to this and they're actually having discussions today with

[3:25:02] some elected official in Greensboro.

[3:25:07] » It's it's a joint effort and the the way we're going to be successful on this is

[3:25:12] from a regional standpoint. Mhm. >> The state and the federal has indicated

[3:25:15] to us and and to Mr. Boon as well that they're not seeking to give individual

[3:25:21] towns or municipalities funding. They're seeking to give a regional facility

[3:25:26] because it it encompasses so much more of the area and affects so many more

[3:25:30] citizens in a positive way. Okay.

[3:25:39] » All right. Any other discussion?

[3:25:43] Uh, all right. You heard the motion. You understand the

[3:25:49] motion? All in favor of the motion, let it be

[3:25:52] known by saying I. >> I. I.

[3:25:54] » All opposed. >> Motion carried.

[3:25:59] » Mr. Chair, can I make a comment? >> Yeah. Yes, sir.

[3:26:04] » Just want to thank my colleagues on this and I'm trying to be fully transparent

[3:26:07] in asking for these funds. I'm not trying to move anything forward without

[3:26:11] your acknowledgement and your involvement. That is that's why I did

[3:26:14] this. Thank you. >> All right. Okay. We'll move to item

[3:26:18] number 27.

[3:26:25] » Good afternoon. >> Good afternoon. Um, September is

[3:26:30] recognized nationally as recovery month to raise awareness of mental health and

[3:26:34] substance use disorders, celebrate individuals and families in recovery,

[3:26:38] and recognize those who support recovery efforts. This resolution affirms that

[3:26:43] recovery is possible and highlights the importance of reducing stigma, expanding

[3:26:47] access to support, and creating a community where individuals feel

[3:26:51] encouraged to speak up. It also recognizes the families, peer support

[3:26:56] specialists, healthc care professionals, first responders, treatment and recovery

[3:27:00] providers, faith communities, nonprofit organizations, and other partners

[3:27:05] serving Nash County. Um, I have attached uh in your packet a resolution um

[3:27:12] recognizing September uh 2026 as recovery month in Nash County. Would you

[3:27:19] like me to read the resolution? No, I don't think that's necessary. We

[3:27:24] have it in the package. Any discussion uh for Mr. Mr.

[3:27:28] » Chairman, not to be disagreeing with you, but I would like for us to read the

[3:27:32] resolution into the record because it is a very important uh resolution, very

[3:27:37] important item, and I just think reading it would put it uh available for those

[3:27:42] ones that may be viewing online or the many people that view it later on. If

[3:27:47] you're not opposed to that, sir. >> No.

[3:27:52] Okay. Okay. Uh that's okay with the rest of the board.

[3:27:56] » They like to hear the you read the resolution.

[3:27:59] » Yes, sir. Resolution recognizing September 2026 as recovery month in Nash

[3:28:04] County. Whereas September is recognized as National Recovery Month, an annual

[3:28:09] observance dedicated to increasing awareness of mental health and substance

[3:28:13] use disorders, promoting effective treatment and recovery practices and

[3:28:18] celebrating individuals and families whose lives have been transformed

[3:28:21] through recovery. And whereas recovery is possible and every person deserves

[3:28:26] access to compassionate care, meaningful support, and the opportunity to build a

[3:28:31] healthy and fulfilling life. And whereas individuals in recovery demonstrate

[3:28:37] courage, strength, and resilience, and their experiences provide hope and

[3:28:41] encouragement to others who may be struggling. And whereas mental health

[3:28:46] and substance use disorders affect individual individuals, families, and

[3:28:51] communities, making recovery a shared responsibility strengthened through

[3:28:55] compassion, connection, and support. And whereas reducing stigma and increasing

[3:29:00] awareness encourage individuals to seek assistance without fear or shame and

[3:29:05] help create a community where recovery is recognized, respected, and supported.

