[0:06] Good evening everyone, and welcome to the july 8th, 2025 new board of alderman

[0:10] meeting. Prayer tonight will be given by alderman royal. Good evening,

[0:14] let us pray. Heaven and father,

[0:20] we ask for your wisdom as we begin this meeting.

[0:25] we acknowledge this evening that we have need of your wisdom,

[0:29] and we welcome your presence among us. Guide us

[0:33] in our deliberations and decisions. Help us

[0:37] to seek what is best for all involved

[0:42] and that you direct our meeting according to your will.

[0:46] I pray that you will not only give us wisdom, but that you will also give us grace

[0:51] to respect those whose views are different, that we

[0:55] will minimize our differences and rally around our commonalities

[1:01] in order to advance what is best for our citizens.

[1:06] let this board be mindful that every voice has value,

[1:10] and every citizen has a fundamental right to be heard,

[1:15] and that this will be our belief and serve as a guiding principle.

[1:21] it is my prayer that we do our work in a spirit of kindness and

[1:25] justice. Help us to use our authority to serve faithfully

[1:30] and promote the general welfare of all of our citizens,

[1:34] whether they are poor, wealthy, or homeless.

[1:40] I pray that each member of this board and every person on staff

[1:44] be mindful that we are called to serve our citizens with

[1:49] fairness, compassion, and humility.

[1:53] and now, heavenly father, we pause to pray for the families in texas

[1:58] who have suffered the devastating loss of over 100 people.

[2:03] it is my prayer that they be competent by your peace and your

[2:07] presence. I ask this in jesus' name. Amen. Amen.

[2:11] if you're able to stand, please do so. And pledge allegiance to the flag of our country.

[2:16] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america

[2:21] and to the republic stands, one nation

[2:25] under god, individual with liberty in justice

[2:29] for all. Madam clerk, if

[2:34] you would please call the roll

[2:41] alderman kri. Here. Alderman royal. Here.

[2:45] alderman aster. Here. Mayor odom. Here. Alderman kenzie.

[2:50] alderman. Best present. Uh, next step is item number three. Approve the

[2:54] agenda. Are there any changes the board would like to make to the agenda? Yes, ms. Mayer? Um,

[3:00] my agenda won't come up. What number is the item concerning

[3:04] the raising electric base?

[3:09] um, 16. You won't vote. What is it? 16. Six 16.

[3:13] mayor, I'd like to make a, a motion that we, um,

[3:17] full item number 16 for consideration at

[3:21] a later date. There's some unlimited

[3:26] pca in there that I would like to have more information about before

[3:30] we put this burden on our customers.

[3:34] okay. I have a motion. Do we have a second?

[3:40] uh, well, I'll make a second for discussion purposes. Okay. I have a

[3:44] motion a second to approve the agenda. Less. Item number 16. Is

[3:48] there a further discussion question?

[3:52] yes, ma'am. It was item number. What again?

[3:57] 16. Is that part of the consent agenda? No, no,

[4:01] it is not just approving the agenda. Number

[4:05] three, it's the electric rate schedule. Okay. Alright. Thank you.

[4:09] foster by holman off until, presumably the august

[4:13] meeting. Does that present any issues for the city?

[4:18] no, sir. Okay. That'll still give us plenty

[4:22] of time and opportunity.

[4:26] any further discussion? I, I'm,

[4:31] I'm, I'm confused. What, what, what's missing? Alderman, um, aster

[4:35] that, well, it's that mr. Bouchard hasn't already addressed us with

[4:39] it. It, it's an unlimited pca and I, I mean, I'm just concerned

[4:45] and I would like to know some more information about it. I mean, I don't, I don't want an unlimited

[4:49] pca and then our, some of the electric bills,

[4:53] that's what he is asking for, and some of the electric bills

[4:58] go skyrocket.

[5:02] um, well, I would like to, since we're discussing this, I would like to have mr.

[5:07] bachar come up and tell me his opinion of what you're

[5:11] saying. Uh, mr. Davis, could you just clarify, we're in, we've got a motion, a second

[5:15] to approve the agenda. Um, we probably need to take action on that, correct? Yes, sir.

[5:19] you're, you're, you're in the discussion, but at some point someone can call the question on the vote.

[5:24] so we're still in questioning discussion. Yes, ma'am.

[5:28] so, mr. Shar can come forward, excuse me.

[5:32] you can make that motion to invite department head up and we can proceed that way.

[5:37] okay. Do we have to, uh, go ahead and close the first motion

[5:41] on the floor? No, ma'am. Okay. During the discussion, if the board wants

[5:46] more information from anybody in the audience, the board can make that motion. Um,

[5:50] and if approved, take that information. Well, I make that motion

[5:54] to, for mr. Bihar to come forward to give,

[5:58] uh, work information on the pca.

[6:03] okay. We have a motion. And a second. Second was all repri.

[6:08] any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye.

[6:12] any opposed? Okay. Mr. Bouchard,

[6:32] did you have a specific question in mind? Uh, good

[6:36] evening, sir. And I, I hate to put you on the spot like this, but you have come before

[6:41] us years too many times for us to and express

[6:45] to us about the pca, and now we're wanting to

[6:49] hold to table this until we can get more information.

[6:53] and I just want to know, is there any additional information that you have that

[6:57] you haven't already shared with us? No, ma'am. It, it's

[7:02] pretty much the same information that I shared during the workshops that we had. There

[7:06] is an option that I am presenting that keeps our pca the way

[7:10] it is, but it requires a higher, uh, rate increase. So

[7:14] I'm presenting basically three different options tonight. My recommendation is

[7:18] the 3% rate increase with a balancing factor

[7:22] on the pca. So some changes to the pca. What was the

[7:26] amount of the rate increase? 3%. 3% with a, with

[7:31] a balanced pca 4.5%. If we leave a pca

[7:36] as it is,

[7:40] that's your recommendation. My recommendation is

[7:44] for the 3% rate increase with the balancing factor

[7:48] on the pca.

[7:52] there's also another item in the agenda to, um,

[7:57] adjust the credit for our schedule 60, um, renewable

[8:01] energy credit that we provide, uh, customers that,

[8:05] uh, produce solar power and we credit them for the solar that,

[8:10] for the energy that we receive from them. So that, that's also in the presentation

[8:15] tonight and in the amendment.

[8:23] any other questions for mr. Bouchard?

[8:27] thank you, sir. You're welcome. Okay. Uh, I'll go back to the

[8:31] motion that is on the table to approve the agenda. Pooling item number

[8:36] 16. We had a motion in a second.

[8:40] we were in discussion. If there's no other discussion on that, we'll

[8:44] have a roll call vote starting with alderman prill.

[8:49] alderman pll. Yeah. What do we, yeah, what's yesterday?

[8:53] clarify what we're, what we're voting on is to approve the agenda less

[8:58] tabled. Item number 16. Okay.

[9:02] no alder memorial. Let

[9:07] me ask, was your question resolved? Mine? No, I don't.

[9:11] I I mean, I just think I'd like to have some more time I

[9:15] to, to review it. I'm just concerned about the

[9:19] rates. But you do what you have to do. Yes,

[9:23] sir. No

[9:28] derman astro. No, I'm sorry. That's a no.

[9:33] yes. Wait a minute. It's your motion that you made to approve the agenda.

[9:37] less. Item number 16. Okay. Yes,

[9:43] alderman best? No. Mayor odom? No.

[9:47] so now we need to approve the agenda. Item number three. Do

[9:51] we have a motion to do so? So moved. Second. Have a motion and

[9:55] a second. Any further discussion? Hearing

[9:59] none. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Agenda

[10:04] is approved as is. Next is request and petition of citizens. Madam clerk.

[10:16] thank you. First up is karen sullivan.

[10:24] good evening. Members of the board of alderman, mayor odom, and city officials.

[10:28] I'm karen sullivan, executive director of swiss fair, and I am

[10:33] here tonight to let you know what swiss fair has been working on for the last few months.

[10:37] swiss fair's interest as the north carolina main street organization

[10:41] for the city of new bern is to promote development of a vital downtown

[10:46] district that continues to thrive. We believe that when our

[10:50] downtown is successful at offering employment opportunities,

[10:54] attractions, and investment, all awards can benefit.

[10:59] in february, we hired mary hannah parker, our new event specialist.

[11:03] mary hannah comes to us with event planning experience and a strong network

[11:07] of connections in new bern. In march, mary hannah and I, along

[11:11] with several of our board members, attended the north carolina main street conference

[11:16] in morrisville. At the conference, lynn au was

[11:20] recognized as a main street champion for her years of service,

[11:25] uh, to swiss bear and to the downtown development of new bern.

[11:29] we also took that opportunity to announce that new bern and swiss bear will

[11:34] be hosting the 2026 north carolina main street conference,

[11:38] march 10th through 12th at the riverfront convention center.

[11:42] this conference will welcome between 800 and 900 attendees

[11:46] to our city. We consider this not only an honor, but a great revenue

[11:50] driver for new bern. We've already started planning for this conference,

[11:55] and we'll begin meeting monthly to work on breakout sessions, tours

[11:59] and logistics. We are pleased to share that we've had several

[12:03] new businesses open in downtown in the last few months, and we hope you've had the

[12:07] opportunity to welcome those business owners and frequent those shops

[12:11] and restaurants. Planning for month fest 2025 is

[12:15] well underway. The dates are october 11th and 12th. We'll be making some

[12:20] changes this year, like moving the main music stage to the county

[12:24] lot at the end of broad street. This year, the month fest concert

[12:28] will be combined with the festival offering a free music experience

[12:33] for our community on saturday at the waterfront. We also

[12:37] will have a kid zone this year offering free activities for children who may

[12:41] be too small to ride amusement rides and fun for kids of all ages.

[12:45] last year, we had over 70,000, 75,000 people attend

[12:50] mum fest, and we hope that that number just continues to grow.

[12:54] in june, swiss bear received notification that we had once again been accredited

[12:58] by main street america as a main street community. Newburn has been

[13:02] part of the main street program since 1980 and remains one of its longest

[13:06] standing communities. Since 1980, our downtown

[13:11] has seen 259 building rehabs and over $360 million

[13:16] in public and private investment. Downtown newburn is a proven example

[13:21] of long-term revitalization success. We look forward

[13:25] to the next chapter of swiss bay and downtown revitalization with

[13:29] your support and help. Thank you for your leadership, vision and

[13:33] commitment to our community and the future of you. Thank

[13:37] you. Thank you.

[13:43] next is soraya bliss.

[13:49] hello, alderman. My name is soraya bliss from ward one.

[13:53] I would like to know, are you okay with raising taxes while

[13:58] spending money on outdated hpc guidelines? Should

[14:02] newburn pay for unnecessary consultants are the alderman

[14:06] comfortable with an hpc who has operated out of legal compliance

[14:10] since 2021? Withholds information from the public

[14:14] and don't seem to know the rules that they are appointed to uphold.

[14:18] have all of your constituents received their end core funding?

[14:23] you have extensive documentation highlighting serious deficits

[14:27] in the new bern hpc, along with the draft plan for correction.

[14:32] you have the power, and I respectfully say the responsibility

[14:36] to act. While city departments support the hpc,

[14:41] only the alderman can mandate change. The buck stops

[14:45] with you. These three immediate changes to the

[14:49] hpc rules of procedure are needed to ensure legal compliance

[14:54] and promote transparency, which you have the authority to make tonight.

[14:59] currently, the hpc can amend rules with zero oversight.

[15:03] the ability to make changes in the dark of night is a bad idea.

[15:07] alderman approval should be required for all future hpc changes.

[15:12] the hpc rules of procedures state, they supersede those in the guidelines.

[15:17] this invites inconsistency and unchecked power, which is

[15:21] dangerous. This should be stricken. The enabling statutes are

[15:26] four years out of compliance. They

[15:30] need to be updated. You have a red line document that annotates

[15:34] the above requests, and I offer any support needed for implementation.

[15:39] you simply need to decide to make the change. I'll also reiterate

[15:44] my request for the alderman to initiate a public led process to revise

[15:49] the hpc guidelines as the oversight board for the hpc.

[15:53] according to statute, this is fully within your power.

[15:59] you have heard or will hear excuses for delaying none

[16:03] are valid. Excuse one. It takes time and money. We

[16:07] don't have false. The alderman can initiate the process to create

[16:12] a public work group. We will work for free. And existing meetings

[16:16] can be leveraged. You can drive this action with or without. The

[16:20] hpc two work is planned for next

[16:24] year's budget maybe, but that hasn't been approved yet. And

[16:29] unnecessary expenses. Given the state of and given the state of the a

[16:33] pc, it is unfair to expect the public to wait.

[16:37] excuse three. Revising the guidelines took years last time.

[16:41] true, but it absolutely does not have to. A phased

[16:45] plan can deliver meaningful changes by years end and set up

[16:49] a better process for the future. Excuse four hpc

[16:54] work groups are on hold, so they can't do any work. Partially

[16:58] true, but grossly misleading. The hpc had been

[17:02] holding illegal meetings, and when called out, rather than make the meetings

[17:06] public and producing required minutes, they decided to cancel

[17:11] the meetings. Now they're using this as an excuse for not doing the work

[17:15] they signed up to do. As a reminder, the hpc has made

[17:19] zero guideline changes for more than four years. Now, they say they've

[17:23] been working on it, but when asked to provide legally required documentation of the

[17:27] guideline work, they show nothing more recent than 2021.

[17:31] this doesn't seem to pass the sniff test. I always keep two things

[17:35] in mind. It's not a plan if it's not on paper, and do not

[17:40] confuse effort with results. You appoint the hpc, you

[17:44] provide its primary oversight, and you can course correct your

[17:48] action, can save money, protect the public, and rebuild trust. Let's get

[17:52] a plan on paper. Thank you. Thank you.

[17:59] mr. Hughes. Is there a path forward to

[18:03] address this? There he is. We have been working with development services staff.

[18:08] they have been working with hpc on updating the rules and procedures, which I believe

[18:12] is gonna be, um, um, uh, brought up at the next hpc

[18:16] meeting. Uh, and we are also working with staff on how the hpc

[18:21] guidelines will be updated. Just a

[18:25] reminder to the board, uh, we typically don't engage. Uh, I've

[18:29] been fairly lenient on that over the past couple years. Uh, but

[18:33] as far as rules and procedures, um, we can address all of these issues

[18:37] if someone brings it up in a new business. So, next up is minister tyrone brown.

[18:47] good evening. Evening. My name is tyron brown, and I currently

[18:51] live at 1414 harrison street, new bern, north carolina, 2 8 5 6 0.

[18:57] today, I stand before you, not with just words, but with the weight of too many names,

[19:02] too many candles and too many dreams. Cut. Short gun

[19:06] violence is tearing through our communities, our streets, our schools,

[19:10] and our homes. And in many african american neighborhoods,

[19:15] it's become a daily reality. But let me be clear, this is not normal. It

[19:19] is unacceptable, and it must end. Behind every

[19:23] statistic is a life, a child who won't graduate, a mother who won't

[19:27] stop grieving. A community that keeps asking why we cannot afford to

[19:31] grow, numb to the sound of gunshots or the site of yet another

[19:36] memorial. This crisis is not just about guns. It's

[19:40] about poverty, lack of opportunity, broken trust, and generations

[19:44] of pain. But we are more than our struggles. We are

[19:48] resilient, powerful, and united. We have the right to live without

[19:53] fear. Our children deserve to go to school and not have to worry about, am

[19:57] I gonna get shot? Today? Our elders deserve to sit on

[20:01] their porches in peace. Change starts with us demanding

[20:05] better, standing together and refusing to stay silent. So to every

[20:10] life lost, we remember you. And to every life still, here, we fight for you. Enough

[20:14] is enough. It's time to heal, to rebuild, and to rise.

[20:18] thank you.

[20:26] next is jesse morris, jr.

[20:38] uh, good evening board. Uh, good evening. Good evening. City of new bern citizens.

[20:43] I'm the president of juneteenth of new bern. We're just coming to give you guys a big thanks

[20:47] for all of your support, uh, during our festivities. Uh, first we want

[20:51] to thank, uh, the mayor and all of his support. Uh, we want to thank parks and rec

[20:56] and ms. Carey. They, they did a wonderful job helping us with everything that we needed help with.

[21:00] um, also the facility and maintenance team, we, we want to give a, a big shout out to them

[21:04] as well. Uh, the fire department, uh, mr. Johnny gaskins, he

[21:08] helped us tremendously when it came to our, our fireworks show. Uh, the

[21:12] police department, they helped us a lot as well. And, uh, the chamber of

[21:16] commerce with miss melissa and her team, um, we, we thank them. Uh, and just,

[21:20] just wanted to show our, our appreciation for all that you guys have done for us.

[21:25] um, the only other thing that we would like to

[21:29] see moving forward, um, is the, the attendance of the board

[21:33] for our events. Um, there were a lot of faces that weren't seen throughout

[21:37] the two weeks. Um, so, and I think it would, it would mean a lot to us and also to the community

[21:41] as well, to, to see the faces that, that represent us. Um,

[21:46] did I miss anyone? Um, the, the, the event has, all of our events

[21:50] have grown tremendously. Um, from, from year to year,

[21:54] we've seen how we've increased and been able to better serve our communities.

[21:58] uh, so it's, it is, thanks to you guys. Um, so, um, that's,

[22:02] that's pretty much it. Thank you. And, uh, for the, the voting for

[22:06] the uhhon, uh, city, sister city,

[22:11] uh, just wanted to, to speak with you guys to see if, if you can, vote in on

[22:15] behalf of that to make sure that's something that we can make happen for our city. Uh, thank

[22:19] you much and we appreciate you. Thank you. Thank you.

[22:28] next is patricia to

[22:39] hi, um, patricia toth. I live

[22:43] here in new bern, and a couple of weeks ago I went to

[22:48] a, um, carolina nature coalition

[22:52] meeting. Uh, they have one every month. It's a free

[22:56] presentation, and they had an unusual one.

[23:00] it was on artificial intelligence, which I knew very little about,

[23:05] but I was struck. And so were the other participants in the room.

[23:10] we saw a film on ai, artificial intelligence,

[23:15] and what it is going to do to our environment, what

[23:19] it actually is starting to do with our environment and

[23:23] being the leaders of our community. I wanted to just

[23:28] bring this to your attention. So it's five pages. I've

[23:32] given it to the clerk. It will be given to you, and I hope that

[23:36] you will look at it and maybe even watch one of

[23:40] the videos because it's frightening.

[23:44] but the main impact I wanted to let you know about

[23:48] was the consumption of power and the consumption

[23:53] of water to cool these massive machines.

[23:57] they are coming. There's no stopping it. But I wanted you to know,

[24:01] to be proactive for the environment, because our environment

[24:07] is where we live, and that's a huge, huge thing to

[24:11] consider. So, I know it's a little bit out of your realm, maybe, I'm not

[24:15] sure, but I did want you to be aware of it,

[24:20] and I put together some good information for you,

[24:24] um, just as a lay person. But there's some really

[24:29] good sites that you can go to, to learn more, and I hope you will.

[24:33] so thank you. Thank you, thank you.

[24:41] next is edward toth.

[24:54] thank you for letting me speak. Uh, I heard that there's a trap door if I overextend

[24:59] my time and go down to basic and fill the alligators. So, uh, I'll make a

[25:03] brief or as brief as I can. Uh, thursday night

[25:07] is the fifth. It's a candlelight vigil for the fifth anniversary

[25:11] of john lewis's death, a leader and a hero. And one of the

[25:15] things he says is, make good trouble. So tonight I'm gonna try to make some good trouble.

[25:20] I've already handed out my writeup. It's called newburn, and it's black roots.

[25:25] it basically, when I came here, I just had this feeling

[25:29] that slavery in new bern was very low key existed,

[25:34] but nobody really talked much about it. So I started digging into it. And

[25:38] what you find out that slavery was very important in new bern. Not

[25:42] only was it the foundation for new bern and the economic drive for new

[25:46] bern, but new bern was one of the major ports for

[25:50] the importation of slaves from africa.

[25:55] they came into places like union point. They were sold,

[25:59] um, at places like, uh, uh, edward, uh, uh,

[26:03] bachelor's, uh, front. They were sold at the courthouse. They were sold on

[26:07] the streets like you would sell. I don't know, taco bells, who knows? But

[26:12] what you find out is also that this town does not have any

[26:16] real memorials to the slaves or what they contributed to this

[26:20] town. We have a good, good, wonderful memorial to the confederate soldiers

[26:25] that I appreciate and I support because robert e. Lee was someone

[26:29] I appreciated. Uh, but where is, where is the monument to

[26:33] the thousands of people who died because of the southern cause?

[26:37] we have the, uh, fort totten, which is a

[26:41] fort that we show a little marker there. But where's the marker there for the thousands of

[26:46] slaves that took refuge there during the civil war and

[26:50] escaped from their, their masters. We have tyra, uh, tryon

[26:54] palace, um, where across the street we have some kind

[26:58] of a plaque to a lady who was a spy for the confederates.

[27:02] where's the plaque for the people, the slaves that built trium palace?

[27:07] we have the declaration of independence on the steps, and that

[27:11] is something the declaration of independence, where people who built

[27:16] the palace and who were, uh, servants at the palace were slaves.

[27:21] we have the, um, junk kadu, uh, um,

[27:26] celebration at christmas. What is that? It's not a celebration of slaves.

[27:31] it's a celebration of slavery. It was a one day of the year

[27:36] that a slave was allowed to celebrate. Not their weddings,

[27:40] not a birth. And then we have the desecration of the cemeteries, and

[27:44] you could go on and on. I think this town needs to start thinking about maybe putting up a

[27:48] memorial where the slaves were landed, because we know where they landed.

[27:52] we know where they were sold. There should be a memorial there of some sort. There should be a

[27:56] memorials equivalent to the one for the confederate soldiers who died for their

[28:01] cause to the people who died because of their cause.

[28:05] so, that's it. I just want to say that I hope this town starts taking

[28:09] it seriously and dig through and come to the surface

[28:14] on its history of slavery. Slavery was not a passive thing in

[28:18] new bern. It was an active thing. It was a business, and it was an international

[28:22] business that we were part of. Thank you. Thank you. Thank.

