[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.