[3:29:10] And whereas Nash County recognizes the the families, peer support specialists,

[3:29:16] health care professionals, first responders, treatment and recovery

[3:29:20] providers, faith communities, nonprofit organizations, and other community

[3:29:24] partners whose dedication helps make recovery possible. Now, therefore, be it

[3:29:29] resolved that the Nash County Board of Commissioners hereby recognizes

[3:29:33] September 26th as recovery month in Nash County and encourages residents,

[3:29:38] organizations, and community partners to support individuals and their families

[3:29:42] on their recovery journeys and participate in activities that promote

[3:29:46] awareness, hope, healing, resilience, and lasting recovery throughout our

[3:29:50] community. Adopted this third day of August, 2026.

[3:29:55] » All right. Will this resolution be if approved I'll put on the website?

[3:30:00] » Thank you sir. >> That's it.

[3:30:02] » It will be. Yes. >> Okay. All right. Any other questions?

[3:30:08] » Seeing none. Is there a motion to accept the uh resolution?

[3:30:12] » We accept. >> I've been moved by Commissioner

[3:30:15] Balefield. >> Second.

[3:30:17] » Second by Commissioner Davis. We accept the resolution. Any further discussion

[3:30:21] on it? Seeing none, all in favor of the

[3:30:25] resolution, let it be known by saying I. I.

[3:30:28] » All oppose. Uh motion carried. >> Thank you very much.

[3:30:33] If I may, before we leave that item, I'd like to take this opportunity to ask the

[3:30:37] board uh to join with my time left on this board to continue to encourage uh

[3:30:46] our sheriff's department to join in with us and find a way more than what we are

[3:30:52] currently doing to help those citizens that we have incarcerated

[3:30:56] uh that have drug abuse or mental issues. A lot of them do indeed have one

[3:31:02] or the other or sometimes both. And I just see a lot of counties doing a lot

[3:31:07] more than what through that board of commissioners than what we are doing.

[3:31:12] And I don't have an answer. I I will just ask for support to uh work with our

[3:31:17] sheriff's department and see what kind of programs we can put together to help

[3:31:21] these individuals uh while we have them uh fixed and in place. uh because drug

[3:31:27] addiction is a very hard item uh to overcome.

[3:31:33] But certainly there are so many success stories that we know it can be done and

[3:31:39] uh I will maybe bring back other items over the next month or two that we could

[3:31:44] consider doing as I study other counties. But it is a high priority item

[3:31:49] that I think needs our attention. And of course with the jail population like it

[3:31:53] is uh a little bit of study and I have done there is a lot of people going in

[3:31:59] and out out of our jail over and over and over if we could just help solve

[3:32:03] that and thank you for any consideration the board would give in working towards

[3:32:08] that. Thank you Mr. Chairman. >> All right. Thank you.

[3:32:12] » Okay. Uh >> thank you sir.

[3:32:13] » We will move to item number 20 28. >> Okay. Um, this is the expansion of

[3:32:19] community nlloxxone access. Nash County remains committed to protecting the

[3:32:24] health and well-being of our residents and ensuring that life-saving nlloxxone

[3:32:27] is readily available throughout the community. Opioid use and overdose can

[3:32:31] affect individuals and families from every background and timely access to

[3:32:35] nlloxxone can mean the difference between life and death. Each life saved

[3:32:39] also represents another opportunity for an individual to connect with treatment,

[3:32:43] support, and recovery. Currently, a public health kiosk is located at Brazma

[3:32:48] Memorial Library and provides access to Nlloxxone and other public health

[3:32:52] supplies. Building building upon this effort, the county is expanding access

[3:32:57] by placing newspaper style distribution boxes at each Nash County Library

[3:33:03] branch, including Bailey, Middle Sex, Nashville, Spring Hope, and Whitakers.