[28:36] next up is helen robinson.

[28:44] good evening everybody. Good evening. My name's helen robinson.

[28:49] I still live in ward six. So many of us

[28:53] in ward six are still bewildered by the cavalier

[28:57] response of this board toward resolving our lack of

[29:01] representation in a way that people want.

[29:06] I keep trying to make sense of the unwillingness of the leadership

[29:10] to work for a timely solution about representation.

[29:16] immediately after alderman brinson resigned last july, the

[29:20] mayor said, we need a new alderman to go to work on day one.

[29:24] the implication was that this was important enough to resolve quickly and

[29:28] effectively fellow citizens.

[29:33] today is day three hundred and forty two, three hundred and forty two.

[29:39] civil in ward six will have been without representation in government

[29:43] for 365 days, one whole year.

[29:47] this shows a fundamental disregard for our form of government

[29:53] through repeated efforts on the part of citizens in ward six. To support a new

[29:57] aga,

[30:01] a common response from some leaders has been, we need someone who's

[30:06] qualified. At first, this was really a convincing

[30:10] argument to me. Dana outlaw, the preferred candidate of three

[30:14] members of this board, certainly has experience,

[30:18] but you know, he's not really the only person in newburg qualified to do this

[30:23] job. In may, our board presented to the board

[30:27] a petition with nearly 200 signatures from voters in ward six

[30:32] asking that darlene brown be appointed many people throughout

[30:36] the city. Think darlene brown's resume shows a breadth

[30:40] and depth of leadership experience that would equal that of anyone

[30:45] else sitting on this board. The argument about only

[30:49] wanting someone qualified just doesn't

[30:53] hold water. So what is going on?

[30:58] it seems that there may be personal motives for only wanting dana outlaw

[31:02] in this job. It's worrisome when personal agendas

[31:06] drive the decision making in government.

[31:11] another confusing piece of the puzzle was the

[31:15] statement made in may that ward six only has to go

[31:19] four more meetings without an alderman. Since the new board doesn't

[31:24] take office until december, that would've meant six more regular meetings.

[31:29] what wasn't mentioned were called meetings, work sessions, and other

[31:33] times when an alderman needs to show up, the failure

[31:37] of the board to fill this vacancy trivializes

[31:42] the right of citizens to be fully represented

[31:46] before the vote on appointing darling ground to the seat in

[31:51] may, the mayor expressed his strong opinion that he wanted to let the process

[31:55] unfold after the october election, and that he was not

[31:59] going to vote to appoint anyone. We would like to

[32:03] hear tonight that the board, that everybody on this board at this point

[32:07] is committed to that plan since we waited to hear, we're ready to

[32:11] wait until december now, and we will not be pleased

[32:16] if you use our discontent with your performance

[32:20] as an excuse to give dana outlaw two extra months on the board

[32:25] should he be elected. I spent a lot of time in my

[32:29] life studying and observing healthy organizations

[32:33] and healthy leadership styles. You know, good leaders are those

[32:37] people who work to bring people together to find appropriate

[32:41] and acceptable solutions to problems. Good leaders, good

[32:46] leaders don't always have to get their own way. Thank you for your

[32:50] conference. Maybe it's time for some fresh leadership in the city. Thank

[32:54] you.

[33:03] next is tracy dso.

[33:12] good evening. Evening. Um, just want to bring attention to the,

[33:16] uh, board, um, an issue regarding hpc.

[33:20] at last month's meeting, our hpc became, it became apparent the hpc and

[33:24] the board members and the staff are not well versed on preservation

[33:29] best practices as defined by the national alliance preservation commissions

[33:35] commission is a nonpartisan, um, non-profit organization whose

[33:39] goal is to promote architectural preservation through education and mentoring

[33:44] of hpc members. Um, and, uh, our

[33:48] hpc board is actually members of this organization, of this alliance.

[33:53] um, and even though the board does have membership, um,

[33:58] as stated by the hpc staff administrator at last month's meeting,

[34:02] they have not been able to participate in the extensive training the alliance offers

[34:07] due to a lack of funding by the city and or planning

[34:11] by development services. So my request to

[34:15] you is, is to direct the development services to

[34:19] investigate improving the training opportunities for the hpc board,

[34:25] its members and the staff. Our city will benefit from the

[34:29] hpc board that knowledgeable and preservations best practices

[34:34] and fosters a culture found on helping property owners instead of entering

[34:38] them. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

[34:46] next is amy brigham.

[34:52] hello, my name is amy brigham. As a citizen of downtown new

[34:56] bern, I'm honored to be here and speak my peace. Thank you for this opportunity.

[35:02] at the may boa meeting, the mayor stated that he did not plan to vote

[35:06] for or appoint to appoint anyone to the empty ward six

[35:10] meeting, and then he went and voted against darlene brown.

[35:15] I'm confused about how this is supposed to work. I would like to understand the role

[35:19] of the mayor better. When the mayor gets involved in taking a side on an

[35:23] issue, isn't he supposed to turn over the gavel to someone else? Can someone

[35:27] on the board clarify this for me?

[35:32] I would like to speak to that. Now, what would you say in there, if we're, if

[35:36] we're gonna do that, the board needs to make a motion to suspend our rules

[35:42] and then the board can have discussion and deliberation. Is that correct, mr. Attorney? Yes, sir.

[35:47] so we would need a motion and a second, a vote to suspend our rules to have conversation.

[35:51] so moved. Second. We have a motion. Do we have a second?

[35:56] is that good? Second, any further discussion?

[36:00] all those in favor say aye. Aye. A aye. All those opposed? No

[36:06] ayes have it go right. Thank you, sir.

[36:11] I, I don't know if I need to direct this to our attorney.

[36:15] you have, um, you're the expert in the room perhaps on

[36:20] this issue, but I was asked the same question, uh, a number

[36:24] of times. And so I need clarity, uh, as

[36:28] our citizen, just as for clarity as to

[36:34] protocol or ordinance or rules or regulations regarding

[36:38] this question that she posed to the board. Yes, ma'am. We've

[36:42] discussed this a number of times. There is not a bright line

[36:47] test as to how far a chair can go

[36:51] in, um, participating in a debate, I've used the word

[36:55] robust discussion. Um, but the, the

[36:59] policy for you to understand as board members is

[37:04] the mayor who serves as your chair, is the referee of the

[37:08] meeting. The mayor cannot use that power

[37:12] to dominate a debate because he or she has a gavel.

[37:17] so the principle is the referee can't run the game to their favor.

[37:21] it does not mean that they can't participate in a discussion

[37:26] otherwise, the gavel would just roll around the board for

[37:30] hours, as everyone said something. So this

[37:34] is a self-governing process where you as board members,

[37:39] you call the balls and strikes. If any board member believes

[37:43] that the chair, in this case, the mayor is misusing

[37:48] the power of the gavel to dominate a debate,

[37:52] then you can speak up, make a motion that the gavel be passed to

[37:57] the mayor pro tem, and the same test would apply to the mayor pro

[38:01] tem. If that person is engaging to robustly

[38:05] and misusing that power, then it would pass to someone else.

[38:10] I will tell you, and having done this for 30 years, not only in newburn, but in many

[38:14] other jurisdictions, I have never seen a chair or a

[38:18] mayor have to pass the gavel because they were misusing

[38:23] that power in directing a discussion.

[38:30] so it is not simply that a mayor or a chair cannot speak

[38:34] or make a point without passing the gavel. The

[38:38] question is, is the chair being an unfair referee

[38:43] and not allowing others to participate because they have the gavel?

[38:48] does that make sense? It's pretty commonsensical. It does, and I appreciate that

[38:52] so much. And let me further, uh, ask a question then

[38:57] with, uh, respect to mayor odom's

[39:02] decision when he said he would not vote,

[39:06] however, the city clerk counted

[39:10] his response as a vote and it was said three

[39:15] to three. Yes, ma'am. Let me, if I can,

[39:19] um, my comments, I believe said I would not vote to support

[39:24] anyone getting the position I'm legally obligated to vote.

[39:28] is that correct, mr. Turner? Yes, sir. Yes. Thank you.

[39:34] I'm trying to understand the thin line. Yes, ma'am. So, so what the mayor's

[39:39] pointing out every board member has. Yeah, we, hold

[39:43] on just a minute. I, I don't know that we've ever had this since I've been mayor, but

[39:47] I love children, but it's becoming a distraction. So the, the child needs

[39:51] to quiet down or needs to exit the courtroom, please.

[39:57] so, as the mayor said, each of you

[40:01] have a duty to vote on every issue before the board,

[40:06] unless you have a legal conflict. So

[40:10] you have to vote what the mayor was saying. And what I recall is that he was not going

[40:14] to support any candidate since you were so close to the election.

[40:19] so that that's, I I I don't see that as an abuse of the

[40:23] gavel, if that's no, I didn't consider that abuse. I was just

[40:27] trying to get clarity. And as our citizen so well pointed out,

[40:32] I have been asked a question. So this is a proper time for our public.

[40:36] yes, ma'am. If any other citizen has a question that we can get some answers tonight,

[40:41] and, um, I, I appreciate that mayor odom. Um,

[40:45] again, the clarity and we can make

[40:50] informed decisions when we receive proper information. So thank you so

[40:54] much, mr. Attorney. Yes, ma'am. Ley, did you have something to say? It has became,

[40:58] um, a city, a city ordinance that the mayor can vote

[41:03] along with the board that has been in place for 19 years.

[41:08] and I have brought it up several times to ask,

[41:13] is that something we want to change? And no one wanted to

[41:18] vote on that. So it has remained what it is to today.

[41:25] um, uh, attorney davis? Yes, ma'am. I need

[41:30] a little bit more clarity too, because, um,

[41:35] when it says by the mayor becoming engaged in debates,

[41:39] and I'm looking at our rules of procedure here, and I'm not following

[41:44] the conduct of debate presiding officer, it says,

[41:49] if the presiding officer becomes actively involved in debate

[41:53] on a particular matter, he or she may designate another board

[41:57] member to preside over the debate. Yes, ma'am.

[42:02] so what am I missing here? , you,

[42:06] you, you're missing the area of when does a mayor or a chair cross

[42:10] the line and become so active that the gavel

[42:14] needs to be passed? Okay, so that's the ok word here. When it becomes

[42:19] a, a problem and the mayor steps out of line, and then that's when the board

[42:23] can I got yes, ma'am. If you read that, that's the word that I was looking for. Yes, ma'am. If you read that

[42:27] any other way, it means the mayor, each time has to pass the gavel

[42:31] to say anything during a discussion, which I think would be

[42:36] a, a waste of time. Okay. Thank you so much, sir. Yes ma'am.

[42:41] everybody satisfied? Okay, we will move on. The next

[42:45] petition of citizen is

[42:50] nat crosby.

[43:03] good evening, y'all. Mayor, board of alderman. I'm nat mckellar

[43:07] crosby, a resident in ward six. I appreciate the time to speak

[43:11] to you this evening. I first wanna lend my support to the effort

[43:15] to create a sister city agreement with hanta

[43:19] g. During the past juneteenth uh, events, we had the honor of

[43:23] hosting the junk new commandos and queen mother angelique

[43:28] angelique mckay, who has done much of the initial work to establish

[43:32] a sister city agreement between us here in uba and

[43:37] ahan, we have the opportunity to make history

[43:42] as the first si, uh, sister city to hanta and establish

[43:46] a bridge between our shared legacies. This opportunity

[43:51] also comes with funding opportunities to expand our cultural and tourism

[43:55] program. This initiative honors the history

[43:59] of new burning to provides funding to continue to tell

[44:03] this important story. In my humble opinion, this is a win for

[44:07] all parties and I support this endeavor.

[44:12] next, I would like to, um, like to speak with you all about

[44:16] the public bank of new bern initiative. I have emailed the city clerk,

[44:20] uh, with the preliminary feasibility study, uh, outlining the

[44:25] details of how we can get this done. Now, this is an

[44:29] important initiative for new bern because it will be a true economic driver

[44:34] in this city, helping working people improve

[44:38] their wages. Retirees have a safe and reliable place to

[44:42] deposit their savings at a much better rate than what they're receiving now,

[44:46] and lending opportunities for our small businesses and organizations

[44:51] to scale and grow. Not to mention, uh, mr. Mayor,

[44:56] the low cost funding for this infrastructure needs of

[45:00] this city. Our economy's growth is just 0.4%

[45:06] in terms of the job rate and our poverty rate is above

[45:10] 14% in comparison to the state and

[45:14] to national standards, we aren't where we could be.

[45:19] with this in mind, we must consider resiliency measures like a public

[45:24] bank to ensure our future and uplift the citizens of new bern.

[45:29] since I do not have representation at this time, I look forward

[45:33] to meeting with each of you to discuss this further.

[45:37] I thank you for your time and I hope you have a great evening. Thank you. Thank you.

[45:47] next is steve skiffington.

[45:58] good evening, lord. Um, good evening. I come here to

[46:02] let you know that I believe in transparency in government,

[46:06] and part of that is open and very clear communication

[46:11] both ways between citizens and elected officials

[46:15] because of that belief. At the last meeting you held on june 10th,

[46:21] I asked a question of the board. I was

[46:25] not aware that you do not answer during

[46:29] those times. And so what I did the next morning on the 11th,

[46:33] I sent an email, uh, I offered her up to the court tonight.

[46:38] uh, she explained very patiently to me that it would've

[46:42] had to have been sent in in advance

[46:46] for me to show it on the screen. Uh, but then she also

[46:50] made it very clear that that does not mean that you would do so.

[46:55] she then generously offered to take a copy of that email

[47:00] and give it to all the board members. I don't know if you have it now or you'll receive

[47:04] it after the meeting. So because, uh, that cannot

[47:08] come up on the screen and because I do believe in transparency,

[47:13] I am now gonna read that email. And I also want to

[47:17] thank, uh, alderman royal during her prayer.

[47:22] one of the things she said was, every citizen has a fundamental right

[47:27] to be heard. So I'm claiming that right now.

[47:32] the email was addressed to two people, which

[47:36] will be clear when I start reading it. Gentlemen,

[47:41] I am the gentleman who at last night's board meeting, which was june, june 10th,

[47:46] who asked the question quote. It's my understanding

[47:50] that's several months ago, councilman alderman and the mayor

[47:55] agreed to hold a citywide town hall meeting.

[47:59] can someone tell us when he been schedule four?

[48:05] I understand. I continued, I understand that

[48:10] portion of the meeting is only to tell the board something you do

[48:14] not take or give answers. That being so

[48:18] exactly when can the public ask

[48:22] questions and receive answers? Continuing in my

[48:26] email back to my question, please advise

[48:30] if it's been scheduled and if it has not, why

[48:34] not? So

[48:39] I'm just gonna wait for the balance of my time because I know you're not going to answer me,

[48:43] but I'm claiming my time.

[48:48] do we need to do that motion again?

[48:52] yes, ma'am. So moved. Second.

[48:57] I have a motion to second to suspend the rules and engage in discussion. Is there further discussion?

[49:03] hearing none. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed?

[49:08] aye. After the discussion, I'm claiming my last 48 seconds.

[49:13] okay. What was your question again, mr. Smith? The question was,

[49:17] uh, first of all, I was told that at

[49:22] a public meeting that, uh, councilman alderman and the mayor agreed

[49:26] to hold a citywide wide town hall meeting. Now, it could

[49:30] be that I was given that information incorrectly. I doubt it.

[49:35] if I was given it incorrectly, then I expect them to tell me. So

[49:39] my question is, question. When will we have a

[49:43] citywide town hall meeting? That's it.

[49:47] mayor matthew, you sure can. Um, I'm

[49:52] not sure if I recall doing anything about a town

[49:56] hall, citywide town hall meeting. I didn't ask the

[50:00] mayor during one of our board meetings if he would contact

[50:05] congressman murphy and ask the congressman to have a town hall meeting

[50:09] with the citizens of duber. And I know since then

[50:13] that the mayor, 'cause I have followed up with it, has sent that

[50:17] request in to congressman murphy's office. Now, I'm not

[50:21] sure if that's what you're thinking of or referring to or not,

[50:26] but I don't, I never, and and unless somebody's, unless I'm

[50:30] wrong. Have we discussed having a city board town hall meeting?

[50:35] why are you even asking permission

[50:40] of congressman murphy to have a town hall meeting

[50:44] that is not his business's the point that's going to be holding the meeting? We've asked

[50:49] congressman murphy to come here and have a

[50:53] meeting through his office. We had a meeting

[50:57] and there was a meeting here with congressman murphy. There was some conversations

[51:02] about not everybody knew about it. Not everybody was invited to it.

[51:06] so at that time, I asked the mayor to invite congressman murphy

[51:10] here for him to have a meeting,

[51:14] a citywide meeting to discuss the, um,

[51:19] the issues on his level. That's the only meeting that

[51:23] I recall or ever requesting for. Does anybody

[51:28] recall anything any differently? Mr. Mr. Steve, are you referring

[51:32] to a town hall for the upcoming election? Is that what you're

[51:36] talking about? No, ma'am. I am a, I'm referring to a classic

[51:40] town hall where all the board members are present

[51:44] and members of the community can ask whatever they want to ask and they

[51:48] receive some type of answer or guidance. It has

[51:52] nothing to do with congressman murphy. Well,

[51:57] I'm, I'm not sure if that request was ever made in this meeting. I know the, the

[52:01] request was made to have a, a town hall meeting with congressman murphy.

[52:06] 'cause I was the one that made the request. That is not, not my question. So

[52:10] my question now is, will this board

[52:15] hold at some time in the near future

[52:19] a citywide town hall meeting, which

[52:23] will obviously have to be a bigger venue than here? That's

[52:27] my request. I can only speak

[52:32] for me. I am more than willing. Thank you, ma'am.

[52:40] anything else from the board? So am I. Thank you.

[52:45] I think it's zoning that the two women

[52:49] on the board have no problem with it. Thank you, sir.

[52:54] we appreciate your comment. Thank you.

[52:58] thank you. Thank you.

[53:06] uh, next is amanda mckowski.

[53:20] hi. Good evening. Good evening. Evening. Have you ever been woken up in a panic at

[53:25] 2:00 am in the morning when the police are banging on your door? I have

[53:29] twice, both within six months of each other, both times to alert

[53:33] me and my ex-husband are that our car parked correctly on the street had been hit.

[53:38] both of them hit and runs. I live on the 3,500 block of elizabeth

[53:42] avenue. I have lived here for 16 years and I have watched the traffic

[53:46] on this street get more and more reckless. Very few people are abiding

[53:50] by the 25 mile per hour speed limit. I have two small children.

[53:54] sometimes I need to load them in the car parked on the street. And to be honest, it's terrifying.

[53:59] people don't even bother to slow down when you're getting in or out of the car

[54:03] on the side of the road. I have learned that various hoas have requested

[54:07] that a stop sign be installed or speed bumps be installed and have been

[54:11] denied. Maybe a stop sign isn't the answer, but what other traffic control options

[54:16] are available? Could speed pumps or humps work? I informally

[54:20] requesting that there is some traffic control done on elizabeth avenue to help reduce

[54:24] the speed of the drivers. With every new housing section added, the issue

[54:28] has compounded. As a reminder, there are kids who live on elizabeth avenue

[54:32] and the streets that branch off of, off that walk to school at h day mcdonald.

[54:37] I know I'm not the only person who is concerned or who has asked for speed bumps

[54:41] or stop signs or any other control measure that would help slow traffic down.

[54:46] how many tickets need to be issued? How much property damage needs to be incured?

[54:51] how many pets need to be injured? How many kids need to be hit? Or

[54:55] does someone need to die before a requests are finally heard?

[54:59] I'll end by asking questions that are not rhetoric, but I would like to be placed on a

[55:03] record. What metric is going to be the trigger for adding traffic control measures?

[55:07] what will it take for something to be done? I brought photos

[55:12] of bulk our, that were totaled

[55:17] outside our house in the middle of the night.

[55:22] this car, this was the first one that was totaled. This

[55:26] was parked on the very front of this photo and it got hit

[55:30] so hard that it landed in our next door neighbor's driveway.

[55:34] what happens if it hit my house? My daughter sleeps in

[55:38] the front bedroom of our house. What if that had hit our house

[55:43] and killed my daughter? I'm asking that something

[55:47] be done to control the speed on elizabeth avenue. Thank you. Have a great night. Thank

[55:51] you.

[55:58] and our last petition of citizens this evening is anastasia

[56:03] feal gates.

[56:17] hello. I go by socially, uh, anna fagel and I live in

[56:21] ward six. I work with easterseals port health,

[56:25] which is partnered with trillium and one community

[56:29] to support individuals with disabilities and mental health needs.

[56:33] I'm also a special education student at east carolina

[56:38] university focusing on adapted curriculum

[56:43] as a citizen of ward six. I am speaking out because I

[56:47] do not have an alderman to represent me.

[56:51] uh, representation matters, especially for those of

[56:55] us who support and serve vulnerable populations every

[56:59] day. It's a beautiful day in

[57:03] this neighborhood. A beautiful day for a

[57:07] neighbor. Could you be my, would you

[57:12] be mine? Please? Won't you be my neighbor.

[57:18] these words aren't just a song, they are a reminder

[57:23] of the kind of community we should strive to be

[57:27] connected, compassionate, and held accountable

[57:33] to one another. Thank you. Thank you.

[57:43] okay, board. Next up is the consent agenda items five through 13. What's

[57:47] the pleasure of the board? Mayor, I make a motion to approve the consent agenda as

[57:52] is second. I have a motion to second.

[57:56] is there further discussion? Mayor, I have a few questions,

[58:00] um, with regards to item six, seven, and eight.

[58:05] um, if the board is willing, I'm

[58:09] happy to ask those questions before we vote on the consent agenda.

[58:14] or I would ask that those three items be removed

[58:18] from the consent agenda, um, at which time I could

[58:22] ask the questions and then evoke could be taken on them.

[58:26] mr. Davis, we have a motion and a second on the floor to approve the consent

[58:30] agenda throughout the discussion. Uh, question has been raised on three items.

