[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?