[3:33:08] Additional boxes will also be placed at the Nash County Health Department

[3:33:11] locations, one in Nashville and one in Rocky Mount. Libraries and public health

[3:33:16] facilities are trusted and accessible community spaces. Placing a lot zone at

[3:33:20] these locations helps reduce barriers, supports individuals and families who

[3:33:24] may be impacted by substance use, and equips community members to respond

[3:33:28] during an overdose emergency. This initiative not only is not only about

[3:33:34] distributing the lock zone, but also about meeting people with compassion,

[3:33:37] reducing stigma, and affirming that every life is worth saving. This

[3:33:42] expansion is another step in Nash County's in Nash County's broader effort

[3:33:46] to address the opioid crisis through prevention, harm reduction, treatment,

[3:33:50] recovery support, and community partnership. And no action is requested

[3:33:53] of the board at this time. >> All right. Thank you.

[3:33:59] » Okay. Move to item number 29. >> Thank you, sir.

[3:34:02] » And let y'all any any discussion on this?

[3:34:06] Okay. All right. >> Thank you. Uh board appointments. Uh the

[3:34:10] following board appointments um are presented for your consideration. Please

[3:34:15] consider uh for the planning board the new appointment of Freeman Reynolds to

[3:34:20] the Nash County Planning Board. Mr. Reynolds application is included in your

[3:34:24] packet for review. He is eligible, willing to serve and recommended for

[3:34:28] appointment. If approved, Mr. Reynolds will replace Kim Moore, whose term

[3:34:32] expired on June 30th, 2026. Mr. Reynolds resides in Commissioner District number

[3:34:38] one, which is Commissioner Arrington's district, which currently has no

[3:34:41] representation on the board. His three-year term will expire on June

[3:34:45] 30th, 2029, if approved. >> All right. You

[3:34:51] recommendation. >> So move, Mr. Chairman.

[3:34:54] » All right. I'll second that motion. >> Excuse me. I'll be glad to take the

[3:34:58] second, sir. >> Okay. Uh, any further discussion on the

[3:35:04] motion? Seeing none. All in favor of the motion,

[3:35:07] let it be known by saying I. I. >> All opposed. Motion carried. Thank you.

[3:35:12] » Thank you. Next is the ABC board chair position. Um the Nash County ABC board

[3:35:17] met on Friday, July 31st and voted to nominate Miss Jacqueline Lewis to serve

[3:35:22] as chair and they nominated Mr. Bill William Bill Jones to serve as vice

[3:35:26] chair. Both nominees are willing to serve, eligible for appointment, and

[3:35:30] recommended by the ABC board. And if approved by this board of commissioners,

[3:35:34] each will serve a one-year term concluding on June 30th, 2027.

[3:35:39] » All right, you're at the recommendation. Is there a motion?

[3:35:42] » Move approval. >> Commissioner Bfield. All right,

[3:35:49] I'll second a motion. All right. Any further discussion?

[3:35:55] All in favor of the motion. >> All in favor of the motion, let it be

[3:35:59] known by saying I. I. >> All right. All oppose.

[3:36:03] » All right. Motion carried. >> Thank you. And finally, I have the human

[3:36:07] services board. Please consider the appointment of Andrew Stocks to the

[3:36:10] human services board as its engineer representative. The human services board

[3:36:15] recommended his appointment at its June 18th meeting, and his application is

[3:36:19] included in your packet for review. If approved, Mr. Stocks will serve a 4-year

[3:36:24] term ending June 30th, 2020. >> All right, you heard the recommendation.

[3:36:29] » Mr. Chairman, move for approval. >> Second motion by Commissioner Howell, I

[3:36:34] mean Commissioner uh Outlaw and second by Commissioner

[3:36:39] » Davis Davis. >> All right. Okay. Uh any further

[3:36:44] discussion on the nomination? >> Seeing none, all in favor, let it be

[3:36:49] known as saying I. I. >> All oppose. All right.

[3:36:52] » Thank you. I do want to say, sir, in addition, there's with the human

[3:36:56] services board, there are several or three discipline specific positions for

[3:37:00] the uh human services board. Qualified professionals and community members who

[3:37:04] are interested in serving and supporting the health and well-being of Nash County

[3:37:07] residents are encouraged to apply. Uh board members play an important role in

[3:37:11] in advising on policies, programs, and serve and services that affect

[3:37:15] individuals and uh families throughout the county. The vacancies include a

[3:37:20] psychiatrist, a psychologist, and also a veteran representative.