[58:35] yes, sir. You, you need to entertain the motion on the floor. That's been second. If that fails,

[58:40] then we can revert to alderman prills, um, request.

[58:44] okay. So we have a motion on the floor to approve the consent agenda as is.

[58:49] we'll have a roll call vote starting with alderman royal.

[58:53] alderman royal in respect to alder mccrell. No.

[59:00] alderman naster. Now if he wants to pull him, we'll pull up

[59:05] alder mckenzie, we can pull him. Is that a no sir.

[59:11] okay. Alderman best no

[59:16] alderman. Creel? No. Mayor odom, no. Motion

[59:20] fails an out. Its back open alderman per, uh,

[59:24] mayor, I'll make a motion to, um, pull items

[59:28] six, seven, and eight from the consent agenda

[59:33] second, and otherwise approve it and

[59:37] otherwise approve the consent agenda. Oh, yes. Uh,

[59:41] yes. Okay. So we have a motion and a second to pull item number six, seven,

[59:45] and eight from the consent agenda and prove what is or prove what is remaining

[59:49] second. I already have a second. Any further discussion?

[59:54] hearing none. Um, let's have a roll call starting with

[59:58] alderman astor. Alderman astor. Yes.

[1:00:03] alderman kenzie. Yes. Alderman best? Yes. Alderman krill.

[1:00:07] yes. Alderman royal? Yes. Mayor odom? Yes. Motion carries.

[1:00:12] alderman. Prill. Get right ahead, sir. Yes. On item six, just

[1:00:16] a a quick question, um, uh, question for staff.

[1:00:21] um, I'm curious as to, um, where

[1:00:26] this request, um, originated.

[1:00:31] is this, um, simply a part

[1:00:35] of the land use ordinance update that we

[1:00:39] are working through? Um, or was this a request

[1:00:44] from some other entity? No, I asked for this request when reviewing

[1:00:48] a very large project. It was asked of us, what is the density in that

[1:00:52] zoning district in c four. Every other zoning

[1:00:56] district we have, has it called out? This one does not. That's poor planning practice and

[1:01:00] I wanted it fixed immediately. Okay.

[1:01:04] I might have missed the first part of that. So was this a request

[1:01:08] from, uh, an entity outside of staff or no, sir. This is

[1:01:13] staff me recommending that we put better planning practice in and define

[1:01:17] what the density is 'cause it's missing. And without that, uh, there is

[1:01:21] potential to argue you can do what you want with density and that's not a good place

[1:01:25] to be in. Okay. Thank you on that one.

[1:01:31] well, on item seven,

[1:01:35] uh, first question, uh, same, same question, um,

[1:01:40] as to where this recommendation originated. Sure. Our assistant

[1:01:45] city attorney was reviewing a project with us and how to

[1:01:49] interpret it. And in going through that, we realize two things. There's

[1:01:53] a very antiquated way of measuring height in an overlay district. It says

[1:01:57] you can have stories. It doesn't define what a story is. Typically

[1:02:02] ordinances require you to measure things in feet. So we're requesting to make

[1:02:06] that change. Additionally, there is some antiquated language

[1:02:10] that requires design standards in several of our overlay districts that

[1:02:14] are inconsistent with current state law and have been since 2020.

[1:02:19] and so we are removing those in that same section of the ordinance at her recommendation.

[1:02:24] okay. Um,

[1:02:29] um, given, given the fact that we're talking

[1:02:33] about, uh, changing

[1:02:39] the determination of changing stories to feet,

[1:02:44] why is this change

[1:02:48] only being directed, um, at specific

[1:02:52] overlay zones versus city block? It's the only place it, it says you measure

[1:02:56] in stories everywhere else. It uses feet, like is the preferred practice.

[1:03:01] okay. So this would bring the overlay zones

[1:03:05] into, into consistency with how we measure everything else. Okay. Yes, sir. Good

[1:03:09] question. Okay. Um, third question. Um, there's

[1:03:14] reference to the broad slash queen street

[1:03:18] corridor singled out for a 60 foot limit.

[1:03:23] why, why is that one corridor

[1:03:27] specifically being mentioned for a 60 foot limit

[1:03:32] as opposed to the 60 foot limit is consistent with the zoning there?

[1:03:38] it's inconsistent. It is consistent. It would be consistent in changing the stories

[1:03:42] to feed. And so there you'll see 60 feet and 30 feet respectively

[1:03:47] in the amendment, which I'm happy to explain during the public hearing.

[1:03:55] okay. I'm not sure I fully follow you on that one. Um,

[1:04:00] so anywhere outside of this particular court or what, what is the

[1:04:04] height limit? It's different for every zoning district. Okay. But here they're

[1:04:08] saying stories right now and we need to be able to measure

[1:04:13] when applying the standards to a project. Okay. So the

[1:04:17] 60 foot is just a recommended height

[1:04:21] limit? It's pretty standard. That's yes, sir. That's based on the recommended change

[1:04:25] that's being made. Yes, sir.

[1:04:32] okay. Uh, last question on this one. Um,

[1:04:38] uh, just real quick, what are the boundaries of that

[1:04:42] broad queen street corridor? That's the redevelopment commission area.

[1:04:48] oh. Oh, I just wondering where oh, I, I, we can show a map. Um,

[1:04:54] scott, can you verbally on the fly, describe that boundary for me? I wanna say

[1:04:58] ottoman prill that, um, it runs roughly from the intersection of broad and first

[1:05:03] toward downtown. And I think it extends over to the rear

[1:05:08] property lines of all of the, all of the properties

[1:05:12] on broad street. That is a rough description. That's

[1:05:16] all. It's the, that corridor does not actually go down

[1:05:20] queen street. It is really a broad street corridor

[1:05:25] or does, it does. I don't recall how far down broad it goes

[1:05:29] if it goes very far. I just don't recall. Okay. Well, I would, I would just ask as

[1:05:33] part of next month's presentation if that could just be

[1:05:37] identified, um, just more for clarification.

[1:05:42] uh, so that's it with item seven. Item eight.

[1:05:47] um, and it, this may just be

[1:05:51] my own confusion. Um, in, in the memo that the board

[1:05:56] has received, um, from robert, um,

[1:06:00] it, there's a statement that says the proposed amendment

[1:06:04] seeks to expand the setback allowances to apply

[1:06:08] more broadly to all single family residential duplex and multi-family

[1:06:13] construction within the overlay district. I, I'm just a little confused

[1:06:18] as to what that actually means. Sure. I'll put it in, in some,

[1:06:22] uh, simple english right now in the rdc,

[1:06:26] we have relaxed standards because there are so many non-conforming

[1:06:31] lots that we want to have reused. And the way this ordinance was written

[1:06:35] allowed very specifically residential setbacks,

[1:06:39] lot sizes, things of that nature to be relaxed and

[1:06:43] applied only in our six zoning. And

[1:06:48] there was a question, well, what if you build residential uses

[1:06:52] in the rdc boundary that are not zoned r six because

[1:06:57] we allow by right for people to build residential

[1:07:01] uses in other areas, but they're not afforded the more lenient, smaller

[1:07:05] lot sizes and setbacks. This is a request

[1:07:10] from the rdc that was discussed also and also recommended by

[1:07:14] the planning and zoning board to allow those same standards if you're building residences,

[1:07:18] residential uses to be in any, any zoning district within

[1:07:23] that boundary. And that's what that changes and that is all this changes.

[1:07:28] okay. And I guess the, um, the, the, the issue that

[1:07:32] I just want to make sure that, um, we're addressing clearly,

[1:07:37] um, if this gets approved, uh, it just came

[1:07:41] across to me and I may, it just may be the way I'm reading it, that

[1:07:48] we're not being real specific in terms of what

[1:07:52] standards would be applied. That it, it would be left

[1:07:56] in some way as an interpretation and I'm concerned if that's

[1:08:01] the case. Okay. Uh,

[1:08:05] absolute clarity and comfort moving forward. The minimum lot size would be

[1:08:09] 1500 square feet minimum lot with 25

[1:08:13] feet setbacks, 15 from the front, 10 feet from the

[1:08:17] rear, and five on the sides. And that would be consistent for residential uses in all

[1:08:21] of those zoning districts. Okay. Even in the commercial zones. Okay. So,

[1:08:26] so we're dealing with some very specific, and that is,

[1:08:30] uh, how it is right now for residences in the r six district.

[1:08:34] okay. But it doesn't allow that in the other districts. I think there has been

[1:08:38] more interest in building residences in zoning districts within

[1:08:42] that boundary outside of r six. And that was kind of the impetus

[1:08:46] to have this discussion and public hearing. Okay. Um,

[1:08:51] mayor, that's all I have. Thank you jessica. You're very welcome. Does anyone else have questions

[1:08:55] on six, seven or eight? Sir?

[1:08:59] if not, I will entertain a motion to approve items six, seven, and

[1:09:03] eight. So moved. Discussion. I have a

[1:09:07] motion and a second. Any further discussion?

[1:09:14] uh, hearing none, let's have a roll call starting with alderman

[1:09:18] kinzie. Alderman kinzie. Yes.

[1:09:23] alderman vest. Yes. Alderman pri. Yes.

[1:09:27] alderman royal. Yes. Alderman aster. Yes. Mayor

[1:09:31] odom. Yes. Motions carried. Next is item number 14. Conduct a public hearing

[1:09:35] and consider adopting a resolution approving an amendment to the development agreement with warehouser for

[1:09:39] west newburn. Mr. Hughes. Mayor alderman. In october of 2018, the

[1:09:44] city entered into a development agreement with warehouser for west newburn.

[1:09:48] warehouser recently approached the city about amending the original agreement.

[1:09:52] that information is, is in your packet. You are asked to conduct a public hearing

[1:09:56] and then consider the the proposed changes.

[1:10:00] does the board have questions before we open a public hearing?

[1:10:07] hearing none at this time, we will consider the public hearing open if anyone would like

[1:10:11] to speak regarding item number 14. Please come forward at this time.

[1:10:20] thank you. Board cliff parson on behalf of warehouser. Uh, when we

[1:10:24] agreed to this development agreement in 2018, we knew it was a living, breathing

[1:10:28] document and that it would need to be addressed and potentially amended from time to time,

[1:10:33] uh, based on changing circumstances and market conditions. And that's what

[1:10:37] we're here doing hopefully tonight. Um, the amendment does a few things that,

[1:10:41] uh, I believe mr. Hughes put in the agenda. We're reducing. We're

[1:10:46] making a speed limit, communitywide 25 miles an hour. Uh, we're addressing the

[1:10:50] connectivity of the development to 43 as it connects to elizabeth

[1:10:54] avenue. Once that's extended, um, we're agreeing to comply with the electric

[1:10:58] line policy. We're removing a 25 acre limitation on

[1:11:02] multi-family uses within the development that was self-imposed

[1:11:07] by the developer back when their vision for this was a little different.

[1:11:11] um, and then we're revising street standards for the development just to give the developer

[1:11:15] a little more flexibility when it comes to the internal roads in the development.

[1:11:23] okay.

[1:11:28] board, have questions for mr. Parsons? Will I stand in there? Yes, I do.

[1:11:32] um, when you say, uh, connect the community to highway 43

[1:11:38] at what route are you going? You are extending, coming down elizabeth avenue,

[1:11:42] or is this on the 43

[1:11:47] corridor area? It's gonna be a connect, it's gonna be a connection, uh, to

[1:11:52] the 43 connector, um, through our development to where

[1:11:56] elizabeth will ultimately, once that developer develops its sub subdivision,

[1:12:01] uh, it'll connect to elizabeth as extended there. Um, I'm not

[1:12:05] sure if any of the, the master development plan can be put up, but I can kind

[1:12:09] of guide you through that. Um, the attachment c to the

[1:12:13] amendment shows, uh, the connection points, and there's actually, we've

[1:12:17] removed two connection points from highway from the 43 connector.

[1:12:22] um, and the connection that we're talking about here,

[1:12:26] um, which is gonna extend, uh, from charles avenue

[1:12:30] to what we call bradham boulevard to 43, once the

[1:12:34] new elizabeth is connected to us. Okay. So that

[1:12:38] new elizabeth debt connection will be where the warehouse of

[1:12:43] development is right now with the community of

[1:12:47] homes? Is that where the elizabeth gonna tie into the 43?

[1:12:51] yep. Where elizabeth dead ends now, it's gonna okay. Sort of jog, I believe,

[1:12:55] sort of westerly, mostly westerly southwesterly to the development where,

[1:13:00] uh, currently the dr. Horton has built many houses.

[1:13:04] thank you. Yes, ma'am. I have a

[1:13:08] question also, sir. Are you saying that currently

[1:13:13] the elizabeth avenue is undeveloped?

[1:13:17] it, it dead ends? Uh, currently, I'm not sure which development. It's not, it's not dead.

[1:13:21] doesn't dead end. The property owned by warehouser that ends into our, into

[1:13:25] adjacent property. And I understand that developer has plans

[1:13:30] once that property gets developed to extend elizabeth avenue through

[1:13:35] to west newburn. Thank you. Yes, ma'am.

[1:13:40] on the, the self-imposed, um, density

[1:13:44] limit that you mentioned, um, can, can you just expand

[1:13:49] on that a little bit as to, um, what's changed in the market

[1:13:54] and what that means for the proposed development that will happen in

[1:13:58] the future? Yeah, you, you'll recall that when, when this development

[1:14:02] was first, um, contemplated, uh, there were big box

[1:14:06] developers, um, that were being sought out. Um,

[1:14:10] there was a talk of a movie studio being there. Um,

[1:14:15] all those have sort of come to pass. And, uh,

[1:14:19] we are seeing more interest in residential. Um,

[1:14:23] specifically multifamily. Uh, I believe this board or the, the planning board

[1:14:27] just approved a town home unit, um, behind the

[1:14:32] current apartments there. It's gonna be between that and the future school

[1:14:36] that's gonna be there. Um, and so market conditions

[1:14:40] is telling us that we do not need to limit ourselves

[1:14:44] to just 25 acres. Um, at the time, our

[1:14:48] potential buyers were interested in that, and now our potential buyers

[1:14:53] and developers are just the opposite. They, they, they are hoping

[1:14:57] for more land to be developed as multifamily and, and

[1:15:01] it's all allowed in c3. So this is not doing anything that's not allowed

[1:15:05] in c3. It's basically bringing the development consistent with the,

[1:15:10] the c3 zoning designation. Thank you.

[1:15:17] any other questions for mr. Parsons?

[1:15:21] okay. Thank you sir. Thanks.

[1:15:36] hi. Good evening everybody. Good evening. Evening. I live on elizabeth avenue.

[1:15:40] and, um, I'm wondering a couple of things

[1:15:44] because I've been here for a while and we were talking about eliminating the

[1:15:48] public hearing portion, um, and being a person that

[1:15:53] doesn't have technical expertise about developing, is this

[1:15:57] one of those moments where whatever I say is not really

[1:16:01] gonna affect every anything 'cause it's already been approved? Yes, ma'am. Because this is

[1:16:05] that situation. Okay. Well, this is an

[1:16:09] agreement between the city and a developer that simply locks in

[1:16:13] the current rules so the developer can make large investments

[1:16:18] and no, going forward that the city won't change the rules on them. So

[1:16:22] it's a tool to lock in the rules that exist today. It doesn't give them any

[1:16:26] special rights other than locking in the current rules.

[1:16:31] okay. Um, thank you. Um, the, the major concern that I have

[1:16:35] is that on elizabeth avenue where, um, amanda was talking earlier,

[1:16:40] um, our roads are very narrow and people

[1:16:44] park on both sides of the street and essentially only one person can drive

[1:16:48] through at a time if both sides of the streets are being used for parking.

[1:16:53] um, so it's concerning to me that the plan is to connect,

[1:16:57] um, the, to be developed

[1:17:02] land to elizabeth avenue and it becoming a cut through

[1:17:06] and causing even more congestion, even more danger, um, for

[1:17:10] the people that live on elizabeth avenue and the people driving on the

[1:17:15] street as well. So, um, that really needs to be taken

[1:17:19] into consideration. Um, I've, I've spoken to many people

[1:17:23] in my ward, and it's

[1:17:27] being able to walk safely on sidewalks, being able to

[1:17:31] not be, um, terrorized by drunk drivers

[1:17:36] by speeders. I just, I can't emphasize enough how important

[1:17:40] that is to our community, especially on a list avenue. Um,

[1:17:44] and then there was also one other

[1:17:49] thing that I wanted to say that, um, I'm thrilled that the city is

[1:17:53] using mixed use. Um, and what I understand about mixed use land

[1:17:57] is that it goes hand in hand with walkability. And in

[1:18:01] this drive home, the point again where the, the cars

[1:18:05] on the street, the pedestrians, it's not gonna

[1:18:10] work well if the planners and the developers are not taking this into

[1:18:14] consideration. Um, and making sure that we,

[1:18:19] I don't know if the planning for when my part, I live in derby

[1:18:23] park, the streets are too narrow. Is this gonna be a consideration

[1:18:27] for this upcoming development? Um, and that's,

[1:18:32] that's all I have to bring to your attention. Thank you. Thank you.

[1:18:46] good afternoon, board of alderman may name. Good afternoon.

[1:18:50] I'm okay. I'm wendy card. We burn out. And I have a few

[1:18:55] questions for the board. So

[1:18:59] the traffic will be coming from maybe racetrack or

[1:19:03] elizabeth, has this plan been discussed with the mpo

[1:19:07] or anything like that? Um,

[1:19:12] have you talked about this plan before? And if this plan is not approved,

[1:19:17] can this change happened? The sense of locking in the

[1:19:21] rules, what does that mean?

[1:19:33] um, I'd like to ask jessica ru to come

[1:19:37] up. What, what I can't answer is whether or not the, the developer

[1:19:42] of the proposed property that would connect to elizabeth avenue has, has he's even

[1:19:46] come to, to staff to even present that plan yet.

[1:19:53] yes. Some answer. Deanna has been at the table with me and george and looking

[1:19:57] at all of these street connections and with talking with tim er's representative

[1:20:02] with us. Yes. I didn't get that.

[1:20:06] what did you say again? Deanna trouble is our mpo administrator and

[1:20:11] she has been at the table along with george chiles looking at all of these street connections.

[1:20:15] yes, thank you. And

[1:20:19] part two, I understand streets sidewalks

[1:20:23] are gonna be considered in this bond, um,

[1:20:28] referendum proposal. Is there a possibility

[1:20:32] that the money that could be for the streets and

[1:20:36] sidewalks is could be used for this development

[1:20:41] since I think there's a payment in lieu of, um, sidewalks?

[1:20:48] am I making any sense? I'm, I'm just, I'm just trying to

[1:20:52] absorb this information. Mr. Davis. I think it's safe to say the city doesn't

[1:20:56] build roads or sidewalks. Um, developers do that and then the city accepts

[1:21:00] those. Uh, and the rare occasion where the city has accepted the development,

[1:21:05] where there are no sidewalks, the city will sometimes go in and add sidewalks, but

[1:21:09] we would not use bond money or taxpayer monies

[1:21:14] to build roads or sidewalks in new developments. Is that fair? Correct.

[1:21:18] thank you. Thank you for clarifying that. Thank you.

[1:21:26] as a reminder, this is a public hearing for item number 14. If anybody would like to come forward and

[1:21:30] say anything

[1:21:35] you like to make a motion to close the public hearing. Okay. Have

[1:21:39] a motion and a second close the public hearing. All those in favor

[1:21:43] say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Public hearing is now closed.

[1:21:47] uh, I have a question for, uh, mr. Parsons or any representative

[1:21:52] for ser. This original agreement was signed what

[1:21:56] year? December of 2018. Okay. Um,

[1:22:01] I don't believe it was part of that agreement that there would be land

[1:22:05] provided or compensated to the city for a fire station, but I know there

[1:22:09] was a lot of discussion around that. Are you familiar with any of those conversations? There is, but

[1:22:13] it's not on this parcel. Okay. Yeah. So, mr. Hughes,

[1:22:18] any recent conversations, uh, with auer about this? Yes, sir.

[1:22:22] we have been having discussions with warehouser and we're working on, on something

[1:22:26] with that. Alright. Does board have any further

[1:22:30] questions on item number 14?

[1:22:37] what's the pleasure of the board on item number 14, I'd like to make a motion to

[1:22:41] the development agreement with warehouser of west new bern.

[1:22:46] second. I have a motion a second. Is there further discussion?

[1:22:51] hearing none. Let's have a roll call starting with alderman vest.

[1:22:56] alderman bes? Yes. Alderman prill. Yes.

[1:23:00] alderman royal. Yes. Alderman naer. Yes. Alder mckenzie?

[1:23:04] yes. Mayor odom. Yes. Motion carries. Next is item number

[1:23:08] 15. Conduct a public hearing on the community development block grant that are known as

[1:23:13] c-d-v-g-f-y 2025 annual action plan. Ms. Ru,

[1:23:24] um, it's a pleasure to present to you our 2025

[1:23:28] proposal for how we're going to spend our cdbg funds this year. As we

[1:23:32] do every year, we are required to go through and develop an annual

[1:23:36] action plan. That annual action plan has to connect to our broader,

[1:23:40] longer range five year consolidation plan. So this will be

[1:23:44] the second annual action plan of that consolidated larger plan you all

[1:23:48] approved the last year. What we're going to do this evening is go through

[1:23:53] a a quick summary of why we're here doing this. Go through our community engagement

[1:23:57] efforts, show you the highlights from the plan, walk through

[1:24:01] the budget, and then what to expect next. Our annual action

[1:24:06] plan, really, I want you to think of this as a budget. We set very

[1:24:10] broad priorities that we would like to fulfill throughout five

[1:24:14] years in the longer range consolidated plan. And the annual plan

[1:24:19] is an actual project list with a budget connected to it

[1:24:23] of how we're going to fill those priorities. And so

[1:24:27] in order to do this cyclical every year, we go through very similar process.

[1:24:32] we have two big public input steps. We're in one right now,

[1:24:37] but this project actually started back when we advertised

[1:24:41] our community needs hearing and discussion that took place in february, which

[1:24:45] we are required to advertise in january. And we had very robust

[1:24:49] attendance at that meeting this year. And if there's specific questions on

[1:24:53] that, we have our subject matter expert to answer those for you.