[3:37:25] » All right, >> that's all I have, sir. Thank you.

[3:37:27] » All right. Thanks.

[3:37:32] Okay, we are now down to uh calling commissioners w wishing to

[3:37:39] make comments. I'll start

[3:37:45] to my left down at Miss Commissioner Le comment.

[3:37:49] » Thank you.

[3:37:53] » Good. No comments. >> All right. Commissioner Wil.

[3:37:57] » Um, Chairman Arrington and the board, I just have one thing from the National

[3:38:02] Association of Counties that you all really have in front of you, but I

[3:38:06] wanted to read the first two paragraphs. Um, and it's in reference to the SNAP

[3:38:11] cost shift, delaying the shift in SNAP administrative and benefit costs. As

[3:38:18] part of the major reconciliation bill HR1, Congress enacted significant

[3:38:23] changes to the financing structure of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance

[3:38:28] Program we know as SNAP. Beginning in fiscal year 2027,

[3:38:32] the federal share of SNAP administrative costs will be reduced from 50% to 25%,

[3:38:39] increasing the required non-federal share from 50% to 75%.

[3:38:44] This is a substantial transfer of new administrative costs to states and local

[3:38:49] governments responsible for delivering the program in households and helping

[3:38:55] millions of lowincome families across access nut nutritious food. In addition

[3:39:02] to the increased administrative costs, states with payment error rates above 6%

[3:39:07] will also be responsible for 5 to 15% of SNAP benefit costs. While states will

[3:39:13] ultimately determine how these costs are financed, counties are deeply concerned

[3:39:18] that both the administrative cost shift and benefit cost sharing requirements

[3:39:23] will place significant new pressure on local budgets. Together, these charges

[3:39:28] changes represent an unprecedented cost shift from the federal government to

[3:39:33] state and local governments at a time when many counties are already facing

[3:39:38] rising costs, workforce challenges, and an increasing demand for essential

[3:39:43] services. And it goes on to say in the end that counties are responsible for

[3:39:49] the entire share of non-federal match requirements for SNAP administration in

[3:39:56] three states and North Carolina is one of them. And I just want to say I hope

[3:40:01] this board if it comes before us before the new board is sworn in, the new

[3:40:06] members are sworn in. I hope this board and its members are as as generous with

[3:40:13] providing for our lowincome families and those in need and our seniors as they

[3:40:19] are were with the land of 1,950,000 today for uh the college without trying

[3:40:27] to get that number red that amount reduced. I just hope you are generous

[3:40:33] and look after our citizens. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you, Commissioner

[3:40:38] Wilkins. Uh, Commissioner Howell. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just want to

[3:40:42] take a moment to recognize that this week, um, beginning August the 3rd

[3:40:46] through August the 9th is National Farmers Market Week. This is nationally

[3:40:50] observed week meant to celebrate the farmers, growers, and vendors who bring

[3:40:54] fresh local products directly to our community and recognize the vital role

[3:40:59] that farmers markets play in supporting local agricultural and local economics.

[3:41:05] Uh Nash County is fortunate that we're home to two thriving farmers markets.

[3:41:08] The Nash County Farmers Market in Rocky Mount and the Nashville Farmers Market.

[3:41:13] So these markets give our residents direct access to fresh produce, meats,

[3:41:17] baked goods, and handmade products grown right here in our nearby areas by our

[3:41:21] farmers and small business owners. So thank you, sir.

[3:41:26] » All right. Okay. Well, I want to thank uh the

[3:41:31] commissioners uh for allowing me to attend the National Conference for

[3:41:37] County Commissioners uh this July

[3:41:41] uh in New Orleans. It was a very informative uh gathering uh Mr. George

[3:41:49] Dunlap uh from Mechenburgg County. He was elected as a president for our

[3:41:57] national incoming. He's the national incoming

[3:42:01] president of the National Association of County Commissioners.