[1:24:57] but there was a discussion on how, uh, to fit

[1:25:02] goals for our, um, needs areas in

[1:25:07] and fulfill needs of the community while meeting the, the parameters

[1:25:11] set in the five year consolidated plan. And so that took place.

[1:25:16] and once that takes place, we also go through and are required to advertise

[1:25:20] if non-profits would like to participate and be a part of the plan.

[1:25:25] when we get those non-profit applications in, they are looked at, they

[1:25:29] are put through a scoring method through hud and that's how we determine

[1:25:33] who is the best fit to do those projects. And we do have two community

[1:25:37] groups that, that are listed in this year's budget, which I'll walk through momentarily.

[1:25:44] and so in our consolidated plan, we have our

[1:25:48] various strategies. And the strategies that are being addressed this year in

[1:25:52] the annual action plan are the homeless strategy, the community development,

[1:25:56] and of course the administration. I'm gonna walk

[1:26:00] through the six separate projects that are included in the annual action plan.

[1:26:05] as you see in every annual action plan, there is an administration

[1:26:09] project. What that is, is the budget for, uh, you

[1:26:13] know, these plans don't run themselves. We have a staff member who is partially paid

[1:26:17] from the administration budget, as well as paying a consultant

[1:26:21] who helps design these plans and facilitate that. We are meeting

[1:26:25] all of the hud requirements. There are many of 'em as well as to pay for the

[1:26:30] advertising and our public meetings that we are required to have.

[1:26:34] our second proposal in this year for $107,723

[1:26:40] is for streets and sidewalks and cdbg eligible areas.

[1:26:47] the third is for demolition. We also have this in last year's plan.

[1:26:51] we are allowed to use a certain percentage, I believe up to 30% for

[1:26:56] demolition of substandard structures. So frequently when

[1:27:00] patrick or I are up here asking you to approve demolition

[1:27:05] orders, and we have exhausted all efforts to get a homeowner or

[1:27:09] a property owner to bring something into compliance and it remains dilapidated

[1:27:13] and is bringing negative impacts to the area within our cdbg

[1:27:18] boundary, we can use this funding to remove those homes and not need to

[1:27:22] use funding from the general fund to do so

[1:27:27] at listening to the community, both at the meeting and at that meeting. At

[1:27:31] at these meetings, we have heard a lot of interest in setting up scholarships

[1:27:36] to be able to use our recreation facilities and camps and things of

[1:27:40] that nature. This does include $10,000 of funding for

[1:27:44] up to a hundred scholarships to be able to participate in programs in this area.

[1:27:51] my sister's house is, is in this budget year for

[1:27:56] $14,000, which would fund two aides to work

[1:28:00] with them. And then catholic charities is

[1:28:04] also in this year's budget for $15,000 to

[1:28:08] continue to provide low income food assistance. And that wraps

[1:28:12] up pretty much the entire budget, very simply of what

[1:28:16] is proposed to take place in this year's annual action plan.

[1:28:21] and so our whole budget allocated to us from the federal government

[1:28:25] this year for this is at the bottom of the screen of about $261,000.

[1:28:30] that came out a little bit later than it normally does just due to

[1:28:34] holdups in the federal government this year. Typically, you're seeing this presentation

[1:28:39] a few months ago, like in may, april or may this year. You'll notice it's

[1:28:43] a little bit late. That's not on staff, that is on the federal government delay

[1:28:47] on issuing what our funding would be. And so they would withhold this

[1:28:51] funding from us until we have an approved annual action plan.

[1:28:56] I will pause here just for a moment because one thing that we talk

[1:29:00] about quite a bit is, um, assistance for home

[1:29:04] repairs and things of that nature. And you will not see that in this

[1:29:08] budget. That does not mean that that money is not still available.

[1:29:13] we have found that it is very difficult to spend that

[1:29:17] money down in a timely fashion, and we are audited on how fast

[1:29:21] we spend this money. We still have in our 2022

[1:29:25] annual action plan budget, $87,400,

[1:29:31] a few extra dollars. I'm pretty close, I think, but we did just check that number

[1:29:36] to be used for programs from that year. However, due

[1:29:40] to the fact that you have to have an owner occupied

[1:29:44] residency, you have to go through for

[1:29:48] verification income and other background checks to receive this money.

[1:29:52] and that takes about three months to take place. There's a $10,000

[1:29:57] limit on the project. And in order to fulfill those projects, you

[1:30:01] have to have bids from three separate contractors that meet federal government

[1:30:05] guidelines. It has been very difficult to spend that money

[1:30:09] down on projects that fulfill all of those things. It takes

[1:30:14] a very long time. And so in the previous

[1:30:18] annual action plan, you'll recall staff stood before you and

[1:30:22] we moved some money around because we were concerned with the timeliness and we had

[1:30:26] several projects that were costing a little extra and you all made the amendment

[1:30:30] and be able to draw that money down. But to be very clear, this program

[1:30:34] still exists. It is still spendable if you can fulfill

[1:30:38] those criteria I just explained. But I want to, to everyone

[1:30:43] watching at home and here to understand, we still support that program. It is still

[1:30:47] funded for this particular budget. We did have a particular

[1:30:52] goal set to have projects that we were very confident we could

[1:30:56] get fulfilled by june 30th, even with the delay that we're in.

[1:31:03] and so to start summarizing, our annual action plan

[1:31:07] is a budget. It connects to the larger five year plan this particular

[1:31:11] year. And moving forward, we are making an effort to make sure we have very realistic

[1:31:15] projects and are working with partners that are able to meet our deadlines and

[1:31:19] fulfill all of the many requirements that hud sets out to be eligible

[1:31:23] to use this program. And so what will happen next,

[1:31:27] just as a reminder, the plan that has been included in the agenda,

[1:31:32] I hope you've looked at, will be on display until august 11th, that fulfills

[1:31:36] a hud um, requirement. And then a

[1:31:40] resolution will be brought before you on august 12th, be to fulfill

[1:31:45] voting on our resolution to adopt the plan. This is just one of those

[1:31:49] strange nuance things in a hud public hearing. We don't vote on the plan the

[1:31:53] same night we have the public hearing. We will do that at the next meeting

[1:31:58] and with that, uh, staff, or I'll be happy to answer any questions you may

[1:32:02] have. Ms. Board have questions? Yes. Um, ms. Ru, I have

[1:32:06] one question for you. The home ownership that you're saying that the

[1:32:10] programs, the money's still there, $10,000 per home, is

[1:32:14] that where a citizen will go to your office to start the

[1:32:18] process? Absolutely. Or do you have a developer just handling that? Nope. The

[1:32:22] citizen would initiate the request to be a part of the program and then we

[1:32:27] would sit down and have an application meeting with them and explain all of these, uh, requirements

[1:32:31] to them. Okay. And sometimes they are very overwhelming just explaining

[1:32:35] them to you all. The list got kind of long and felt overwhelming. Um,

[1:32:40] like I said, it is sometimes difficult not necessarily to find people

[1:32:44] in need that they're, they're out there. It's the difficult part is working

[1:32:48] with the limited budgets and then finding people that can do the

[1:32:52] work locally that are interested in doing the work and bid

[1:32:56] on the work and then do the work. And so we've got the three month application

[1:33:00] process for the background to be looked at and make sure that we're

[1:33:05] crossing all our t's and dotting our I's. And then we add on that, having to find those three contractors,

[1:33:10] um, and get those bids in. And you have, you're

[1:33:14] at probably six or seven months then, and then you have to get that work done. And it is

[1:33:19] very difficult to draw that money down in a timely fashion.

[1:33:23] thank you. Thank you. Any other questions? Yes, I

[1:33:27] have a couple of questions in regards to what you said earlier about

[1:33:31] the paperwork and the bureaucracy, the red tape, all of the above.

[1:33:37] uh, when our citizens make application for

[1:33:41] home, we rehab, do we have in place any type of,

[1:33:46] um, I don't know if we want to say counseling or assistance

[1:33:52] to help our citizens meet all of those requirements?

[1:33:56] do we have, so if they come in and meet the

[1:34:00] requirements of the home ownership and a project that is outlined in the

[1:34:04] program for a home repair, dea will start working with them on

[1:34:09] a program. They are not responsible for going out and finding the people to do the

[1:34:13] work. We walk them through that and facilitate it and make that happen

[1:34:17] when, when possible. Frequently. Also,

[1:34:21] this is just notable, if this program can't help them, we do try to work

[1:34:26] with them and find out what their issue is and what they need

[1:34:30] assistance with and connect them with sometimes religious groups

[1:34:34] or community groups that work and can do these projects with far less

[1:34:38] red tape than we can necessarily spend this money by doing. So

[1:34:43] I think that's a wonderful opportunity for whoever the applicants are because

[1:34:47] again, we're, we, we're talking about a tremendous understanding

[1:34:52] of whatever the rules and regulations are and is it,

[1:34:56] um, reader friendly. So I, I appreciate that.

[1:35:01] if, um, there's someone on staff such as ms. Who

[1:35:05] can assist the, uh, applicants to work through the paperwork, the,

[1:35:09] uh, other question that I have for you is regarding the streets and sidewalks improvement.

[1:35:14] um, are those sidewalks and streets already

[1:35:18] designated or will that be forthcoming? No, ma'am. They will

[1:35:22] have to be within the cdbg foundry, however,

[1:35:27] they have not been determined yet. And the absolute, uh, kind

[1:35:31] of workings of how our scholarship program also has not been

[1:35:35] completely worked through yet. In, in full disclosure, the area budgeted,

[1:35:39] it's being developed, but we don't have a street sidewalk plan. We do not

[1:35:43] have direct number of, of structures

[1:35:47] identified to use this money to demolish, nor do we have the,

[1:35:52] uh, how the scholarship program will work because this is

[1:35:56] edbg money. There will be a similar background, uh, requirements

[1:36:01] of income and things of that nature to qualify for it. Thank you so

[1:36:05] much. Final question is, I see my sister's house,

[1:36:09] $14,000 for staff salaries along with catholic charities,

[1:36:13] $15,000. Did you receive applications from

[1:36:17] any other nonprofits? We did. I believe ms. Told

[1:36:22] me we received a total of five applications and

[1:36:27] these two scored the highest when you run them through hud

[1:36:31] scoring on, if you can fulfill the mission, um, meet the

[1:36:35] criteria and do it in a timely fashion, they are proven partners that have been successful

[1:36:40] previously and they scored the highest this year. Thank you very much. You're welcome.

[1:36:46] so, um, ms. Ru, let me, um, ask one

[1:36:50] question, um, to clear up my mind about

[1:36:55] the streets and sidewalks for the cdbg monies. Okay.

[1:36:59] so that $107,000, um, we'll

[1:37:04] go back into the low and moderate income areas.

[1:37:08] yes, absolutely. We are nothing that was not within the

[1:37:13] boundary in the maps, which are included in the actual plan, everyone can look

[1:37:17] at and see. It has to be spent within that area. And so typically

[1:37:21] if we have a shovel ready project ready to go on one of those areas, we'd look to that first

[1:37:25] because we could get something done very quickly. And so, um, if this

[1:37:29] plan gets adopted, we will coordinate and figure out, um, where the highest

[1:37:34] need is with a project that we can execute most efficiently and quickly

[1:37:38] in that area. Good question. Thank you,

[1:37:43] jessica. Jumping back to the, just the housing rehab,

[1:37:47] um, issue that you outlined, uh, is,

[1:37:51] is the, the biggest challenge finding qualified

[1:37:55] applicants or finding qualified contractors?

[1:38:00] qualified contractors? That's what I thought. Um,

[1:38:06] willing to do those small projects at $10,000 or less right.

[1:38:11] with the federal requirements. Right. No, I understand that

[1:38:15] hud has a lot of requirements and regulations that

[1:38:19] a contractor has to meet and for a small project, it's

[1:38:23] not worthwhile to them. Um, so no, I fully understand

[1:38:27] that. Um, does is what,

[1:38:31] what happens to the money if, if we are unsuccessful

[1:38:36] in spending it the way we want to spend it?

[1:38:40] typically we'll come to you and ask for amendment and ask for you to, to

[1:38:45] reallocate it to something else. Alright. So there will come a time when that 2022

[1:38:50] pot of money needs to be spent. And I will probably be standing before

[1:38:54] this board asking you so we don't get punished by hud for

[1:38:58] a timely this issue. We're not being efficient in spending our money down on a project.

[1:39:02] we wanted to put that money towards something else. Okay. If that, if

[1:39:06] that comes, would have five years, I'm not sure when the 2020

[1:39:10] we're not at that point yet, but it'll be in a year or two where we've got to have that money spent

[1:39:15] or move it somewhere else where we can spend it efficiently. So a

[1:39:19] a future board will address that, that issue. Correct.

[1:39:23] as far as reallocation. Um, thank you.

[1:39:29] any other questions for ms. Ruth? No, sir.

[1:39:34] okay. At this time, I will open a public hearing on

[1:39:38] the community development block grant, c-d-b-g-f-y 2025

[1:39:42] annual action plan. If you'd like to ask a question or make a comment, please come

[1:39:46] forward at this time.

[1:39:54] hey, y'all, I was, uh, I was just looking at this and I,

[1:39:59] it seems like this would be a good opportunity for investment. I

[1:40:03] was looking at the past several, uh, budgets that have been

[1:40:07] approved over the years, and there is no money, uh,

[1:40:12] allocated towards just the general, uh, community development budget

[1:40:16] or the grants budget. And there hasn't been for at least five

[1:40:20] or six years. And so I know that these monies are specific to a

[1:40:25] a certain region, um, but

[1:40:29] it seems like it's not really filling the gaps the way that it could.

[1:40:34] and I think that those gaps could be filled if we started to put a little bit more attention,

[1:40:38] excuse me, into our community development budget in

[1:40:42] our grants budget to help fill those gaps. Now, in particular to this

[1:40:47] not having the contractors, uh, available for our, our citizens who need this

[1:40:51] work, is it possible to use some of these funds to,

[1:40:56] um, help contractors meet those requirements?

[1:41:01] like I said, we have students here at the vote center, uh, in the trades.

[1:41:06] maybe some of them may come from these designated areas. Is it, is

[1:41:10] it possible to pass through these funds to help those, uh,

[1:41:14] uh, students or those community members to, to be able to get qualified, to

[1:41:18] be able to be approved by hud, uh, for, to make those projects, you

[1:41:22] know, folks in these areas, you know, $10,000 might not be, you know, good enough for some,

[1:41:27] but I bet you it'd be plenty good for for others. And so is

[1:41:31] there a way for us to, to reallocate these funds to be a better benefit towards

[1:41:35] the community? Ms. Fillmore, could you

[1:41:40] answer that question on whether the funds could be used for training contractors

[1:41:44] to become eligible? Good

[1:41:48] evening, everyone. Good evening. Good evening. Um, that answer is no.

[1:41:52] um, you have to already be licensed and bonded. Um, according

[1:41:56] to hud, it is not, um, that funding could not be used to

[1:42:00] do training to assist contractors, unfortunately. I'm sorry.

[1:42:09] those funds have been available since 2022, correct? Mm-hmm .

[1:42:14] and, and I, I don't know how long those funds will be available. I know she mentioned that there, that it will

[1:42:18] come a time, but if, if we have the time, is

[1:42:22] it possible to, if we had money in our community

[1:42:26] development budget, then we can take it upon ourselves to

[1:42:30] fund these, uh, lower income or me, uh, medium income folks

[1:42:35] to do this job and get them to a place where they could be certified

[1:42:40] and then join in with the time that we've had already and maybe the time coming up

[1:42:44] to be able to have them approved, uh, for these projects. It'd

[1:42:48] be a great opportunity for, uh, the city to partner, uh, with

[1:42:52] its citizens to kind of fill these gaps and get this job done. If

[1:42:56] we have community members who need this work, excuse me, and we have community

[1:43:01] members who can do this work, or at least be trained to do this work,

[1:43:05] this is a great opportunity to make that bridge, uh, so that we can fulfill these needs and,

[1:43:09] and fulfill these, uh, uh, hud requirements.

[1:43:14] are, are you, are you advocating that the funding come from cdbg or the general

[1:43:18] fund to pay for that? I am, uh, for the initial part, I'm, I'm

[1:43:22] advocating for our, uh, community development budget that's within

[1:43:26] our, uh, budget now to have funds allocated to it. At the current time,

[1:43:31] there are $0 allocated to the community development, uh, budget.

[1:43:35] and so I think if we, if you were to allocate funds to that budget,

[1:43:39] you may be able to fill gaps better.

[1:43:44] thank you. So the piece that you're speaking on is,

[1:43:48] um, certification. And that would probably be something more

[1:43:52] so with the vault center to help, um, get some funds over there to

[1:43:56] maybe assist, but it comes down to a contractor sitting down for their, for

[1:44:01] their license, which is something we can't aid them in. Um, but

[1:44:05] if, if they are licensed and they are bonded, they can bid on our projects,

[1:44:09] it's just a matter of them sitting for the test, which is more so on the workforce development

[1:44:14] side of things. So we wouldn't be able to pay for it with the cdbg funds

[1:44:18] or maybe even the community development fund because that has to go into the community.

[1:44:22] but maybe we could start a conversation with the vote center and talk about some opportunities

[1:44:26] there to assist these contractors with sitting for their exams.

[1:44:35] um, no, I think that would be great. Again, uh, community partnerships

[1:44:39] is, uh, something I think we could focus on. So a partnership with the vote center, uh, that,

[1:44:44] that could help us train these students and, and train community, uh,

[1:44:48] members to do this work and then escalating that partnership to join

[1:44:52] in with, uh, the, uh, community development block brand.

[1:44:56] you know, to me it just sounds like a good way to get the job done. You know, if

[1:45:00] we take the necessary steps and the time to do it and to create those partnerships,

[1:45:05] uh, with the bowl center, these are resources that we already have, right? So

[1:45:09] why not do the best to use them?

[1:45:16] thank you. Thank you.

[1:45:24] hello? Uh, I just wanted to say that I'm very grateful that we've

[1:45:28] chosen to do the scholarship programs for parks and rec as part of this year's community

[1:45:32] development block grant. Um, I've been here supporting people that have talked

[1:45:37] about the expense of programs, and I've been here myself being critical of the parks

[1:45:41] and rec budget. So I wanted to come here and say something nice instead and say,

[1:45:45] I'm really excited to see that. Um, I appreciate the transparency about the process

[1:45:49] not being worked out yet. Um, I'm looking forward to hearing more about it.

[1:45:53] and now hearing that there's money from so long ago that hasn't been able to be spent, I'm

[1:45:57] also looking forward to hearing how this scholarship program shakes out in a year

[1:46:02] and here if the money was able to be spent and if it all worked out, or if need

[1:46:06] to go a different road. So, thank you all. Thank you.

[1:46:13] does anyone else like to speak on item number 15?

[1:46:19] if no one wants to speak, um, may I make a motion to close the public

[1:46:23] hearing? Second, uh, motion to second close the public hearing. Is there

[1:46:27] further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say

[1:46:31] aye. A a aye. Any opposed? Public hearing is now closed. There's no act

[1:46:35] further action needed on this item. So we'll move on to item number 16,

[1:46:40] conduct the public hearing and consider adopting an ordinance to amend the

[1:46:44] electric rate schedules. Mr. Bouchard,

[1:47:08] good evening, mayor o I'm board of alderman. Good evening. I'd like to take a few minutes to

[1:47:13] discuss, uh, the proposed amendments to the electric grade ordinance.

[1:47:19] I'm just getting my recommendations up front and we'll try to, I'll try to drive into

[1:47:23] a few more details. I'm recommending a 3% rate increase for all metered

[1:47:27] and unmetered electric rates, uh, modifying our current

[1:47:32] pca to recover uncollected power supply costs by

[1:47:36] adding a balancing factor to the pca and removing the one and a half

[1:47:40] cent per kilowatt hour cap from the pca. Also included

[1:47:44] in the proposed amendment is, um, our schedule 60,

[1:47:48] which is our renewable resource facility credit, adjusting that energy

[1:47:53] credit on a monthly basis as opposed to a fixed credit that's

[1:47:57] only adjusted at the time of rate setting.

[1:48:01] just a quick re recap. As you recall, we had two workshops,

[1:48:05] um, earlier this year in april and june. We discussed,

[1:48:10] uh, operational updates that I had at the time. Our

[1:48:14] operating budget from fiscal year 26, fiscal year ending 26,

[1:48:18] our capital by capital five year plan, our wholesale

[1:48:22] power supply, uh, rate plan, which is a five year forecast.

[1:48:26] we reviewed electrical financial study with presentations by

[1:48:30] utility financial systems, as well as myself identified

[1:48:35] under recovery of power supply costs. Since the time of the pca

[1:48:39] was approved december 1st, 2025 until now,

[1:48:43] it's about $2 million that we've under recovered in our power supply costs

[1:48:48] over the last 12 months. It's about $2.5 million, and if you go back

[1:48:52] further 24 months, it's about $4 million in under recovery power supply

[1:48:56] costs. Also recommended rate adjustments during

[1:49:00] those conversations and recommended modernizing our our

[1:49:04] current rate designs and moving away from volumetric rates and unbundling

[1:49:09] our variable and fixed costs out of our wholesale power supply costs

[1:49:13] and out of our, um, our retail rates, and trying to

[1:49:17] get in a position where we could pass forward wholesale costs directly to our customers

[1:49:24] considering rate modernization. Schedule

[1:49:29] 60 is a credit that we give to our customers that provide solar

[1:49:33] energy to our part of the system. And that credit is a fixed amount

[1:49:38] that, um, is adjusted at the time of rate setting.

[1:49:42] the recommendation is to allow that energy credit to be a variable, um,

[1:49:46] and for it to be adjusted monthly. Um, and that credit would equal

[1:49:51] utilities monthly avoided cost for energy using a

[1:49:55] 12 month rolling and two month lagging cycle, very similar to how

[1:49:59] we're doing the pca. If I'm saying if our power supply costs

[1:50:03] change on a monthly basis, then I should recognize that

[1:50:07] as well on the credit that I'm buying solar energy for, um,

[1:50:12] and to maintain that. So it tracks the equivalent cost of energy that we're not

[1:50:16] buying from the chemical and our power supply costs and our power supply contract, I should say,

[1:50:23] considering the electric department's financial health

[1:50:27] and looking out over the next few years, you've seen this slide before.

[1:50:32] um, here is, uh, an option,

[1:50:36] um, that includes a 0%, uh, rate adjustments.

[1:50:40] it includes the capital plans that I have recommended.

[1:50:44] and as you can see, the debt coverage ratio is unfavorable.

[1:50:49] it goes negative. System depreciation is in the 40 to 50%

[1:50:54] range due to the capital investments. Um, adjusted operating income

[1:50:58] is unfavorable and goes negative next year. Cash balance

[1:51:02] continues to decline and go negative in the days of working capital cash

[1:51:06] on the hand with low minimum policy and is expected to go

[1:51:10] negative in three years. So overall, I don't think this is a very favorable plan.

[1:51:16] if we look at an option to go 0% rate increase, take out the capital

[1:51:20] improvements, not do those, um,

[1:51:25] your debt coverage ratio temporarily inflates, but before declining

[1:51:30] and going negative. Um, your system depreciation approaches 75%

[1:51:35] and that's due to the lack of a capital investment. And your system, your

[1:51:39] adjusted operating in income, uh, looks good for a year. Uh,

[1:51:43] 'cause spending has been artificially cut, but then rapidly starts to decline,

[1:51:48] um, at large losses. And your projected cash balances look good,

[1:51:52] but it's artificial as you need to. You eventually need to start drying it down to

[1:51:56] maintain the system. Um, annual dates of working capital

[1:52:01] are near policy requirements, but again, those will start to decrease as soon spending

[1:52:05] occurs. So overall, I don't think this is a favorable plan.

[1:52:12] this slide is an option for a four and a half percent rate

[1:52:16] increase. Um, the pca stays the same. There's no changes

[1:52:20] to the pca and includes the recommended five year, uh, capital

[1:52:24] investment. Um, your debt coverage ratio is favorable

[1:52:29] and stays well above one. Your system depreciation is in the 40 to 50%

[1:52:33] range, and that's due to your capital investments. Adjusted operating

[1:52:37] income can support your operational costs. Projected cash balance

[1:52:42] keeps pace with targeted cash requirements. Your days of working capital

[1:52:46] stay above the minimum policy requirements. Um,

[1:52:50] and it also approaches, uh, industry recommendations. Overall, I think this

[1:52:54] is a very favorable plan. Looking at another

[1:52:58] option, which is the one I recommend, I I

[1:53:02] like this one a little better. Um, this is a 3% rate increase.

[1:53:07] uh, however we're adding a balancing, uh, factor to our power cost

[1:53:11] adjustment charge. It also includes the five year capital plan. And overall,

[1:53:16] this achieves the very similar results as the four point half percent

[1:53:20] option. But the method of collecting that is different. Um,

[1:53:25] some through more through rates, and in this case

[1:53:30] more through the pca. Um, your debt coverage ratio is favorable

[1:53:34] and well above one. Your system depreciation is 40 to 50%.

[1:53:39] do your capital expenditures. Adjusted operating income supports your operating

[1:53:44] expenses, projected cash balance maintains targeted operating levels

[1:53:48] and your days of cash on hand meets minimum requirements and trends

[1:53:52] towards in industry recommendations. Um,

[1:53:57] I'd like this plan, um, particularly because,

[1:54:01] um, you're, you're adding

[1:54:06] 1.5% less to your base rates, uh, compared to the four point half percent

[1:54:10] methodology and then going down the road, future rate changes will

[1:54:14] compound by that amount, um, on top of that. So I think this is

[1:54:18] better all overall for the utility and for the customer. I think it's a nice blend.

[1:54:24] um, diving into the balancing factor a little more,

[1:54:28] um, this is included in the 3% option

[1:54:33] and would be added to the, uh, power custom adjustment charge.

[1:54:37] uh, presently the power customer customer charge has, our cost

[1:54:41] adjustment charge has been under collecting since the time it was

[1:54:45] approved december 1st, 2024. We've under collected about two point

[1:54:50] or $2 million over the past, uh, 12 months, $2.5 million.

[1:54:55] and if we would've had a pca, um, it would've been about 4 million under

[1:54:59] collected. Um, so adding a balancing factor to the pca,

[1:55:03] um, to recover those undercover undercovered power supply expenses,

[1:55:08] uh, the balancing factor would be recalculated each fiscal year.

[1:55:12] the amount would be fixed for the entire fiscal year,

[1:55:16] um, and then recalculated at the start of each new fiscal

[1:55:21] year to maintain recovery of last year's under

[1:55:25] recovered power supply expenses.

[1:55:32] this is a comparison of the rate track options that I discussed.

[1:55:36] um, the, the I, the one that's highlighted

[1:55:40] is the 3% option, um, with, uh, the balancing

[1:55:45] factor on the pca, it attempts to collect

[1:55:49] the $2 million of under recovery since december.

[1:55:53] um, I think if you compare those across, um,

[1:55:58] you'll see over a three year rate plan

[1:56:02] using this option. You'll under, you'll, you'll cost the customer

[1:56:06] less per month over the course of three years

[1:56:11] as compared to the four and a half percent rate increase with the pca

[1:56:15] as it is. And then that middle option I threw in there for you just to see

[1:56:19] if you wanted to go back and try to collect all 24 months of under recovery, what

[1:56:23] that would look like for you.

[1:56:28] so in conclusion, I'm recommending that you adopt the, uh, amendments

[1:56:33] to electric coordinates, which includes the 3% rate increase,

[1:56:37] all metered and unmetered rate for all meter and unmetered grades. Uh, the

[1:56:41] changes to, uh, rider number one, our power cost adjustment charge,

[1:56:45] it adds a balancing factor and removes to 1.5%, one point half percent

[1:56:50] per kilowatt hour cap and changes to the schedule 60

[1:56:54] or renewable resource facilities credit by adjusting that

[1:56:58] credit on a monthly basis. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may

[1:57:02] have. This board have questions. How many

[1:57:06] utility cu uh, customers are within the city?

[1:57:10] pardon me? How many utility customers are within

[1:57:15] the city? Total electric across all, all right. Classes, about

[1:57:19] 24,000 meters right now. Thank you.

[1:57:26] any other questions? Yes, I do. Um,

[1:57:33] I'm gonna direct this to, um, I, I heard

[1:57:37] your presentation, you've given us the facts here.

[1:57:42] we as almond, our citizens needs

[1:57:46] to know what they're facing and you have delivered

[1:57:50] that information to us. Now, moving down the line,

[1:57:54] um, as the city manager

[1:57:59] has said before in the past, he recommends,

[1:58:04] um, this rate increase. Am I correct mr. Use? Because

[1:58:09] of the agent infrastructure we have, um, we

[1:58:13] know that it's going to affect our customers. Um,

[1:58:17] it always does. When we have these just regular storms come

[1:58:22] through here, citizens are out of power.

[1:58:26] um, and I just feel that

[1:58:30] maybe I'm missing something here. Why are we

[1:58:35] continuously, um, debating this and you coming

[1:58:40] here before us and discussing this when we know that this is something that we

[1:58:44] need to do. We need to, to do this rate adjustment.

[1:58:48] and I don't want to impose a rate adjustment on any customer, but

[1:58:52] I would prefer my customer to have some electricity when needed.

[1:58:57] and you're, you are talking about, you know, we got three transfer

[1:59:01] formers that needs to be replaced. You know,

[1:59:06] I don't know what else is missing here. Am I missing a, a piece here about,

[1:59:10] you know, I did hear a rumor that, uh, several rumors that the

[1:59:14] city was thinking about, uh, selling the electric department.

[1:59:20] now I don't know how true that is, but it's, like I said, that's rumor mill, but

[1:59:24] is that the reason why we're we all here, you know, this

[1:59:28] board and we're not wanting to move forward with this? What, what is going on?

[1:59:33] I mean, mr. Bouchard has come through us so many times and letting us

[1:59:37] know our citizens need

[1:59:42] . They don't want this rate increase. I wouldn't want a rate increase, but if it's

[1:59:46] needed, if it's a dire need so that we need power, our citizens need power,

[1:59:51] and I'm all for approving this 3%

[1:59:55] rate increase in what he has recommended to us.

[2:00:01] and I feel like I've been kicking a dead horse. So I'm,

[2:00:06] I'm done with it. I just want the citizens to know that I agree with mr. Rashard

[2:00:10] and ask him for this rate increase.

[2:00:14] tell me one, one more time, what is the, the max or is there

[2:00:19] a cap on the, is it tca currently a cap of one and a half

[2:00:23] cent per kilowatt hour. And with the balancing factor

[2:00:27] in doing the modeling that I have, we'll get close to it again going

[2:00:31] a couple months in the future. It's all, you know, it's all forecasted,

[2:00:35] but I don't expect this to be much over the cap. Now it needs to be removed in case we

[2:00:39] do touch over that, um, in a month or two

[2:00:44] on the average bill, what is that? That's, that would be $15,

[2:00:48] $15 just for the pca if it reached a cap. Okay.

[2:00:52] correct. I just don't see it reaching that.

[2:00:58] but isn't it within a three year period, the $15?

[2:01:02] no ma'am. If, if the cap was, the cap is

[2:01:07] 1.50 cents per kilowatt hour, and I'm speaking, the average residential customer

[2:01:11] uses a thousand kilowatt hours, so they couldn't see a $15

[2:01:15] pca charge. Okay. Because the reason why I asked that, because I said you had it broken out

[2:01:20] here for 2026 is $6 and 61 cents. So am

[2:01:24] I and then the 2027 is that that's what, yes.

[2:01:29] lemme see if I can find my way back.

[2:01:33] that's what I expect. The, the rate and the

[2:01:38] pca to look like in 2026. Okay,

[2:01:42] at $6 and 61 cents, I think that would be equivalent,

[2:01:46] um, increase to the customer's bill. You'll notice in 2027

[2:01:50] that drops off. That's because we recovered that money that

[2:01:55] was under recovered since december of this year. And then it starts

[2:01:59] to stable out. And as long as we keep consistent with that under

[2:02:04] recovery, I think it flattens off. I like that better than, than a fixed

[2:02:08] four and a half percent rate increase. That just will compound, um,

[2:02:12] time and time again.

[2:02:23] any more questions for mr. Bouchard? Not necessarily

[2:02:28] a question for mr. Bouchard, but charlie, feel free to jump

[2:02:32] in and answer it if you can, but, um, alderman astor

[2:02:36] had previously expressed concern about the kind of the open-ended

[2:02:40] power, uh, cost adjustment. Um,

[2:02:46] what, um,

[2:02:51] not sure how best to answer this or ask the question,

[2:02:57] what do we need to do to ensure that

[2:03:01] this issue gets revisited

[2:03:06] in a year's time? Because,

[2:03:12] you know, this board with the upcoming elections,

[2:03:16] there may be more than one new face on this board.

[2:03:21] um, and they need

[2:03:25] to have an opportunity to wrestle with this

[2:03:30] issue, um, I think sooner rather

[2:03:34] than later. So one, I guess one

[2:03:38] question for city manager or city

[2:03:43] attorney, is there any way of putting

[2:03:47] a sunset provision in the ordinance addressing,

[2:03:52] you know, the pca charge to ensure that this

[2:03:56] issue will be revisited, um, in a specific

[2:04:00] time period? Well, one thing we started doing this is, this is this

[2:04:04] budget process. This was the second year in a row as part of the budget.

[2:04:08] we had the utility director make this presentation on why he

[2:04:12] felt there was a need for a rate increase. And so the goal is to continue doing

[2:04:17] that. Um, if, if the board

[2:04:21] votes on this increase, it's gonna be interesting to see one

[2:04:25] year from now if that increase meant, meant

[2:04:30] what the expectations were based on the director's, um, presentation

[2:04:35] and also the consultants. Uh, it kind of fell flat the previous year.

[2:04:40] but I will say we do need to increase the rates.

[2:04:44] and the main reason why is because we do have an infrastructure that we have to maintain with

[2:04:48] our electric utility. And I said this during the budget process,

[2:04:53] however, I cannot recommend allocating any funds

[2:04:57] toward those capital items until we can meet our policy of

[2:05:01] meeting the minimum days of cash on hand to be able to go to the lgc

[2:05:05] for additional funding. Can I add to

[2:05:09] your comment? Sure. I I would say that

[2:05:15] in the electric rate ordinance, all of

[2:05:19] the rates excluding the

[2:05:24] pca and the proposed changes to schedule 60

[2:05:28] have no requirement to adjust them.

[2:05:33] it adjusted whenever, um, the board elects to

[2:05:38] adjust them in the language for the

[2:05:42] pca with the balancing factor. And in the language for the

[2:05:46] schedule 60 adjust the monthly credit, it's to be reviewed annually

[2:05:51] and adjusted on an annual basis at the time of, um,

[2:05:56] the start of the fiscal year. And

[2:06:00] that would coincide with all of our wholesale power supply

[2:06:04] forecasts and, and that process. So we do our best to

[2:06:09] engage that in the city's budgeting process. But as I've said before,

[2:06:14] wholesale power supply, um, forecasts and

[2:06:19] adjustment period is not in cycle with our

[2:06:23] process in cycle. Am I answering the question? Well, I, I

[2:06:27] think so. I don't know whether, uh, alderman, astor,

[2:06:32] you know, feels any more comfortable, um, with that or not.

[2:06:36] um, and, and again, we have been,

[2:06:40] over the last couple of years we have been, uh, faced

[2:06:44] with, um, digging ourselves out of a difficult financial

[2:06:48] hole with the electric utility. Uh, and this is the latest,

[2:06:53] um, iteration of that, that ongoing effort.

[2:06:58] um, but if alderman masters concern is

[2:07:02] that, you know, we we're building in or you know, if

[2:07:06] this gets approved, um, sort of an unlimited

[2:07:11] power adjustment charge and, and that may

[2:07:15] not be the right way of of wording it. Um, I just want

[2:07:19] to try to figure out how do we ensure that this

[2:07:24] issue will be revisited in a year's time?

[2:07:29] and alderman prill, to answer your initial question, yes, there could

[2:07:33] be a sunset put in with this on pca

[2:07:38] if that's what the board, so choose chose. And the other part of that, as I'm

[2:07:42] monitoring the pca monthly, um, paying very,

[2:07:46] very close attention to that. And if it starts to trend up and I'm

[2:07:50] forecasting, I have modeling tools, I'm looking years ahead. If I see it

[2:07:54] getting outta whack, I'm sure I sure you, I'll be back before you talking about

[2:07:59] should we do a base rate change and lower the pca

[2:08:03] and make that a more stable cost for our customers.

[2:08:09] and I appreciate that, um, ,

[2:08:15] but we, we found ourselves in a financial

[2:08:19] hole because

[2:08:23] passports chose not to address

[2:08:27] the issue. And I'm sure you and your predecessors,

[2:08:32] and I may be wrong on this, um, brought the issues

[2:08:37] to the boards at that time, but the decisions were made

[2:08:41] not to address those issues. And unfortunately

[2:08:46] it led us to where we were a couple of years ago of

[2:08:50] a very difficult financial situation. I'm just trying to address

[2:08:54] that issue and, and address alderman astor's

[2:08:58] concern. Uh, don't know whether or not a sunset provision does

[2:09:03] anything for alderman astor, but it's just a suggestion.

[2:09:11] charlie, I have a question for you. Um, how long have you been the

[2:09:15] utility director in newburn? Seven years. Seven years. How

[2:09:19] many rate increases have you requested from the board during your seven

[2:09:23] year tenure? None. Well, uh, as of

[2:09:27] an exception to last january and last july, none.

[2:09:32] okay. My recommendation is go to the city manager and I'm up

[2:09:36] here at the request of the city manager. Thank you.

[2:09:42] so if the city manager tells you no, we're not taking, uh,

[2:09:46] a recommended rate increase to the board, then it doesn't get to this

[2:09:51] board. I'm only here by the invitation of the city manager. Right?

[2:09:55] so all due respect to what the,

[2:09:59] I think what the mayor was suggesting by that question.

[2:10:04] if, if the issue is

[2:10:09] put to bed before it gets to this board, then no action

[2:10:13] is gonna happen because this board is not being

[2:10:18] advised that there is a potential problem ruling

[2:10:22] itself. I don't know that bias by incorporating

[2:10:27] a sunset provision, it sort of forces the issue to

[2:10:31] this board or the future board.

[2:10:36] and that's all I'm suggesting. Interesting.

[2:10:43] any more questions for mr. Bouchard? Yes.

[2:10:47] I just want to sum this up. Uh, mr. Bachar. So if

[2:10:51] we do nothing, we're still currently under collecting,

[2:10:56] uh, $2 million you said a year, correct? Yes.

[2:11:00] in power. In power of power, exactly. Yes. So we're under collecting that.

[2:11:05] so the way that it, it stands right

[2:11:09] now, um, the city is not financially

[2:11:14] solvent to, at this point with the electric department

[2:11:18] in the, in the condition that is in where you can, even if you wanted

[2:11:22] to request whatever to go out and try to get a geo bond,

[2:11:29] I believe I'd have to refer to our finance department. But looking at the slides that I

[2:11:33] looked at, I don't think, I think people would laugh at us . Okay. You think we,

[2:11:37] we asked them for lending right now, given if we do nothing to your,

[2:11:41] your original comment. That's why I just, why I just made that statement. 'cause that's

[2:11:45] what ms. Kim told us the, at the last work electoral

[2:11:49] workshop we had. Yeah, I think she's accurate. Yes. So

[2:11:54] I, that's all I have.

[2:12:03] any more questions? Okay. This time I

[2:12:07] will open a public hearing to consider adopting the ordinance to amend

[2:12:11] the electric rate schedules. If you'd like to come forward, please do so at this time.

[2:12:20] hello again. Um, and city manager, I, I left you out 'cause

[2:12:24] you're part of this council manager

[2:12:29] form of government. If, if things are according to charter,

[2:12:34] the board of alderman is the board of alderman and you vote

[2:12:39] as one and the mayor presides on the meeting and directs

[2:12:43] people. And then the city manager used to sit next

[2:12:48] to the mayor, but he was lowered sometime after

[2:12:52] 2009. Thank you ms. Carr. But it needs to be relevant to the public hearing for

[2:12:56] electric rates. Well, I'm, I'm going back in the history in,

[2:13:02] in nine in the 1970s, it was,

[2:13:06] it was initiated by the board of alderman to seek,

[2:13:12] uh, funding for carolina power

[2:13:16] and light and power cpl to get a bond.

[2:13:21] and that was a revenue bond at the time. I mean, who

[2:13:25] knows how much the city paid. 'cause I just can't, the details are sketchy,

[2:13:30] but, but the, the utility has been paying for that

[2:13:35] and the payment ends this year.

[2:13:40] so going back to 2015 ish,

[2:13:45] the mayor was on the board and alderman kinsey was on the board when

[2:13:49] there was a deal when duke and progress merged

[2:13:53] and a deal was made, something to deal with the rates, I don't know, it was closed session

[2:13:58] and I haven't sought through the city

[2:14:02] clerk 'cause there's just too much information. So I'm just asking

[2:14:06] you simply

[2:14:12] in may of 2024,

[2:14:16] this floor derman four of you voted for

[2:14:21] to support mr. Bouchard's electric rate and

[2:14:25] a pca, then that was during

[2:14:29] the budget talks, then it came to

[2:14:34] the board making a final decision on rates. And charlie had presented

[2:14:38] all the information. I was there. I so I'm not like imagining

[2:14:42] this, right? He presented the board all this information

[2:14:47] and the rates and they were set and it was a public hearing and then

[2:14:52] the mayor said, I wanna match duke's rates.

[2:14:56] everything changed. That was last june

[2:15:00] or july. It was around then. So then the

[2:15:04] mayor's like, no, we're going to give you whatever percent, 3%,

[2:15:09] whatever the amount was. So that's not,

[2:15:13] you know, going with whatever the department of public utilities director's

[2:15:17] telling him. Like he's been in an engineer for I, I have no idea. Right? That's his

[2:15:21] job. That's what he does. That's instead

[2:15:26] he keeps revising to try to catch up with duke's

[2:15:30] rates. So I guess my question is,

[2:15:34] I know I got a lot of them. The board

[2:15:40] has the legal authority to take 5% of the gross revenues from the

[2:15:44] electric fund. Y'all have that power through state statute.

[2:15:48] so as, I don't know if that's what mr. Bachar was referring

[2:15:53] to, but it appears to me that these rates are being raised.

[2:15:57] it was a 6% rate and then the 6% rate, but it

[2:16:01] wasn't a pca, um, was not added or

[2:16:05] it was restricted. So this

[2:16:09] authority to take 5% of the gross revenue,

[2:16:14] the money is just going up. That's being taken out of the electric department

[2:16:20] and it's being put into general fund. And I'm not saying anything shady going

[2:16:24] on 'cause that's a legal issue, but you're not addressing the

[2:16:28] actual problem that the consultant

[2:16:33] said during the financial study that there

[2:16:37] was an aging system. It's affecting reliability.

[2:16:42] and I don't know if there's an n one contingency or not, but

[2:16:46] there's a situation going on with the system and by

[2:16:50] keep funding it with funding the utility

[2:16:55] without or, uh, keep taking money out, transferring it

[2:16:59] to the general fund. What is this about

[2:17:03] the, the, the duke energy or the carolina light power

[2:17:08] bought the assets that the city owns, the whole electric system or

[2:17:13] I'm sorry, I apologize. The plant, the generating plant that they paid

[2:17:17] this revenue bond for. And I know I'm, I'm, I'm

[2:17:21] really confused. Sounds confusing, but I'm bringing this home

[2:17:26] right now. So by taking

[2:17:30] the money out of the general fund, keep raising the rates without adjusting

[2:17:34] the power cost, you're not

[2:17:38] collecting natural cost of the power.