[3:42:06] And on our state level, uh Alan Thompson will be the president of the North

[3:42:12] Carolina Association. I attended a number of conferences as

[3:42:17] you see I left some handouts uh with you and one of the general sessions that I

[3:42:25] attend uh we had master sergeant Citric King uh who's a double amputee and an an

[3:42:33] endurance athlete. Uh he gave a presentation and he's from uh North

[3:42:38] Carolina. It was uh very informative and as I left on each one of your desks that

[3:42:46] uh I attended the data data center and grid county development uh seminar

[3:42:54] and

[3:42:58] we also had the North Carolina Association meeting and reception which

[3:43:01] was attended uh very well. I also attended

[3:43:07] the uh

[3:43:10] well we had that general session achievements and we had a number of

[3:43:14] North Carolina counties that receive uh achievement awards for the various uh

[3:43:20] projects that they have uh put forward and I left on some of your desks the a

[3:43:27] jazz fest main street arts and cultural arts uh seminar that really focus on uh

[3:43:34] tourism in your county and how to develop uh tourism dollars through arts

[3:43:39] and the performing arts and let me get and I also

[3:43:46] went to the mastering Roberts rules of order and trying to run effective

[3:43:51] meetings. Uh we all do the best that we can with that. The closing session was

[3:43:57] uh a monograph type of closing session which they had. There are 64 parishes in

[3:44:05] uh Louisiana, which means there are 64 counties, and they all bought their

[3:44:09] various uh food uh special items to the uh event, and they had a nice band and

[3:44:18] everything went very well. So, uh again, I want to thank everyone for allowing me

[3:44:24] to attend. And um

[3:44:29] I hope you can read some of the information that I brought back. Thanks.

[3:44:34] Yes. Uh >> will you ask me a question? Go ahead.

[3:44:38] » I was just going to say uh it it appears like your class and Robert's rule order

[3:44:44] was uh very timely attended, sir. Okay. >> Commission all.

[3:44:50] » No comments today, sir. >> All right. question to David.

[3:44:54] » I have none other than if uh you want to hear the housing report. We got rather

[3:45:00] late uh yesterday. I don't know when Adam goes home, but uh it was pretty

[3:45:05] much a slow month on the commercial side. We only had $317,000

[3:45:10] worth of work uh applied for. There were 27 new homes which were scattered pretty

[3:45:16] much throughout the county. Uh the highest price one was 8 834,000.

[3:45:22] There were 10 modular homes and the highest price of those is two was

[3:45:27] 266,000 uh for a total of 37 new home

[3:45:31] applications or permits during the month of uh July. They were about 13 builders

[3:45:37] and as I said they were distributed pretty much throughout the county uh

[3:45:41] which still a large concentration in the southern part of the county. Thank you

[3:45:46] Mr. Chairman. >> All right, Commissioner Bfield. Any

[3:45:49] comment? I don't have a report that T River Transit is scheduled to meet this

[3:45:54] month. >> Yeah, you don't need you don't need to

[3:45:56] report on your committees. Just uh this is just for comments. If you got any

[3:46:00] general comments to make. >> No. Well, I don't have any comments at

[3:46:05] this time. >> Okay. All right. Thank you very much

[3:46:09] everyone. Um I think now we move to the manager's report,

[3:46:16] Miss Stacy Stagnner.

[3:46:22] Thank

[3:46:25] you very much. >> All right,

[3:46:29] » Commissioner Wilkins, thank you for sharing about SNAP. We are keeping our

[3:46:33] eye on that legislation and um Miss Deega sits on the Association for DSS

[3:46:40] directors. So, we're keeping up with that.

[3:46:44] » Thank you. I believe I passed a handout from the conference on Snap.

[3:46:52] » Well, good afternoon. >> Afternoon.