[2:17:42] so is there something in that closed session which

[2:17:46] may be, um, available to the public?

[2:17:51] now that was said that when the

[2:17:55] contract ends, then we can,

[2:18:00] that the 5% will be lifted or something. Was there a deal made

[2:18:04] that nobody is aware of except for the mayor? 'cause he was there

[2:18:08] and, and possibly, uh, mckenzie, mr.

[2:18:13] mr. Davis. Um, I I typically don't want to go down

[2:18:17] rabbit holes, but let let's be clear, anything that took

[2:18:21] place from negotiations in closed sessions during the empa

[2:18:25] and duke buyout was made public because

[2:18:29] this board or previous board, board of ottman voted to accept that agreement,

[2:18:34] which became public, correct? That is correct. The city was not a direct

[2:18:38] party to that settlement between duke and in kemba.

[2:18:44] and any rates or any deals would be evidenced by a

[2:18:48] document that the board would approve.

[2:18:52] and and every time the city changes our rates, there's

[2:18:56] a public hearing yes sir. By law. And it's voted on by the full board

[2:19:00] and the majority of the board determines the rates. Correct. Okay, sir,

[2:19:05] thank you. Okay. Are is the city of new

[2:19:09] bern, not a member of, of one of the 32 members are part of

[2:19:13] mpa and the city of new bern has actually, I think al my masters

[2:19:17] part of the current board for mpa.

[2:19:21] is that true or not? Yes. Yes ma'am. So how

[2:19:25] is the city not involved with the bio? We were not

[2:19:29] a direct party to that bio in kemba. I think the city's one of 32

[2:19:34] or 36 members. So the city's one

[2:19:38] 32nd of that entity. So in that sense, the

[2:19:42] city has a vote within kemba, but the city's not

[2:19:46] in charge of the negotiations or that global resolution between

[2:19:51] those two entities. Charlie, feel free. So

[2:19:56] issue, but I'll try to add some clarity.

[2:20:00] kemba, which is a power supply agency that we're a member

[2:20:04] of, has a contract with duke to

[2:20:08] buy wholesale power. Yes sir. That's between the kemba

[2:20:13] and duke new bern has a separate contract

[2:20:17] between the city of new bern and the kemba.

[2:20:21] does that help the two different matters? I mean, then

[2:20:25] the rates kind of follow each other. They're pretty much similarly aligned, but they're,

[2:20:29] yeah. The, the, the issue that's being raised is, is there are some

[2:20:33] unknown deal between the city and in kemp or

[2:20:38] the city and duke that has not been disclosed. And the

[2:20:42] legal issue we're making is that all those documents, records,

[2:20:46] agreements are in writing and were approved in public. So there could

[2:20:50] not possibly be a secret deal between new vern and

[2:20:54] duke or anyone else.

[2:20:58] and I haven't looked at all of those public, the closed session

[2:21:02] meetings, 'cause basically a closed session meeting just said this happened. So I don't,

[2:21:07] I wasn't there. No one can, there was no transcript of closed sessions. So I'm

[2:21:11] just trying to get to the bottom up. How did this board be fully, totally

[2:21:15] on board? And then mayor says, no, we're gonna match duke's rates.

[2:21:20] and now, and, and mayor, you're shaking your head, but

[2:21:24] you said that right? I'm shaking my head because you're inferring that I

[2:21:28] overruled the board and made a suggestion. And the, the staff

[2:21:32] followed that direction, which did not happen. I simply made a suggestion that instead

[2:21:36] of coming back every six months or every year, asking for more money

[2:21:40] to close the gap between where we are and where duke is, if the city would mirror duke's

[2:21:45] rates, we wouldn't be having this discussion tonight. The board didn't go along with that, unless

[2:21:49] I'm completely losing my mind. The board didn't go along with that. The board took other action.

[2:21:54] okay. Three members of the board, which is the majority of the board,

[2:21:58] two, no, four, four members is a majority of the board.

[2:22:04] you have four members on the board. So the

[2:22:08] majority of four is you have two aldermen,

[2:22:13] alderman kinzie, and asked her. And then you have three

[2:22:17] people that aman, that voted to raise a raise. So

[2:22:21] then at the very end on our

[2:22:25] mayor, you voted and you, you blocked that. Right.

[2:22:30] um, charlie, could you clarify the last time? You, you well, I, no, no, no. I apologize. I,

[2:22:34] excuse me. It's, excuse the la the last time you asked for a rate increase, it was

[2:22:38] voted on, if I remember correctly, it was four to two. And I supported

[2:22:42] your request to raise the rates along with alderman pr, alderman, royal,

[2:22:46] and alderman best. Is that what you recall? I was saying I was

[2:22:51] apologizing for misspeaking. So, and

[2:22:56] I guess the bottom line is all of the alderman

[2:23:01] were on board with the power rate

[2:23:06] increase and a pca and then that meeting when

[2:23:10] it was all brought in front of the board at the for

[2:23:15] sign off, the mayor said, no, we're, you know, I think we need

[2:23:19] to do this. And then alderman asked her, and alman kinzie

[2:23:24] said, yes, let's raise the, or adjust to

[2:23:28] duke's like a penny underneath duke's race. Is

[2:23:32] that addressing the issue with the city electric department, or

[2:23:36] is that a political move? Number one. And there was discussions made

[2:23:41] behind closed doors. I can address that. So I guess the bottom line

[2:23:45] is, I'm just trying to figure out what, what is going on here. Yes, ma'am. Let, let me address

[2:23:49] the behind closed doors to help everybody understand

[2:23:54] governing bodies in north carolina cannot take any legal action

[2:23:58] in a closed session. That that's legal rule one, they can't

[2:24:02] take secret actions. They can approve a settlement,

[2:24:07] a legal settlement in a closed session, provided that the settlement is

[2:24:11] released thereafter. So to the extent there was a discussion

[2:24:15] in 2015 about the duke and kea settlement,

[2:24:20] there would've been discussions about that settlement. There may well have been a recommendation,

[2:24:25] but thereafter, in a public meeting on the

[2:24:29] agenda, those documents would've been approved in broad daylight

[2:24:33] by the board. So there is never any secret action that can legally

[2:24:37] be taken, ever. Okay. I, I totally understand that.

[2:24:42] so getting back to 2015 or whenever that happened,

[2:24:48] it was a deal made with duke saying that it, once the contract's over,

[2:24:52] then something's gonna happen. Or,

[2:24:56] I mean, do you, can you tell me what happened in a public meeting that you, you

[2:25:00] were a part of?

[2:25:05] I, I don't even know where to start, to be honest with you. I mean, you, you're asking about something

[2:25:09] from 10, 11 years ago. I can tell you this,

[2:25:13] that when we signed the agreement and the city had to sign on with the 31

[2:25:18] other agencies to accept the buyout from duke to nampa,

[2:25:23] we always said in 2025 or 2026,

[2:25:27] the remaining debt that had essentially been refinanced by duke

[2:25:31] through this wholesale power sale would come off

[2:25:36] of our book. So essentially we wouldn't owe it anymore. Therefore,

[2:25:40] whatever we were paying, charlie, I believe it was $3 million a year roughly,

[2:25:44] would no longer be obligated by all of the 32 cities a part of

[2:25:48] that. That is the only thing that I can try to make a connection with what you're

[2:25:53] trying to infer tonight. And I don't know if that's what you're talking about or not. So why are you

[2:25:57] asking to match duke's rates when duke is providing

[2:26:01] the power? And there's all these costs for charlie to be at the meeting

[2:26:05] and for new bern 1 0 1 and all these things, they cost money.

[2:26:09] but if you're, you want to , I'm

[2:26:13] just confused. So meeting wholesale

[2:26:18] issues confused with charlie, can you please come to the mic?

[2:26:22] thank you. Are, are we getting do wholesale issues confused with duke retail

[2:26:26] issues? Mm-hmm . And

[2:26:32] I think the mayor simply requested it the time it, I, correct me

[2:26:36] if I'm wrong there, that instead of keep coming back to this board asking for

[2:26:40] 3% or 6% or 3%, he just

[2:26:44] made a recommendation that we match

[2:26:49] our either due, it seems like a penny aachi kilowatt

[2:26:53] hour cheaper than duke's rate, retail rate. Retail rate.

[2:26:57] correct. Not, we would still be either at the same rate as

[2:27:01] duke, or we would be one penny a kilowatt

[2:27:06] hour cheaper than duke. That was best. I recall

[2:27:10] his recommendation. I recommended, I recommended we

[2:27:14] match duke's rate, and I believe you said, well, can we come in a little bit cheaper so we

[2:27:18] can say we're below it? If I recall that correctly. And, and just mayor, for, for a

[2:27:23] bit of history, for decades, duke's rates were lower

[2:27:27] than the city rates. And the citizens were very upset about

[2:27:31] the city's lack of competitiveness with its electric rates because it was saddled

[2:27:36] with very large debts. And once that buyout took

[2:27:40] place, the tide turned and new bern's rates

[2:27:44] over time became lower and they were never raised.

[2:27:49] and because of that, we are now under recovering, which puts

[2:27:53] the mayor's comments in context. We've,

[2:27:57] we've beat duke now for a decade and we've paid a price for that.

[2:28:01] wouldn't it be easier to match their rate so that we stay

[2:28:05] on the same tide? And, and I heard that and although

[2:28:09] I didn't put anything formally together because I didn't sense the board was asking

[2:28:13] me to do that. Staff and myself, we did, we did look at duke's

[2:28:17] retail rates and I can't, I can't match

[2:28:21] them. I don't have the tools to match all their rate designs. There's a lot of details. I can

[2:28:25] try to match their costs. And just speaking of the re

[2:28:30] average residential customer, I'd have to increase

[2:28:34] our rates 14%, including

[2:28:38] the unrestricted pca. If we don't, if we keep the pca

[2:28:42] restricted, it would be about a 16% rate increase to get rid of kids today.

[2:28:53] so getting back to all this, you lost $2 million

[2:28:57] la or it's, it's gonna be at the end of the year, it's gonna be $2 million have

[2:29:01] not been recovered because the rates

[2:29:05] weren't, the, the 3% plus the pca was not added

[2:29:10] in may of 2024. So here, here

[2:29:15] we are, and then that $2 million is being transferred to the general

[2:29:19] fund. How do you ever catch up? And that's it. Thank you. I

[2:29:23] thank you everyone for being so patient. I'm just trying to fill in the dots because

[2:29:28] the mayor has not responded to any of my requests for comment

[2:29:32] information, but he, he goes on, on the media and talks

[2:29:36] about this situation. So here we are.

[2:29:46] would anyone else like to come forward and make comments on item number

[2:29:50] 16? Hey, I ain't gonna take up too much

[2:29:54] of your time. Uh, but I did have a couple of questions I saw on the chart.

[2:29:58] it said bond issue with fees included, uh, one year

[2:30:03] was about 28 million. The next was 29. The next of 27 is

[2:30:07] that, is that money that we are paying out over the next three years

[2:30:14] slide? It was a slide that had

[2:30:30] that, that's, is that money coming in or that that's what I'm asking for.

[2:30:34] if you look at the column on the left of the capital improvement plan, those dollars

[2:30:39] should match what I'm asking in bonding

[2:30:46] request. In this, essentially

[2:30:50] alone, in this group, percent we'll be getting there. That match well is

[2:30:54] that I believe we be financially qualified, but we still have to

[2:30:58] go to the market. And that falls more aligned with our finance department. Can

[2:31:03] you're ask asking, use the microphone. You're asking to issue those bonds

[2:31:08] over the next few years. I'm not asking to issue bonds at this point

[2:31:12] in time. All I'm trying to do is get the money so that we're in a position that we

[2:31:16] get asked for lending the most likely in the form of

[2:31:20] a revenue bond in those amounts.

[2:31:24] yes. Okay. I think maybe to help answer

[2:31:28] your question at the present time with the electric utility

[2:31:33] is not in a position to be able to issue revenue

[2:31:37] bonds. The state will not allow that to happen because

[2:31:41] of our financial condition in, in the electric utility.

[2:31:46] so what mr. Bouchard has been, uh,

[2:31:50] recommending to the board is that we have to increase the rates to

[2:31:54] generate more revenue, to put the utility into

[2:31:59] a position that would allow us to request

[2:32:03] the state's approval to issue revenue bonds. Okay.

[2:32:07] okay. I I, I appreciate that clarity. I just wanna take a few more moments to say

[2:32:11] that, uh, the, the public banking initiative could

[2:32:15] also be, uh, another recourse for this issue. Y'all have,

[2:32:20] uh,

[2:32:27] just sitting here and listening to you this conversation.

[2:32:31] and I was also at the budget meeting, um, at the rec center,

[2:32:36] what, two months ago probably. And so, and I've been paying

[2:32:40] attention to the electric thing. It concerns

[2:32:44] me, if we're going to run a utility business,

[2:32:49] we're going to have to charge for that.

[2:32:54] we can't go in the red. So it's

[2:32:58] hard to raise rates. It's

[2:33:02] hard to raise taxes, but you guys gotta have

[2:33:06] the courage to do it. 'cause we can't just be without

[2:33:12] electricity. That's all I have. Thank you.

[2:33:16] thank you. Thank you.

[2:33:22] anyone else?

[2:33:28] mayor, make a motion to close the public hearing. Second, I have a motion to

[2:33:32] second to close the public hearing. Is there further discussion? Hearing

[2:33:36] none. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Public hearing is

[2:33:40] now closed. What is the pleasure of the board? On item number 16, I

[2:33:46] mayor, I'll make a motion to, um, adopt an ordinance to

[2:33:50] amend the electric rate schedules, um, and,

[2:33:56] um, to include a sunset provision,

[2:34:00] uh, in that ordinance. Um,

[2:34:05] so that this issue is revisited, um, a year from this,

[2:34:09] um, tonight. Second. I have a motion a second.

[2:34:13] are you clear? No, sir. If we could unpack that a little bit. Altman pri um,

[2:34:19] are, are you thinking of the rate itself or the pca rider? Well,

[2:34:23] yes, and and thank you for that clarification. The, the sunset

[2:34:27] provision would be with regards to the pca and, and

[2:34:31] that would, uh, expire six 30, uh, 26

[2:34:36] next, the end of next fiscal year at this current fiscal year.

[2:34:40] charlie, is that the cycle you were thinking? I'm trying

[2:34:44] to understand mr. S head. We would this sunset, the pca rider,

[2:34:48] the removing the cap with the new language, that new rider, that new amended

[2:34:53] rider would terminate, would self terminate. So all

[2:34:57] of the pca would go away. Yes.

[2:35:02] is that what you want, uh, to revisit it? I, I

[2:35:06] am looking for this, that pca issue to

[2:35:10] be revisited approximately a year from tonight

[2:35:15] by the, the board that's sitting here at that time. And if, if, if the

[2:35:20] intent is to take action on it and stop it and cycle

[2:35:24] with our budgeting process, then we probably need to do that

[2:35:28] in advance of july 1st,

[2:35:33] um, rated, um, rates being effective or de

[2:35:37] effective? So probably sometime in

[2:35:41] this has a two month lag. Um, probably sometime in may.

[2:35:45] uh, if I, if I may, I, I, am I getting close? Close,

[2:35:49] uh, for simplicity, if it expires on six 30 at the end of the fiscal year,

[2:35:54] you will have had your whole budget season to talk about it. Think about it

[2:35:58] so that as part of the budget that rider is addressed.

[2:36:02] okay. I think that will make it easier to keep up with.

[2:36:06] I need it simple. And secondly, ottoman. If that, if that

[2:36:10] was your clarification. The other issue was the rate increase. Are I was presuming

[2:36:14] that you were suggesting to take the director's recommendation?

[2:36:19] yes. The 3% yes.

[2:36:24] is, is is the board, is everyone clear the 3% rate

[2:36:28] increase with the unrestricted pca? Yes, ma'am. That expired with the, with

[2:36:32] the rider to, to expire. 6 30 26.

[2:36:39] any further discussion? Hearing none? Let's

[2:36:43] have a roll call starting with alderman prill.

[2:36:47] alderman prill. Yes. Alderman royal? Yes.

[2:36:52] alderman aster? Yes. Alderman kenzie? Yes.

[2:36:56] alderman best? Yes. Mayor odom. No.

[2:37:02] motion passes the stop to one.

[2:37:06] anything else on item number 16?

[2:37:11] okay. Moving on to item number 17. Conduct a public hearing on the proposed general obligation

[2:37:15] bonds and consider document a resolution calling for a bond referendum.

[2:37:20] ms. Ostrom

[2:37:27] there, why? She's getting her side up. The mayor. Uh, can

[2:37:31] I make an announcement please? Sure. Someone lost some tickets out in

[2:37:35] the area by the lady's bathroom. I have 'em if

[2:37:39] they're still here. Okay, I see. But someone lost some tickets. Gotcha.

[2:37:46] parking ticket or no, these are, I can't say what tickets

[2:37:51] they are because anybody can say what these are. Those are my tickets. Okay.

[2:37:55] I can say those are my tickets. An event ticket tickets for an event? Yes. An event ticket. Okay,

[2:37:59] . Okay. After discussion over the past year

[2:38:04] or so, the board is pursuing general obligation bonds

[2:38:08] for streets and sidewalks, parks and recreation and stormwater projects, totaling

[2:38:12] 24 million with an estimated tax rate impact of 2.75 cents

[2:38:17] per over 20 years. The estimated annual cost is $27

[2:38:22] and 50 cents, which is $2 and 29 cents per month for every a

[2:38:26] hundred thousand dollars of assessed property value. So an assessed

[2:38:30] value of $200,000 would cost about $55 annually,

[2:38:35] which is $4 and 58 cents per month. $300,000

[2:38:40] of assessed value would cost $82 and 50 cents annually, which

[2:38:44] is $6 and 88 cents per month. And 400,000

[2:38:48] of assessed property value would cost $110 annually, which

[2:38:52] is $9 and 17 cents per month in additional annual taxes.

[2:38:57] at the last board meeting, the board approved the first reading and called for a public hearing.

[2:39:01] after the public hearing tonight, you'll be asked to approve the second reading

[2:39:06] of the three bond orders and adopt resolution calling for bond referendum,

[2:39:11] which is needed to present the referendum to the voters to, to decide

[2:39:15] on in october.

[2:39:19] okay. Does board have questions for staff on item number 17, before we open

[2:39:23] a public hearing?

[2:39:30] hearing none at this time, I will open a public hearing

[2:39:34] on the proposed general obligation bonds and consider adopting a resolution for calling a bond referendum.

[2:39:38] so the public hearing is now open. If anyone would like to speak, please come forward.

[2:39:48] hey, y'all, just me again. Um, in, in regards to these,

[2:39:53] uh, bonds, it was mentioned in, it was mentioned in the

[2:39:57] workshop that a bank could possibly, uh, take

[2:40:01] the issue of these bonds without you having to go through the steps of,

[2:40:05] um, getting your bond rated that you might be able to, um,

[2:40:10] uh, issue these without, without those additional steps that incur

[2:40:14] additional fees. Um, I would like to suggest,

[2:40:18] as I have a few times this evening, uh, that a public bank could

[2:40:22] be a bank that, uh, takes on those bonds at a favorable

[2:40:26] rate to the city. Uh, that way we can get these infrastructure needs taken care

[2:40:31] of properly. Thank you,

[2:40:43] mayor. Hearing no further comments, make a motion to close the public hearing.

[2:40:48] second, I have a motion, a second to close the public hearing. Is there further discussion?

[2:40:53] hearing none. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed?

[2:40:57] public hearing is now closed. What is the pleasure of the board? On item number

[2:41:02] 17, mayor, I'd like to make a motion to

[2:41:06] approve the three bond orders on second reading and adopt

[2:41:10] the resolution calling for a bond referendum on the three orders.

[2:41:18] I have a motion. Do we have a second? I second

[2:41:23] motion a second. Is there further discussion?

[2:41:28] hearing none. Let's have a roll call starting with alderman royal.

[2:41:33] alderman royal, yes. Alderman aster. Yes.

[2:41:37] alderman kenzie. Yes. Alderman. Best. I just want the

[2:41:42] citizens to know before I cast my vote, that by no means

[2:41:47] am I not for this bond referendum, but I do not

[2:41:52] approve of some of the wants that are

[2:41:56] included in this bond referendum. I, um, think I could

[2:42:00] approve for the storm water, but parks and recs, those

[2:42:04] are amenities and upgrades. Streets and sidewalks. We have

[2:42:08] funding within our public works department for streets and

[2:42:13] sidewalks and other resident sources from the city. So I cannot

[2:42:17] support this bond referendum at this time. And I vote no.

[2:42:22] alderman krill. Yes. Mayor odom. Yes. Motion

[2:42:26] carries. Item number 18, update from new bern housing authority on cni

[2:42:30] status and consider adopting a resolution to certify a choice neighborhood's partnership

[2:42:35] with the housing authority of the city of new bern. Mr. Hughes. Mayor, at this time, I'd like to ask

[2:42:39] mr. Rigie barner with the housing authority to give us a brief update on the status

[2:42:43] of, of the cni process, and then he's gonna go into a discussion

[2:42:47] on his request for the mou with the city.

[2:42:51] uh, good evening, mayor and alder. Thank you all for the opportunity

[2:42:56] for myself, board, chair, and staff to be able to be present,

[2:43:00] uh, this evening to kind of give you an update. Uh, we've given an update

[2:43:04] on several other occasions and this evening, uh, want to

[2:43:08] let you know that we're almost complete, uh, with the, uh, master

[2:43:12] plan, uh, process that we've been going through for over the last year.

[2:43:17] uh, we will culminate that and we're inviting you, uh,

[2:43:21] as we've done before. We're inviting each of you, uh, to come to

[2:43:26] a, uh, culmination presentation, uh, on

[2:43:30] september 16th at the stanley white center at 5:30 pm

[2:43:35] uh, we will, our consultants will be in town to present the

[2:43:39] final, uh, presentation. Some of you all, alderman pri

[2:43:44] uh, the mayor and others have attended, uh, some of those work

[2:43:48] sessions that we've had, uh, over the last, uh, year. And

[2:43:52] we will, uh, present the final presentation at that time. The flyer

[2:43:56] that's, uh, presented up, uh, on the board, uh, focuses

[2:44:00] on that. And, and, and again, we, we invite you all, uh, to do that.