[3:46:54] » Good evening. >> Um, so the first item is about our water

[3:47:00] supply. Nash County is returning to voluntary conservation stage two, August

[3:47:05] 1. Due to the ongoing drought conditions, residents are encouraged to

[3:47:09] follow voluntary watering schedules to help reduce peak water demand. Please

[3:47:14] visit the Nash County Public Utilities web page for details um and conservation

[3:47:20] efforts for our senior center expansion project.

[3:47:24] You can see we've got windows and gutters installed on the exterior of the

[3:47:29] expansion and then framing has uh is going up on

[3:47:34] the interior. And late Friday, I was um shared some more images where drywall

[3:47:41] and um duct work is being installed on the interior.

[3:47:46] And for Med Park, it continues to take shape. Uh the service areas um are

[3:47:52] coming together and flooring and molding are being installed.

[3:48:00] We will have a ribbon cutting on the outdoor classroom I shared with you last

[3:48:05] month. Um it will be Monday, September the 21st for at 10:00 a.m. at the A

[3:48:12] Center in Nashville. Sharpsburg will host the next managers,

[3:48:18] administrators, mayors, and clerks meeting. The invitations have been sent

[3:48:21] and we're looking forward to another great networking event with our county

[3:48:25] leaders. The health department has issued

[3:48:30] um a public health notice about rabies, a raccoon tested positive in Nash

[3:48:35] County. If you've had any physical contact with an animal acting

[3:48:39] aggressively or sickly, please call the Nash County Health Department at 252

[3:48:45] 382904.

[3:48:48] To report sightings of animals behaving unusually aggressive or sickly, call the

[3:48:53] Nash County Animal Services at 4599855. And pet owners are encouraged to make

[3:49:01] sure that your pets are up to date on their rabies vaccinations.

[3:49:06] To reduce your risk, you should not feed or try to handle wild animals.

[3:49:12] Secure trash cans and remove food sources that attract wild animals. Keep

[3:49:17] pets on leashes and supervised while outside. And avoid and report sick or

[3:49:24] dead animals. Our

[3:49:27] Nash County Animal Services is pleased to announce beginning August the 3,

[3:49:32] today we will have extended hours for adoption. The new hours will be Monday

[3:49:37] through Friday, 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. and the 2nd and 4th Saturdays from 11:00

[3:49:43] a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Our first Saturday opening will be August the 8th. Please

[3:49:49] stop in and see if we have the perfect companion for you and your family.

[3:49:55] Nash County has received a grant from the North Carolina Department of

[3:49:59] Agriculture and Conu Consumer Services to develop a farmland protection plan.

[3:50:04] We're asking the public to complete two short surveys. Your feedback will help

[3:50:08] guide the future of agriculture and farmland preservation in Nash County.

[3:50:15] The Nash County Health Department is hosting two after hours vaccine clinics.

[3:50:20] The first is Tuesday, August the 4th at the Nashville location from 5 to 7:00

[3:50:25] p.m. And the second is Thursday, August 13th at the Rocky Mount location from 5

[3:50:31] to 7 p.m. These are by appointment only. So call today and make sure that you and

[3:50:37] your children's vaccines are up to date. Our health department is surveying Nash

[3:50:43] County residents to learn what classes, workshops, and community events will

[3:50:48] best meet the needs of our residents. Please use the QR code to link to the

[3:50:53] survey and tell us your thoughts. Nash County Cooperative Extension

[3:50:59] Services is offering grant writing lessons to gain step-by-step guidance

[3:51:04] for writing grants, how to work effectively with foundations and

[3:51:08] partners, digital resources to help with future grants, and so much more.

[3:51:14] Sessions will be August 19th, 26th, and September the 2nd from 9:00 a.m. to

[3:51:20] 12:00 noon. Registration is required and there's a $30 program fee for materials

[3:51:25] and refreshments. Use the link on this slide to register. And for more

[3:51:30] information, you can contact Tracy Dixon at 4599810.