[2:44:04] uh, before I get into the, uh, uh, cni,

[2:44:08] uh, partnership, are there any questions thus far

[2:44:12] on anything that we've been involved in that we've kind of tried to keep you all abreast

[2:44:17] of? Uh, but we do look forward to seeing you on september 16th.

[2:44:22] so since your meeting in april that you came before us, nothing has changed

[2:44:26] with the actual planning of, or anything has changed with within

[2:44:30] the cni grant. Nothing has changed as of right now. Okay. Uh, the biggest

[2:44:35] thing that we're focused on, uh, ultimate best is focused on working with

[2:44:39] the city and staff on zoning changes, making sure that

[2:44:43] we in compliance and making sure that the proposed unit mix that we're

[2:44:47] proposing on each of the sites. If you, as you all know, the three main

[2:44:51] sites that we're focused on at this time is one, the trent court

[2:44:56] location naturally, two, the days in site, and three, uh,

[2:45:00] f the west street school site. So those are our three main,

[2:45:05] uh, targets right now. Let me be clear again tonight. We do

[2:45:09] not own the school. We're in consultation and

[2:45:13] communication, uh, with the state district. We're working to get the environmental

[2:45:17] reviews. We're in negotiations with the school district, but just

[2:45:21] like today's in site that you all own, we do not own that site. So I

[2:45:25] don't want to mislead anybody when I mention that location. It is only

[2:45:30] for planning purposes and it, it is our desire if things

[2:45:34] work out to move forward, but currently we do not own that site

[2:45:40] being no other, uh, questions related to, uh,

[2:45:44] to the cni process that we've been going through. As you all have before

[2:45:49] you this evening, uh, the partnership,

[2:45:53] uh, agreement between, uh, the city, uh, and new

[2:45:58] bern housing authority, and let me kind of go back in history you all,

[2:46:02] before my, my time in the city, uh, partnered

[2:46:06] with this, with the housing authority to receive a planning grant

[2:46:10] back in 20 14, 20 15. So that was a partnership between the

[2:46:14] city and the house of authority at that time. It is a generally a

[2:46:18] two phase process. First you get a planning grant, so you received

[2:46:23] a planning grant of a little over $400,000 that you do community

[2:46:27] charettes and community involvement, and then get the input of the community

[2:46:31] to create this transformation plan. You all created that.

[2:46:36] uh, since, uh, since myself being here and working with

[2:46:40] fema, uh, we're required in order to develop a, to receive the

[2:46:44] fema funds, fema has allocated and set aside about $40 million

[2:46:49] for us. They released 8.9 million for me to be able to do a master

[2:46:53] plan, uh, process. And that's the funds that we're using to do

[2:46:58] the cni process and we use to do the grant application. And

[2:47:02] so when we got involved in that, the consultants that we

[2:47:06] selected that have experience that we've shared with you all before, uh,

[2:47:10] they have been, uh, they have every application that they've applied

[2:47:14] for with cni, they've received an award for. So they've

[2:47:18] never lost an application on cni before. So we

[2:47:23] did a good job of selecting, uh, one of the best firms in the country

[2:47:27] to help us with this application. But with that being said, uh,

[2:47:31] we had to update. And that whole year process that we've been involved in,

[2:47:36] we've been updating that previous transformation plan

[2:47:40] to make sure it's in line with what we need to go forward with that, with the application.

[2:47:45] but in order to do the application, just like you all did when you did

[2:47:49] the planning grant, it has to be a partnership between the

[2:47:53] city and the house of authority. And so then the question is, why would the

[2:47:57] city be the lead versus the house of authority? As lead, we

[2:48:01] want to be competitive. And so keep in mind that

[2:48:05] newburn is competing against cities like

[2:48:09] dallas, san antonio, los angeles, seattle.

[2:48:14] so generally speaking, it is a very, very, very competitive

[2:48:18] application. We're applying for almost $50 million. And so when

[2:48:22] you have a small community like newburn, our chances

[2:48:27] are already slim. And so we've assembled the best of the best

[2:48:31] on our team. And let me be clear, you all, as a community, have

[2:48:35] been great to work with. The community, community partners

[2:48:40] have been engaged. Uh, marvin, uh, foster and others have

[2:48:44] seen that in the, in, in live, uh, ultimate pri has

[2:48:48] been there and seen other where the community partners have come out

[2:48:52] and supported this. So we feel like that we got an excellent chance

[2:48:57] whenever that nofa comes out. But we want to win. We don't wanna spend all

[2:49:01] of this money and lose. And so in order to win, we gotta make sure that

[2:49:05] we put forth the best application that we can do. And in order to do that,

[2:49:10] we want the city because of infrastructure, because of

[2:49:14] the management, because of recreation and, and electricity

[2:49:18] and roads and bridges and all of those things. When we look at the holistic nature

[2:49:22] of how the city operate operates versus the smallness

[2:49:27] of the housing authority, when we present that to hud and say, we

[2:49:31] want to spend $50 million, they're gonna look and look beyond.

[2:49:35] while I bring 30 years of experience to new bern and to

[2:49:39] the housing authority, they're still gonna look at the capacity of a small agency

[2:49:44] like that. And so having the city service at lead, we get to

[2:49:48] prove to hud and the reviewers that we, through this application

[2:49:52] have the capacity to manage a $50 million grant. You

[2:49:56] all are serving as that you would be that responsible party

[2:50:00] know, even though hud has the ability, once that award

[2:50:04] is given to come back and say, hey, you're default of not

[2:50:08] managing that in the right manner. Uh, they've not taken one back. So

[2:50:12] to date, they've not taken a grant back from a city that may have fallen in

[2:50:16] default. They give you a chance to have a cure period to get

[2:50:21] yourself back together and move forward. But we feel like by having the city

[2:50:25] serve as the lead partner in that application process, it it,

[2:50:29] it positions us better to be able to receive the award. And that's

[2:50:33] why we're asking, uh, you all to do that. And so when we also look at

[2:50:39] a part of that $50 million, you say, okay, well, reggie, if we take on that responsibility,

[2:50:43] there's a cost associated, we got staff time, we got other

[2:50:48] expenses associated from a staff standpoint, please keep in mind that 5%

[2:50:53] of the award can be utilized internally for that cost.

[2:50:57] so if we got $50 million grant, 5% of that, so

[2:51:01] $2.5 million of that can be utilized by the city

[2:51:05] to help administer and handle the responsibilities that come along with it.

[2:51:10] so it's not a, it's not a freebie from that standpoint. You're not doing this

[2:51:14] and not getting reimbursed for staff time and cost. There isn't allowed

[2:51:18] cost that's associated with it.

[2:51:22] so I'd like to open it up for any, any questions. I think the resolution

[2:51:26] that's been presented, uh, our attorney, uh, scott, uh,

[2:51:31] both worked on it. We're comfortable with it. And so the resolution that's being

[2:51:35] presented, uh, puts us, uh, in position.

[2:51:39] we want to make sure that we we're hoping that the notice of funding availability

[2:51:43] comes out, uh, this fall. And so our whole plan right now

[2:51:48] is to complete the master plan. Uh, by the end of, uh,

[2:51:52] july, I will take it, my goal is to take it to my board,

[2:51:56] uh, by the end of, uh, august. And then when we have the presentation

[2:52:01] on september 16th, uh, we will be presenting a fully

[2:52:05] baked and board approved final plan. And so then therefore,

[2:52:09] whenever the nofa comes out, that is why we have to be ready when the nofa

[2:52:13] comes out. Hud only gives you 90 days to submit your application.

[2:52:18] and so that is why we want to make sure that all of these pieces are

[2:52:22] in place. Any questions or have questions?

[2:52:30] reginald? Um, I know from the previous,

[2:52:34] um, public presentation you had indicated

[2:52:38] that the consultants, um, you know, have

[2:52:43] been meeting with representatives of hud, um,

[2:52:47] with regards to the application that's being put together.

[2:52:53] has hud given anybody any indication

[2:52:57] as to whether this program is even

[2:53:02] going to be funded? So I may answer it two

[2:53:06] ways. One, uh, the previous two budgets cycles

[2:53:10] of funding, uh, was, uh, in both of those budgets,

[2:53:14] those funds are still there. Uh, because it went from

[2:53:18] 140 million to 75 million, a decision was made

[2:53:22] not to issue a nofa because previously they issued nofa

[2:53:27] at about 140 million. Uh, this administration has money

[2:53:31] in its budget, uh, for this program. So hopefully the answer

[2:53:35] is yes, there's previous money from the previous administration, and there's

[2:53:40] money in the administration currently that is going towards this program.

[2:53:44] and that's why we think that we'll be on track sometime in the fall for hopefully

[2:53:48] a note for the come. Okay. Um, you, you just

[2:53:52] mentioned, um, that the, uh,

[2:53:57] resolution that, uh, we have a copy of, um,

[2:54:02] has been a, a joint effort between, um,

[2:54:06] the housing author's attorney and the city's attorney. Um,

[2:54:13] in reading that resolution, I was a little surprised

[2:54:17] to see a reference to establishing an

[2:54:22] implementation advisory committee.

[2:54:26] um, that I, I, that's, it is sort of adding another

[2:54:31] layer and I'm kind of questioning as to why do we need

[2:54:35] an advisory committee when the city would be the

[2:54:39] lead applicant. The housing authority is a co-applicant.

[2:54:43] why do we need an advisory committee? It's just an advisory

[2:54:48] as you indicated. Uh, it gives you all the authority and us authority,

[2:54:52] uh, to be able to, uh, place people, uh, from representing

[2:54:57] both agencies. Let's just say our board chair and someone from here, you

[2:55:01] may have someone from stat that's attending, is sitting on that advisory committee.

[2:55:06] for us, this is a template, uh, alderman prill that we're using from

[2:55:10] other cities. So the information, while they looked at it, we

[2:55:14] still with our consultants are utilizing a template and some of

[2:55:18] the requirements that hud requires that we've built into

[2:55:22] this resolution. Uh, so that that implementation committee

[2:55:26] is built upon what has been done in other cities. But also,

[2:55:31] uh, as an example, uh, you all

[2:55:35] change, you make a decision not to run for

[2:55:39] election. And so when we put people on this implementation

[2:55:43] committee, whether you all are here today or next year,

[2:55:48] we gotta be able to be consistent with who is

[2:55:52] representing that $50 million in funding. And so when hud does

[2:55:57] that, we want to make sure that we got a collective group of individuals,

[2:56:01] whether I'm at the house of authority, you all are sitting here

[2:56:05] on as alderman, we've now put together a core

[2:56:09] group of individuals that will help make sure that the ship is

[2:56:13] steered in the right direction, kept on track, regardless of

[2:56:18] internal issues at the housing authority or political issues here. Once those funds

[2:56:23] are granted, we want to make sure that we keep things on track.

[2:56:27] mond prill, in addition to that. Excellent answer. Another more practical answer

[2:56:32] is that in scoring these applications,

[2:56:36] there will be a box about community involvement, community input, et cetera.

[2:56:40] and this committee can help check that box aside from the, the

[2:56:44] solid, you know, practical implications of it. Okay.

[2:56:48] no, and I appreciate that. Um,

[2:56:54] so this is, um, an advisory committee

[2:56:59] is not a requirement of hud,

[2:57:04] it's not necessarily a requirement. It may be a requirement within the nofa. It is,

[2:57:08] but it is a template. And what we are trying to do, alderman kri, it is put

[2:57:12] those things in place that are best practices of those cities

[2:57:16] that have won awards. And so this is one of those things as well,

[2:57:21] just like let, there is not an option. If

[2:57:25] you all say, as a city, we don't want to be a part of it, there is no

[2:57:29] award that can be given to any community. If the city

[2:57:33] is not an integral part of it or the housing authorities are not a

[2:57:37] part of it, it is a partnership between the two. Now, who serves as the lead

[2:57:42] can be up in discussion, but those two entities have to be a part

[2:57:47] of the, uh, application process. Okay.

[2:57:52] um, but again, I, I, I think if I, if I'm

[2:57:56] not mistaken, um, it's not a requirement of how to

[2:58:00] have an advisory me committee, but as you've indicated,

[2:58:04] as the city attorney has indicated, um,

[2:58:08] having an advisory committee will add another

[2:58:13] check absolutely. For the application. And as I said,

[2:58:17] you all are, I hate to say it, and I'm not trying to be disrespectful.

[2:58:22] you're voting in, in and out, depending upon if you

[2:58:26] decide to run for election, not run for election. This puts us

[2:58:30] in a position to have a, an advisory board

[2:58:34] that's focused on this program that enables us to keep track

[2:58:39] regardless of the political whims of any party, group or interest.

[2:58:43] this keeps us, greg, on track. Mm-hmm . And that is one of the key components

[2:58:47] that we're trying to focus. Um, and, and I don't have any problem with that. Um,

[2:58:53] where, where I'm a little bit uncomfortable with this,

[2:58:57] um, is that this is, this is a new issue that has

[2:59:01] been presented. I don't recall ever hearing or seeing

[2:59:05] anything about an imp you know, an implementation advisory

[2:59:10] committee would be a part of this whole process. Um,

[2:59:15] but where, where I'm uncomfortable is

[2:59:20] it's not fleshed out very well in this resolution. So

[2:59:24] we're being asked to approve a resolution that includes,

[2:59:29] um, establishing, uh, an implementation advisory

[2:59:33] committee. And

[2:59:37] all it really says is that a chairperson will be appointed,

[2:59:43] um, the housing authority and the new bern redevelopment commission

[2:59:49] will have membership on, on the advisory

[2:59:53] committee. And then the advisory committee

[2:59:57] would decide who else to invite

[3:00:02] to be, uh, participants on the advisory committee.

[3:00:08] I'm uncomfortable with that because that

[3:00:12] doesn't really tell me a lot. And the word invite

[3:00:17] in there raises a red flag in my mind.

[3:00:22] um, the purpose of the

[3:00:26] advisory committee is not outlined in,

[3:00:30] in this resolution. So again, we're being asked to

[3:00:35] approve something blind, and I don't like that.

[3:00:40] I would rather see a a, a more

[3:00:44] fleshed out proposal

[3:00:49] of what the, in the advisory committee, um,

[3:00:53] who would be on it specifically more than just the housing authority

[3:00:58] and redevelopment commission. What other entities

[3:01:02] might be participants? I would think it would be to our benefit

[3:01:07] to highlight that. So hud sees it

[3:01:11] and sees that the community involvement piece of it is

[3:01:16] there, but that's not done here.

[3:01:20] um, what the, the role

[3:01:24] of this advisory committee would be is not identified,

[3:01:30] if I'm gonna vote on it, I'd like to understand that. Um,

[3:01:35] the last item, um, it indicates

[3:01:39] that the mayor would appoint the chairperson.

[3:01:45] I would like to see the board of alderman,

[3:01:49] including the mayor, would make that decision, not

[3:01:53] just the mayor. So

[3:01:58] this may be the way that other cities have developed

[3:02:02] a template. I would like to see this

[3:02:06] expanded further. In all due respect, you can make a motion, I'm sure that

[3:02:11] you can modify this resolution as you, as you deem necessary.

[3:02:16] uh, I, I think that what's been presented to you all

[3:02:20] has been well thought out. Uh, the modification that you talked about,

[3:02:24] whether it's the alderman make a recommendation to who serves on this committee

[3:02:28] versus the mayor, that's ultimately up to, to you all as

[3:02:32] alderman to make that decision. And I'm comfortable with whatever you all want

[3:02:36] to recommend as it relates to that. But I think otherwise, I think what has

[3:02:41] been presented in the moui think has been well thought out.

[3:02:45] and I, from my perspective, needs the requirements of the authority. And, and you're

[3:02:49] the one standing at the podium, so I'm addressing this to you, but I'm,

[3:02:53] I'm really addressing it to the city manager and city attorney.

[3:02:58] um, because, um, at least the city attorney has been involved

[3:03:02] in the drafting of this, I don't know how much the city manager has. Um,

[3:03:07] so I'm expressing concern sure.

[3:03:12] um, about us, the board being

[3:03:16] asked to approve this resolution

[3:03:20] that includes this implementation, you know, advisory committee

[3:03:25] where that entity has not been really fully described

[3:03:30] the way I think it should be, so that the board

[3:03:34] understands what the role of that advisory

[3:03:38] committee would be. Um, and, and what is

[3:03:42] purpose is, is really for, so, and

[3:03:46] again, I'm, I'm just focusing my comments to you because

[3:03:50] you're standing at the podium. I'm really focused to, uh,

[3:03:54] staff. Absolutely. Absolutely. And I don't know whether or

[3:03:58] not anybody else on the board has that same concern,

[3:04:03] but I just wanted to express that. And I,

[3:04:07] I don't know whether I am prepared to vote

[3:04:11] in favor of this resolution because of that

[3:04:15] uncomfortable is, and I, and, and I,

[3:04:20] I fully support this effort. And it'd be unfortunate if I feel

[3:04:26] it would be unfortunate, you know, that, that I need to vote no. Because

[3:04:30] of how this is currently framed,

[3:04:36] uh, attorney davis. Yes, ma'am. If, if the

[3:04:40] language within this document has changed, so highlight

[3:04:45] me is when we're saying where the city, or are we talking about

[3:04:49] the city as a whole, or how are we using that

[3:04:53] work city? Is that including the board of tn or is

[3:04:57] how is that yes, ma'am. It would refer to the board of altman broadly. Um,

[3:05:03] so in trying to find a solution, um, reggie refresh me is,

[3:05:07] do we have a hard deadline on this? We, we, we don't, I mean, we,

[3:05:11] we got some time. Um, 'cause I, I'm very happy derman prill to, to take your

[3:05:15] notes and, um, and, and revise that language

[3:05:19] to overcome any objections. I'm very happy to do that as long as we don't have any time constraints. And if

[3:05:23] that's the only issue that's causing us pause, then we can address that

[3:05:27] for sure. Okay. Yeah. The only, only thing that's

[3:05:32] our goal. When, when do you have next, next month.

[3:05:37] one month from today. Yeah. Our goal is to try to complete our final

[3:05:42] by the end of this month. Their, their goal is to give me a final draft,

[3:05:47] uh, on the 21st of this month. And that's, so when we talk,

[3:05:51] so going back to your question from the timing standpoint, our goal

[3:05:55] is to try to have the final draft, uh, completed by the end of

[3:05:59] this month.

[3:06:07] um, another option would be to, um,

[3:06:12] approve the proposed draft,

[3:06:16] um, subject to my final revisions, subject

[3:06:20] to the city attorney's final revisions, which of course I would run by the board,

[3:06:24] um, to make sure everybody is happy with that, that way we could adopt

[3:06:29] it tonight. Subject to my approval with our understanding

[3:06:33] that I will take alderman prills notes, modify that

[3:06:37] paragraph, circulate that, um, for comment back to me

[3:06:41] directly, not among yourselves, um, as a way to get

[3:06:45] on firmer ground. Let me add, I

[3:06:49] do agree with alderman creel. Um,

[3:06:55] I'd like to see as he so well pointed out, um,

[3:06:59] this language more defined and I know that's what you're

[3:07:04] recommending. I'd like to see a better cross section

[3:07:09] of our community represented in this

[3:07:13] implementation advisory committee. Um,

[3:07:19] I see that again, the housing authority and the new bern redevelopment

[3:07:24] commission will be part of the stakeholders. I'd like to see how broad

[3:07:28] that will end up looking how you would change the language to be

[3:07:32] inclusive of the city. Uh,

[3:07:36] I'd like to see also, uh, again, I know our mayor appoints

[3:07:41] the commissions, uh, to the, um,

[3:07:46] housing authority. I know that you said that was a

[3:07:50] template that you were following from other cities. I'd like to see

[3:07:56] if that is not a rule from hud

[3:08:01] those appointments, what it would look like to appoint the chair as

[3:08:05] our alderman pri appointed out that it could be done by the board of alderman.

[3:08:11] that is my recommendation and that's what I'd like to see. Mr. Davis,

[3:08:15] how long would it take you to draft a resolution with these updates

[3:08:19] this week? So I could call for a special hearing or a special meeting,

[3:08:24] um, on july the 22nd

[3:08:28] at six o'clock at city hall to discuss this one topic.

[3:08:34] yes sir. Would you like the board to vote on that tonight? Or do you want

[3:08:38] me to send the clerk? That would be great. That would be great. Um, in fact, you could do that now or under new

[3:08:43] business, but, um, it'd be a motion to call a, uh, a special

[3:08:47] meeting for tuesday the 22nd at six o'clock

[3:08:51] here. We would, we would take up that issue.

[3:08:55] I'll, I'll be outta the town. I'll be out of the . Alright, so let

[3:08:59] me ask you this. What day does everyone have between now

[3:09:03] and the end of the month that we can have a special meeting next, next tuesday can work

[3:09:08] if, as was pointed out, that there are not any time constraints

[3:09:12] by hud, it's a time constraint by the application. I'm sorry, right to

[3:09:16] interrupt you. We we're trying to complete the master plan. It's a twofold

[3:09:21] process. We have to submit in order to get fema to

[3:09:25] release the 40 million that they have, we have to submit

[3:09:29] the master plan to them. So we have a twofold process. And

[3:09:33] so I, I did revise alderman roy, I did revise my initial

[3:09:37] statement. There is a timeframe because they're trying to get the, the

[3:09:42] consultants are trying to complete the complete master plan by the

[3:09:46] end of this month. Thank you

[3:09:52] again. I I to avoid having to call a special

[3:09:56] meeting just on this item, uh, I mean I will,

[3:10:01] you know, go along with the city attorney's suggestion

[3:10:05] that we take action tonight to approve it subject to

[3:10:10] his revisions. Just dealing

[3:10:14] with the implementation advisory committee. Um,

[3:10:22] may not be everything that, that I'm looking for, but I trust that

[3:10:26] he will do his best to incorporate, um, the

[3:10:30] comments that, that that's great and I appreciate it. But wouldn't we have to have a printed resolution to actually

[3:10:34] vote? This would work, mayor, but I, I, I'm, I'm like you, I'd prefer,

[3:10:38] I'd prefer that, that the board touch it. I'd prefer that

[3:10:43] if we, if we can accommodate that, um, because if not,

[3:10:47] we're just gonna bounce it around. That's, that's my fear. Mm-hmm . Um, I,

[3:10:51] I've heard your notes. I've got it. I feel like we can draft that. Um,

[3:10:55] are we precluded that if the board took action

[3:11:00] tonight, subject to right. Your revisions.