[3:51:36] Our Nash County Department of Social Services and Veteran Veterans Services

[3:51:42] are partnering to offer a community fair Saturday, September the 19th from 10:00

[3:51:47] a.m. to 2:00 p.m. in the parking lot of the administration building.

[3:51:52] Participants can expect community resources connecting families with local

[3:51:57] agencies and service providers, youth and family support programs, and

[3:52:02] services to help families succeed. Giveaways and and prizes will be

[3:52:08] available for activities and games and food trucks will be on site for the

[3:52:12] event. Our Nash County Veteran Services now has

[3:52:17] a stocked cabinet with personal care essentials. If you are a veteran in need

[3:52:23] of hygiene and personal items, please stop in and let us assist you. Our parks

[3:52:30] and recreation staff are getting ready for their annual golf tournament

[3:52:34] fundraiser. Sign up today to enjoy a day of golf while supporting the Nash County

[3:52:39] Parks and Recreation Services. You can register online or call the office.

[3:52:45] Parks and Recreation is also planning the next Mother and Son dance. This

[3:52:50] year's theme is you're my superhero. The dance will be Saturday, September the

[3:52:56] 26th from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Registration started August the 1st and

[3:53:02] it goes through September the 13th. And it's not too early to start thinking

[3:53:08] about the holidays. Cooperative Extension Services is advertising their

[3:53:12] annual holiday bus trip to New York City. If interested, please call

[3:53:17] 459-9810.

[3:53:22] This is a reminder that several commissioners along with staff will be

[3:53:26] attending the 119th NCACC annual conference in Durham at the

[3:53:31] Durham Convention Center from August 20th through the 22nd.

[3:53:40] And offices are closed Monday, September the 7th to observe Labor Day holiday.

[3:53:46] And our board meeting, the Nash County Board of Commissioners September board

[3:53:50] meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, September the 8th at 9:00 a.m.

[3:53:56] And that is all I have. If there's any questions,

[3:54:01] any questions for the manager? >> No. I will turn it over to Mr. Boon for

[3:54:06] his report.

[3:54:10] » Thank you, ma'am. Clearly, I need to step my game up a

[3:54:14] little bit because I I haven't been providing you with a PowerPoint, but I

[3:54:16] did give you a piece of paper. I didn't want you to leave empty-handed. So,

[3:54:19] you've got your 11 by17 with a very small print on it. Um, giving you an

[3:54:24] update on our capital projects. We've already discussed a few of those today.

[3:54:27] So, I was just going to hit on four of those on the list. Uh, one is a

[3:54:31] fellowship church. Uh, Commissioner How referenced that project earlier today as

[3:54:36] parks and recreation department. Just want to update you. Our intent was to

[3:54:39] have that project ready to bid uh late last month. Uh but we ran into a couple

[3:54:44] of issues when we sat down to review the final set of plans. Uh we got a couple

[3:54:48] issues to revise. Charter Construction is working on those. Uh and we

[3:54:52] anticipate adding that uh advertising that project this month. Uh we'll say we

[3:54:56] may have to delay work on the modular unit which was uh something we were hope

[3:55:00] hoping to repurpose for use by DSS for emergency placements. Uh we've run into

[3:55:05] a permitting issue there. So I think we're going to set that aside for the

[3:55:08] time being so it does not delay the overall project. We are we are moving

[3:55:12] forward. Uh second project I was going to touch uh based on is the courthouse

[3:55:16] building repairs. Uh as far as original scope of work, I would say that project

[3:55:20] is approximately 98% complete. Really all that's left to do from the original

[3:55:24] scope is the indoor uh trim the interior trim. Uh so that work continues. Uh

[3:55:30] project has gone really well. Uh you may recall we did or the board rather

[3:55:35] approved a change order to install an interior elevator to serve the clerk

[3:55:38] court's office. Uh we've run into a snag with uh that particular u element of the

[3:55:44] project and continuing to work with Calvin Davenport uh try to resolve that

[3:55:49] and identify a path forward. Uh and we're also waiting on a change order. Uh

[3:55:55] we've already had a few change orders today. So, we've got a few more uh in

[3:55:59] our future uh to address some additional roof repair work that was identified

[3:56:03] while working on the exterior repairs. Uh this is primarily on related to the

[3:56:08] superior superior courtroom and also uh some PA repairs in front of the superior

[3:56:13] courtroom. Uh next project is the emergency services uh warehouse. Uh we

[3:56:20] had a meeting with Stocks Engineering who's assisting the county on that

[3:56:23] project uh back on the um 23rd uh of the month and uh the lot was cleared uh this

[3:56:31] past week uh in anticipation of the survey work uh in order to move forward

[3:56:36] uh with that uh site design work uh for the emergency services warehouse. And

[3:56:41] then finally uh the Northern Ash water system project phase two contract one.

[3:56:47] Um that project is underway. Um busco contractors has mobilized. I think they

[3:56:52] were working on some bores last week, but work is underway and again just

[3:56:55] remind you that uh anticipated substantial completion is February 2nd

[3:56:59] of 2027. Uh moving beyond capital projects, two

[3:57:03] things I just want to update you on. Uh again, Commissioner Howell had mentioned

[3:57:06] the work on our wastewater planning grant. Uh we did meet uh back on the

[3:57:11] 27th. Uh that was Monday the 27th. Uh we discussed next steps on the project

[3:57:16] required followup with the North Carolina Department of Environmental

[3:57:18] Quality. Uh new technology which Commissioner How alluded to and we had a

[3:57:22] conference call on Friday uh with that particular company uh that may have some

[3:57:28] um um utility to us as we look uh at either a regional solution or possibly a

[3:57:35] interim solution for um one or more of the members of the proposed authority.

[3:57:40] Uh and we also discussed the need for a grant extension. Again, we've run to

[3:57:44] some issues with the North County Department of Environmental Quality

[3:57:47] getting some answers on some of the alternatives that we've considered. Uh

[3:57:50] and I believe Commissioner Howell had mentioned he had already uh contact our

[3:57:54] local delegation about intervening on our behalf for an extension. I don't

[3:57:59] know if he's received a final answer on that, but we discussed uh certainly to

[3:58:03] uh request an extension beyond the end of this calendar year. Uh and then

[3:58:09] finally, the fire services working group uh met uh last week on Thursday and uh

[3:58:14] just kind of preliminary meeting. We did spend some time talking about the

[3:58:17] $50,000 allocation that was approved in uh the FY27 budget for the volunteer

[3:58:22] fire departments. Uh and we will be picking that up again. Our next meeting

[3:58:25] scheduled on the 25th of this month at 10 a.m. That's all I have.

[3:58:33] » All right. Thank you.

[3:58:40] All right. Now, I will, if there's no other business, I will entertain a

[3:58:45] motion to go in close session uh to discuss economic development

[3:58:51] attorney client privilege personnel. Uh attorney, do you think we'll be

[3:58:57] taking any action? I >> I do not believe so.

[3:59:01] » Okay. All right. Um,

[3:59:06] need a motion to go into close session. >> So move.

[3:59:09] » Second move by Commissioner Wilkins. >> Second.

[3:59:12] » Second by Commissioner Bfield. We go into close session at this time. Uh, any

[3:59:17] further discussion on the motion. All in favor? Let it be known by saying I.

[3:59:22] » I. >> All opposed. Okay. We'll now go into

[3:59:25] close session. Motion carries. We're back in the open session. uh

[3:59:31] Commissioner Belfield had to leave

[3:59:35] uh but there is no action to be taken after our closed session meeting. So at

[3:59:40] this time I entertain a motion to close our regular session meeting.

[3:59:46] » So moved by Commissioner Outlaw and second by Commissioner Davis that we uh

[3:59:53] adjourn our regular meeting for this month. All in favor of the motion let it

[3:59:59] be known by saying I. >> I.

[4:00:01] » All opposed. Motion carrot. Meeting the journal.

8.3.26 Commissioners' Meeting

Transcript