[3:11:05] are we precluded from re

[3:11:09] readopting the resolution in august? If there was something in there

[3:11:13] that needed to be tweaked further? I,

[3:11:17] the question is for the consultants. I I, my understanding is they

[3:11:21] would like a final, a final draft signed by the mayor and,

[3:11:26] and done. Yeah, but let me answer it this way.

[3:11:31] I'm with that approval,

[3:11:35] let's say yes. Mm-hmm . Okay. Let's say yes because

[3:11:40] the final is going to my board

[3:11:44] at the august board meeting with the full packet

[3:11:49] to be adopted, adopted at my august board meeting,

[3:11:53] which is the third monday in august.

[3:11:59] so what we're saying is, is idealistic to have this

[3:12:03] document, this resolution, uh, approved,

[3:12:08] that's idealistic. However, we have some issues with the

[3:12:12] language. And so there

[3:12:17] you have time constraints. But you said that your board

[3:12:21] full approval is august, what? The third? Monday in august.

[3:12:25] third monday. So we've got time. Yeah. That gives

[3:12:29] us a small window that we can still,

[3:12:33] uh, receive, uh, attorney's, um, david's

[3:12:37] recommendations. Yes, ma I'm thinking that we can, we can accomplish

[3:12:41] both things. Let me redraft this with those notes.

[3:12:46] I will circulate it to reggie and the consultants, get their

[3:12:50] comfort level with it. And, um, and then I'll and then of course you two,

[3:12:55] um, and the board. And, and then once I have a sense that we're on the same

[3:12:59] page, the consultants can put that unsigned copy in their package.

[3:13:04] this board can approve it at your meeting on august 12th

[3:13:09] before their monday sounds good. And then everybody's happy.

[3:13:13] that's doable. Okay. Got it. Alright.

[3:13:19] thank you mr. Barner. Alright. Thank you all. Thank you, sir.

[3:13:23] alright, mayor. Yes. Excuse, excuse me. Can we take a,

[3:13:28] uh, recess please? , we, we can, if

[3:13:32] the board wants to, but I don't think these next

[3:13:36] few items are gonna be very long. Do you mr. Hughes? Do we got,

[3:13:40] they, they should not take very long. I think we could grind

[3:13:44] it out in 10 minutes to keep from taking a 15 minute break, but that's up.

[3:13:48] do oh, you talking to finish and conclude in 10 minutes well get, get to, get

[3:13:53] to where we go to closed session is what I was thinking. So

[3:13:57] is the board okay with pushing through or do you want, unless she has some

[3:14:01] urgency, if that's what y'all want to do, fine. Okay.

[3:14:05] okay. And obviously you can get up if you need to, um,

[3:14:10] and leave. Okay. Item number 19, consider dock

[3:14:14] resolution approving a water and sewer use agreement with st. Bartholomew and anglican

[3:14:19] catholic church for 29 60 old airport road. Mr. Hughes.

[3:14:24] mr. Jordan hughes.

[3:14:33] uh, good evening mayor. Members of the board, uh, the owners of 29 60 old airport

[3:14:37] road have recently reached out to the sea of newman requesting connection to the city's

[3:14:41] water and sewer system for the development of a church facility on the subject

[3:14:46] property. As is parcel is currently outside of newbury municipal, uh, limits,

[3:14:50] they're required to enter into a water and sewer agreement to establish a, before

[3:14:55] establishing service to the site, a copy of the agreement included in

[3:14:59] the agenda pack along with a, a brief description of what they're doing, along

[3:15:03] with a map of the, the property. Is that a four ac parcel? It's

[3:15:07] directly across from the entrance of bryce's crossing on old airport road near

[3:15:11] the area. Happy to answer any questions regarding the, the project or

[3:15:16] us or you agreement. Does the board have questions? Do you have

[3:15:20] any inkling that they are moving

[3:15:24] to a new site or, or you don't have that information?

[3:15:28] the, the best I understand in talking with representatives from the church, this is actually

[3:15:32] a property that has been consumed by, or their current church property

[3:15:36] has been consumed by some of the highway 70 construction and they

[3:15:41] have acquired this site as a place to relocate their church to. Thank

[3:15:45] you.

[3:15:49] it's pleasure of the board on item number 19. Is this building already

[3:15:53] under construction? It, it is not already. Actually, this is still a vacancy. I

[3:15:57] saw one being built back off the road a little bit. I didn't know.

[3:16:02] mayor. I would like to make a res, make a motion to approve a resolution

[3:16:06] approving a water and sewer use agreement with st. Bar

[3:16:11] bartholomew and anglican catholic church for 29 60

[3:16:16] old airport room. Second. I have a motion to second. Is there further discussion?

[3:16:21] hearing none unless have a roll call. Starting with alderman astor.

[3:16:25] alderman astro. Yes. Alderman kenzie.

[3:16:30] alderman best? Yes. Alderman reel. Yes.

[3:16:35] alderman royal. Yes. Mayor odom? Yes. Motion carries. Thank you jordan.

[3:16:40] next is item number 20. Consider ing resolution. Appro of memorandum of understanding

[3:16:44] for the croatan area fire she partnership chief locklear.

[3:16:57] good evening. Good evening. Um, we respect the time. I'm just gonna give you

[3:17:01] the quick highlights. Um, croton area fire shift partnership

[3:17:06] is basically followed up from the april 19th, 2023

[3:17:10] fires that took place in croatan. As far as the lake, the, um,

[3:17:15] the fire that took place then, uh, actually you had 32, I

[3:17:19] think it was approximately 30,000 acres that were burned and endangered.

[3:17:23] some of the areas local to , when we talk about the water rise within a mile

[3:17:28] of that location. So over time, that's been just, uh, something

[3:17:32] that's come about as far as the different agencies and organizations we meet on a quarterly, and

[3:17:36] this was something that put in more formal, um, it

[3:17:40] is not any funding or requirements by the city, but it is

[3:17:45] very beneficial when we talk about educating, um, our community, our

[3:17:49] citizens. Um, as far as wildlife, um, with the

[3:17:55] local, uh, I would say in recent, uh,

[3:18:00] we've had pretty good conditions as far as fires in the area, but

[3:18:04] at, at any given time, when you talk about dry low humidity, um,

[3:18:08] that's something that could endanger property. So basically, uh, over

[3:18:12] the last year since I've been here, meeting with them on the quarterly, a couple things that we

[3:18:16] highlight is the community and the reporting and the public relations and the outreach.

[3:18:20] one of the things that we were working on was surveying some of the areas, uh, that are close

[3:18:25] to that, uh, particular area that that was .

[3:18:29] so again, just from a highlight standpoint, it's a good

[3:18:33] partnership. There's grant funding that will most likely come down the pipe as far as assisting

[3:18:38] us with that and working along with the other agencies. And I'd be glad to answer any

[3:18:42] questions, start for kind of rushing through that. But if you have any questions,

[3:18:46] I just wanted to be respectful of the time. Thank you. Any questions for the chief?

[3:18:52] if there are no questions, I'd like to make a motion to adopt a

[3:18:57] resolution proven an mou with the croatan area.

[3:19:02] is that fire? She fire? Fire? She, that's correct. Thank you. Partnership

[3:19:06] for the fire mitigation and resilience. Second.

[3:19:11] I have a motion a second. Is there further discussion on item number 20?

[3:19:15] hearing none. Let's have roll call starting with alderman kenzie. Alderman kenzie?

[3:19:20] yes. Alderman best? Yes. Alderman reel.

[3:19:24] yes. Alderman royal. Yes. Alderman aster. Yes. Mayor

[3:19:29] odom. Yes. Motion carries. Thank you chief. Thank you. Next up is item number 21.

[3:19:33] consider adopting a resolution authorizing the city manager to execute amendment to the service agreement with

[3:19:38] hansen. Banner, llc mr. Bouchard.

[3:19:42] good evening again. I'm here requesting that you authorize the city manager the

[3:19:46] authority to execute an amendment to our existing customer

[3:19:50] information and billing service agreement. The amendment adds necessary

[3:19:55] meter data management functionality to our complex billing and metering

[3:19:59] process. The mdm also enhances our data analytics

[3:20:03] and aids in the prevention of lost revenue. The cost of

[3:20:07] the amendments $399,500. There

[3:20:11] are service and support fees of 30 cents per meter. However, that will be accounted

[3:20:16] for in future budgets and would not be necessary

[3:20:20] at this time. Expense of the mdm was previously

[3:20:25] approved in the fiscal year ending 2024, uh, budget period.

[3:20:29] however, the purchasing process extended beyond that fiscal year.

[3:20:34] and this was largely due to excessive, I should

[3:20:38] say, extensive evaluation and scoping functionality

[3:20:42] of, um, the deliverables. Um, the mdm

[3:20:46] integrates in between our a mi system and our customer information system,

[3:20:51] the mi being our advanced metering infrastructure and our customer information system.

[3:20:55] and it's the system of record for all raw meter data,

[3:21:00] meter reads, meter validation estimates, as well as billing

[3:21:04] determinants. So we have thousands and thousands and thousands of

[3:21:08] meter reads that we take on a daily basis. Um, it

[3:21:13] effectively, effectively acts as a central hub for all of that

[3:21:17] meter data, and this enables the utility to provide metering and billing

[3:21:21] efficiency. Um, accuracy, uh, gives us the

[3:21:25] ability to, to use that data to do analytics and also aid in the,

[3:21:30] in the prevention of lost revenues. Um, additionally,

[3:21:34] uh, without the mdm, the utility has very limited

[3:21:38] capacity to evolve any of our rates, um, to modernized

[3:21:43] standards. Um, and I'd be happy to discuss any questions you may have. Board have

[3:21:47] questions. Um, one question.

[3:21:52] um, it, it's really, I guess a, a question for either foster

[3:21:56] or kim. Um, if I'm not mistaken, uh,

[3:22:00] in the, in the backup information that we received, uh,

[3:22:04] it indicated that, um, this

[3:22:09] system might also be used for the water utility.

[3:22:13] that's correct. The water utility customers. But the, uh,

[3:22:18] the money that is being, uh, appropriated is all coming

[3:22:22] out of the electric utility. I'm just curious as to

[3:22:26] if, if it's gonna be potentially used for by a couple

[3:22:30] of different utilities, why wouldn't both of them participate in the cost

[3:22:35] or they will? Um, water and wastewater will also

[3:22:39] benefit from this and through our accounting process, correct

[3:22:43] me if I'm wrong, um, the,

[3:22:48] there's contributions from those other enterprise service funds

[3:22:52] to account for those budgetary expenses. So it's typically done

[3:22:57] at the end of the evening, which screwed up that way.

[3:23:02] I'm not sure that I followed that part. But meter we can metering, uh, water and wastewater pay

[3:23:06] a portion of customer service. Yeah. So that can get recouped

[3:23:10] back. Yes. But as for the meter charges moving forward,

[3:23:14] um, into next year, that'll be allocated based on water and

[3:23:18] electric, correct? Mm-hmm . Correct. Okay. Does that answer your

[3:23:23] question? Yep. Charlie, can you talk about the implementation timeframe?

[3:23:27] um, if we get this, uh, going right now, uh, they'll

[3:23:32] give us a slot to kick it off the first of, uh, um,

[3:23:37] august. Take about a year to get it up and running tested.

[3:23:41] we want to, um, run it in parallel with our billing system to

[3:23:46] make sure you know, it's all working good. Staff needs to get familiar with it. Um,

[3:23:50] concurrently we'll be working on, um, modernizing rate

[3:23:54] designs for us to consider so that when the system's implemented, we're

[3:23:58] ready to go and be more advanced, um, down the road. Does

[3:24:02] that answer your question?

[3:24:07] okay. What's the pleasure of board on item number 21? Mayor,

[3:24:11] I'd like to make a motion to approve a resolution authorizing the city manager

[3:24:15] to execute an amendment to the service agreement with hanson banner,

[3:24:19] llc. Second, I have a motion and a second. Is there further discussion?

[3:24:25] hearing none. Let's have roll call starting with alderman best? Alderman best,

[3:24:29] yes. Alderman cre. Yes. Alderman royal.

[3:24:33] yes. Alderman aster. Yes. Alderman kenzie. Yes. Mayor

[3:24:38] ota? Yes. Motion carries. I think charlie. Next up is item number 22.

[3:24:42] consider adopting, adopting an ordinance to amend section 70 78. One way streets

[3:24:46] established in 70 98 through streets enumerated to adjust

[3:24:50] kilmarnock street, mr. Chops

[3:24:56] evening board. Um, we were contacted by a business owner through

[3:25:01] city hall that, uh, they're requesting us look at kilmarnock

[3:25:05] street to transition it to a two-way. Currently it's a one-way.

[3:25:10] we did, uh, did have an inspection of that, the

[3:25:14] dimensional features of that roadway and found no issues

[3:25:19] with vehicular pedestrian conflict with a request to

[3:25:23] transition to a two-way for that 200 feet of kilmer oak street

[3:25:27] from broad street north to the intersection of kraver drive.

[3:25:31] we're, um, recommending to the board adopt an ordinance which would amend the traffic

[3:25:35] chapter 70 of the traffic vehicle section 70 dash 7 8 1

[3:25:42] way streets established, which would remove kilman from that current listing

[3:25:48] and also amend 70 dash 98 through streets enumerated

[3:25:52] to include kilman knot street as a stop street at the broad

[3:25:56] street intersection. So that would be to add a stop sign within the

[3:26:00] ordinance at broad. Does the board have questions?

[3:26:07] so this, this can be accomplished just basically with some signage.

[3:26:12] we can have it done before lunch tomorrow morning. Okay.

[3:26:18] it's a pleasure of the board. On item number 22, may I make a

[3:26:22] motion to consider adopting an ordinance to amend section 70

[3:26:27] through 78? One way streets established in 70 through 98 through,

[3:26:31] through streets enumerated to adjust cuman

[3:26:35] knot street. Second, I have a motion to second. Is there further discussion?

[3:26:41] hearing none unless have a roll call starting with alderman prill. Alderman prill.

[3:26:45] yes. Alderman royal. Yes. Alderman astor. Yes. Alderman

[3:26:49] kenzie. Yes. Alderman best? Yes. Mayor odom. Yes.

[3:26:53] motion carries. Okay. Board, uh, items 2324

[3:26:57] and 25 can all be done together. Uh, if it's, uh, unanimous,

[3:27:02] I'll read, uh, each one of those now. Item number 23 is consider adopting an ordinance

[3:27:06] to close the american rescue plan fund. Item number 24

[3:27:10] is to consider adopting a budget ordinance amendment for fy 26 electric

[3:27:14] fund and item number 25 is considered adopting a budget ordinance amendment for

[3:27:18] physical year 2026 ms. Strom. Okay. The city was

[3:27:23] eligible for standard allowance category for the american rescue plan funds,

[3:27:27] which allowed the city to offset general fund expenditures for public

[3:27:31] safety salaries and benefits in the amount of $6,704,351.

[3:27:37] the award was exhausted and is requested that the board approve closure of the fund

[3:27:41] at this time. Um, number 24 earlier under

[3:27:45] the agenda item number 21, mr. Bachar discussed the software agreement

[3:27:49] for the meter data management system. This budget amendment transfers $399,500

[3:27:55] from fund balance for the purchase of that software system, which

[3:27:59] covers the implementation costs only.

[3:28:04] and number 25 last month,

[3:28:08] the board approved various downtown projects within the msd, the

[3:28:12] municipal service district. The budget amendment appropriates 1,155,000

[3:28:18] from msd fund balance for those projects, the employee's

[3:28:22] benefit insurance fund is amended to appropriate $17,628

[3:28:26] from fund balance to cover the increase of medicare supplement

[3:28:32] premium rates for retirees in the emergency

[3:28:36] telephone system fund is amended to recognize the north carolina 9 1 1 board public

[3:28:41] safety answering point, also known as psap distribution for $60,900.

[3:28:48] does board have questions on any of those items?

[3:28:55] if not, I would entertain a motion to approve items 23, 24 and 25.

[3:29:02] may I make a motion to adopt an ordinance to close the american rescue plan

[3:29:06] fund? Also adopt a budget ordinance amendment of

[3:29:10] physical year 2026 electric fund and also adopt

[3:29:15] a budget ordinance amendment for physical year 2026. Second. I

[3:29:19] have a motion to second. Is there further discussion? Hearing none unless have a roll call

[3:29:23] during with alderman royal. Alderman royal, yes.

[3:29:27] alderman aster. Yes. Alderman kenzie. Yes. Alderman de yes.

[3:29:32] derman? Yes. Mayor odom. Yes. Motion carries. Next up is

[3:29:36] appointments. Does the board have any appointments to make tonight

[3:29:41] hearing none. Number 27 attorney's report nothing. Report tonight, mayor 28.

[3:29:45] city manager's report a few updates for you on this. This past friday, we, we,

[3:29:49] um, celebrated the 4th of july celebration, uh, that occurred at

[3:29:53] lawson creek park. 6,100 were in attendance at the park. 1400

[3:29:57] were attended in attendance at union point park for the fireworks display. I want to thank parks

[3:30:02] and recreation for coordinating the event police, fire, rescue and public

[3:30:06] works for their part as help. It was a great event that evening. Also,

[3:30:10] general update on the peg channel. We anticipate the peg channel if all

[3:30:14] goes well, being live again at our next meeting. Excited about that.

[3:30:19] also, we received a letter from craven county and forming us that as part of

[3:30:23] their budget process, they did allocate $5,000 toward, uh, upgrades

[3:30:27] at, uh, samson park. So we're working with parks and recreation staff

[3:30:31] on what that upgrade will be. Uh, and finally, uh,

[3:30:35] we appreciate the support on the geo bond that we will be having

[3:30:40] drop-in style meetings, uh, in august and september in various parts

[3:30:44] of the city to, in inform the public of, of, of the bonds itself.

[3:30:48] uh, and we'll also be updating the website, uh, to pro, uh, to provide additional

[3:30:53] information as well as we go through this process this summer. Happy to answer any other

[3:30:57] questions you may have. Court have questions for the manager.

[3:31:02] hearing none new business. Alderman frill, nothing ahead, your honor.

[3:31:06] thank you. Alderman royal. Not tonight. Alderman astor. Nothing. Fair. Alder

[3:31:10] mckenzie? Yes. I'd like for the chief to come up to talk about this program

[3:31:14] been we have in the community in contact on the citizens,

[3:31:19] the elderly citizens to assure their families that they

[3:31:23] are looked after. And it's called

[3:31:27] care the program? Yes, the acronym is care, care,

[3:31:32] which stands for call, answer, respond, and empower.

[3:31:36] this is a great opportunity and uh, I think it's an underused,

[3:31:41] um, asset to our community. Um,

[3:31:45] those residents that live in the city of new bern, uh,

[3:31:50] specifically the elderly or those that have some kind

[3:31:54] of, uh, disability, have the option to, uh, participate

[3:31:58] in a program in which we have an automated system that would call

[3:32:02] them every day if they pick up the phone. Um,

[3:32:07] that is a positive response that they are. Okay.

[3:32:12] um, if they do not pick up the phone, a second

[3:32:16] call will be sent to the same number. If nobody answers

[3:32:20] that phone, then that would dispatch a police officer to go and check on that

[3:32:25] individual to make sure that they're okay. Is it

[3:32:29] a number that we, they can call to find out how they

[3:32:33] can become involved with this, with that, uh, program?

[3:32:37] yes. The easiest way would be just to go on the new bern police department

[3:32:42] website and we have specific information about care, but

[3:32:46] any call to the new bern police department, we'll get, uh, any citizen hooked

[3:32:50] up with that program. Thank you so very much. Chief.

[3:32:55] yes sir. Anything else on mckenzie? That is it, sir. I'll run best.

[3:33:00] um, yes, I do have, uh, one thing I would like to, um,

[3:33:05] take. I know I've already, um,

[3:33:10] allocated my a rp funds to the stormwater project and

[3:33:14] I'm wanting to ask the board that I would like to take an, uh,

[3:33:19] have that money move back around and take

[3:33:23] a $273,000 out to do some paving

[3:33:27] of streets within the ward. Five within the,

[3:33:31] um, community. Um, I've

[3:33:35] already talked with, um, mr. Hughes, mr. Childs, and that's where I got

[3:33:40] that, um, dollar amount, um, of $273,304.

[3:33:49] so you, you made a motion to reallocate a

[3:33:53] rp funds from ward five from stormwater projects

[3:33:57] to paving projects and the dollar amount of $273,304.

[3:34:03] okay. And so let me, lemme see what that was a motion. Let's

[3:34:08] see if we get a second. Second. Second. Okay. We have a motion and a second discussion.

[3:34:12] and so that would come from the north hills project. Okay.

[3:34:19] has that project been completed and, and funding left over or

[3:34:23] no? It's really been tied up in, in trying to get approvals from, uh, dot

[3:34:27] and the north carolina railroad course.

[3:34:33] any other discussion? Are we okay with your voice vote on this,

[3:34:38] kim? Yes. Okay. Uh, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye.

[3:34:42] any opposed? Okay. Unanimous. Anything else? Um,

[3:34:47] no, that's it. Okay. I believe we do need a closed session, mr. Attorney?

[3:34:51] yes, sir. Briefly, uh, pursuant to 1 43 13 11 a three. To

[3:34:55] maintain our attorney-client privilege, shouldn't take long. Can I have a motion?

[3:35:00] second, I I need a motion. Make a motion to go. Enc. Closed session

[3:35:04] second. A motion a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those

[3:35:08] in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

Jul 08, 2025 Board of Aldermen

Agenda

Transcript